Engagement Contract¶
“Clarity at the beginning prevents conflict at the end.”
Purpose¶
The Engagement Contract (EC) establishes the initial working agreement between Client and Vendor organizations entering a 3SF-based engagement.
It defines the rules of collaboration, shared vocabulary, contextual drivers, and maturity baseline before delivery begins.
This contract acts as a governance bridge between the commercial SoW and the Delivery Charter, ensuring that both parties understand:
- Why they are collaborating (purpose & outcomes),
- How they will collaborate (process & governance), and
- What principles and maturity assumptions apply (3SF alignment).
The EC does not replace legal contracts — it supplements them by creating operational coherence that supports trust-building from day one.
Applies To¶
| Dimension | Scope |
|---|---|
| SDLC Stages | Discovery → Design |
| 3SF Relationship Lines | Engagement ↔ Delivery ↔ Value |
| 3SF Layers | Contextual Drivers Layer (CDL) + Stable Rules Layer (SRL) |
| Maturity Target | From Transactional Trust → toward Collaborative Confidence |
Actors / Roles¶
| Client Side | Vendor Side | Shared Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Executive Sponsor | Account Lead | Approve engagement setup and sign off on rules of collaboration. |
| Product Leader (Client Product Owner) | Product Leader (Vendor Product Manager) | Align outcomes and delivery scope. |
| Governance Officer | Delivery Facilitator | Define control, reporting, and escalation procedures. |
| Solution Architect | Solution Architect | Align architecture and delivery model constraints. |
Key Components of the Engagement Contract¶
| Component | Description | Referenced 3SF Artifacts |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose & Value Statement | Defines why the engagement exists and what outcomes matter to the business. | Outcome-to-Accountability Map |
| Engagement Context Definition | Documents the commercial, organizational, regulatory, and cultural context. | Engagement Context Canvas (ECC) |
| Governance Model | Defines meeting cadence, decision flow, and escalation routes. | Autonomy & Control Boundary Charter |
| Delivery System Design | Describes collaboration structure, team topology, and delivery approach. | Initial Delivery Design |
| Shared Principles Acknowledgment | Lists 3SF Principles recognized by both organizations. | 3SF Theory |
| Baseline Maturity Assessment | Defines initial trust and autonomy level. | Maturity Dashboard |
Agreement Format¶
The Engagement Contract may be structured as a jointly signed operational memorandum (not a legal SoW).
It typically includes:
- Statement of Intent — shared purpose, objectives, and 3SF adoption commitment.
- Roles and Responsibilities Matrix — aligned with 3SF Functional Role Model.
- Engagement Context Summary — based on the ECC output.
- Governance Cadence Table — meetings, reports, decision frequency.
- Maturity Baseline & Targets — expected relationship evolution goals.
- Sign-off Section — co-signature by both Executive Sponsors.
Example (extract):
| Section | Client | Vendor | Maturity Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product Ownership | Accountable: Product Owner | Responsible: Product Manager | Outcome before Output |
| Architecture Decisions | Co-sign: Solution Architect | Co-sign: Solution Architect | Shared Accountability |
| Governance & Reporting | Governance Officer | Delivery Facilitator | Trust before Control |
Inputs / Outputs¶
| Inputs | Outputs |
|---|---|
| RFP, SoW draft, Discovery documentation | Signed Engagement Contract, contextual baseline, governance alignment matrix |
Metrics / Signals¶
| Category | Example Indicators |
|---|---|
| Clarity Signal | 100% of roles and escalation paths documented before delivery start. |
| Context Completeness | All six contextual drivers defined in the Engagement Context Canvas. |
| Maturity Alignment | Both sides rate baseline maturity consistently (±1 level variance max). |
| Governance Activation | First joint governance meeting scheduled before project kickoff. |
Common Pitfalls¶
- Treating the EC as a legal document instead of a governance alignment tool.
- Starting delivery without defining contextual or maturity baselines.
- Over-engineering governance models before trust maturity is known.
- Omitting sign-off by key stakeholders (especially Product and Executive roles).
- Copy-pasting EC templates without adaptation to specific engagement context.
Scaling Notes¶
| Maturity Stage | Evolution Focus |
|---|---|
| Transactional → Collaborative | Use EC as part of RFP and vendor selection to define expectations. |
| Collaborative → Co-Creative | Embed EC into Delivery Charter and track alignment metrics quarterly. |
| Co-Creative → Strategic | Integrate EC outcomes into portfolio-level Relationship Audits. |
At higher maturity, EC evolves into a Portfolio Engagement Framework governing multiple product or service streams.
Client-Side Application¶
Objective: Ensure the engagement begins with clarity, context, and measurable trust expectations.
Client actions¶
- Lead definition of business purpose and value metrics.
- Approve governance model and cadence jointly with Vendor.
- Confirm context accuracy in ECC.
- Track contract adherence through Maturity Dashboard reviews.
Vendor-Side Application¶
Objective: Ensure delivery system is designed to meet contextual and governance expectations from day one.
Vendor actions¶
- Facilitate ECC and Delivery Design workshops.
- Document accountability and sign-off structures clearly.
- Align internal delivery practices with agreed governance cadence.
- Use EC as a training and onboarding document for new team members.
Summary¶
The Engagement Contract anchors collaboration in shared purpose, context, and maturity.
It ensures that both Client and Vendor enter the relationship consciously, with clearly defined principles and expectations.
By co-signing the EC, organizations establish the foundational trust loop of the 3SF Operating System — clarity, transparency, and measurable alignment.