Share this page:
Team Training & Adoption (TTA) Principles
Enterprise Architecture principles for building team capability in AI-assisted development.
Category
TTA
Principles
3
Focus
Building Team Capability for AI-Assisted Development
Status
🔍 Under Peer Review
Category Overview
flowchart TB
subgraph Training["TRAINING PROGRESSION"]
L1["Level 1: Foundation<br/><i>All devs</i><br/>Basic usage, Security"]
L2["Level 2: Advanced<br/><i>Senior devs</i><br/>Advanced prompts, Architecture"]
L3["Level 3: Leadership<br/><i>Tech leads</i><br/>Governance, Risk mgmt"]
L1 --> L2 --> L3
end
subgraph Principles["TTA PRINCIPLES"]
TTA001["TTA-001: Skills Development<br/><i>Structured training programs</i>"]
TTA002["TTA-002: Adoption Governance<br/><i>Responsible adoption mgmt</i>"]
TTA003["TTA-003: Knowledge Sharing<br/><i>Practice sharing mechanisms</i>"]
end
Key Concerns:
- Training curriculum by role and level
- AI-assisted coding vs. “vibe coding” distinction
- Gradual adoption with success criteria
- Knowledge sharing and community building
Principles in This Category
Relationship to Other Categories
flowchart TB
PS["PS: Planning &<br/>Strategy<br/><i>Strategy informs training needs</i>"]
PS --> TTA
TSI["TSI: Tool Selection<br/><i>New tools require training</i>"]
TTA["TTA: Training &<br/>Adoption<br/><i>Enables effective AI adoption</i>"]
DC["DC: Development<br/>& Coding<br/><i>Training enables dev practices</i>"]
TSI --> TTA
TTA --> DC
TTA --> GSC
GSC["GSC: Governance<br/>Security<br/><i>Training includes compliance</i>"]
TTA-001: Skills Development
Statement
Implement structured training programs that build AI-assisted development skills progressively by role and experience level.
Rationale
| Dimension |
Justification |
| Business Value |
Trained developers produce higher quality AI-assisted outputs faster |
| Technical Foundation |
AI tools require specific skills (prompting, review) not taught elsewhere |
| Risk Mitigation |
Untrained users may misuse AI tools, creating security or quality issues |
| Human Agency |
Training ensures humans can effectively direct and validate AI outputs |
Implications
Training Level Framework
LEVEL 1: FOUNDATIONAL (All Developers)
| Topic |
Content |
| AI Capabilities |
Understand AI capabilities and limitations |
| Policies |
Enterprise policies and acceptable use |
| Security |
Security awareness and data protection |
| Basic Usage |
Basic tool usage and prompting |
| Duration: 4-8 hours |
Format: Online + hands-on |
LEVEL 2: ADVANCED (Senior Developers, Architects)
| Topic |
Content |
| Advanced Prompting |
Advanced prompting techniques |
| Architecture |
Architecture assistance patterns |
| Code Review |
AI output code review |
| Integration |
Custom AI integration |
| Duration: 8-16 hours |
Format: Workshop + projects |
LEVEL 3: LEADERSHIP (Tech Leads, Managers)
| Topic |
Content |
| Governance |
Governance and compliance |
| Risk |
Risk management |
| Enablement |
Team enablement |
| Metrics |
Metrics and measurement |
| Duration: 8 hours |
Format: Seminar + case studies |
| Area |
Implication |
| Development |
All developers complete Level 1 before using AI tools |
| Governance |
Training completion tracked; certification required |
| Skills |
Training curriculum maintained and updated regularly |
| Tools |
Training environments with sandboxed AI tool access |
Maturity Alignment
| Level |
Requirements |
| Base (L1) |
Level 1 training required; completion tracked |
| Medium (L2) |
All three levels implemented; role-based requirements |
| High (L3) |
Continuous learning; AI-assisted personalized training paths |
Governance
Compliance Measures
- Training curriculum documented and approved
- Completion tracking system in place
- Level 1 completion required before AI tool access
- Annual refresher training required
- Training effectiveness measured
Exception Process
| Condition |
Approval Required |
Documentation |
| Emergency tool access |
Manager |
Training deadline set |
| Experienced hire waiver |
Director |
Skills assessment |
| Contractor training |
Project Manager |
Scope limitations |
- TSI-001: Evaluation Framework (training for new tools)
- DC-002: Prompt Engineering (prompting skills training)
- PS-004: Structured Prompting (prompt governance training)
TTA-002: Adoption Governance
Statement
Manage AI tool adoption through defined governance stages with success criteria and responsible scaling.
Rationale
| Dimension |
Justification |
| Business Value |
Phased adoption reduces risk and validates ROI before scaling |
| Technical Foundation |
Gradual rollout identifies integration and workflow issues early |
| Risk Mitigation |
Governance prevents uncontrolled AI proliferation and shadow IT |
| Human Agency |
Humans control adoption pace; metrics guide decisions |
Implications
flowchart LR
subgraph Stages["ADOPTION STAGES"]
Pilot["PILOT<br/><i>Small team, low-risk projects</i>"]
Validate["VALIDATE<br/><i>Measure success, document learnings</i>"]
Expand["EXPAND<br/><i>Broader teams, refine guidance</i>"]
Standardize["STANDARDIZE<br/><i>Org-wide rollout, standard practices</i>"]
Pilot --> Validate --> Expand --> Standardize
end
Success Criteria by Stage
| PILOT |
VALIDATE |
EXPAND |
STANDARDIZE |
| Tool works |
Quality met |
Scaled to 3+ teams |
All teams trained |
| No security incidents |
Productivity improved |
Best practices documented |
Governance operational |
| Team positive |
ROI validated |
|
|
| Area |
Implication |
| Development |
Teams participate in structured adoption programs |
| Governance |
Stage gates with defined success criteria |
| Skills |
Change management and adoption facilitation skills |
| Tools |
Metrics collection and reporting infrastructure |
Maturity Alignment
| Level |
Requirements |
| Base (L1) |
Pilot program defined; basic success criteria |
| Medium (L2) |
Full governance model; metrics-driven stage progression |
| High (L3) |
Automated adoption tracking; predictive scaling recommendations |
Governance
Compliance Measures
- Adoption stages documented with success criteria
- Stage progression requires approval
- Metrics collected at each stage
- Learnings documented and shared
- Rollback procedures defined
Exception Process
| Condition |
Approval Required |
Documentation |
| Accelerated adoption |
Director |
Business justification |
| Skip stage |
VP + Governance |
Risk acceptance |
| Emergency rollback |
Tech Lead |
Incident report |
- PS-002: Strategic Integration (strategy guides adoption)
- TSI-001: Evaluation Framework (tools evaluated before pilot)
- GSC-001: Governance Framework (adoption within governance)
TTA-003: Knowledge Sharing
Statement
Establish mechanisms for sharing AI-assisted development practices, patterns, and lessons learned across teams.
Rationale
| Dimension |
Justification |
| Business Value |
Knowledge sharing multiplies ROI from AI investments across organization |
| Technical Foundation |
Patterns and anti-patterns emerge from collective experience |
| Risk Mitigation |
Sharing failures prevents repeated mistakes; sharing successes accelerates adoption |
| Human Agency |
Humans curate and validate shared knowledge; AI assists discovery |
Implications
flowchart TB
subgraph Sources["KNOWLEDGE SOURCES"]
Individual["Individual Discovery"]
Team["Team Patterns"]
Project["Project Learnings"]
Org["Organization Standards"]
end
subgraph Repository["KNOWLEDGE REPOSITORY"]
Prompts["Prompt library (categorized, tested)"]
Patterns["Pattern catalog (what works, what doesn't)"]
Cases["Case studies (success stories, failures)"]
FAQ["FAQ and troubleshooting guides"]
end
subgraph Sharing["SHARING MECHANISMS"]
direction LR
CoP["Communities of Practice"]
KB["Knowledge Base & Wiki"]
Training["Training Updates"]
CoP <--> KB <--> Training
end
Sources --> Repository
Repository --> Sharing
| Area |
Implication |
| Development |
Teams contribute to and consume shared knowledge |
| Governance |
Knowledge review process ensures quality and accuracy |
| Skills |
Facilitation and curation skills for knowledge stewards |
| Tools |
Knowledge management platform with search and discovery |
Maturity Alignment
| Level |
Requirements |
| Base (L1) |
Basic knowledge repository; voluntary contributions |
| Medium (L2) |
Community of practice; curated content; regular sharing events |
| High (L3) |
AI-assisted knowledge discovery; automated pattern detection |
Governance
Compliance Measures
- Knowledge repository established and accessible
- Contribution guidelines documented
- Content review process defined
- Sharing events scheduled regularly
- Knowledge usage metrics tracked
Exception Process
| Condition |
Approval Required |
Documentation |
| Confidential learnings |
Legal/Compliance |
Sanitization plan |
| External sharing |
Communications |
Approval and review |
| Deprecated content |
Knowledge Steward |
Archive decision |
- TTA-001: Skills Development (training integrates shared knowledge)
- PS-004: Structured Prompting (prompt library maintenance)
- DC-002: Prompt Engineering (prompt patterns shared)
Category Summary
Principle Matrix
| Principle |
BASE (L1) |
MEDIUM (L2) |
HIGH (L3) |
| TTA-001 Skills Development |
Level 1 required |
All levels + role-based |
AI-assisted personalized |
| TTA-002 Adoption Governance |
Pilot + basic criteria |
Full model metrics-driven |
Automated tracking + predictive |
| TTA-003 Knowledge Sharing |
Basic repo voluntary |
Community + curated |
AI-assisted discovery |
Legend: Requirements increase with maturity level
Critical Distinction: AI-Assisted vs. “Vibe Coding”
| “VIBE CODING” ❌ |
AI-ASSISTED CODING ✅ |
| Describe end product |
Iterative interaction |
| AI handles all details |
Developer guides AI |
| No engineering needed |
Engineering required |
| Result: Unreliable |
Result: High quality |
⚠️ Training MUST distinguish these approaches
Key Takeaways
- Training is prerequisite - No AI tool access without appropriate training
- Levels match roles - Different training for developers, seniors, leaders
- Adopt gradually - Phased rollout with success criteria at each stage
- Share actively - Knowledge multiplies when shared across organization
- Distinguish coding approaches - AI-assisted ≠ “vibe coding”
Next Steps
License