ABPA Starter Kit
The ABPA plan is not another note-writing track. The output is a set of business decision artifacts that can survive interviews, consulting discussions, architecture reviews, and delivery governance.
ABPA-180 Starter Kit
ABPA = AI BA x Product x Architect. This folder turns
docs/AI_BA_PRODUCT_ARCHITECT_180_PLAN.mdfrom a curriculum into reusable work assets.
Purpose
The ABPA plan is not another note-writing track. The output is a set of business decision artifacts that can survive interviews, consulting discussions, architecture reviews, and delivery governance.
This folder is additive. It does not replace earlier Web3, architecture, Solidity, LLM, DSDB, AIPA, trading, finance-design, or daily-note materials. Those remain useful learning assets. ABPA only adds a BA/PM/architecture lens on top of them.
Use this folder when you want to:
- start a new AI transformation case study,
- convert a PRD into eval-ready requirements,
- explain why an AI system should or should not be built,
- prepare an AI BA / AI PM / AI Solutions Architect interview story,
- turn existing AML Copilot work into an executive-ready portfolio artifact.
Folder Structure
| Path | Purpose |
|---|---|
templates/ | Reusable blank templates for each ABPA asset |
capstone-aml/ | First filled capstone using the existing AML Copilot assets |
interview/ | Interview question bank and answer scaffolds for AI BA / AI PM / AI Architect roles |
../LEARNING_ASSET_GOVERNANCE.md | Preservation, review, and portfolio-conversion system for all learning assets |
Recommended Workflow
1. Pick a business scenario.
2. Copy the templates you need.
3. Fill evidence before opinion.
4. Map every important requirement to an eval, signal, owner, or control.
5. Summarize the decision in one page.
Evidence Hierarchy
| Evidence strength | Examples | How to use |
|---|---|---|
| Strong | production metrics, labeled external dataset, observed user workflow, CI result, trace export | Decision basis |
| Medium | internal synthetic dataset, expert interview, prototype usability test, vendor trial | Hypothesis support |
| Weak | vendor demo, generic survey, model benchmark unrelated to workflow | Never use alone |
ABPA Asset Stack
| Layer | Asset | Question it answers |
|---|---|---|
| Problem | AI Opportunity Canvas | Is this worth doing with AI? |
| People | Stakeholder Evidence Map | Who can make it succeed or fail? |
| Workflow | BPMN + Pain Metrics | Where does work actually break down? |
| Requirements | Requirements-to-Eval Matrix | How will we know it works? |
| Data | Data Readiness Pack | Is the data fit for the AI decision? |
| Architecture | AI Architecture ADR Set | Which design choices are explicit and reversible? |
| Risk | AI Control Pack | How do we prevent and detect harm? |
| Operations | Operating Model + RACI | Who owns the system after launch? |
| Adoption | Adoption Dashboard | Are users actually changing their work? |
| Value | Business Case | Is the investment justified by measurable value? |
| Decision | Executive Decision Memo | What should leadership approve now? |
Template Index
| Template | Use it when |
|---|---|
templates/01-ai-opportunity-canvas.md | deciding whether a scenario deserves AI investment |
templates/02-stakeholder-evidence-map.md | mapping who has power, pain, evidence, and objections |
templates/03-bpmn-pain-metrics.md | converting process pain into measurable workflow facts |
templates/04-requirements-to-eval-matrix.md | making requirements testable through evals and thresholds |
templates/05-ai-control-pack.md | designing AI risk controls and release gates |
templates/06-executive-decision-memo.md | summarizing a decision for sponsors |
templates/07-data-readiness-pack.md | proving data quality, labels, access, and governance readiness |
templates/08-ai-architecture-adr-set.md | documenting AI architecture choices and reversal triggers |
templates/09-operating-model-raci.md | assigning owners for product, evals, data, risk, operations, and adoption |
templates/10-adoption-dashboard.md | tracking usage, trust, quality, behavior change, and value realization |
templates/11-business-case.md | turning workflow impact into funding gates and ROI logic |
templates/12-portfolio-evidence-map.md | mapping notes, code, PRDs, evals, and capstones into interview evidence |
Current Capstone
Start here:
capstone-aml/README.mdcapstone-aml/AML_ABPA_10_DAY_STARTER.mdcapstone-aml/AML_30_DAY_DEEPENING_PLAN.md
Interview Pack
interview/AI_BA_PM_ARCHITECT_INTERVIEW_BANK.md
2026+ AI Expansion Tracks
These are new expansion tracks, not just ABPA starter material:
../AI_2026_EXPANSION_START_HERE.md../AI_NEW_DEMANDS_2026_EXPANSION.md../AI_FOUNDATIONS_CLASSIC_PAPERS_PLAN.md../AGENTIC_ENTERPRISE_ARCHITECTURE_90_PLAN.md../AI_GOVERNANCE_EVALOPS_RISK_90_PLAN.md../AI_BA_PM_PRACTICE_LAB.md../AI_ROLE_COMPETENCY_MATRIX_2026.md../FINANCIAL_RETAIL_AI_CASE_PORTFOLIO.md../AI_ARCHITECTURE_DIAGRAM_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_LONG_TERM_KNOWLEDGE_GRAPH_AND_REVIEW_SYSTEM.md../AI_INTERVIEW_PORTFOLIO_STORYLINE_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_VENDOR_BUILD_BUY_ADOPTION_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_REQUIREMENTS_TO_EVAL_COOKBOOK.md../AI_OPERATING_MODEL_RACI_RUNBOOK.md../AI_ARCHITECTURE_REVIEW_GATE_CHECKLISTS.md../AI_CONTEXT_ENGINEERING_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_EXPANSION_MASTER_INDEX.md../AI_CASE_DRILL_WORKBOOK_30_DAYS.md../AI_EXECUTIVE_COMMUNICATION_MEMO_PACK.md../AI_PLATFORM_PM_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_REGULATORY_RESPONSE_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_DATA_PRODUCT_MANAGEMENT_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_BOARD_AUDIT_COMMITTEE_GOVERNANCE_PACK.md../AI_CAPABILITY_ASSESSMENT_RUBRIC.md../AI_RETRIEVAL_EVAL_GRAPH_RAG_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_PLATFORM_SECURITY_GATEWAY_LAB.md../AI_REGULATOR_EXAM_SIMULATION_PACK.md../AI_ADVANCED_CASE_DRILL_WORKBOOK_60_DAYS.md../AI_MEMORY_CONTEXT_STATE_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_MULTI_AGENT_ORCHESTRATION_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_OBSERVABILITY_COST_SLO_PLAYBOOK.md../AI_AGENT_PROTOCOLS_MCP_A2A_PLAYBOOK.md
It uses existing repository evidence:
docs/AML_COPILOT_PRD.mdsrc/aml/types.tssrc/aml/evalBaseline.tssrc/aml/failureTaxonomy.tssrc/aml/groundTruthEval.tssrc/aml/__tests__/aml.test.tssrc/aml/__tests__/p1evals.test.ts
Quality Bar
An ABPA artifact is complete only if it answers four questions:
- What decision does this support?
- What evidence backs it?
- What uncertainty remains?
- What should be tested next?