The Adoption Paradox — Live Session
One session covering the paradox, the five forces, the Law, and the diagnostic — 73 minutes of teaching before 17 minutes of the offer. Below is the commercial section of the session, published before you attend, so nothing in the room is a surprise.
NO REPLAY YET — the replay publishes the day cohort-1 results ship.
Not a pressure tactic: a recording describing results that don't exist yet shouldn't circulate. The day the first cohort's numbers are published — good or bad — the recording goes up alongside them.
The schedule
Live sessions run the first and third Tuesday, 8pm SGT.
Next session
Tue 1 Sep 2026
Session 2
Tue 15 Sep 2026
Session 3
Tue 6 Oct 2026
One email for the joining link, one reminder. If you’d rather not wait, go straight to a fit call — the theory is free on this site either way.
Support probably makes sense if
- You scored under 17 and the weak section is Visibility or Dependency
- Your systems hold real data you can’t currently combine
- There’s someone who could own this — and change a process without asking you
- You’ve started this before and stalled
It probably doesn't if
- You scored 17+ — your constraint is capacity, not clarity
- You want it done for you without your involvement
- Nobody in the business has 2–3 hours a week for a quarter
- You can’t be in the room for the decisions
90 days · three phases · weekly
Days 1–30 · SEE
Three systems connected, one source of truth per number
Days 31–60 · WRITE
Close checklist, follow-up sequence, decision rules documented
Days 61–90 · SEQUENCE
Gates defined, weekly review running, what’s next mapped
You: four gate sessions. Your second-in-command: all thirteen.
Diagnostic re-scored at day 90.
Slide 48A · The delegation model, stated before anyone can wonder about it
Most programmes assume the owner does everything and quietly hope someone else picks it up.
You — four gate sessions
Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12. The decisions only you can make.
Your second-in-command — all thirteen
They build; you decide.
- You see the raw numbers directly — never only their summary.
- We speak to them alone, once, before you start.
If you don't have that person, you are that person. That works — it just costs double the hours.
Slide 48B · The honest hours
| With a viable 2IC | Without one | |
|---|---|---|
| 4 gate sessions × 90 min | 6.0 | — |
| 13 weekly sessions × 90 min | — | 19.5 |
| 3 one-to-ones × 45 min | 2.25 | 2.25 |
| Baseline + 2 worksheets | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Between-session decisions | 1.75 | varies |
| You, over 13 weeks | ≈ 12 hrs | ≈ 22–25 hrs |
The total work is roughly the same either way. What changes is whose calendar it lands on.
Designed to be — estimates from the delivery design, published as-is until cohort one's measured numbers replace them.
This section stays in the session under any time pressure, because it's the part that makes the rest believable. We can't yet prove the Instruments Install's outcome data — the first cohort is the evidence base, and we say so on screen. We present the sample's distribution, name the worst result in the set, and commit to a published standard before knowing what the numbers say. A set of results where everything worked isn't a result set — it's a selection.
We turn people down. Here's what that looks like.
- 01Score already 17+ — you don’t need this yet
- 02No second-in-command, and no willingness to be one
- 03Data lives on paper — there’s nothing to connect
- 04Wrong stage — too early, or too large for a cohort
- 05Right fit, wrong quarter
We publish the count and the reasons, by lane, after every cohort.
Cohort 1 rejections — counted here after cohort 1
The box is empty because the first cohort hasn't run. It fills on publication of the cohort-1 results, with the count and the reasons broken down by lane. If we rejected nobody, that'll be on the slide too — and you should judge us for it.
Most programmes put the ninety-day guarantee first because it sounds bigger. It's third here, because by ninety days you've already spent the thing you can't get back — the quarter.
① Week-3 exit — the real one
"If after week 3 you tell us in writing it's not worth continuing, we refund in full — within 7 business days, to your original payment method — provided you attended or watched sessions 1–3 and submitted the Week-1 Baseline Worksheet and the Week-2 Instrument-Selection Worksheet."
No justification required. We don't get to argue.
② Deferral, at any point
Restart at week 1 of the next cohort, no charge, re-baselined. Your seat is guaranteed, not waitlisted.
③ The 90-day score guarantee
Score hasn't moved 6 points? We continue free, in 30-day extensions, capped at 90 further days. Not guaranteed: revenue, profit, or a multiple.
Objection /01
"Who grades the grader? You score the diagnostic, and you decide whether it moved six points."
Fair, and it’s the right question. Three things. The scoring is a fixed rubric — 0, 1 or 2 against a written definition per question, and you’ll have the rubric before you start, so you can score it yourself and check my arithmetic. Your baseline is recorded before you pay anything, so I can’t adjust the starting line. And the aggregate is countersigned by an independent accountant against a standard we publish before we have results. If you want a second person in the room for the day-90 score, bring your accountant — I’ve never had a reason to say no to that.
Objection /02
"How do I know my ops manager will tell you the truth about her authority? She works for me."
She probably won’t tell me everything, and she certainly won’t with you on the call. That’s exactly why the call is without you. What I’m listening for isn’t a confession — it’s whether she describes changing things or describes checking first. Those sound completely different and people can’t easily fake the difference.
And I’ll tell you what I need to tell you afterwards, which is the shape of the answer, not the transcript. If she says something in confidence, it stays that way — but if it means the engagement would fail, I’ll say so and we won’t start.
Objection /03
"My business is built on client confidentiality. What exactly would you be looking at?"
Named systems, read-only, named people, nothing extracted at your client level. We look at how your business runs — margin by matter type, how a job gets from enquiry to invoice — not at who your clients are or what they told you.
There’s a mutual NDA you can sign before telling me anything at all, including whether you’re interested. And the aggregate reporting never publishes a cell with fewer than five businesses in it, because at a cohort of fifteen, industry plus revenue band plus metric identifies exactly one firm. That’s a floor we publish rather than a policy you have to trust.
Objection /04
"My wife signs off on anything over a couple of thousand. What do I show her?"
Ask for the Co-Decision Brief and I’ll send it today. One page written for her rather than for you: what your score means in plain language, what it costs in money and in your evenings for thirteen weeks, the week-3 refund clause in full, and a straight paragraph on what happens if it doesn’t work.
It leads with the refund, deliberately — that’s the part she can verify before you spend anything. And she’s welcome on the fit call if she wants to be. Nobody has ever asked a question on one of those that I minded answering.
Objection /05
"Why can’t we automate some of this in week two? I’ve already got the tools."
Because automation multiplies whatever system it’s attached to, and in week two we don’t yet know what your system is. Automate an undefined process and you get the wrong thing happening faster, reliably, without anyone noticing for a month.
There’s a second reason that’s more practical. If we automate early and the numbers come out wrong at day 90, neither of us can tell whether the problem was the process or the automation. Sequence first, then automate — and by day 91 you’ll know exactly what to point a tool at, which is a better position than most people ever reach.
Book the fit call — 30 minutes.
What happens next: fit call → a separate short call with your second-in-command → if it's yes on both sides, enrolment and a recorded baseline → session one.
Someone else in this decision? Ask for the Co-Decision Brief — a one-pager written for them, not for you.