Skip to content

Decision Systems and Commitment Boundaries

This part of the framework defines how decisions are made before delivery systems, learning approaches, or governance structures are selected.

It exists to address a recurring systemic problem in cross-functional delivery:
teams often choose how to work before explicitly understanding what kind of decision environment they are operating in and how safe it is to commit.

When this happens, execution quality is asked to compensate for unresolved decision risk.

The Problem This Section Addresses

In practice, delivery breakdowns frequently originate upstream of execution.

Typical patterns include:

  • selecting a familiar delivery model by default
  • treating all uncertainty as discovery-safe
  • committing capacity or scope before strategy is sufficiently clear
  • relying on governance or process to correct decision mistakes after the fact

These issues can appear even when:

  • context is documented
  • roles and responsibilities are defined
  • governance agreements are in place
  • teams are experienced and aligned

The underlying issue is not a lack of rules or practices, but the absence of an explicit way to classify decision risk before commitment.

Decisions as a Distinct System Concern

This part of the framework treats decision-making as a system in its own right, not as an implicit side-effect of planning or execution.

It focuses on questions such as:

  • How clear and shared is the strategy at the moment a decision is required?
  • How costly or unsafe would it be to reverse that decision later?
  • What assumptions are acceptable, and which are dangerous?
  • Which types of decision systems are appropriate under these conditions?

These questions are intentionally distinct from:

  • how work is delivered
  • how learning is conducted
  • how governance is enforced
  • how maturity is assessed

They define the conditions under which those systems may be chosen.

Position Within the Framework

This part of the framework sits between:

  • the sections that define principles, context, and systemic rules, and
  • the sections that define practices, tools, contracts, and diagnostics.

Its role is to ensure that:
before execution or governance systems are designed,
the decision environment is explicitly understood and declared.

This preserves the intent of Context before Method while making commitment risk visible and discussable.

Decision Regimes

The framework recognizes that not all decisions are made under the same conditions.

Different situations combine:

  • varying degrees of strategy clarity, and
  • varying levels of commitment safety.

These combinations form distinct decision regimes.

Each regime:

  • optimizes for different types of decisions
  • tolerates different levels of uncertainty
  • requires different decision systems
  • fails in predictable ways when mismatched

Applying the wrong decision system to a regime creates systemic risk that cannot be eliminated by better execution.

What This Section Provides

This section introduces:

  • a small set of decision regimes relevant to cross-functional delivery
  • a matrix for identifying the current regime
  • a family of decision systems, each designed for a specific regime
  • clear boundaries on when certain decision approaches are appropriate or unsafe
  • guidance on how decision regimes change over time

Together, these elements prevent:

  • accidental over-commitment
  • default method selection
  • governance overload
  • learning activities that cannot influence outcomes

When to Use This Section

This section is most relevant:

  • before selecting delivery or learning systems
  • at initiative formation or re-planning points
  • when commitments feel forced, contested, or difficult to reverse
  • when teams disagree on whether they are still discovering or already executing

It is typically used by:

  • product and engineering leadership
  • cross-functional decision makers
  • facilitators designing delivery systems
  • anyone responsible for committing shared resources

Relationship to Other Sections

This section does not replace any other part of the framework.

It:

  • complements the Contextual Drivers Layer by compressing context into decision-relevant signals
  • reinforces stable rules related to clarity, reversibility, and transparency
  • protects practices and tools from being misapplied
  • reduces reliance on governance and diagnostics to correct upstream decision errors

By making decision conditions explicit, the framework ensures that execution systems are selected deliberately, not by habit.