Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 28964ce309537a691e7c2d544418ada71bf55b145f3f992808c44a74fd0ff9ce

# Team Decision Matrix

Teams map recurring operational decisions onto a clear four-column grid to agree on who decides, who is consulted, and what level of agreement is required.

**Time:** 55 minutes. UWT suggested duration for realistic sorting, plenary negotiation, and recorded agreement
**People:** 4 to 24. Subgroups of 3 to 6 people, followed by whole-room alignment

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Establish explicit team agreements on which decision-making method applies to recurring team choices.
**Use it when:** Use during team chartering, after reorganization, or when team members report confusion over who holds authority to make specific calls.
**Skip it when:** Skip when dealing with an urgent one-off crisis that requires immediate top-down command, or when governance rules are strictly imposed by external legal regulations.

## Materials and tools

- One blank matrix poster or digital board per subgroup with 4 columns: Individual Decides, Specialist Decides with Consultation, Team Majority Vote, Team Unanimous Consensus
- One main plenary matrix poster or master digital board
- Sticky notes (one pad per subgroup)
- Felt markers (one per participant)
- Wall tape or digital workspace access
- Countdown timer

## Before participants arrive

1. Draw the four-column decision grid on butcher paper or prep digital whiteboard frames.
2. Ensure every subgroup table has sticky notes and markers ready.
3. Write three neutral sample decisions on the board as examples: 'Choosing a team retro format', 'Selecting a third-party code library', and 'Approving scheduled leave'.

## Say this to open

Teams lose momentum when every minor choice turns into a consensus debate, or when solo calls blindside colleagues. Today we will map our recurring decisions across four explicit styles: Individual, Consulted, Majority Vote, and Unanimous Consensus. Your task is to identify key recurring decisions and agree on where they belong.

## How to run it

### 1. Brainstorm recurring decisions (10 minutes)

Say the opening script. Spend 4 minutes working individually on sticky notes writing 3 to 5 recurring decisions. In subgroups, take 6 minutes to pool notes, remove duplicates, and pick 8 to 12 shared priorities per subgroup. Neutral example: 'Choosing a retro format' versus 'Changing an architecture standard'.

### 2. Sort decisions into the matrix (15 minutes)

In subgroups of 3 to 6, take each sticky note one by one. Place each into one of four columns: 1. Individual Decides, 2. Consulted, 3. Majority Vote, or 4. Consensus. If members disagree, place the note on the border line between the two debated columns.

### 3. Resolve boundary disputes and align (20 minutes)

Merge subgroup notes onto the master matrix, clustering duplicates. For contested border notes, give advocates 45 seconds to explain the risk. Test for consent: 'Can everyone live with this column for a 30-day trial?' If objections persist after 30 seconds of negotiation, the facilitator guides the room to default safely to the higher-consultation column.

### 4. Debrief and record agreements (10 minutes)

Review the master board. One designated person photographs or exports the matrix as the team's official charter artifact. Facilitate whole-room reflection using the debrief questions, hearing from 3 to 4 contributors across the room while capturing remaining open questions on a parking lot board.


## Debrief questions

- Which decisions were easiest to assign to an individual, and why?
- Which types of choices genuinely require full consensus instead of simple consultation?
- How will we test this matrix during our day-to-day work over the next two weeks?

**Finished output:** A completed four-column agreement chart listing recurring team decisions categorized by required level of consultation and consensus.

## Remote

Use a digital whiteboard with pre-formatted 4-column templates. Place participants in breakout rooms of 3 to 6 for steps 1 and 2, then bring everyone into the main room for steps 3 and 4 using screenshare and the master digital board.

## Hybrid

Pair in-person attendees with remote attendees in unified digital whiteboard breakout rooms, or assign an in-person scribe to mirror physical sticky notes onto the shared digital board visible to all participants on a main room display.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may submit decision ideas via typed chat or digital stickies instead of speaking aloud.
- Anyone may choose to observe a subgroup debate without being compelled to speak or defend a placement.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants want every decision placed in full consensus.**

Remind the team that consensus on daily low-stakes issues creates decision fatigue and bottleneck delays. Ask what specific harm occurs if one person decides after consulting others.

**Disagreement stalls the subgroup on a single edge-case item.**

Direct the subgroup to place the sticky note across the dividing line immediately and proceed to the next item, reserving boundary cases for the full-room alignment step.


## Terms used here

- Consulted Decision: A process where one designated owner listens to stakeholder input before making the final call alone.
- Consensus: A decision where all team members actively support or agree to abide by the chosen direction without formal objection.

## Participant material: Decision Matrix Columns Reference Sheet

Column 1: Individual Decides (Solo)
- Action: The assigned individual decides and informs others if needed.
- Typical fit: Low risk, high speed, routine personal workflow choices.

Column 2: Specialist / Leader Decides with Consultation
- Action: One person gathers perspectives from affected peers, then makes the final decision.
- Typical fit: Technical architecture, budget approvals, tool evaluation.

Column 3: Team Majority Vote
- Action: Options are proposed, debated briefly, and decided by a 51% or higher majority vote.
- Typical fit: Meeting scheduling, sprint team names, tactical process experiments.

Column 4: Team Unanimous Consensus
- Action: All members must agree or consent to proceed; any veto requires renegotiation.
- Typical fit: Core team norms, definitions of done, foundational policy shifts.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Management 3.0, Miro templates, and SessionLab catalogs as 'Team Decision Matrix', inspired by Management 3.0 Delegation Poker concepts.

Retained the core mechanic of sorting recurring team decisions into explicit authority and agreement bands, inspired by the Management 3.0 Delegation Poker and team decision practice documented by Miro and SessionLab. UWT added a 4-column framework, precise time allocations (55 minutes total), concrete setup examples, and a structured consent-based boundary resolution protocol.

[Management 3.0](https://management30.com/practice/team-decision-matrix/)

[Miro](https://miro.com/templates/team-decision-matrix/)

[SessionLab](https://www.sessionlab.com/methods/team-decision-matrix)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/team-decision-matrix/