Diverse and distributed teams
On Dinis Cruz's list as a practice rather than a person. The formative case is probably twenty years old and already in this register under another name.
Block 1 The anchor
Working in diverse and distributed teams — a practice
No canonical URL. Not every anchor has one address — a book, a practice or a personal era does not — and this site links what is linkable rather than inventing a canonical home for something that has none. The wider library below carries what can be linked.
No single work. The likeliest formative instance is OWASP's global chapter model, which has its own entry — the briefing needs to say whether that is the origin or a later example.
Block 2 In his own words
No first-person statement about this influence exists in the corpus yet. What follows is the site's reading of the evidence, not Dinis Cruz's words — and it stays labelled as such until his briefing document arrives.
The circumstantial case is strong enough to be worth stating and weak enough that it must not be presented as evidence. This estate's practices are unusually written-down: role definitions as documents, briefs as first-class artefacts, decisions recorded rather than remembered. That is what a distributed habit looks like when it has been fully internalised — but a habit that thorough could equally come from working with agents, who have no other way to receive context.
Which of those came first is the question, and it is Dinis Cruz's. OWASP's global chapters predate everything else here by two decades, which makes them the best candidate for the origin.
Block 3 The principle
(hypothesis) Distribution forces thinking to become explicit, written and asynchronous — and cognitive diversity is what stops a team agreeing quickly on the wrong thing.
Two claims bundled into one principle, which is usually a sign the entry has not been thought through yet. The briefing should separate them: distribution and diversity are different mechanisms with different failure modes.
Block 7 The wider library
The rest of the work, linked and never rehosted, each item with one line on what it adds. The full union of every entry's Block 7 is at /library/.
- Team Topologies — Skelton & Pais — the nearest published framework, and itself a discovered entry in this register
Awaiting the briefing document
This entry is a stub, and says so. Named by Dinis Cruz, with no direct corpus citation. The estate is full of consequences that would be consistent with this influence, which is not the same thing as evidence for it — and the difference is what the tier means.
The research plan
N7. Three places to look, in order of likely yield: Dinis Cruz's management writing; the estate's own team-roles system, which reads like a formalisation of something learned earlier; and OWASP's global-chapter model as the formative experience. The question the briefing must answer: which of these is the origin and which are consequences.
Tracked as N7 in the briefing queue.
The corpus evidence
None. This influence is on Dinis Cruz's own list and the corpus scan found nothing to attach to it. That is the definition of the STATED tier, and it is published rather than hidden: an empty evidence block is the most honest thing this page can show.
Where this sits
No nesting and no sibling site: this entry stands on its own. The influence map draws every relation the register records.