Decisions
Which trade-offs must the conference be able to make?
Exercise 1A
Map the Value Stream Landscape
Move from an ART list to a decision-capable coordination scope. The goal is not a perfect org chart. The goal is a working map of the people, units, constraints and decision interfaces that can shape value flow.
Why this exercise exists
The landscape is the minimum viable map.
The first map makes the coordination problem visible. It shows who contributes to the value stream, where decisions may be blocked, and which parts of the system must be represented later in the Value Stream Conference.
People
Who must be in the room — or on standby — so decisions are real?
Preparation
Which roadmaps, capacity views, constraints and inputs are needed?
Key reframing
Exercise 1A is not an ART inventory.
Map every group whose work, authority or constraints can shape the value stream. The decisive question is not whether a unit is agile. The decisive question is whether it can affect value flow or decisions.
Value Stream Coordination Scope
Trigger → Value
Agile delivery units
ARTs · Solution Trains · Solution Areas · Teams
Shared functions
Architecture · Cyber · Finance · Legal · HR
External partners
Suppliers · Test labs · Cloud/platform partners
Traditional org parts
Line departments · PMO · Governance boards
Shared platforms
Platform ARTs · DevOps · Toolchain · Data / AI
Customers / Operations
Support · Service operations · Users · Feedback loops
Minimum capture
Collect only five things first.
The first map is a working hypothesis. Use rough ranges and visible uncertainty instead of waiting for a perfect model.
Name + Type
What is the unit, and what kind of contributor is it?
Rough people / teams
How large is the coordination surface? Use ranges when unsure.
Key roles
Who can decide, unblock, represent capacity or own an artifact?
Reason to coordinate
Which dependency, objective, bottleneck or interface makes coordination necessary?
Confidence / gaps
Where are you guessing, and what must be validated before inviting people?
Fast facilitation flow
A compressed 12-minute version.
In a 90-minute workshop variant, Exercise 1A should feel like a fast sketch, not a census. Keep the room moving and end with a named scope hypothesis.
Draw the value stream frame
Trigger → value. Keep it rough and end-to-end.
Inventory units
ARTs, trains, suppliers, functions and traditional departments.
Estimate scale
Teams, people and key roles. Use ranges when unsure.
Mark coordination signals
Shared objectives, dependencies, decisions and bottlenecks.
Name the scope hypothesis
Which units probably need one shared conference?
Facilitator prompt
“If this group can block, accelerate or constrain value flow, put it on the map.”
Snippet prompts
Use cards as thinking aids, not as taxonomy.
Select the prompts that fit your context, rename them, or create your own. The goal is to reveal contributors and coordination signals that a pure ART list would miss.
Agile delivery units
- Agile Release Train
- Solution Train
- Platform ART
- Solution Area / Domain
- System Team / Shared Service
- Enabling or specialist teams
Central functions
- Finance / Controlling
- Procurement and Legal
- HR / Skills
- Compliance / Safety
- Cybersecurity
- Enterprise Architecture
- Operations / Customer Support
Suppliers and non-agile structures
- Agile or waterfall suppliers
- Hardware partners
- Test lab / V&V partners
- Cloud or platform providers
- Traditional PMO
- Line departments
- Governance boards
Coordination signals
- Shared objective
- Common release window
- Platform dependency
- Capacity bottleneck
- Architecture decision
- Evidence chain
- External lead time
- Unclear ownership
Output
A first coordination boundary.
The output is a named coordination scope for the next planning horizon. It should be good enough to design invitees, input artifacts and follow-up questions.
Boundary
Which units belong in the shared coordination scope?
Population estimate
How many teams, ARTs, suppliers, functions and people are roughly involved?
Role gaps
Which decision rights are missing or unclear?
Coordination signals
Why is a higher-level coordination event needed at all?
Confidence
Where are we guessing and where do we need validation?
Good enough means useful
End with a scope hypothesis, not a perfect structure.
If the result can help you prepare a real conference — invitees, inputs, risks and next questions — it is detailed enough for Exercise 1A.