Week long courses are great at filling bucket, but they sometimes struggle to light the fire (William Butler Yeats quote)


With the Roundtable, attendees are introduced to a topic during a facilitated discussion. The outcome of the discussion is an understanding of the topic and series of safe-to-fail experiments.

These experiments are then implemented with coaching assistance from me during normal product development time, after which point we have a facilitated retrospective to see what findings we have from the experiments.

In theory, you could run 2 groups concurrently as introducing the topic shouldn't take more than half a day - You could have 1 group in the morning & the other in the afternoon.

This means that the attendees in each group are not only off the product for half a day, when they do get onto a product they are adding value immediately by applying what they have just learned & discussed.

As a minimum, I'm on-site for introducing the topic and for the retrospective to facilitate the feedback discussion.

As for the coaching element, I can be on-site for as little or as often as you require. I do prefer to be on-site immediately after the discussion to help with any teething problems or concerns to get the ball rolling.

To wrap up the cycle, I would hope that the attendees on the Roundtable would be having a retrospective among themselves to see what value they got out of the course. This feedback could then be discussed with me so that we can adjust our relationship accordingly.

Below is an example of a typical Roundtable cycle: