Explore

Restructure chapter thinking

⁠

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/next-chapter-is-called-the-pro-e2UdrrbkTY6C_gGhg1EmhA⁠

⁠

Prompt:

Ok I am trying to be critical of my own thinking and I need you to help me. I per this thread I writing the chapter called the process. I am currently in the first sub chapter called "You can't change a plan if you don't have a plan". This is how I have started the chapter:

Since my days working in sustainment programmes, I have always been a fan of my bosses saying "you cant change a plan, if you do not have one". Maybe more famously and better stated for SME's with long term vision in mind, Warren buffet said: Someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago. As simple statements go, these likely conjure different ideas and pictures in peoples heads because we have all unique lived experiences, biases, assumptions - mental models. For me, my boss was about planning for what you know and be prepared to adapt for what we did not. Warren Buffets inspires, vision and persistence will get you there. Either of the statements do not describe the who, what, when, where, why or how - all elements of a great plan. If you have ever googled what most plans consists of you, may have come across these topics: Direction and intent; Goals and focus; Strategy and methods; Resources and responsibilities; Assumptions and evidence; Feedback and control. All of these might seem like parts of a project plan, or to some part of a large enterprises strategy; and you would be correct they usually do. They are also great for building SME's. Given that this knowledge is free and available, why am I writing a book called called "Making the complex simple"?

One concept that comes to mind to answer this, is called equifinality - many roads lead to Rome. Equifinality is the principle, especially in systems theory, that a final outcome or goal can be reached through multiple, different paths or starting conditions, meaning there's no single "way" to achieve something, but systems thinkers also know there are better ones. Given the amount of information available to us today on how to execute ideas, peoples backgrounds, cultures, peer groups - it just makes sense that the complexity monsters can creep into your Enterprise. You only have to look at the current practice, test first, pivot fast, MVP culture started roughly in 2001, with mass adoption post‑2011 to the present. The upside of this method is speed, reduced upfront risk of designing a product or service the customer does not want. The downside of the practice is the normalising of constant pivots and partial fixes, while rarely pausing to design simple, scalable systems, so complexity quietly accumulates underneath the experiments - this is the cost of the "speed is everything" mental model. Where last century it was research first (maybe), design, build it, then sell it, as the default for most of industrial and corporate history. Needless to say the last century method spent significant time and resources perfecting product and services that the customer sometimes wanted or didn't want. Last century accumulates all the cost and risk up front. I don't know about you, I definitely prefer the current methodology, especially when considering as an SME we have limited resources and constant operational demand.

I also want to tie in Culture How current culture of quick fixes and fire fighting looks like more detail on the cost of this what questions SME should ask themselves like these: What you need to ask yourself? Conduct an honest audit of how your organisation currently addresses problems: What percentage of management time goes to firefighting—responding to crises and addressing recurring issues that should have been solved long ago? What problems have recurred multiple times despite multiple attempted fixes? What processes have accumulated layers of workarounds and verification steps that slow operations? What employees have left due to stress and overwork from dealing with constant crises? What opportunities have you missed because the organisation was too busy managing current crises to invest in growth? to get them thinking and ready to change their culture or method - building on Simplicity needs a champion and this chapter is the nail in the coffin as to why they need to change. I am leading to Introduce the idea that your whole book is about upgrading from instinct and anecdotes to a visible, testable operating model. This sets up the emotional payoff: “If you’re exhausted, it’s not you. You’ve been trying to change a system you never had on paper.” I have attached the research you helped me define some of thinking. Here is my issue in thinking. Last century Cleary did planning up front - so why should they have a plan? How can I tie this all together to Founders, CEO, COO my target audience to want to modify their current practices whether last century or this century mental models and think systematically at critical times to keep their organisations simplistic. Remembering just because it's simple it can still be complex - good complex. Critical thoughts?

Outcome:

The tension you’re feeling is exactly the point of this chapter: you’re not anti‑planning or anti‑MVP; you’re anti‑unexamined mental models that drive bad culture and hidden complexity. Your job is to show founders they must keep the good of both eras and consciously drop the costly bits.

1. Why “last century planned” doesn’t weaken your argument

Last century’s model did have plans, but they were mostly one‑big‑bet, locked‑in plans: long research, big design, full build, then push to market. Those plans:[1]

Assumed you could predict the world well enough that changing later would be rare and expensive.

Hard‑coded complexity into products and organisations because every detail was baked before real feedback.

So your critique is not “they didn’t plan”; it’s “they planned as if change was the enemy,” which made adaptation and simplification very hard later on.[1]

Punchy way to say it: “Yesterday’s planning culture worshipped certainty: design everything now, pay for every mistake later.”

2. How today’s MVP culture also mis‑plans

Modern MVP / “million‑dollar weekend” culture does plan – but often only at the experiment level: what to test this week, how to pivot next.[2][3]

It assumes speed and learning automatically beat structure.

It underplans the operating model: workflows, hand‑offs, decision rules, and how experiments get retired instead of layered.[1]

Result: lots of clever micro‑plans, almost no coherent system, so complexity accumulates in tools, processes, and workarounds.[1]

Punchy line: “Today’s speed culture worships motion: test everything now, drown later in the debris of old experiments.”

3. How mental models become culture (for your audience)

Founders, CEOs, COOs don’t run on Gantt charts; they run on mental shortcuts:

Last century model: “Think harder, design better, then execute flawlessly.” That becomes a culture of long decks, big launches, and shame around visible learning.

This century model: “Launch fast, pivot faster.” That becomes a culture of half‑finished fixes, firefighting, and heroic effort instead of system design.[1]

Over time, these repeated choices create norms: what gets praised, promoted, or punished. That’s how a mental model turns into a culture that either invites complexity or actively prunes it back.[1]

You can name the cost very directly: “The cost of your dominant mental model is written in rework, burnout, and opportunities you never had time to chase.”[1]

4. The bridging argument you need

Here’s the through‑line that ties both eras together and leads straight into your “You can’t change a plan…” message:

Both the old “plan–make–sell” world and the new “test–pivot–repeat” world skip something: a simple, shared operating plan for how the business works and changes over time.

Without that, old‑school firms lock in complex systems they can’t easily change; new‑school firms layer quick fixes and MVPs into sprawling, fragile operations.[1]

The method changed, but the blind spot stayed the same: nobody owns system simplicity as a first‑class goal.

That gives you a clean invitation to the reader:

“You don’t need more planning or less experimentation. You need a different kind of plan: a visible, testable operating model that lets you move fast without feeding the complexity monster.”

5. Where your culture / questions fit

Your audit questions are gold because they turn this from theory into a mirror:

They expose firefighting, repeated problems, workaround‑heavy processes, burnout, and missed opportunities.[1]

They show the lived cost of the current mental model and culture, regardless of whether the reader is more “old‑school planner” or “MVP sprinter.”[1]

You can explicitly frame it:

“Whether you grew up in the ‘perfect it before launch’ era or the ‘ship it this weekend’ era, these questions reveal the same thing: if you don’t deliberately design how your business learns and simplifies, it will default to firefighting and complexity.”

6. A possible sharpened punch line on cost

For this chapter, something like:

“The real price of both eras’ mental models isn’t just wasted projects or failed tests; it’s a business that gets heavier every year.”[1]

“If speed or certainty are your only gods, you end up paying in complexity, burnout, and profits that quietly leak away.”[1]

Use that to pivot straight into your promise: this book gives them a way to keep speed and ambition, but anchor them in a simple, visible operating plan they can actually change.

⁠

1⁠

2⁠

3⁠

⁠

Prompt:

Thanks this helps - some good insights into the deeper links I am trying to achieve. As a consultant I have always said that I try to make Entrepreneurs more like Large enterprise and large enterprise more like entrepreneurs. There is this middle ground when it comes to governance, systems, speed, decisions. I would like to start with my anecdote still on planning, you also know where I want to end + the research I am leaning on. Can you help me improve the structure of this sub chapter on planning? or offer flow suggestions?

Outcome:

A clean way to structure this sub‑chapter is to walk the reader from “planning as slogan” to “planning as operating model,” while weaving in both eras and your research.

1. Hook: two quotes, one problem

Start with your anecdote and the Buffett quote, but tighten their job:

Use them to show that everyone “believes” in planning, yet almost nobody has a simple, working plan of how their business actually runs.

Briefly name mental models: how the same quote lands differently depending on whether someone worships certainty (old model) or speed (new model).

Punchline for this opening: “Planning isn’t the problem. What we think a plan is – that’s the problem.”

2. What people think a “plan” is

Now contrast common images of a plan with what SMEs actually need:

Big‑company artifacts: decks, business plans, strategy docs, project plans.

Founder artifacts: a head‑plan, a to‑do list, some numbers in Xero.

Drop in the classic elements (direction, goals, strategy, resources, assumptions, feedback), but immediately translate them into order‑to‑cash reality for an SME: “How does work move from customer request to cash, and who decides what when?”

Message: most are over‑planned on paper, under‑planned in operations.

3. Two eras, same blind spot

Bring in your cultural timeline here, briefly:

Last century: plan–make–sell, long cycles, big bets, certainty worship. Cost: slow learning, high sunk cost, hard‑to‑change complexity.

This century: test–launch–pivot, MVPs, weekends to market. Cost: layered experiments, partial fixes, hidden complexity under the speed.[1][2][3]

Your key move: show that both mental models ignore the same thing – a simple, shared operating plan and a systematic way to change it.

Line you can use: “Old school planned the product and froze the system. New school tests the product and forgets the system. In both cases, complexity wins.”

4. Mental models → culture → behaviour

Now connect this to culture:

Explain briefly how repeated decisions from a mental model harden into norms: what gets rewarded, what gets rushed, what never gets discussed (like root causes and system design).[1]

Use your consultant lens: “I try to make entrepreneurs more like large enterprises and large enterprises more like entrepreneurs.” Define that middle ground as governed speed – clear systems, simple rules, fast decisions.

This is where you can foreshadow: “That middle ground needs a different kind of plan.”

5. The real cost: firefighting and quick fixes

Bring in your research here, anchored in lived experience:

Describe the quick‑fix / firefighting culture: adding people, tools, rules instead of redesigning the work.[1]

Name the costs: recurring problems, process and technical debt, employee burnout, missed opportunities.[1]

Then use your audit questions as a mini self‑diagnostic box. Frame it as:

“Before we talk about a better way to plan, check how your current ‘plan’ actually behaves in real life.”

6. Redefine what “a plan” means in this book

Now pivot:

Redefine a plan not as a document, but as a visible, testable operating model:

What are we trying to achieve?

How does work actually flow?

Where do we decide, measure, and learn?

Emphasise: this is the thing you can’t change if you don’t have it.

You can explicitly say: “This book won’t ask you to become more corporate or more reckless. It will ask you to adopt one simple habit: make the way your business works visible enough that you can change it on purpose, not by accident.”

7. Bridge to the rest of the chapter

Close the sub‑chapter by pointing forward:

Next: “But my business is different” – showing they share the same building blocks.

Then: PDCA and your process – how to use a simple loop to keep the plan alive and complexity under control.

Emotional payoff: “If you’re exhausted, it’s not you. You’ve been trying to change a system you never had on paper.”

If you like this flow, the next step can be to rewrite your existing text against these seven moves, and then tighten language so it still sounds like you but carries this clearer spine.

⁠

1⁠

2⁠

3⁠

⁠

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ··· in the right corner or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.