Skip to content
Ameen Abozaid
Englishالعربية
SRB-011

Cross-team design

  • 7 Lessons
  • 4 h practice (estimate)
Start module
On this page 9 topics

Overview

Topics

  • Aligning contracts
  • ownership
  • timelines
  • and dependencies

Learn first

4 h of practice (estimate)

Learning outcomes

  1. Map ownership, interfaces, and dependencies across teams for an initiative.
  2. Run a design process that includes every affected team before decisions harden.
  3. Align contracts and timelines so teams can work in parallel (contract-first, stubs, feature flags).
  4. Resolve design conflicts between teams with explicit criteria.

Lessons

  1. 01Designs that cross team boundaries
  2. 02Ownership and dependency mapping
  3. 03Inclusive design processes
  4. 04Contract-first parallel delivery
  5. 05Resolving cross-team conflicts
  6. 06Demo: a four-team design session for stock synchronization
  7. 07Demo: unblocking a team stuck on another team's API

Lab and exercises

Lab

SRB-011-LAB1 · Program design

Outcomes: 1–4 · Time: ~4 h

  1. Build the dependency map for the four FulfillCo teams: capabilities, owners, interfaces, consumer-to-provider arrows.
  2. Draft interface agreements (schema, owner, versioning, date) and an integration timeline using stubs and feature flags.
  3. Run a recorded design session with role-played team leads; include a seeded disagreement between two teams.
  4. Resolve one conflict on record using agreed criteria.

Acceptance: every interface has an owner and a date; one conflict resolved on record.

Exercises (assessment: session facilitation scored by role-players)

IDOutcomeTask
SRB-011-EX011Case: stock sync, shipment status, and returns involve four teams. Produce an ownership table and mark the busiest provider.
SRB-011-EX021A map shows a chain A to B to C to D. Identify the schedule risk and propose two ways to shorten it.
SRB-011-EX032Write the pre-read and agenda for a design session on returns, including roles, decision date, and what silence means.
SRB-011-EX043Write a contract-first plan for the stock-changed event: schema agreement, stub, contract test, flag, and swap date.
SRB-011-EX054Case: warehouse team wants a nightly batch; shop team wants near-real-time events. Write criteria, score both, and state what would change the decision.
SRB-011-EX062Review a transcript of a design session where one lead presented a finished design. Identify three process faults and fixes.
SRB-011-EX073Case: a consumer team has waited three weeks for a provider API. Write the unblocking message and a two-week plan.
Show solutions
  • EX01 One accountable owner per capability and interface; the provider with the most inbound arrows (often the stock source) is the bottleneck and gets contracts first.
  • EX02 Chains serialize the schedule. Options: agree contracts early and use stubs so C and D start in parallel; split the middle service's work so a thin interface lands first.
  • EX03 Pre-read: problem, two or three options, constraints known. Agenda with time boxes; roles proposer/reviewer/informed; decision date; silence after the date recorded as agreement.
  • EX04 Week 1 agree schema and versioning rule; provider builds; consumer uses a stub behind a flag; both run contract tests in CI; swap stub for real event on an agreed date.
  • EX05 Criteria such as freshness need, delivery date, operational cost, reversibility. A plausible outcome: events for stock, batch reconciliation as a safety net; state what evidence (stock accuracy tolerance) would flip it.
  • EX06 Faults: no pre-read, decision made before the session, no recorded dissent or owners. Fixes: share options first, ask for constraints, record owners and dates.
  • EX07 Ask for the minimum viable contract, publish a stub, flag the integration, add a contract test and a date; inform managers after talking to the provider lead.
  • Outcome 4 is also covered by the lab (conflict on record); outcome 2 by the lab recording and by Q03.

Workplace evidence: a cross-team design you led to agreement.

Quiz

Outcomes: O1 ownership and dependency mapping · O2 inclusive design process · O3 contract-first parallel delivery · O4 conflict resolution.

A self-check for you: nothing is graded, saved or sent anywhere. Choose an answer, then check it. You can try again as often as you like.

  1. 1Three teams all wait on one provider team's API. What is the best reading?O1
  2. 2A dependency map is complete for an interface when it has:O1
  3. 3You designed alone and present for sign-off. Teams raise big objections in the meeting. Most likely cause?O2
  4. 4The best use of a design-session pre-read is to:O2
  5. 5A consumer team can start before the provider finishes by using:O3
  6. 6Contract tests primarily prevent:O3
  7. 7Feature flags help parallel delivery because they:O3
  8. 8Two teams disagree on a design. What should you do first?O4
  9. 9When escalating a conflict, bring:O4
  10. 10A design session ends. What makes it effective?O2

Practical part

Facilitate a recorded cross-team design session with role-played leads (SRB-011 assessment) and complete SRB-011-LAB1. Pass: at least 8/10 on the quiz, a facilitation score of at least the pass mark set by role-players, every interface with an owner and a date, and one conflict resolved on record.

Common mistakes

Designing alone and "presenting" to teams; serial dependencies that block three teams on one.

Assessment

Session facilitation scored by role-players.

Workplace evidence

A cross-team design you led to agreement.

Career relevance

Cross-team programs (STF-013).

Type to search levels, phases, modules and lessons.