Exploring
Compare perspectives.
Six people describe the same Friday handoff. Their assumptions differ.
View full page: ExploringRelational architecture
Better work begins
between us.
Relational architecture makes the working arrangements between people visible: responsibilities, decisions, information, commitments, and handoffs. Andrew brings research-informed design guidance; your people help draw, test, and refine arrangements they can use.
The method in practice
From one situation
to a shared way forward.
Make the invisible visible.
We begin with pencil and paper. In the first working session, your people draw how responsibilities, decisions, information, and handoffs connect their work. Andrew draws alongside them, compares perspectives, and helps develop a practical arrangement to try. Other accessible formats are welcome.
The illustrations show Exploring, Drafting, and a wider Blueprinting example. Framing follows adopted agreements into daily use, review, and improvement.
Drafting
Visualize the relationships. Try a clearer way to work.
A proposed arrangement is ready for a trial with three changes.
View full page: DraftingBlueprinting
Making working agreements visible.
This illustrative organization view shows how shared leadership functions connect teams and how specific agreements clarify coordination.
Maria coordinates Delivery’s adopted Friday handoff to Harper in Client Success. Alex confirms commitment changes within agreed authority.
The first two pages follow one Friday handoff. The five-team page illustrates a wider scope: several connected working arrangements. They are not successive stages of one verified client outcome.
Adapted from anonymized client work. Names, intended contributions and working details are illustrative. Adopted is the illustrated record status.
Inspect the full Blueprinting example Download the printable PDFYour relationprint brings adopted agreements together in a guide you own. Explore the guide
Think together on paper. Keep useful agreements on paper or in digital tools your people choose and maintain.
Adapted from anonymized client work. Names and dialogue are illustrative.
How the work develops
Explore together.
Learn through use.
Andrew guides the design and contributes practical recommendations. Your people draw, test, and refine the arrangements they will use; authorized client decision-makers choose what to adopt. Framing keeps those agreements current.
Four C’s. One continuous cycle.
Capacity is the investment and the return. Start at the inner Capacity.
- ExploringCapacity invested to CuriosityAsk questions and compare perspectives.
- DraftingCuriosity to ConsistencyTry a draft agreement in everyday work.
- BlueprintingConsistency to ClarityRecord the tested agreement adopted together.
- FramingClarity to Capacity through practiceUse, maintain, and improve the adopted arrangement; review the return alongside the effort invested.
Capacity is both the investment and the possible return. We review what the work required, what people learned, and what changed. A demonstrated gain in usable time, attention, or ability requires evidence; an inconclusive trial can still inform a better decision.
Two leadership functions. A shared working rhythm.
The Prioritizer clarifies direction and commitments within agreed governance; the Facilitator coordinates delivery within delegated authority. Together they compare stakeholder needs with evidence from everyday work and refine decisions through constructive dialogue. These are working functions with clear responsibilities and authority.
Everyone contributes. Prioritizer and facilitator are continuing roles within your team, active across all six dimensions. Andrew facilitates the engagement and helps your people establish their own working agreements.
How the six dimensions work together.
Processes and operating rhythm connect all six dimensions. A process diagram can sit in an Execution Blueprint, linked to the relevant agreements about ownership, value, coordination, priorities, and information.
Data maintains accurate, current records, measures, feedback, decisions, and captured knowledge, with stewardship, security, and appropriate access. A scorecard is one expression of that work; its measures need a purpose and a decision they inform.
Execution makes agreed methods, standards, and exceptions usable in everyday work. It uses dependable evidence to check results, coordinate handoffs, review the method, and adapt it.
Dimensions of Capacity
Useful questions.
Connected agreements.
Six questions help people examine working arrangements from connected perspectives. Use whichever matter to the situation—whether the work concerns one leader, a team, or an organization.
Ownership
Who is responsible for this?
Make ownership, decision authority, and qualified cover clear.
At each engagement scale
- Leadership
- Clarify commitments with clients, collaborators, or colleagues, including the authority retained or delegated.
- Team
- Agree who prioritizes, facilitates, and contributes, with qualified cover for essential work.
- Organization
- Connect accountabilities and delegated authority across teams. Make responsibility at each interface explicit.
Value
Why does this matter?
Connect effort to the benefit it creates for the people served.
At each engagement scale
- Leadership
- Use feedback to clarify the benefit a practice or leadership role creates for the people it serves.
- Team
- Agree who benefits from the work and what a useful result looks like from their perspective.
- Organization
- Bring customer, colleague, and stakeholder needs into choices about services and shared priorities.
Cadence
When should this happen?
Agree recurring coordination and the events that call for a conversation.
At each engagement scale
- Leadership
- Agree when to coordinate with clients or collaborators, including preparation, decisions, feedback, and review.
- Team
- Agree recurring coordination and event-based triggers, including what needs to be ready and who takes part.
- Organization
- Connect team rhythms so decisions, information, and commitments reach the right people in time.
Focus
What is the priority?
Choose priorities that fit available capacity and make commitments explicit.
At each engagement scale
- Leadership
- Choose commitments that fit available capacity, with clear priorities and completion criteria.
- Team
- Translate priorities into a realistic sequence of work with owners, dates, and a shared definition of done.
- Organization
- Resolve competing priorities across teams and match commitments to usable capacity.
Data
Where can this be found?
Keep information accurate, current, protected, and easy to find.
At each engagement scale
- Leadership
- Keep decisions, commitments, feedback, and learning accurate, current, protected, and easy to find.
- Team
- Agree where information lives, who maintains it, and how people can access and protect it.
- Organization
- Connect records, measures, and captured knowledge through shared definitions, stewardship, security, and appropriate access.
Execution
How should this be done?
Use agreed methods and dependable evidence to deliver, learn, and adapt.
At each engagement scale
- Leadership
- Make the working method clear, including standards and exceptions; use evidence to review results and improve it.
- Team
- Agree methods, handoffs, standards, and exceptions; review results together and adapt the working method.
- Organization
- Connect agreed methods across teams, with clear standards and exceptions, using evidence to review and improve delivery.
What you take forward
Your relationprint
Your relationprint is a client-owned reference for tested, authorized working agreements. It can start with one Blueprint, kept on paper or in familiar tools, with a current version, maintainer, and review point.
From trial to shared reference
- Draft
- A proposed working agreement for practical trial.
- Blueprint
- A tested, authorized and usable working agreement. Use diagrams and concise writing where helpful.
- Your relationprint
- Your shared, living source of truth for current adopted working agreements.
Your proposal names the intended endpoint and the trials, capture, records, and handover included. Focused work can end with a recommendation or trial-ready Draft; adoption follows practical use and review.
See how your guide takes shapeResearch & established practice
Twelve influences.
A practical synthesis.
These are the key influences selected for their relevance to this approach. Each contributes a useful idea; the application is shaped around your people and work.
Six questions.
Shared understanding.
The questions connect ownership, purpose, coordination, priorities, information, and working methods. The overlap is the point: an answer in one area can change the others.
Use whichever question helps with the situation. The sources below inform the practice; trials establish what helps in your work.
Research
Relational coordination
Jody Hoffer Gittell
Strengthen the relationships that connect the work.
Application & sources
In our work
Explore shared goals, shared knowledge, mutual respect, and timely communication. Agree how people coordinate across roles and teams.
Ownership · Cadence · Execution
In context
The cited study examined care-provider groups. Its findings inform questions we test in each client’s setting.
Source
[1] Gittell, J. H. (2002). Coordinating Mechanisms in Care Provider Groups: Relational Coordination as a Mediator and Input Uncertainty as a Moderator of Performance Effects. Management Science, 48(11), 1408–1426. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.48.11.1408.268.
Research
Psychological safety
Amy Edmondson
Make room for candor and learning.
Application & sources
In our work
Invite people to compare expectations, question assumptions, and discuss the working arrangement together. Leaders model curiosity and respond constructively.
Ownership · Value
In context
The study linked team psychological safety with learning behavior. Safety depends on everyday conduct, authority, and follow-through.
Source
[2] Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. DOI: 10.2307/2666999.
Research & theory
Self-determination theory
Richard Ryan & Edward Deci
Support autonomy, capability, and connection.
Application & sources
In our work
Pair accountability with appropriate authority. Give people the support and capacity to carry their responsibilities, contribute expertise, and participate in agreements.
Ownership · Value
In context
Autonomy, competence, and relatedness inform the conditions for motivation. The practical arrangements are shaped with the people involved.
Source
[6] Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
Management theory
Stakeholder theory
R. Edward Freeman
Let the people who benefit help define value.
Application & sources
In our work
Gather feedback from customers and other stakeholders. Use their needs to clarify worthwhile outcomes and inform the prioritizer’s tradeoffs.
Value · Focus
In context
Stakeholders include people who contribute to, benefit from, or are affected by the work. Their needs can differ and require explicit choices.
Source
[9] Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman. See also the University of Virginia Darden School of Business, Olsson Center, stakeholder-theory research overview.
Design framework
The Star Model™
Jay Galbraith
Align the whole arrangement around the work.
Application & sources
In our work
Consider how strategy, structure, processes, rewards, and people interact. Examine a local agreement in the context of the wider organization.
All six dimensions
In context
This informs a whole-system perspective. The six relationprint dimensions are a separate synthesis with their own questions and language.
Source
[8] Galbraith, J. R. The Star Model™. Galbraith Management Consultants. Official framework summary; reviewed 5 October 2026.
Improvement framework
Model for Improvement
Associates in Process Improvement · IHI
Try a change. Learn from use.
Application & sources
In our work
Set an aim, choose useful evidence, and run a bounded trial. Review what happened before adapting or adopting the agreement.
Cadence · Focus · Execution
In context
Plan–Do–Study–Act cycles inform practical testing. Clients choose measures that reflect their work, including time invested, learning, and any evidenced return in usable time, attention, and ability.
Source
[3] Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Model for Improvement, including Plan–Do–Study–Act cycles. Guidance accessed 4 October 2026.
Problem-solving practice
A3 thinking
Toyota tradition · Lean Enterprise Institute
Give different perspectives a shared page.
Application & sources
In our work
Capture the situation, evidence, proposed change, and follow-through concisely. Use the draft to support dialogue and a clear next experiment.
Focus · Data · Execution
In context
The inquiry and conversation are central. The page format supports the thinking and stays proportionate to the situation.
Source
[4] Lean Enterprise Institute. A3 Report. Lean Lexicon. Guidance accessed 4 October 2026.
Practice principles
Agile principles
Authors of the Agile Manifesto
Learn in short cycles at a sustainable pace.
Application & sources
In our work
Make useful progress visible, review it regularly, and adapt as needs change. Agree a coordination rhythm that supports the people doing the work.
Cadence · Focus · Execution
In context
These principles originated in software development. We adapt feedback, sustainable pace, and reflection to the client’s operational setting.
Source
[10] Beck, K., et al. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development: Principles behind the Agile Manifesto. Official principles; reviewed 5 October 2026.
Research
Visual reasoning & memory
Suwa & Tversky · Wammes, Meade & Fernandes
Make relationships easier to examine and remember.
Application & sources
In our work
Use words and simple diagrams to externalize ideas, compare perspectives, and revisit assumptions. Begin on paper, with accessible alternatives throughout.
All six dimensions
In context
These studies concern architectural reasoning and controlled memory tasks. Shared organizational understanding is established through discussion and practical use.
Sources
[5] Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1996). What Architects See in Their Sketches: Implications for Design Tools. CHI ’96 Conference Companion.
[7] Wammes, J. D., Meade, M. E., & Fernandes, M. A. (2016). The drawing effect: Evidence for reliable and robust memory benefits in free recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(9), 1752–1776. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2015.1094494.
Knowledge theory
Organizational knowledge creation
Ikujiro Nonaka
Connect lived experience with useful shared records.
Application & sources
In our work
Bring practical know-how into conversation and drafts. Capture adopted agreements with a maintainer, accessible location, and review point.
Data · Execution
In context
Nonaka’s theory connects tacit and explicit knowledge. Records complement experience, practice, and relationships.
Source
[11] Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.5.1.14.
Visualization framework
The C4 model
Simon Brown
Show the right detail at the right scale.
Application & sources
In our work
Keep organization, team, and profile views connected through stable identifiers. Let each view answer a clear question for its audience.
Ownership · Data
In context
C4 describes software architecture. Relationprint adapts the principle of connected levels of detail into its own human-system diagrams.
Source
[12] Brown, S. The C4 Model for Visualising Software Architecture. Official model: hierarchical abstractions, diagrams, and notation. Reviewed 5 October 2026.
Operational guidance
Continuity planning
FEMA
Keep essential work covered as circumstances change.
Application & sources
In our work
Identify essential work and qualified cover. Confirm authority, access, handover, and activation conditions. Rehearse critical arrangements and review readiness.
Ownership · Data · Execution
In context
FEMA provides continuity guidance. Its principles are adapted proportionately; relevant legal, safety, and regulatory requirements receive specialist review.
Source
[13] Federal Emergency Management Agency (2018; updated 2024). Continuity Guidance Circular. Essential functions, succession, delegated authority, essential records, and exercises.
Start with a conversation
Bring one real situation.
Explore a useful starting point for your leadership, team, or organization.
Prefer to reflect first? The Capacity Snapshot offers 20 questions and an immediate personal summary.