Staffing and Procurement for Fast Flow

Organizations striving for adaptive fast flow face a common challenge: how to make staffing and procurement decisions that balance speed, expertise, and cost. While it is often tempting to assume that building everything in-house is the best option, the reality is more complex. Constraints in recruiting, budgets, and available know-how require pragmatic, context-sensitive approaches.

In this talk, I will examine how organizations can develop staffing and procurement strategies that actively support fast flow. The session will begin with the motivation behind addressing this topic, followed by a structured exploration of available options: internal teams, outsourcing (on-location, near-shore, off-shore and also AI), off-the-shelf solutions with or without customization, and Software-as-a-Service.

To support effective decision-making, I will demonstrate how Wardley Maps, Cynefin, and DDD domain classifications can be used as heuristics to evaluate which staffing and procurement approaches are appropriate in a given strategic context. Attendees will learn how to apply these perspectives to design delivery organizations that remain adaptable, resilient, and efficient over time.

Target Audience: Architects, engineering leaders, and decision-makers who are responsible for setting up and evolving delivery organizations.

Key Takeaways:

* A structured understanding of the staffing and procurement landscape
* Decision heuristics to evaluate sourcing strategies in context
* Practical guidance on combining architectural and organizational perspectives to achieve fast flow

Transcript

1. STAFFING & PROCUREMENT FOR FAST FLOW Michael Plöd @ Agile Meets Architecture 2026
2. MICHAEL PLÖD INNOQ FELLOW & INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT HTTPS://WWW.MICHAEL-PLOED.COM HTTPS://WWW.INNOQ.COM
3. WHY DO WE NEED A TALK ABOUT THIS? ISN’T THIS ALREADY ADRESSED BY TEAM TOPOLOGIES?
4. TEAM TOPOLOGIES DOES NOT EXPLICITLY DISCUSS STAFFING AND PROCUREMENT
5. THE PARADOX 01. FRAMEWORK 02. CLASSIFICATION 03. HEURISTICS 04. AI-INVOLVEMENT 05.
6. THE PARADOX
7. Domain ownership by stable, long-term teams Internal expertise in core areas Autonomous teams with deep context ARCHITECTURE NEEDS Vendor flexibility and rotating contractors Cost optimization over capability building Vendor Management PROCUREMENT NEEDS The gap between these two is where fast flow goes to die
8. LOSS OF KNOW-HOW VENDOR DEPENDENCY SECURITY RISK COMMUNICATION FRICTION STAFF DEMOTIVATION
9. “The fact that software delivery performance matters provides a strong argument against outsourcing the development of software that is strategic to your business, and instead bringing this capability into the core of your organization.”
10. FRAMEWORK
11. Domain Exploration Identify meaningful areas of expertise and activity of your product or organization THREE ACTIVITIES Strategic Classification Three lenses, each answering a different strategic question about your domains. Decision Heuristics Nine delivery options with dedicated heuristics based on the strategic classification
12. DOMAIN EXPLORATION
13. DOMAIN EXPLORATION Collaborative: never an architecture only exercise Involve: domain experts, UX, testers, customer-facing staff Methods: EventStorming, Domain Storytelling, DDD
14. IS IT A DOMAIN ? Is this something we do? Do we have a specific approach here? Is this an area with genuine expertise?
15. STRATEGIC CLASSIFICATION
16. IN THE STRATEGIC CLASSIFICATION, WE LOOK AT THE IDENTIFIED DOMAINS WITH THREE LENSES DDD CLASSIFICATIONS, WARDLEY MAPS, CYNEFIN FRAMEWORK
17. STRATEGIC QUESTION: 'IS THIS WHERE WE DIFFERENTIATE?' DDD CLASSIFICATIONS CORE SUPPORTING GENERIC High mid- to long-term differentiation. Your competitive edge. They enable your core to function but aren't where you win in the market. Many organizations do these the same way, no competitive advantage or differentiation.
18. CORE DOMAIN CHARTS FROM DDD-CREW
19. STRATEGIC QUESTION: 'PREDICTABLE SOLUTION OR EMERGENT OUTCOME?' CYNEFIN FRAMEWORK COMPLEX Unknown Unknowns Experimentation essential Emerging Practice COMPLICATED Known Unknowns Multiple paths Good practice CHAOTIC Lacking constraints Crisis mode Novel practice CLEAR Known Knowns Linear cause/effect Best practice DISORDER
20. STRATEGIC QUESTION: 'DOES THE MARKET PROVIDE THIS ON A GIVEN VISIBILITY LEVEL?' WARDLEY MAPS
21. EVOLUTION STAGES COMMODITY Ubiquitous, standardized, utility-like PRODUCT / RENTAL Stable, well-defined, widely available CUSTOM BUILT Growing, becoming more defined, scarce GENESIS Novel, uncertain, constantly changing Source: https://www.wardleymaps.com/glossary/evolution-stages
22. THREE LENSES ONE PICTURE Where should we invest most, where do we differentiate? What type of problem is this, how do we work on it? Where is this in its evolution and how visible is it on the value chain? DDD​ CYNEFIN WARDLEY ​ MAP
23. 1. In-house development & ownership 2. Mixed teams (internal + local service providers) 3. Local outsourced development 4. Near-shore outsourced development 5. Off-shore outsourced development 6. COTS + Customization 7. COTS - Minimal Customization 8. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) STAFFING & PROCUREMENT OPTIONS
24. DDD LENS Never give full ownership of a Core domain to an external provider RULE​ In modernization, use mixed teams to rebuild internal capability in Core domains RULE​
25. DDD LENS CORE SUPPORTING GENERIC 1. In-house 2. Mixed teams 2. Mixed teams 3. Local Outsourcing 4. Near-Shore Outsourcing 6. Customized COTS 7. COTS 8. SaaS 5. Off-Shore Outsourcing
26. CYNEFIN LENS Complexity always constrains your outsourcing ceiling RULE​ Any sourcing model in a Complex domain that relies on upfront specification will fail RULE​ The more unpredictable the domain, the closer the team must be to the organization RULE​
27. CYNEFIN LENS COMPLEX In-house or mixed teams small, autonomous, iterative COMPLICATED Expert-led teams local outsourcing with senior specialists CHAOTIC In-house crisis response; external experts as advisors only CLEAR COTS / SaaS / structured outsourcing (process-driven) DISORDER no sourcing decision until alignment
28. WARDLEY LENS Never build what the market already provides at Commodity stage RULE​ Never outsource what the market doesn't yet provide at Genesis stage RULE​ High visibility demands internal ownership, even when execution can be outsourced RULE​
29. WARDLEY LENS 1. In- house 2. Mixed teams 3. Local Outsourcing 4. Near- Shore Outsourcing 6. Customized COTS 7. COTS 8. SaaS 5. Off-Shore Outsourcing 1. In-house 2. Mixed teams
30. COMBINATION OF THE THREE LENSES
31. In-House Mixed Local Out Near-Shore Out Off-Shore Out COTS- Custom COTS SaaS CORE Complicated Genesis / Custom CORE Complicated Custom / Product SUPPORTING Complicated Product SUPPORTING Clear Product GENERIC Clear Commodity Internal Ownership Market / Platform FLOOR Driver: DDD - Wardley Map CEILING Driver: Cynefin
33. WARDLEY MAPS LEAVE THE ROOM Wardley already did its job. By the time you're asking which AI level is safe, the Wardley decision is already made. Evolution describes the market, not the mind. Wardley's genius is mapping component maturity against market availability. But AI delegation isn't about the component's position in the market. It's about whether the cognitive process of solving the problem can be specified, delegated, or must remain emergent.
34. AI accelerates execution (GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Claude Code) AI covers SDLC from planning to QA (BMad- style) AI models spec together with a human AI implements from detailed human spec LEVEL 1 CODING AGENTS LEVEL 2 SPEC-DRIVEN AGENTS LEVEL 3 AGENTIC MODELING​ LEVEL 4 FULL LIFECYCLE AGENTIC FOUR LEVELS OF AI-INVOLVEMENT DEPTH
35. HEURISTICS FOR AI-INVOLVEMENT DEPTH COMPLEX COMPLICATED CLEAR CORE SUPPORTING GENERIC If Core feels “Clear” it moves to supporting Reclassify In Generic you want to go for SaaS or COTS Look into MCP for integration In Generic you want to go for SaaS or COTS Look into MCP for integration In Generic you want to go for SaaS or COTS Look into MCP for integration L1 - Coding Agents L1 - Coding Agents L1 - Coding Agents L1 - Coding Agents L3 - Agentig Modeling sparring L3 - Agentig Modeling sparring L2 - Spec-Driven L3 - Agentic Modeling Co-Design L1 - Coding Agents L2 - Spec-Driven L3 - Agentic Modeling Co-Design L4 - Full Lifecycle L3 - Agentic Modeling
36. FOLLOW ME ON LINKED IN THE BIGGEST BOTTLENECK TO FAST FLOW ISN'T YOUR ARCHITECTURE. IT'S THE SOURCING DECISIONS MADE WITHOUT ARCHITECTURAL SENSIBILITY. MICHAEL PLÖD - WWW.MICHAEL-PLOED.COM