RunsheetAgile

Working Agreements

ComplexityLow

Time45-90 min

Participants3-12

FormatWorkshop

MaturityCanonical

Preparation

What needs to be ready before start

Materials

Whiteboard or Miro board with columns Expectation, Proposal, Agreement; sticky notes; dot-voting points; timer; template for final agreements list.

People / roles

One facilitator who holds psychological safety and demands concreteness; three to twelve team members; one scribe for final list; neutral coach if needed.

Pre-read

Work context in 2-3 sentences; known friction points from recent weeks; existing working agreements if available; reason for workshop.

Time needed

45-90 min

Setup

Three-column layout on board. Example row visible. State rule: working agreements are self-chosen behavior expectations, not policy list.

Core question

The one question this method answers

Which concrete behavior expectations make collaboration easier, and which of them does the team want to commit to?

Flow

Marker: Phase

Step	Duration	Action	Hint
1Phase 1: Collect context and expectations	15-20 min	Facilitator describes context. Solo phase: every person writes at least three expectations and one observation. Place in Expectation column.	Solo writing prevents dominance by loud voices. Observations are often more concrete and honest than general expectations.
2Phase 2: Formulate proposals	20-30 min	Cluster expectations. Formulate one rule proposal per cluster. Concrete, observable, checkable.	Avoid negative rules. Prefer "We start standup on time even if not all are there".
3Phase 3: Discussion and commitment	15-25 min	Discuss per proposal: livable, important? Dot-vote to max 7-10 rules. Rephrase or discard contested rules.	Commitment is not majority vote. If one person cannot carry a rule, rephrase or leave it out.
4Phase 4: Review cadence and ownership	5-15 min	Define who monitors agreements, when they are reviewed, where they are visible, and what happens on repeated break.	Agreements without review become wallpaper. Check at least once per retro.

Artifact

What comes out at the end

Form

Working-agreements list with 5-10 concrete rules, cadence-review owner, storage location, date, and review date. Maximum one page.

Versioning / ownership

Own entry per iteration with date. Mark changed rules.

Tool alternatives

Confluence page in team space, pinned in channel
Notion page with update log
Markdown in team repo under docs/team/working-agreements.md
Visible poster in team room or pinned Slack post

working-agreements-checklist.md

Checklist for concrete, testable team working agreements.

Agreement is phrased in an observable way
Applies to everyone on the team
Contains no pure statements of intent
Conflict case is described
Review date is set
Owner for maintenance is named

Example output

Concrete filled scenario, fictional example

working-agreements-beispiel.md

Concrete filled scenario, fictional example

Working Agreements - Activate Team (2026-05-18)

Context: Cross-functional team of 6, hybrid, 2-week sprint rhythm.

Agreements:

Daily standup 09:30, max 15 min, async update by 09:15 on remote days.
Async replies to pings during working hours in under 4 h; no expectation outside.
Code review within 1 working day, then automatic reminder.
Discussions over 5 Slack messages -> 30 min sync call with decision.
Meeting-free mornings Wed and Fri.

Symptom

Agreements disappear in Confluence.

What to do

Calendar review and retro topic. Owner keeps visibility.

Stop criteria

Done signals checkable in under a minute

Team exists only for one-off task, agreements are bureaucracy.

More than twelve people, discussion too large.

Acute team conflict, agreements become battleground.

Workshop under 30 min, four phases cannot be run.

Nobody takes cadence ownership.

Team has no autonomy, organization overwrites agreements anyway.

Finished the runsheet?

Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.

Go to profile More methods