Planning

Control

What can you control? What is beyond your control? What falls between these two categories? What if you took the time to map these quickly before your enterprise approves its next budget or decides on resource allocation? What if you started a generative conversation by adding Post-it notes to a larger template of the above graphic? How might our future discussions benefit from agreeing beforehand about what we control and what is beyond our influence?

Thru-hikers planning for one of the ultra-distance trail networks (e.g., Pacific Crest Trail, Continental Divide Trail, Appalachian Trail1, etc.) in the United States during 2025 are working on extensive details. They can control the gear they acquire, fitness level, re-ration boxes, and goals. They cannot control the snowpack, wildlife, availability of trail angels to assist them, or other trail users they will encounter. They have variable control over the distance they plan to cover, hiking partner(s), and probable scenarios encountered based on previous long-distance hikes.

A thru-hiker can spend most of their time on the controlled and variable inputs, leaving the uncontrolled inputs for evaluation as departure day approaches.

1Appalachian Trail Hurrican Damage Update

Amplifying “Can’t”

Does your mindset change if you are informed ‘you can’ versus ‘you can’t’? When we are restricted from taking action or proceeding, it may increase our desire to sample the mission we aspire to complete. I have often found more satisfaction in gaining access to an experience that started with ‘you can’t’ or a restriction and ultimately allowed access.

For example, an airport gate agent informing us that the boarding door is closed, and we are denied boarding, only to have the door re-opened to accommodate a crew member, and we are boarded. The flight feels like a reward. Reaching a closed trail which requires us to retrace our steps for miles, only to learn that a seldom-used side trail allows us to proceed. Or an endeavor that we are told we have not acquired sufficient experience to attempt, but we find a support team and complete the quest.

How might we recognize that our motivation may increase expoentially when we first encounter a barrier before we are able to proceed?

Not Just One Thing

Notice, that if you endeavor to do one thing, it typically includes several other things. Submit a proposal for a prospective consulting engagement, the client list needs an update, tentative dates require entry to the calendar, and sample work from previous engagements are potential side quests.

Rarely does one thing equal one thing. Are you prepared for the journey?

Planning Alone

If you plan alone, you create a first draft that embeds ideas influenced by your personal magnetic north. If you bring others into the conversation, you can add perspectives and concepts that you might not consider. When we expand the conversation, especially early in the process, we are afforded a plan that has been influenced by those who see opportunities and barriers differently.

Different Peaks

We are not climbing the same route. We might be mountaineering in the same range, or even ascending the same peak but from different approaches. When we compare ourselves to the progress of others, it is extraneous. Our focus and decision-making are best directed to wayfinding on the terrain in front of us. Keep climbing and once we summit, there will be another mountain to climb. Our goal is not to repeat what has already been done in the exact same order, but rather to find new combinations, unique approaches, and immerse ourselves in new experiences.

Direct to the Destination

Technically, the pilots could turn the plane in the pictured scenario and attempt to go directly to the airport. The probability of a successful landing is extremely low. It is in the best interest of the plane, passengers, and crew that the flight passes the destination to line up on a final approach that is practiced, planned, and highly predictable.

How might we avoid heading directly to our destination when we are not likely to reach it safely (or with the intended impact)? How might we plan how to arrive, not just focus on connecting the dots between two locations?

Following

Three boats in a row, the latter two following the wake of the first. Who has the most responsibility in this scenario? Do the second and third boats leverage some leadership to the lead boat? Do they each maintain equal accountability for their autonomy?

It is convenient to allow those we follow to set the course? We can lapse into a daze and miss key landmarks, junctions, possible threats, and options.  It does save us energy and resources to turn over leadership to those who take the point.

How might we be more intentional about when we lead and when we follow?  Who might we remain flexible to break off from the pack when it serves our best interest or the navigation requires individual decision-making?

Boundaries and Functionality

The FAA established Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC). They where not all created at once but they attempt to reflect the volume of flights and major airports that exist within each region. As general aviation pilots or plane spotting enthusiast we might have some depth of understanding as to why certain border exists. However, the genral public probably does not see the immediate rational. When in-flight, it is not obvious that our commercial flight has been handed off from one center to another (unless the air traffic control audio is made available). We assume this works like a trail being routed onto the right tracks when it leaves a large train station.

What systems in our enterprise works like the ARTCC? Which need explanation to those we serve and which ones operate in the background and provide social benefit without being highlighted?

Together or Separate

When we share a Magnetic North (purpose, vision, mission, and values), it is easier to decide on behalf of the group if we arrive at an intersection first. If we are unclear about our compass, we will likely wait for the group to assemble before proceeding. If we consider generative questions when our environment is stable, we get clarity on where the boundaries exist for our team. We can forerun future events if we deliberate about unique situations our peers encounter. A culture of curiosity allows us to focus on the work that matters and guides our reaction when we find ourselves lost in the wilderness.

We cannot always be together, call a meeting, or wait for an answer. Periodically, we must act for the whole. A sense of shared purpose and a calibrated compass enables us to navigate, even in unfamiliar terrain.