Oh, of course, simply sprinkling a few 'eminent female thought leaders' around is exactly the same as genuine diversity, equity, and inclusion. And those stock photos on the website? Clearly, a comprehensive representation of every marginalized group. Job well done!

Naturally, those founders, with their exceedingly high facilitator standards, wouldn't dream of lowering them. After all, quality trumps representation, right? especially after their spectacular foray into trusting outsiders. Clearly, that went swimmingly.

So, they've retreated to their cozy circle of trust. Because, you know, expanding your network is so overrated. And honestly, if you're not trusted by anyone outside that tiny circle, you're clearly hanging out with all the right people.


And let's not forget the founders' incredibly generous offer of full facilitator pay for apprentices from underrepresented groups. It's not their fault if those people have no sense of a good opportunity. The offer, naturally, remains open for those who finally see the light.

#sarcasm

Look at those two founders, I've seen fresher attitudes come from the graveyard. Actually they're not far from it.
They are like the two complaining old curmudgeons, Statler and Waldorf, from the balcony box at the Muppet Show.

#sarcasm

The founders are not MBB alumni. Thank heavens for that; otherwise, they'd be conning you for the long term in the short term. It's kind of genius how they do that.

Life is too important to take it seriously. Life is easy to talk and hard to live.

No, the founders work at all levels. At your executive or board member level, they land punches on you, and make you laugh while they do it.

And they have bigger friends. They're here. A pretty formidable gang they pulled together. The founders researched most of the models, over 80 of them, all promising keys to the promised land; let them take your money, we dare you –– see you next time.

Oh yeah, the founders were trained by Marshall Goldsmith. Hang on, so there is a weakness, a lack of humility. You can be confident and still humble. The founders know they're not the sun:).

For example, who can Marshall get to dinner? Who can John and Nader get to dinner? But who can this formidable gang get to dinner? It might not be a bad list. But the founders would have to keep them apart with separate tables. Nader and John would be doing shuttle bilateral diplomacy all night. The weight of being right all the time can be overwhelming :). Yeah MBB do better dinners. Go MBB...

#sarcasm

Ah, yes, the founders. They are a regular 'harmonious duo'. One is a valiant crusader against the 'evils' of SAFe, while the other clings to it like a life raft. And let's not forget the LeSS enthusiast, bravely championing a methodology that peaked... when was it, the Obama administration?

Then there's the 'product visionary', so beloved by the product community (and the Lean/Agile folks, naturally). And to balance things out, we have a linguistic marvel, rivaling Yoda's eloquence, and a... let's call it 'passionate' communicator, channeling his inner Billy Connolly, with the occasional 'leaked' performance.

One plays the long game, racking up those 'easy' wins, while the other bravely battles the hourly client wars. And of course, one's back to rescuing projects, because apparently, clients prefer chaos.

A match made in... well, somewhere. They do share a few 'charming' traits, though: a sunny disposition, a love for no sugarcoating, and a talent for taking absolutely no nonsense—a regular ray of sunshine, these two.

#sarcasm

John Coleman was recently listed as number 18 on another world list in 2025, but he was listed as a nano-thought leader. Big names were in the top six, and they were mega. Below that, you've got macro, micro, and only then nano. At least he progressed from the top 200 lists in previous years. It begs the question: Is it better to be a nobody or a nano?

But Mr. Social Media, he is not. He only makes three keynote speeches annually; otherwise, he will be featured at several conferences. People ask John to speak. If he applies, they never select him; his stuff is too serious, too important. He looks like a walking heart attack, so only friends would invite him, and he doesn't have many of those. He says he's still learning, but many only see failing. John isn't a massive fan of the coaching stance and uses it sparingly, even though he's often a "coach." He sees corruption in accumulating coaching hours to gain coaching certifications and jokes, so guess which stance such folks use. John's cynicism is strong.

The only good thing we can say about John is he's the guy who pulls some of the levers behind the curtains (think the Wizard of Oz), and now you rightly don't believe us. They're not even great levers.

Nader Talai is very well known in the UK and Europe but not much beyond that. Nader has been in the Lean Kanban, SAFe, and Scrum communities for some time. If you name something, Nader has probably already done it or is currently doing it. Nader is a change agent at all levels. Nader has had many leading positions and gets the biggest gigs, maybe because he doesn't see them as gigs, and that's why he oversees short- to long-term change. Nader works on top-secret stuff. So you'd have more of a chance of getting information from him than from Clint Eastwood playing a tough guy.

So where's the dirt on Nader? Nader never entirely became Mr Social Media, perhaps because it's difficult to bottle up all that cynicism inside.

One of the good things we can say about Nader is that he goes beyond being a "safe pair of hands"; he shakes the place up, using delightful cocktails of ingredients already present in the workplace environment.

John Coleman and Nader Talai are two cranky old men who do not take crap, not even from clients, especially not from clients as they deserve more than delusions of fairy dust. They have x-ray vision, and they'll cut through all the "brown stuff" you tell yourself. But they also know they haven't seen it all; that's their power.

They have another power: They overcome their internal cynicism with public positivity, which is a real struggle for them. So they're as authentic as vegetarian meat. Sometimes, the truth leaks.

If you want famous, move on.
If you want charm, move on.
If you think change is a slide deck, move on.
If you want big brand, move on.
If you want someone to inflict "help" on people, move on.
If you want to succeed despite frameworks, pause a little.
If you don't want any frameworks, pause a little.
If you're serious and want change to feel less "samey," maybe slow down and check them out. They know that every hour they need to earn their next hour. You own the change, not them, but if you don't see the value...

#sarcasm

We dare you to find the word "Agile" or "agile" anywhere on this website apart from right here. The founders don't have many good things to say about it and find it embarrassing: there are too many mentions of project and process and too few mentions of "stewing a little in the problem space," problem-solving, opportunity capturing, discovery, and value validation.

John squirms about how well-known he is in Agile and for being featured in the top 10 lists for Agile, even though most of his work is in product. He almost vomits the way big conferences introduce him as a keynote speaker. He doesn't mind the leadership lists.

Nader works with people where they are. He helps them find their own path from what they already have. Nader is more into Lean and navigating complexity in tech and non-tech.

We believe that the Agile Manifesto is showing its age, so we went "back to the future." We went back to Deming, Shewhart, and we added consideration for the enterprise, which Agile never had.

Some valuable elements from the current state remain, such as Plangauge, Cynefin, product management, etc. We created a module for each thing we thought you'd find helpful.

But let's leave the Agile Manifesto behind us.

Long live adhocracy, ambidexterity, humane effectiveness, and timeliness.
#sarcasm

Oh, of course, simply sprinkling a few 'eminent female thought leaders' around is exactly the same as genuine diversity, equity, and inclusion. And those stock photos on the website? Clearly, a comprehensive representation of every marginalized group. Job well done!

Naturally, those founders, with their exceedingly high facilitator standards, wouldn't dream of lowering them. After all, quality trumps representation, right? especially after their spectacular foray into trusting outsiders. Clearly, that went swimmingly.

So, they've retreated to their cozy circle of trust. Because, you know, expanding your network is so overrated. And honestly, if you're not trusted by anyone outside that tiny circle, you're clearly hanging out with all the right people.


And let's not forget the founders' incredibly generous offer of full facilitator pay for apprentices from underrepresented groups. It's not their fault if those people have no sense of a good opportunity. The offer, naturally, remains open for those who finally see the light.

#sarcasm

AI has all the answers,’ you say? If by ‘AI’ you mean Large Language Models, then technically, yes, they generate answers. However, those answers are only as good as the questions you ask, and your ability to spot the difference between brilliance and… well, let’s call it ‘creative hallucination’. We’re not just throwing AI at problems here; we’re teaching you how to wield it effectively. Think of it as learning to speak a new language, not just pressing a ‘magic answer’ button. And trust us, we speak this language fluently. We teach you how to prompt better and how to audit the results.

Podcasts are all I need,’ you say?

Well, funny you should mention that, because we happen to have one too! It's called 'Evolved', and we think it might just broaden your audio horizons.

Give it a listen; you might be surprised.

We think it's not expensive enough. But we would say that.

Did you know that some top fashion brands are starting to interview potential customers? Classless people are buying their products and hence damaging the brand. At least we're not doing that yet; give us a year or so.

We set the price high as we were told, given you're an executive or board member, you'd only buy if it's free or expensive.

The benefit of a high price for you is we hypothesize that you'll have to put with with fewer consultants in the workshops trying to sell you their crap. If that starts happening, we'll jack up the prices further, until we're left with you and your peers.

Better get in quick, those blasted Agile folks are hungry and looking for a new dinner. Hmm, time to get a security gang at the front door...

#sarcasm kind of

Thank you for your feedback. Oh, we approve. Now, if you'd be so kind as to lighten that wallet of yours... it would be ever so helpful. And who knows, maybe we can finally send those consultants and their 'executive couture' on a permanent vacation.

#sarcasm

Leadering vs. Leadership: A Critical Distinction
The concept of "leadering," as articulated by Venkatesh Rao, presents a stark contrast to traditional notions of leadership. While leadership is often idealized as a noble pursuit, "leadering" exposes a more cynical, self-serving perspective.

The Essence of Leadering:

At its core, "leadering" involves crafting narratives that justify existing circumstances. It's about taking credit for successes, minimizing failures, and maintaining the status quo. This approach prioritizes self-preservation over genuine progress. As Rao suggests, it's a form of "truth fashioning," where reality is manipulated to fit a favorable narrative. Furthermore, the 48 Laws of Power, as described by Wikipedia, often manifest in "leadering" practices, emphasizing manipulation and control.  

The Pitfalls of Leadering:

A "leadering" organization may experience fleeting moments of apparent success, but ultimately, it lacks the dynamism and adaptability necessary for sustained growth. By avoiding meaningful change and prioritizing short-term gains, "leadering" leads to stagnation and eventual irrelevance.

The Alternative:
In contrast, true leadership is a dynamic and collaborative process. It involves:
-Responsibility and Relationship Building: Fostering trust and mutual respect among team members.
-Empowerment: Enabling individuals to contribute their skills and ideas.
-Co-creation of Direction: Establishing a shared vision and purpose.
-Effective Alignment: Strategically allocating resources and personnel.
-Mutual Commitment: Building a sense of shared ownership and accountability.  

Leadership for Resilience:
Adhocracy, a flexible and adaptable organizational structure, emphasizes leadership for resilience. This approach prioritizes cultivating specific qualities—clarity, trust, transparency, and adaptability—rather than simply occupying a management position.  

Key Qualities of Resilient Leadership:
-Creating an environment for clarity and trust.
-Embracing uncertainty and failures as learning opportunities.
-Gathering evidence for informed decision-making.
-Reducing organizational inefficiencies.
-Driving for value with compassion and ethics.
-Persistent agency to change workflows, processes, systems, and the work environment.

Leadership at All Levels:
Leadership is not confined to a select few; it should permeate all levels of an organization. It requires persistent agency to change workflows, processes, systems, and the work environment, including HR, finance, and vendor management. Every individual who demonstrates these qualities is, in essence, a leader.

Conclusion:
While "leadering" offers a path of self-preservation and superficial success, leadership fosters growth, resilience, and meaningful impact. Organizations can navigate uncertainty and achieve lasting success by prioritizing collaboration, empowerment, and adaptability.

Rao, V. (2015) The Art of Agile Leadership, ribbonfarm. At: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2015/03/12/the-art-of-agile-leadership/ (08 December 2023).

CC BY NC-ND 4.0


We don't want you showing up if you're not a leader. Phew!

#sarcasm