Most consulting "case studies" tell you who someone worked for. That doesn’t help you much, and it isn’t what carries over to your organization. These pages are the other thing: how I actually sequence the work, what the trade-offs really are, what tends to go wrong in month three, and how you’d know it worked. Scenarios are composite. Names and identifying details are withheld. The patterns are real, and they’re the part you can use.
Each page answers one question that people making technology decisions at associations and nonprofits really ask, in the order the work really happens. I’m writing them slowly and specifically, because the specifics are the only part worth publishing. The first few are in progress.
In the meantime, the weekly column covers the same ground in argument form, and the perspectives set out the underlying thesis. If there’s a question you’d like answered here, just ask me. Honestly, that’s how I decide which ones to write first.
The earlier engagement summaries are still here. They’re written the older way, as accounts of work rather than as technique, which is exactly what these pages replace.