Executive Workshop · Step 8 of 9 · Choose

Should We Run a Value Stream Conference?

Test the logic, expected value, preparation effort, and willingness before the room moves from a shared assessment to a concrete next step.

Duration
20 minutes
Rhythm
3 min individual → 12 min groups → 5 min share
Group size
3–5 participants
Ideal output
Decision, conditions, owners, and scheduling readiness

Step 8 of 9 · Your Choice

Should We Run a Value Stream Conference?

Protect individual judgment, compare the evidence in small groups, and close with an explicit decision and its conditions. The final Date step owns the concrete calendar commitment.

Duration
20 minutes
Rhythm
3 min individual → 12 min groups → 5 min share
Group size
3–5 participants
Ideal output
Decision, conditions, owners, and scheduling readiness
Begin the workshop
  1. 1

    Your Choice · Briefing · Before the 20-minute timer

    The Decision in Front of Us

    The room now decides whether the logic is credible, the potential is material, and a Value Stream Conference is worth pursuing.

    Decision Proceed, Proceed with Conditions, Not Yet, or No

    Make the position and the reasoning explicit.

    Conditions Name What Must Be True

    Evidence, sponsorship, scope, authority, preparation capacity, or participation.

    Handoff Separate Choice from Scheduling

    A Yes or Conditional Yes moves to the final Date step; other outcomes receive an owned next action.

    This is a decision exercise—not a satisfaction survey and not yet a calendar negotiation.
    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    Frame a consequential organizational choice while keeping the later scheduling step distinct.

    How to facilitate

    • Explain the four response states before starting the timer.
    • State explicitly that conditions and dissent will be recorded rather than averaged away.

    Listen and watch for

    • Participants looking to the most senior person for the correct answer.
    • A rush to calendars before the value and effort questions are answered.

    Avoid

    • Advocating for the conference while briefing the task.
    • Treating Not Yet as failure rather than a request for evidence or readiness.
  2. 2

    Your Choice · Briefing · Before the 20-minute timer

    Answer Four Questions in Order

    The sequence separates confidence in the underlying logic from willingness to act.

    Q1 Does the Iron Triangle and Flow Logic Make Sense?

    Can reducing system delay release meaningful effective capacity while Quality remains protected?

    Q2 Could a Value Stream Conference Help Us Use That Potential?

    Would shared decisions, prepared artifacts, and refinement address our cross-boundary problems?

    Q3 Would the Improvement Be Significant?

    Would the expected value clearly exceed the preparation, event, and follow-through effort?

    Q4 Do We Want to Run One?

    Choose a position, state the strongest reason, and name any conditions.

    Question 4 is the decision. The concrete two-day date belongs to Step 9.
    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    Give every participant the same four-part decision ladder without allowing scheduling pressure to distort the choice.

    How to facilitate

    • Keep all four questions visible during reflection and group work.
    • Ask participants to distinguish plausible logic, organizational fit, material value, and readiness to act.

    Listen and watch for

    • Q2 and Q3 being collapsed into general enthusiasm.
    • A Yes that has no sponsor, preparation capacity, or explicit conditions.

    Avoid

    • Adding new questions during the timed exercise.
    • Reintroducing the calendar before the room has made a decision.
  3. 3

    Your Choice · 0–3 Minutes · 3 quiet minutes

    Protect Independent Judgment First

    Each participant answers all four questions privately before hearing the room.

    Position Choose a Response State

    Yes · Conditional Yes · Not Yet · No.

    Reason Write the Strongest Evidence

    Use today’s constraints, Flow Problems, decision gaps, and expected leverage.

    Condition Name the Largest Readiness Need

    Sponsor, scope, evidence, authority, preparation capacity, or participation.

    Confidence Mark What Remains Uncertain

    Record the assumption or evidence gap most likely to change your position.

    No talking, no examples from the facilitator, and no visible voting during the three minutes.
    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    Protect independent reasoning from hierarchy, eloquence, and early group convergence.

    How to facilitate

    • Start a visible three-minute timer after the briefing is complete.
    • Use private notes, face-down cards, or a private digital area before reveal.

    Listen and watch for

    • People waiting for a leader to signal the acceptable position.
    • Participants writing a preference without evidence or conditions.

    Avoid

    • Talking over the silence or interpreting facial expressions.
    • Collecting answers publicly before everyone has written.
  4. 4

    Your Choice · 3–15 Minutes · 12-minute group discussion

    Compare the Reasoning, Not Only the Votes

    Groups of three to five reveal their answers, test the assumptions, and build one transparent recommendation.

    3–6 Reveal Every Position

    Each person shares the four answers without interruption or rebuttal.

    6–10 Test the Logic and Leverage

    Compare evidence for Flow potential, conference fit, materiality, and effort.

    10–13 Name Conditions and Risks

    Identify what must be true before the organization proceeds.

    13–15 Form the Group Recommendation

    Choose the response state, strongest reason, conditions, and remaining uncertainty.

    Decision prompt What would have to be true for the most skeptical reasonable participant to support the next step?
    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    Move from independent judgment to evidence-based group convergence without manufacturing unanimity.

    How to facilitate

    • Use a round before open discussion so every position is heard.
    • Preserve minority reasoning even if the group reaches one recommendation.

    Listen and watch for

    • A fast majority vote ending the conversation.
    • Conditions becoming a vague list with no owner or test.

    Avoid

    • Letting one senior or fluent participant summarize everyone else.
    • Using a convenient date as a substitute for resolving the value and effort questions.
  5. 5

    Your Choice · 3–15 Minutes · Use during group discussion

    Complete One Group Decision Canvas

    The canvas keeps the recommendation traceable and makes hidden conditions visible.

    Logic Does the Flow Argument Hold?

    Answer, workshop evidence, and the strongest counterargument.

    Fit Could the Conference Change the System?

    Name the decisions and artifacts through which it would have leverage.

    Value Is the Expected Improvement Material?

    Name measurable effects and the preparation cost.

    Choice What Is the Group Position?

    Yes, Conditional Yes, Not Yet, or No—with reasons.

    Conditions What Must Be True?

    Name readiness needs, owners, evidence, and the next decision checkpoint.

    Also record: meaningful dissent · sponsor candidate · preparation lead candidate · unresolved evidence gaps.

    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    Give groups a lightweight record that can be compared across the room and used after the workshop.

    How to facilitate

    • Assign one scribe and keep wording in the group’s own language.
    • Require at least one concrete leverage mechanism and one concrete cost.

    Listen and watch for

    • A recommendation with no link to decisions or artifacts.
    • Conditions without owners or due dates.

    Avoid

    • Polishing the canvas instead of discussing the decision.
    • Adding a conference date to the canvas before Step 9.
  6. 6

    Your Choice · 15–20 Minutes · 5-minute cross-group share

    Share the Recommendation, Condition, and Evidence

    Each group gives a compact decision report so the room can see convergence, differences, and readiness.

    1 Position

    Yes · Conditional Yes · Not Yet · No.

    2 Strongest Reason

    The most consequential evidence or expected effect.

    3 Critical Condition

    The readiness need most likely to determine success.

    4 Remaining Uncertainty

    The evidence gap or dissent that must remain visible.

    Use 60–90 seconds per group. Do not reopen the entire presentation.
    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    Create a fast, comparable plenary view without losing meaningful differences.

    How to facilitate

    • Display the four reporting fields while groups speak.
    • Capture convergent positions and conflicting conditions in one shared record.

    Listen and watch for

    • Groups retelling their entire discussion.
    • The plenary debating every objection before all groups have reported.

    Avoid

    • Discarding a minority Not Yet rationale.
    • Allowing the final share to overrun and consume the decision close.
  7. 7

    Your Choice · Closing · Final part of the 5-minute share

    Close with an Owned Decision and an Explicit Handoff

    The facilitator names the decision status, records conditions and dissent, and routes the room to the correct next action.

    Yes Proceed to Date

    Confirm sponsor and preparation lead, then open calendars in Step 9.

    Conditional Yes Proceed to Date with Conditions Visible

    Hold the conditions, owners, and go/no-go checkpoint next to the calendar commitment.

    Not Yet Define the Missing Evidence

    Name owner, source, minimum quality, and a date to revisit the decision.

    No Record the Rationale and Alternate Path

    Route the Flow Problems to another decision, refinement, or governance mechanism.

    Decision prompt What is the next observable action created by the decision we made here?
    Speaker Notes
    Facilitator intent

    End with an explicit status and owned next action while preserving Date as a separate final step.

    How to facilitate

    • Read back the decision, conditions, owners, and dissent before closing.
    • For Yes or Conditional Yes, move directly to the Date section without reopening the case.

    Listen and watch for

    • A Yes with no sponsor or preparation capacity.
    • A Not Yet result with no evidence owner or revisit date.

    Avoid

    • Pressuring the room to say Yes to create a satisfying ending.
    • Closing on “we will coordinate calendars later.”
Ideal result

A transparent conference decision with conditions, named owners, visible dissent, and an explicit handoff to Date, further evidence, or an alternate action path.

The exercise is complete when …

  • Every participant has answered all four questions independently.
  • Every group has recorded its position, evidence, conditions, and uncertainty.
  • Meaningful dissent remains visible.
  • The room has one explicit decision status.
  • A Yes or Conditional Yes has a sponsor, preparation lead, and readiness to schedule.
  • A Not Yet or No has an owned evidence or alternative-action path.
  1. N

    Transition to the next step

    The choice is complete. Move the decision into a concrete calendar commitment.