Move from an unclear team landscape to explicitly agreed interfaces, interaction modes, and sustainable cognitive load.
A documented team landscape with clear interaction modes, an explicit team interface, and a checked cognitive load per team.
You can decide which interaction mode applies to each team boundary and whether responsibilities need to be re-cut.
Anchor the agreed interfaces in the team wiki and re-check with a cognitive load assessment after four to six weeks.
Which local structures do we need for autonomy, alignment, and craft exchange?
Without a visible map it stays unclear which teams actually depend on each other and where interfaces are missing.
The visible dependencies show where an interaction mode is missing or unfit.
Which interaction mode supports this outcome with the least persistent coupling?
An explicitly chosen mode such as collaboration, X-as-a-service, or facilitating clarifies expectations and reduces day-to-day friction.
The chosen mode determines how precisely the interface promise between the teams must be written.
What must other teams know to work effectively with this team with minimal disruption?
A documented team API makes responsibilities, communication channels, and expectations toward other teams binding.
Before the new interface takes effect, it must be checked whether it overloads the teams.
Which load currently blocks sustainable flow, and what system change will reduce it?
Only the load assessment shows whether the new split is sustainable or whether responsibilities need to be adjusted.
Overloaded teams return to the interaction modes or the team API, relieved teams can anchor the agreement.
Artifacts stay collapsed until you actually need them.
Plan Spotify Model Mapping around its domain steps and the concrete decision question.
# Spotify Model Mapping: Worksheet
## Question
To be confirmed
## Desired outcome
To be confirmed
## Scope
Full initiative
Time: 2 × 90 minutes
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
## Preparation for this scope
### Method setup
- **Materials:** Product and value flows, current teams and communities, decision and dependency data, shared workspace, source links, and decision log.
- **Roles:** Leadership · team representatives · Product · People/Organisation
- **Advance information:** Collect Product and value flows, current teams and communities, decision and dependency data in advance and mark open assumptions.
- **Overall time needed:** 2 × 90 minutes
- **Setup:** Prepare map Spotify terms as hypotheses onto local product flows, communities, and leadership needs visibly and calibrate assessment terms before starting.
### Prepare for the work steps
#### Establish context: Establish context
- Product and value flows
- current teams and communities
- decision and dependency data
#### Map product flow: Map product flow
- context boundaries
- current teams and communities
- decision and dependency data
#### Map communities: Map communities
- flow map
- current teams and communities
- decision and dependency data
#### Test hypothesis: Test hypothesis
- community map
- current teams and communities
- decision and dependency data
## organisation mapping
### Local unit
Team/community · purpose · product flow
...
### Spotify analogy
Squad · tribe · chapter · guild · none
...
### Mandate
Decision right · leadership · participation
...
### Risk and test
Misapplication · measure · review
...
[Spotify Engineering Culture, part 1](https://blog.crisp.se/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SpotifyScaling.pdf)
## Establish context: Establish context
Expected artifact: context boundaries
context boundaries · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Are terms marked as analogies?
## Map product flow: Map product flow
Expected artifact: flow map
flow map · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Does the boundary minimise hand-offs?
## Map communities: Map communities
Expected artifact: community map
community map · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Are people responsibility and voluntary exchange distinct?
## Test hypothesis: Test hypothesis
Expected artifact: change hypothesis
change hypothesis · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Is a measurable flow improvement named?
## Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/spotify-model-mapping/run-sheet
Plan Team Topologies Interaction Modes around its domain steps and the concrete decision question.
# Team Topologies Interaction Modes: Worksheet
## Question
To be confirmed
## Desired outcome
To be confirmed
## Scope
Establish and review the practice
Time: 60 minutes
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
## Preparation for this scope
### Method setup
- **Materials:** Team boundaries and APIs, concrete shared outcomes, dependency and flow data, shared workspace, source links, and decision log.
- **Roles:** Representatives of both teams · team leads · enabling team if needed
- **Advance information:** Collect Team boundaries and APIs, concrete shared outcomes, dependency and flow data in advance and mark open assumptions.
- **Overall time needed:** 60 minutes
- **Setup:** Prepare assign a team relationship to one of three modes using outcome, knowledge flow, and desired coupling visibly and calibrate assessment terms before starting.
### Prepare for the work steps
#### Bound relationship: Bound relationship
- Team boundaries and APIs
- concrete shared outcomes
- dependency and flow data
#### Choose mode: Choose mode
- relationship profile
- concrete shared outcomes
- dependency and flow data
#### Frame interaction: Frame interaction
- mode decision
- concrete shared outcomes
- dependency and flow data
#### Review mode: Review mode
- interaction contract
- concrete shared outcomes
- dependency and flow data
## interaction mode map
| Subject | Team A · team B · outcome | Collaboration · XaaS · Facilitating + reason | Timebox · interface · responsibilities | Criterion · next mode · review |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| interaction mode map | | | | |
- **interaction mode map:** Worked example
Enter only real input, sources, and decisions.
[Team Topologies: Team Interaction Modeling](https://teamtopologies.com/key-concepts-content/team-interaction-modeling-with-team-topologies)
## Bound relationship: Bound relationship
Expected artifact: relationship profile
relationship profile · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Is a concrete outcome named rather than generic cooperation?
## Choose mode: Choose mode
Expected artifact: mode decision
mode decision · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Does the mode fit the type of uncertainty?
## Frame interaction: Frame interaction
Expected artifact: interaction contract
interaction contract · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Are start, end, and expected capability clear?
## Review mode: Review mode
Expected artifact: review decision
review decision · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Does the next mode prevent unnecessary coupling?
## Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/team-topologies-interaction-modes/run-sheet
Plan Team API around its domain steps and the concrete decision question.
# Team API: Worksheet
## Question
To be confirmed
## Desired outcome
To be confirmed
## Scope
Establish and review the practice
Time: 90 minutes initially; 30-minute review
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
## Preparation for this scope
### Method setup
- **Materials:** Team mission and services, dependencies and contact routes, work and support data, shared workspace, source links, and decision log.
- **Roles:** Whole team · team lead · key consuming teams
- **Advance information:** Collect Team mission and services, dependencies and contact routes, work and support data in advance and mark open assumptions.
- **Overall time needed:** 90 minutes initially; 30-minute review
- **Setup:** Prepare explicit team contract covering mission, ownership, interfaces, and working preferences visibly and calibrate assessment terms before starting.
### Prepare for the work steps
#### Mission: Mission/ownership
- Team mission and services
- dependencies and contact routes
- work and support data
#### Interfaces: Interfaces
- ownership profile
- dependencies and contact routes
- work and support data
#### Ways of working: Ways of working
- interaction catalogue
- dependencies and contact routes
- work and support data
#### Consumer review: Consumer review
- collaboration rules
- dependencies and contact routes
- work and support data
## team API
### Mission and services
Purpose · outcomes · ownership
...
### Consumers and interaction
Need · mode · contact
...
### Ways of working
Support · response · preference
...
### Boundaries and review
Out of scope · review date · owner
...
Enter only real input, sources, and decisions.
[Team Topologies: Team API template](https://github.com/TeamTopologies/Team-API-template)
## Mission: Mission/ownership
Expected artifact: ownership profile
ownership profile · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Are responsibilities expressed as services or outcomes?
## Interfaces: Interfaces
Expected artifact: interaction catalogue
interaction catalogue · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Is there one clear route for every need?
## Ways of working: Ways of working
Expected artifact: collaboration rules
collaboration rules · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Are commitments realistic and measurable?
## Consumer review: Consumer review
Expected artifact: validated team API
validated team API · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Can consumers find ownership and contact without asking?
## Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/team-api/run-sheet
Plan Team Cognitive Load Assessment around its domain steps and the concrete decision question.
# Team Cognitive Load Assessment: Worksheet
## Question
To be confirmed
## Desired outcome
To be confirmed
## Scope
Establish and review the practice
Time: 75 minutes
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
## Preparation for this scope
### Method setup
- **Materials:** Examples from the last four weeks, interrupt and flow data, team boundaries and services, shared workspace, source links, and decision log.
- **Roles:** Whole team · facilitator · platform or leadership role as needed
- **Advance information:** Collect Examples from the last four weeks, interrupt and flow data, team boundaries and services in advance and mark open assumptions.
- **Overall time needed:** 75 minutes
- **Setup:** Prepare classify concrete load episodes as intrinsic, extraneous, or germane load visibly and calibrate assessment terms before starting.
### Prepare for the work steps
#### Collect episodes: Collect episodes
- Examples from the last four weeks
- interrupt and flow data
- team boundaries and services
#### Classify load: Classify load
- episode list
- interrupt and flow data
- team boundaries and services
#### Test boundary: Test boundary
- load map
- interrupt and flow data
- team boundaries and services
#### Design relief: Design relief
- boundary diagnosis
- interrupt and flow data
- team boundaries and services
## cognitive load map
| Subject | Situation · trigger · effect | Intrinsic · extraneous · germane + rationale | Team boundary · tool · process · dependency | Action · owner · indicator |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| cognitive load map | | | | |
- **cognitive load map:** Worked example
Enter only real input, sources, and decisions.
[Team Topologies: Cognitive Load](https://teamtopologies.com/key-concepts)
## Collect episodes: Collect episodes
Expected artifact: episode list
episode list · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Does each entry include situation, trigger, and effect?
## Classify load: Classify load
Expected artifact: load map
load map · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Is classification based on cause rather than feeling?
## Test boundary: Test boundary
Expected artifact: boundary diagnosis
boundary diagnosis · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Does the load sit in the right team?
## Design relief: Design relief
Expected artifact: relief experiment
relief experiment · source · uncertainty · next decision
Entry:
...
- [ ] Does the indicator measure real flow improvement?
## Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/team-cognitive-load-assessment/run-sheet