# Diverse and distributed teams *Source: · markdown twin of the entry page.* *An influence on **Dinis Cruz** — one of 25 entries in his register.* - **tier** stated — on Dinis Cruz's list, thin or absent in the corpus, awaiting his briefing document - **kind** practice - **status** stub — blocks 1 and 3, plus the research plan — awaiting Dinis Cruz's briefing document - **briefing** requested On Dinis Cruz's list as a practice rather than a person. The formative case is probably twenty years old and already in this register under another name. ## Block 1 — The anchor Working in diverse and distributed teams — a practice No single work. The likeliest formative instance is OWASP's global chapter model, which has [its own entry](../owasp/index.html) — the briefing needs to say whether that is the origin or a later example. *Linked, never rehosted.* ## Block 2 — In his own words The circumstantial case is strong enough to be worth stating and weak enough that it must not be presented as evidence. This estate's practices are unusually written-down: role definitions as documents, briefs as first-class artefacts, decisions recorded rather than remembered. **That is what a distributed habit looks like when it has been fully internalised** — but a habit that thorough could equally come from working with agents, who have no other way to receive context. Which of those came first is the question, and it is Dinis Cruz's. [OWASP's global chapters](../owasp/index.html) predate everything else here by two decades, which makes them the best candidate for the origin. ## Block 3 — The principle ***(hypothesis)* Distribution forces thinking to become explicit, written and asynchronous — and cognitive diversity is what stops a team agreeing quickly on the wrong thing.** Two claims bundled into one principle, which is usually a sign the entry has not been thought through yet. The briefing should separate them: distribution and diversity are different mechanisms with different failure modes. ## Block 7 — The wider library - **Team Topologies — Skelton & Pais** — the nearest published framework, and itself a discovered entry in this register ## Awaiting the briefing document Named by Dinis Cruz, with no direct corpus citation. The estate is full of *consequences* that would be consistent with this influence, which is not the same thing as evidence for it — and the difference is what the tier means. **Research plan.** [N7](../../admin/comms.html#n7). Three places to look, in order of likely yield: Dinis Cruz's management writing; the estate's own team-roles system, which reads like a formalisation of something learned earlier; and OWASP's global-chapter model as the formative experience. The question the briefing must answer: **which of these is the origin and which are consequences.** ## The corpus evidence None. This influence is on Dinis Cruz's own list and the corpus scan found nothing to attach to it — which is the definition of the STATED tier. --- CC BY 4.0 — Dinis Cruz, with AI co-authorship (Claude, Anthropic). The anchor work belongs to its author and is linked, not licensed here.