Team Topologies & Cynefin
Listed beside Wardley in a 2019 hiring post. One mention is enough to notice and not enough to claim — so this is a discovered stub, published at the strength of its evidence.
Block 1 The anchor
Team Topologies (Skelton & Pais, 2019) and the Cynefin framework (Snowden, 1999)
Linked, never rehosted. This site explains why the work resonated and traces where it was applied; the work itself stays where its author put it.
Two frameworks, bundled because the corpus bundles them. If Dinis Cruz confirms, they should probably be separated — they answer different questions.
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 honest statement of the evidence: a hiring post from 2019 lists these beside Wardley, and Wardley turned out to be one of the deepest-traced influences in the register. Proximity in a list is not evidence of equal weight, and this entry is a stub because the site declines to infer one from the other.
What makes it worth publishing anyway: naming Cynefin means having a position on when a practice is appropriate rather than universally good, and that position — different problems need different methods — is visible in how the estate handles its own uncertainty. Consistent with the influence, and consistent with several other things too.
Block 3 The principle
Organisational structure and problem-domain sensemaking are engineering concerns: the shape of the team decides the shape of the system, and the kind of problem decides which practice is appropriate.
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 (2019) — four team types and three interaction modes ↗
- Cynefin — Dave Snowden — the sensemaking framework; the clear/complicated/complex/chaotic distinction is the transferable part ↗
- A Leader's Framework for Decision Making (HBR, 2007) — Snowden and Boone's most-read statement of it ↗
Awaiting the briefing document
This entry is a stub, and says so. Found by mining and never claimed by Dinis Cruz, on the strength of a single mention. Published at the tier its evidence supports, and it will move — in either direction — when Q2 is answered.
The research plan
Q2 first: does this belong at all, or is it a citation rather than an influence? If confirmed, separate the two frameworks and look for Team Topologies vocabulary — stream-aligned, platform, enabling, complicated-subsystem — in the estate's team-roles system, and for Cynefin's domains in how work is triaged.
Tracked as Q2 in the briefing queue.
The corpus evidence
What the mining run found, by path. These are the files that put this entry in its tier — the claim on this page is checkable against them, which is the whole point of the format.
| Path in the corpus | What it carries |
|---|---|
(a 2019 hiring post) | both frameworks listed beside Wardley mapping; the only occurrence the mining run found |
Paths are as recorded by the mining run behind the commissioning pack (v0.33.62, 25 August 2026). This repository holds the website, not the corpus, so they are cited rather than resolved — R2 in the comms queue.
Where this sits
No nesting and no sibling site: this entry stands on its own. The influence map draws every relation the register records.