I want to take this opportunity in mid-engagement to let you know how the consulting work we’ve been doing has gone. I hope you’ve heard by now that it’s gone well, but I’d like to fill in some of the gaps and catch up on my own understanding of how it has worked.
So the introduction was made by Rohan G (then at NESTA) with whom I’d already talked about who we as a loose network could construct a consulting offer. Rohan suggested that we talk to Catherine Fieschi at Counterpoint about what they wanted to do to build some form of platform for discussing and engaging with people about what cultural relations mean in the twenty-first century. I’m glad to say that after I’d explained what we would do in some detail, Catherine agreed with me that our Crowds, Tribes and Teams methodology would be an interesting way to unpick the brief and get to something practical.
We initially agreed to carry out two half-day sessions at the Crowd and Tribe levels. For those who haven’t been paying attention, that means:
Crowd
10-15 of our members meet with a similar number of your people in a relaxed space for free conversation. People are briefed beforehand on the issues facing the client, but the conversation is allowed to wander in the same way that it does at the Tuttle Club itself. It’s an opportunity for blue-sky thinking.
Tribe
7-10 more specialist contributors are identified to drill down further into issues raised in the Crowd session. These people meet again with a similar number of representatives from the client in a series of short facilitated conversations. The main output is a document detailing what we’ve learned so far, a strategic approach to untangling some of the problems and a few immediately realisable benefits and projects.
We agreed that if team work were required and there was something we could do for them we would discuss that after these two, but that either side could walk away after this first bit of work if things didn’t work out.
Now, the process for bringing a crowd together had already begun a few weeks previously. I had been through my address book and chosen the people that fell into the following categories: had been to tuttle a few times; in my address book; freelance/flexible; I would trust them to take in with me to a client. I e-mailed them and asked for some basic information that I could use in marketing materials: a profile pic; a 140-char biography; a summary of skills and interests; and the tribes to which they feel they belongg. I e-mailed 99 people – if you’re reading this and think you should have been included let me know. Exclusion is a bazillion times more likely to be about my poorly managed gmail address book than to be about my discomfort with taking you into a client.
Anyhow, about 45 people came back to me and a few more trickled in since then. At least when I went to pitch the idea to Counterpoint, I had a pretty good idea of the high callibre of person I might have at my disposal. And then having secured the engagement, I e-mailed the 45-ish to say “this is what the gig is and when, the first 14 people to e-mail me back get to come and play” or words to that effect. I then went out for an afternoon walk. And when I got back I had 22 messages in my mailbox from eager tuttle beavers. You are lovely.
So the quick-draw 14 were, in order of alacrity: Steve Lawson,
Al Robertson, John Dodds, Ben Mason, Brian Condon, Suw Charman-Anderson, David Jennings, Patrick Hadfield, Andy Roberts, Caroline Bottomley, Alison Wheeler, David Wilcox, Richard Stacy and Ben Walker. I knew that I could take any one of them into the client for a half-day and create something very good, but to have 15 of us had mind-blowing potential. I’m glad to say that we fulfilled that potential, and minds were blown (including mine).
Round 1
I’d suggested that we meet in a neutral space. Both sessions were held at Wallacespace in Covent Garden. Lovely, lovely space, thank you. And we started with one of their excellent lunches. Then we went and sat in the “living room” for the afternoon. I facilitated. Catherine gave a brief intro to the brief and we did introductions – it turned out that we had a surprising number of musicians in the group both tuttlers and BC people, though as Steve Lawson was among the first to say hello, perhaps he just set the tone!
We went into conversation. As with Tuttle on Fridays there was no more format than this. From time to time, I would ask them to pause and take the temperature to see if everyone was OK or if people needed a chance to move and talk to new people, but I resisted the temptation to “do” more. After 3 hours of these chats I started the process of convergence to create some placeholders so that we could recall the conversation later. I stressed throughout the afternoon that it was about having the conversation rather than creating a document. And I tried to keep this documentation process true to that. Firstly, I asked people to write (preferably longhand) a paragraph or two describing what they’d learned or found out in the afternoon. We had a wander round the room and had a look at what each other had written.
Then I suggested that people get into Tuttler/BC pairs and come up with three bullet point ideas that needed to be captured. We then played the “same or different” sorting game on a big table to create some concept groupings. And that was all.
It feels uncomfortable to go into the details of the feedback we got without specific permissions, but they loved it. Everyone went away smiley and energized. I’ve asked for some feedback that we can use publicly.
Round 2
So then a week later, six of us went back for more. The second session was still conversational but with more structure to help us boil down to a set of projects for consideration. Into the pot I threw a couple of exercises stolen from my improvisation idol, Johnnie Moore – for those who know Johnnie’s repertoire these were the collaborative face drawing and the fast-draw product pitching exercise. I threw these in when it felt like time to encourage people to keep thinking together and get away from judging ideas too quickly. We did a coupld of rounds of conversation focusing on getting ideas down and then trying to grow them organically (next time I’ll also use Johnnie’s “Yes… and…” exercise)
And then we split. I put the BC people on one side of the room and brought the Tuttle team to huddle around a table together. The BC people were tasked with bringing together all of the (potentially duplicated or overlapping) projects into a simple list. We, on the other hand started looking together for a way forward, a way to add further value. After some meandering and group contemplation, Brian Condon gave us the lead by suggesting a frame for categorising the projects: a y-axis of difficulty or perceived difficulty and an x-axis continuum of novelty between “Yawn! I thought they’d do that” and “Wow! I never thought they’d do that”. We plotted projects on this frame and by doing so developed the ideas a little to see how they could be made easier and have more wow!ness.
Right now, we’re in a process of choosing, defining and costing the Team projects that will kick off very soon in time to create a social platform for engagement by November.
And so…
I really enjoyed doing this and am looking forward to the project work – we’re now looking for more, appropriately open-minded clients to engage in more Crowd and Tribe activities.
And it feels like a time to say something of what I’ve learned or remembered during the process so far. Here are some snippets:
Patience is a virtue, both at the micro level of allowing people time to settle, talk, think and reflect before expecting them to “produce” something, and at the macro level – this is the style of work I’ve wanted to do for at least seven years, but in 2002 I had no idea where on earth I might find 15 likeminded collaborators or be able to convince a client that we could do something useful.
I’m most at home serving the group, allowing them to flower. It’s a beautiful process to observe.
Everyone is creative, capable of creation in one way or another. Categorising people as creatives or managers is fake and doesn’t serve us well, especially in a space where we require innovation and change. People are amazing.
It is possible to bring thirty people together and have a productive conversation without constantly telling them what to do.
My years as a jazz kid have paid off – sitting in smoky cellars in the 70s with a bottle of coca-cola and a packet of crisps, watching and listening to men come together in scratch bands and make beautiful music together is a great preparation for this sort of work.
We could have done this at any time – it’s an obvious move to make to create a consulting offer out of a network of smart people. What I’m pleased about is that we let it emerge, we didn’t rush and we’ve ended up with something far more congruent with the general vibe of the network.
[UPDATE 01/10/09: We’ve started blogging about the projects that were commissioned as a result of this process]
I love you having the confidence to do what’s right and trust that people will talk there way to something useful.
beautifully written up, Lloyd – it was an absolutely pleasure to be involved, and felt like a remarkably efficient, exciting, innovative and cost-effective way of doing consulting.
More please! 🙂
Sx
Brilliant! Agile business in action – I can’t think of any other context where such a diverse set of minds get together to work on a ‘business’ problem.
Fascinating to read about the process in more depth – and refreshing to see a consulting model emerging which is an antidote to the usual cookie-cutter / we have all the answers / get consultants bums on seats / etc approach of the ‘big boys’
Thank you for this Lloyd, it’s an excellent overview. And needless to say I can only agree with the above comments
read this last night and was very excited to hear more details of the project and your approach.
so wonderful to hear about this in action.
BTW, just round the corner from the ICA is someone who said he was looking for a group of “all the talents” – maybe he meant Tuttle?
Great stuff! This feels like the kind of open and creative approach to business and general problem solving that actually engages communities to take part, rather than stifle them with rigidity. However, the challenge then becomes to resist the temptation to model it too discretely such that the framework risks turning into a mandate or decree. Making it accessible can only help to encourage others with further contribution, free-thinking and much sought-after innovation. Props.
I love the idea of a true consultancy where the results are not foreordained and have a chance to be truly surprising. In my days at Reuters, external consultancy followed the same pattern: step 1 – we’ll pretend to examine your business; step 2 – surprise, surprise, look what we can do with one of our products!
Tuttle can set a whole new trend: consultants without suits and no axe to grind. Great stuff.
Glad you’ve written this up. A fantastic approach to consulting and absolutely brimming with your personality and enthusiasm. I really hope it gains some traction.
This sums up went on very well. It was a great couple of afternoons – it felt very creative, and I am glad to have been involved!
“Tuttle can set a whole new trend: consultants without suits and no axe to grind.”
But still charging consultant rates, I hope!
[…] he saw me writing about the tuttle consulting work and acknowledging the importance of making it up as we go along, he pointed me to more interesting […]
[…] bit of play, a bit of snark, a bit of improvisation; a self-assured, authentic, “fragile and beautiful” collection of people and […]
Such great approach to solving client problems and consulting as a community of talents. Look forward to hearing more.
[…] Tuttle Club’s model of collaborative social-media consulting (although I am unclear how they split the […]
[…] The Tuttle Club tuttle2texas Centre for Creative Collaboration Tuttle Consulting […]
[…] will get there the same way that the Tuttle consulting group has been working things through with our consulting client, Counterpoint. We’ll use the tried […]
[…] started in one of the conversations we did with Counterpoint and British Council folk all the way back in the summer of 2009, when we were trying to find social objects through which […]
[…] with a group of the simultaneously nicest *and* smartest people I’ve ever met on creating a new approach to business consulting, a process that resulted in some fabulous open data and the creation of at least one […]
[…] story of how we kicked off working with our first client Counterpoint is detailed on the Tuttle Club blog. ??The stuff we did with them and the rest of the British Council can be perused on the blog we […]
[…] in our attitudes to expertise and knowledge in a highly networked world, I sent him details of the Tuttle Consulting gig we did as an example of how I think we’re making use of networked knowledge in a new way.?? I […]
[…] him to let me know how I could help if it ever got off the ground.?? We then worked together on the first Tuttle Consulting gig and as a strategy consulting old-timer, he sees how radical and powerful this approach can be.?? He […]
[…] in our attitudes to expertise and knowledge in a highly networked world, I sent him details of the Tuttle Consulting gig we did as an example of how I think we’re making use of networked knowledge in a new way.?? I […]
[…] @johnpopham @stephenwrks tuttleclub.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/our… remains one of the only written accounts. The rest is […]
[…] have a (still) unusual engagement model, where we take the simplest of briefs and bring the Tuttle experience to you to talk it over, […]
[…] but the five scales of group is what really caught my attention. Older readers will remember the Tuttle Consulting project (14 years ago, damnit!) which played with using different scales of group at different […]