PLAINREADS — TEAM CHARTER
Guide: https://plainreads.com/blog/team-charter-template

Draft this together. Describe observable agreements and test them with a real
working situation before treating the document as settled.

CHARTER PROMPTS
Purpose: What result does this team support?
Boundaries: What work belongs here? What requires another owner?
Responsibilities: Who maintains each part of the work? Who covers absences?
Decision rights: Who decides, contributes, approves, and needs to know?
Working agreements: What behavior can members reasonably rely on?
Disagreement: How do concerns reach the person authorized to resolve them?
Review: What triggers revision, and how will affected people learn of changes?

FICTIONAL EXAMPLE — THREE-PERSON OPERATIONS GROUP
Purpose: Keep the shared support guide accurate and usable.
Boundaries: Maintain explanations and links; do not independently change policy,
promise product changes, or resolve individual personnel matters.
Responsibilities: Lee maintains the queue, Robin coordinates drafting, and Sam
checks publication and announcements. Owners arrange coverage before absences.
Decisions: The group can correct formatting and broken links. The policy owner
approves policy wording. The sponsor resolves conflicts between departments.
Intake: Requests enter one queue and become commitments only after scope,
ownership, and priority have been agreed.
Response agreement: When working, acknowledge a direct request within one
business day. Acknowledgment does not promise completion. This window is an
illustrative negotiated agreement, not a universal service standard.
Risk agreement: Identify the blocked step and proposed next action early.
Agree who informs the requester before changing a delivery expectation.
Review: Revisit after the next delivery cycle or when membership, responsibilities,
or repeated friction changes the way the group works.

PREPARATION QUESTIONS FOR EACH MEMBER
What do you need from others to do reliable work?
What can others reasonably expect from you?
Where has an unclear expectation caused friction?

ORIGINAL 40-MINUTE DISCUSSION AGENDA
0–8: Purpose and boundaries.
8–18: Responsibilities and authority.
18–32: Recurring friction and observable agreements.
32–40: Test scenarios and next review.
Extend the discussion as needed; this is a facilitation suggestion.

TEST SCENARIO
A late request arrives while an existing commitment is already at risk.
Ask every member what happens next. Resolve different interpretations.

REVISION RECORD
Agreement changed / reason / effective date / affected people informed: