AI implementation. Regenerative commitments. Futures work. 

All share the same pattern: everyone claims authority, conventional metrics fail, proprietary solutions require accepting their framing before you can examine whether you need them.

You cannot distinguish which initiatives address constraints versus which exist because they sound necessary. Not because you lack capability. Because you have not examined implicit assumptions determining what constitutes evidence, who judges quality, what counts as progress.

The Universal Pattern

Why These Domains Share This Problem

Pattern recurs whenever these conditions combine:

• Multiple competing futures claim attention
• Signal-to-noise ratio exceeds filtering capacity
• Physical reality provides delayed or ambiguous feedback
• Conventional metrics fail
• Everyone claims authority
• Proprietary solutions dominate discourse

When these conditions combine, bottleneck shifts from execution to assumption examination. Every consultant helps with execution. No one examines assumptions determining whether you execute the right things.

Why Conventional Help Fails

Business Models Prevents the Examination You Need 

Consultants sell proprietary methodologies. Vendors sell proprietary solutions. Both require you to accept their framing before engagement begins. Neither can examine implicit assumptions that might reveal their offering is unnecessary.

Their business model prevents what you need: independent examination of assumptions before committing resources.

What We Provide

Independent. Provider-Agnostic. Pre-Sales Examination.

I help leaders of organisations (£5-30M, 30-150 people, London and South England) examine implicit assumptions in sectors where work gets tested by physical reality rather than presentations.

We examine root intention. Leaders think they want AI strategy or regenerative roadmap. Root intention examination reveals which implicit assumptions predominate about authority, evidence, progress. Surface examination shows which initiatives exist because they sound necessary versus because they address constraints.

Results:

• Decision meetings reduced ~30-50%
• Budgets freed up
• Leaders see which futures they actually consider plausible
  
• Theatre reduces, capability builds
• Work becomes more enjoyable

The Process in Three Phases

1. First Conversation (45 minutes)

You describe what feels backwards. I tell you what I hear. You decide accuracy.

2. Surface Implicit Assumptions (Months 1-3)

We examine root intention. Which implicit assumptions predominate about evidence, authority, progress. Which initiatives exist because they sound necessary versus because they address constraints. What constitutes actual progress in your sector.

3. Build Recognition Capability (Months 4-6)

Develop skill to recognise when you need to examine assumptions before adding initiatives. Hold contradictions without forcing resolution when assumptions conflict irreconcilably. Distinguish problems requiring better execution from problems requiring different assumptions.

Without This Examination

You add initiatives covering multiple futures because you cannot tell which future to prepare for. Theatre multiplies. Every initiative sounds necessary. No initiative addresses actual constraints. Capability degrades beneath surface of perfect metrics. Best people leave because they are tired of managing contradictions.

Or, examine assumptions first. See which initiatives matter. Redirect energy from theatre toward work that counts.

With Clear Assumptions

Decisions that took five meetings now take one. You cancel initiatives despite budget availability. Authority returns to people who understand the work. Best people stop looking tired.

Not because you adopted templates. Because you examined assumptions determining which initiatives matter.

Work becomes what it should be: clear, enjoyable, tested by reality rather than presentations.

Who This Serves

Leaders of organisations turning over £5-30M, 30-150 people, London and South England. Sectors where work gets tested by physical reality. Where the people you serve know enough about the discipline to judge quality.

Currently facing decisions about AI implementation, regenerative commitments, or futures work. Cannot tell which initiatives matter because signal-to-noise ratio exceeds filtering capacity and proprietary solutions require accepting framing before examination.

You recognised your exact situation reading this. Not just similar. Exact.

First Conversation

You Will Know in 45 Minutes

No slides. No pitch. No proprietary framework you must accept. You describe what feels backwards. I tell you what I hear. You decide if this examination addresses your actual situation.