The situation
This fictional example follows a proposed change and a later finding that reopens a responsibility decision.
A training provider cancels a course. The booking team records the cancellation and the course team identifies alternatives, but the learner receives no clear answer about who will arrange a replacement. The service owner must decide how to make resolution reliable without replacing the whole booking service.
Business intent
Outcome O1 (Accepted resolution): the learner receives a timely resolution they accept, with one named person responsible until it is confirmed.
Principle P1 (Learner agreement): an alternative requires the learner’s agreement.
Requirement R1 (Continuous ownership): preserve the learner’s agreement and continuous case ownership through every handover. Include an escalation path if no acceptable alternative is available.
Start with cancellations of courses run by the provider. Refund policy and partner-run courses are outside this first increment and require escalation.
The service owner proposes observing time to confirmed resolution, cases without a current owner, incorrect bookings and staff effort. Current baselines and an acceptable resolution-time target are unknown. Agree them before judging results. These questions sit in the service brief and review record.
Business relationships
| Identifier | Item | Relationship that matters |
|---|---|---|
| C1 (Resolve a cancelled booking) | Capability: resolve a cancelled booking | Contributes to O1. |
| VS1 (Cancellation resolution) | Value stream: understand options, agree resolution, receive confirmation | Describes value reaching the learner; C1 supports these stages. |
| PR1 (Resolution process) | Process: open case, assign owner, contact learner, agree alternative, confirm | Carries out the work needed for C1. |
| RO1 (Case owner) | Case owner | Remains responsible through PR1 until resolution or an accepted transfer. |
| I1 (Cancellation case record) | Cancellation case record | Contains the owner, options, learner agreement, state and confirmation reference. |
| A1 (Responsibility and information) | Responsibility and information relationship | RO1 maintains I1 through PR1; R1 constrains the handover. |
These identifiers link the narrative, completed records and downloadable relationship table.
The first increment
| Option | What changes? | What must be checked? |
|---|---|---|
| Process-only first increment | Assign one owner and use a shared case record. | Staff can see the current owner and agreement; a transfer is explicitly accepted. |
| Later system support | Add assigned ownership and agreement history to existing booking software. | Permissions, duplicate updates, history and failed notifications preserve R1. |
| Wider service replacement | Replace a larger part of booking and course coordination. | The additional scope, transition work and support cost justify the benefit. |
Decision D1 (Process-only trial): propose a trial of the process-only increment to learn what can be achieved with a small change. The service owner would approve the trial and its conditions; the case owner would handle individual cases within those conditions.
Check V1 (Two-handover check): walk a cancellation through two staff handovers. At each step, the receiving person must be able to identify the owner, the learner’s accepted choice and the next action from I1. A missing or conflicting agreement leaves the case unresolved. This check is specified here; it has not been run against a real service.
A wider responsibility
Hypothetical observation L1 (Partner confirmation gap): an acceptable alternative is run by a partner, but the partner has not accepted responsibility for confirming the booking. The case owner cannot resolve that gap within the agreed scope.
| Record | Trial baseline | Proposed change after L1 |
|---|---|---|
| O1 and P1 | An accepted resolution; the learner agrees to the alternative. | Retain both. |
| A1 | One internal case owner maintains the agreement and resolution record. | Retain the internal owner and define who accepts the partner handover. |
| I1 | Owner, options, agreement, state and confirmation reference. | Add partner acceptance and confirmation responsibility. |
| D1 | Trial internal cancellations; escalate partner cases. | Keep the trial limited until the service owner agrees partner responsibilities. |
| V1 | Check two internal handovers. | Add a partner-handover scenario before extending the trial. |
The review changes the affected relationships and checks, retaining the accepted purpose and agreement principle. A finding that challenges either of those decisions would reopen it explicitly.
Reviewing the result
O1 gives the intended outcome; P1 and R1 constrain the change. A1 connects work, responsibility and information. D1 records the proposed choice; V1 explains how to check it. L1 gives a hypothetical reason to revise part of the design.
Compare method effort with service results separately. Record elapsed time to an accepted decision, waiting and rework; then observe case resolution, incorrect bookings, support effort and the cost of adding a partner. Review whether the records made a handover easier. Useful longevity would require following the service over time, including later change or retirement.
Methodology configuration
The example uses a service brief, a case record and a service review. Map these to your own records and activities, using the terms familiar to your team. See Methodology configuration and download the blank and completed records.
Continue with the case record to explore its definitions, state changes and information checks.