Workshops & Training

Workshops are working sessions, not presentations. Participants arrive with a real current objective and leave with a real MAP for it, having been walked through each phase and required to produce the artifact. Case studies are used sparingly, because a framework practiced on someone else's problem does not transfer.

The core curriculum covers all six phases with disproportionate time on the two that are hardest to do well. Clarify receives extended attention because separating the presenting complaint from the underlying condition from the trigger is a genuine skill that takes practice, and getting it wrong invalidates everything downstream. Comprehend receives extended attention because classifying an item as fact, constraint, or preference is where most participants discover their own habits — particularly the habit of presenting preferences as constraints.

The remaining phases are taught with an emphasis on writing to standard. Participants draft objectives and assignments, then exchange them and attempt to execute each other's as written. Nothing teaches specificity faster than watching a competent colleague be unable to act on your assignment without asking three questions.

The reporting instruments — SITREP and AAR — are taught as practiced skills, because both are easy to understand and difficult to do honestly. Participants write a SITREP about a week that went badly and conduct an AAR on a real initiative that underperformed. The AAR module includes explicit instruction on the framing that makes it work: the review evaluates the plan, not the person. Without that framing, organizations conduct AARs that function as blame allocation, and people learn to report defensively.

Workshops are frequently delivered as the front end of a longer relationship — either as preparation for internal practitioners pursuing certification, or as a way for an organization to evaluate the method before committing to a full engagement.