# Methodology selection guide · [Product] · [Team] · [Date] **Owner:** [PM] **Agreed with:** [tech lead, designer, team] **Review by:** [Date] ## 1. The work (last two quarters, from the tracker) - Share of work planned vs unplanned: [x]% / [y]% - Share of work ordered (known solution) vs complex (learning required): [x]% / [y]% - Typical item size: [hours / days / weeks] - Examples of each category: [three links] ## 2. The main risk (Chapter 00's four risks) Value / Usability / Feasibility / Viability, with evidence: ## 3. External commitments | Commitment | Type (date, scope, service level) | Truly fixed? | Owner | Date | |---|---|---|---|---| | | | | | | ## 4. Coordination - Teams sharing this codebase or backlog: - Dependencies that could be removed by an API, contract or platform capability: ## 5. Verification strength - Automated tests: strong / partial / weak - Evals for AI behavior: strong / partial / weak / not applicable - Share of changes written mainly by coding agents: ## 6. Default method | Situation | Default | |---|---| | Ordered, fixed external date and scope | Plan-driven, iterative build inside gates | | Complex, value risk high | Scrum with dual-track discovery | | Interrupt-driven, service commitments | Kanban with WIP limits and an SLE | | Fixed date, flexible scope | Appetite-bounded cycles (Shape Up style) or Scrum with appetites | | Five or more teams, real dependencies | Remove dependencies first; then LeSS, or SAFe for portfolio governance | | Agent-heavy, strong CI and evals | Continuous flow with a fixed review, retro and planning cadence | **Chosen method:** [method] **Why (one paragraph):** **What would make us change it:** [specific trigger, e.g. unplanned work above an agreed share for two months]