Large People ModelHuman Operating Architecture

Template & Working Tool · LPM Knowledge Object

Communication Map

A map of how information, decisions, updates, escalations, and commitments move across teams.

Mapv1.0.0Communication

Problem it solves

Communication overload creates misalignment, rework, and hidden coordination cost.

Who should use it

Outcome owners, transformation leads, and cross-functional teams

Estimated time

30–45 minutes for a first working session

Three-Step Quick Start

1Map the current communication flow for a workflow or initiative.
2Identify gaps between updates, decisions, and records.
3Redesign the forums and channels that carry critical work.

Open the public PDF

The PDF action is direct and public. All available packaged formats are also public and require no registration.

Object Overview

What this object is

Communication Map is a reusable LPM knowledge object that helps organizations expose communication paths that create delay, overload, duplicated updates, or missing decision evidence. It gives teams a structured way to make communication visible, owned, and reviewable.

Why it matters

As companies scale AI, weak operating-model structures become amplified. This object helps prevent ai summarizes noise and makes confusion appear organized. by defining ownership, flow, and handoff boundaries.

Layer Alignment

Where it fits in LPM

Primary LPM layer

Communication Architecture

Designs how information, intent, decisions, and commitments move across teams without creating noise or confusion.

Supporting layers

No secondary layer assigned.

Why it belongs here

This object sits in Communication because it turns communication into a concrete artifact with owners, evidence, review cadence, and action paths.

Weakness it exposes

AI summarizes noise and makes confusion appear organized.

Usage

How to use it

1Select the business area, workflow, platform, or AI initiative being assessed.
2Identify the accountable owner and required participants.
3Complete the working DOCX version with the team.
4Use the PDF as the reference guide.
5Capture decisions, gaps, risks, and owners.
6Convert outputs into backlog items, governance actions, or Lapemo onboarding inputs.
7Review on the recommended cadence: Quarterly or during operating model redesign.

File Formats

Which file should you use?

PDF

Executive/reference version

Best for education, pre-read, sharing, and workshops.

DOCX

Editable working artifact

Best for facilitation, implementation, and client or internal completion.

Markdown

Website/source version

Best for publishing, documentation, and content reuse.

JSON

Structured knowledge object schema

Best for future Lapemo ingestion, scoring, validation, prompts, and workflows.

Outputs

What the organization should expect

Clearer ownership

Better decision traceability

Reduced ambiguity

Evidence-backed conversations

Better AI readiness

Better handoff into Lapemo later

Communication flow map

Overload risks

Improvement actions

Advanced specification, company-size variants, and future product notes

Company Scale

How this changes by company size

500+ employees

Use this to create baseline clarity.

Focus on named owners, simple governance, and reducing informal workarounds.

Included in this object.

5,000+ employees

Use this to standardize across functions and platforms.

Focus on cross-functional ownership, decision rights, evidence, and repeatability.

Included in this object.

10,000+ employees

Use this to create enterprise control and reviewability.

Focus on federation, risk tiers, governance bodies, AI boundaries, and auditability.

Included in this object.

Artifact Content

Source artifact

The full artifact content below is rendered from the Markdown source packaged with Communication Map.

What this knowledge object does

The Communication Map defines how important information is supposed to move across the enterprise. It separates collaboration from official record, status from decision, signal from noise, and AI-assisted communication from human-approved communication.

For AI scaling, this object matters because AI will increase the speed, volume, and polish of communication. Without a communication map, companies get faster confusion: more summaries, more channels, more unclear owners, and more decision latency.

Core principles

Communication is an operating system: Channels, forums, rituals, alerts, and updates shape how work moves and how risk becomes visible.
Every message needs a source of truth: High-value communication should point back to a system, decision, owner, artifact, or evidence record.
Not all channels are equal: Slack, Teams, email, meetings, dashboards, product tools, and executive forums should have clear purposes.
Urgency needs rules: Escalation should be based on severity, decision rights, customer impact, control risk, AI risk, and dependency impact.
AI changes communication load: AI can summarize, route, and draft communication, but it can also amplify noise, stale facts, and false confidence.
Communication gaps are ownership gaps: When people do not know where to communicate, who to inform, or where truth lives, accountability breaks.
The map must be maintained: As teams, systems, vendors, AI workflows, and forums change, communication paths need review and version control.

Required fields

Field	Definition	Required
Communication object ID	Unique identifier for the communication path, forum, channel, ritual, alert, or broadcast	Yes
Communication type	Decision, status, risk, incident, dependency, customer issue, employee issue, AI event, governance event, launch, change, or executive update	Yes
Purpose	What this communication exists to accomplish	Yes
Primary audience	Who needs to receive, act on, approve, or be aware of the communication	Yes
Sender / initiator	Role or system that starts the communication	Yes
Accountable owner	Person or role accountable for quality, timing, accuracy, and follow-through	Yes
Source of truth	System, record, dashboard, artifact, decision log, evidence pack, or owner record that supports the message	Yes
Primary channel	Official channel where this communication belongs	Yes
Secondary channel	Optional support channel for awareness, reminders, discussion, or routing	Optional
Cadence / trigger	When the communication happens: event-driven, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, launch, incident, risk threshold, or decision gate	Yes
Expected response	Inform, acknowledge, decide, approve, reject, review, escalate, resolve, or archive	Yes
Response SLA	Expected response window based on severity and business impact	Required when action-bearing
Escalation trigger	Condition that moves communication to another owner, forum, control group, or executive level	Required when material
Decision link	Connection to Decision Log, Decision Rights Matrix, Escalation Map, or approval record	Required when decision-bearing
Evidence link	Connection to Evidence Checklist, source dashboard, data object, audit record, or support record	Required when claim-bearing
AI involvement	None, AI summarized, AI routed, AI drafted, AI classified, AI recommended, AI sent, or AI executed	Yes
Human review rule	When a human must approve, validate, or correct the communication before use	Required when AI-assisted or material
Sensitivity level	Public, internal, confidential, restricted, regulated, customer-sensitive, employee-sensitive, or legal-sensitive	Yes
Retention / archive location	Where the communication record is stored for future replay, audit, onboarding, or governance review	Yes
Review date	Date the communication path must be reviewed, refreshed, replaced, or retired	Yes
Version	Artifact version, owner, last reviewed date, and change history	Yes

Scoring logic

Score	Meaning
0	Communication is informal, personality-driven, scattered across channels, and not tied to source systems or decision records.
1	Some channels and forums exist, but ownership, source of truth, cadence, escalation, or response expectations are unclear.
2	Communication paths are documented, but not consistently connected to decisions, evidence, AI workflows, or governance controls.
3	Critical communication is owner-backed, source-linked, channel-specific, escalation-aware, and reviewed on a defined cadence.
4	Communication is governed as a live operating layer with AI-assisted routing, evidence links, audit trails, stale-path detection, and executive visibility.

Communication types

Type	Purpose	Common source of truth
Decision communication	Records what was decided, by whom, why, and what changes downstream	Decision Log, decision forum, product council
Status communication	Shares progress, blockers, risks, and next actions without creating a decision by itself	Jira, portfolio dashboard, weekly update
Risk communication	Signals risk exposure, control issue, dependency risk, customer impact, vendor risk, or AI risk	Risk register, GRC, escalation forum
Incident communication	Coordinates urgent operational, technical, customer, compliance, or AI-related response	Incident tool, war room, executive alert
Dependency communication	Clarifies cross-team need, owner, date, blocker, impact, and escalation path	Program board, Jira, dependency register
Change communication	Explains what is changing, who is affected, timing, training, adoption, and support path	Change plan, Teams post, enablement hub
Governance communication	Confirms review, approval, exception, policy interpretation, or control decision	GRC, governance forum, approval workflow
AI event communication	Reports AI launch, model change, agent action, drift, hallucination, boundary breach, human override, or value result	Model registry, AI control plane, AI owner register

Channel rules

Channel	Best use	Boundary
Email	Formal external communication, executive summaries, approvals when workflow tooling is not available	Do not use as system of record for active work or hidden approvals
Slack / Teams chat	Fast collaboration, awareness, triage, lightweight discussion, working-team context	Do not treat chat as final decision memory unless captured elsewhere
Meetings	Alignment, sense-making, decision preparation, tradeoff discussion, cross-functional resolution	Every material meeting needs output, owner, and record link
Jira / work system	Work status, backlog, dependency, execution state, blockers, delivery ownership	Avoid duplicating work state in decks and chats without links
Confluence / knowledge base	Durable documentation, operating standards, decisions, runbooks, onboarding context	Needs owner, review date, and source links
Dashboards / BI	Metrics, trends, adoption, performance, financial, risk, and value signals	Needs metric owner, refresh logic, and evidence confidence
GRC / risk tool	Policy, controls, risks, exceptions, audit, regulatory or security evidence	Must link back to decision and source evidence
AI tools / agents	Summarization, routing, classification, drafting, recommendation, and workflow assistance	Material output needs source, confidence, and human review rules

Map template

Communication path	Object / event	Accountable owner	Source of truth	Official channel	Response expectation	Escalation rule
Decision approval	[Decision type]	[Decision owner]	[Decision Log / Rights Matrix]	[Forum or workflow]	[Decision needed by date]	[Escalation if blocked]
AI risk event	[AI initiative or agent]	[AI owner + control owner]	[AI Owner Register + evidence]	[AI control channel]	[Severity-based SLA]	[Governance / executive trigger]
Dependency blocker	[Team or platform dependency]	[Dependency owner]	[Jira / dependency register]	[Work system + team channel]	[Delivery impact date]	[Program or exec path]
Customer impact	[Customer segment / account]	[Customer owner + product owner]	[CRM / support / evidence pack]	[Customer impact forum]	[Urgency by severity]	[Business and risk escalation]
Control exception	[Policy or control]	[Control owner]	[GRC / audit evidence]	[Governance forum]	[Compliance SLA]	[Risk executive path]
Operating model change	[Role, process, platform, or AI workflow]	[Change owner]	[LPM object + change record]	[Change channel]	[Launch cadence]	[Transformation council path]

AI communication controls

AI capability	Allowed use	Control rule
AI summarization	AI may summarize long threads, meetings, reports, or updates	Human verifies material claims, owners, dates, and decision implications
AI routing	AI may route messages based on type, severity, owner, or system	Routing rules must be explainable and reviewed
AI drafting	AI may draft status updates, executive summaries, customer notes, or change messages	Human approval required for external, sensitive, or decision-bearing communication
AI classification	AI may classify risk, urgency, affected layer, audience, or escalation tier	Classification must include confidence and override path
AI sending	AI may send low-risk internal notifications when preapproved	No autonomous external or high-risk communication without explicit controls
AI memory	AI may help maintain communication maps by detecting stale paths or missing owners	Human accepts changes before the knowledge object is updated

500+ employee version

Dimension	Recommended pattern	Design note
Primary problem	Communication is fast but inconsistent, driven by relationships, founders, strong operators, meetings, chat, and informal memory	Create simple official paths before AI accelerates noise
Minimum map	Critical decisions, risks, customer issues, AI pilots, dependencies, launches, and executive updates	Do not map every conversation
Channel standard	Define what belongs in chat, email, Jira, Confluence, dashboards, meetings, and decision logs	Stop treating every channel as equal
Owner standard	Every critical communication path has one accountable owner and one source of truth	No ownerless update paths
AI standard	AI can summarize and draft, but material communication must be human reviewed	Keep boundaries simple and strict
Review rhythm	Review monthly during scaling, hiring, new systems, major launches, or AI pilot expansion	Prevent tribal knowledge from hardening

5,000+ employee version

Dimension	Recommended pattern	Design note
Primary problem	Functions have mature channels, but communication breaks across departments, systems, governance forums, and transformation initiatives	Create cross-functional communication control
Minimum map	Enterprise initiatives, decision forums, dependencies, risk events, AI initiatives, data changes, customer impact, platform change, and governance approvals	Connect communication to operating objects
Channel standard	Separate collaboration channels from official record channels and executive control paths	Reduce status theater
Owner standard	Each communication path has business owner, operating owner, system owner, and governance owner where needed	Make handoffs explicit
AI standard	AI may route, summarize, and classify, but high-impact communication needs source links, confidence, and human approval	Prevent AI from creating false alignment
Review rhythm	Review quarterly and after major org, platform, AI, compliance, or operating-model changes	Treat stale paths as risk

10,000+ employee version

Dimension	Recommended pattern	Design note
Primary problem	Communication overload hides decision latency, duplicated forums, inconsistent executive updates, broken escalation, and ungoverned AI-generated summaries	Operate communication as an enterprise control layer
Minimum map	Enterprise communication taxonomy, official channels, decision forums, escalation tiers, AI events, regulatory paths, executive dashboards, and cross-region governance	Make communication auditable
Channel standard	Approved communication paths are tied to source systems, policy, audience, severity, retention, and decision authority	No hidden shadow operating model
Owner standard	Assign communication domain owners, source owners, control owners, and enterprise review bodies	Separate signal ownership from broadcast ownership
AI standard	AI-assisted communication must be logged, confidence-rated, source-linked, governed by sensitivity, and reviewable for regulated or material decisions	Agentic communication requires controls
Review rhythm	Review continuously through control-plane alerts, with formal quarterly governance and annual model refresh	Use automation to flag staleness, not silently rewrite

Workshop steps

Step	Action	Output
1	Select communication scope	Choose one initiative, business unit, platform, AI portfolio, operating layer, or enterprise forum set.
2	List critical communication types	Capture decisions, risks, dependencies, AI events, customer impact, incidents, launches, and governance events.
3	Identify official source of truth	Tie each communication path to a system, artifact, evidence pack, owner record, or decision record.
4	Assign owners and audiences	Name sender, accountable owner, primary audience, secondary audience, and approver where needed.
5	Define channels and response rules	Set official channel, backup channel, trigger, cadence, expected response, SLA, and retention path.
6	Attach escalation logic	Map severity, impact, blocked decision, AI risk, or control trigger to the right escalation path.
7	Add AI communication boundaries	Define where AI can summarize, route, draft, classify, send, or maintain the map.
8	Score and remediate	Score each path from 0 to 4 and turn gaps into ownership, channel, evidence, governance, or AI-control actions.

Validation rules

Every critical communication path must have one accountable owner.
Every claim-bearing communication must link to evidence or an explicit evidence gap.
Every decision-bearing communication must link to a decision record or approval path.
Every AI-assisted material communication must include AI involvement, confidence, and human review rule.
Every urgent or risk-bearing path must include escalation trigger and response SLA.
Every official communication path must define source of truth and retention location.
Every sensitive communication must include classification and approved channel handling.
Communication paths with missing owners, stale review dates, or unclear source of truth should be flagged for remediation.
Status updates should not create new decisions unless captured in the Decision Log or decision workflow.
AI should not silently update this object. It should propose changes for human approval.

AI prompts

Prompt	Use
Map creation prompt	Using the initiative, system, team, or forum context provided, create a Communication Map that lists critical communication types, audiences, channels, owners, source of truth, cadence, response expectations, escalation triggers, AI involvement, and review dates.
Gap detection prompt	Review this Communication Map and identify missing owners, unclear channels, duplicate forums, missing source of truth, stale review dates, ungoverned AI communication, weak escalation logic, and communication paths that create decision latency.
Scale adaptation prompt	Adapt this Communication Map for a [500 / 5,000 / 10,000+] employee company. Adjust governance depth, source-of-truth requirements, AI boundaries, response SLAs, escalation tiers, and executive visibility.
AI control prompt	Identify where AI may summarize, route, classify, draft, or send communication. For each use, define risk level, human review rule, source requirement, audit requirement, and escalation rule.
Maintenance prompt	Compare the current Communication Map against recent org changes, system changes, AI initiatives, governance changes, and incident patterns. Propose updates and mark each as approve, reject, defer, or needs human review.

Mapping rules

Connected object	Mapping rule
Ownership Map	Communication owner, source owner, escalation owner, AI owner, and control owner must map to named ownership records.
Decision Rights Matrix	Decision-bearing communication must map to decision authority, approver, consulted roles, and escalation rules.
Decision Log	Decisions created or changed through communication must be captured as decision records.
Evidence Checklist	Claim-bearing communication must map to evidence source, confidence, freshness, and reviewer.
Escalation Map	Urgent, blocked, risk-bearing, customer-impacting, or AI-risk communication must map to escalation paths.
Platform Structure	Official channels must map to the platforms where work, knowledge, data, governance, and AI activity are managed.
AI Initiative Owner Register	AI-generated, AI-routed, or AI-sent communication must map to the initiative, owner, risk tier, and control boundary.

Reuse model

This artifact should exist in four layers: a human-readable guide, a downloadable template, a machine-readable schema, and a guided Lapemo skill. AI can propose updates when communication paths become stale, owners change, systems change, AI initiatives expand, or escalation patterns reveal hidden bottlenecks. Human approval should remain required before the canonical object is updated.

Future Lapemo Use

The JSON schema turns communication map into software.

Lapemo can use this knowledge object as a guided workflow, scoring model, evidence record, governance input, and operating intelligence object. The schema is public for inspection and evaluation; production ingestion and governed execution remain separate product capabilities.