Wednesday: Meetings, Students Tomorrow, and the Quiet Case for Growing Bigger by Getting Smaller
It is Wednesday, October 7, 2026.
Today is meeting-heavy. The calendar has taken the lead.
That means a few items from our to-do list will move to the side. We are doing that on purpose. Setting something aside is not automatically a failure. Sometimes it is the correct operational decision.
Not every task is urgent. Not every open loop needs to be closed before the next conversation begins. When a meeting requires real attention, protecting that attention is part of the work.
So today, we are choosing what today is for.
This morning: protecting the room
Meetings can become expensive when we treat them as interruptions. They can also become wasteful when we rush through them because a list is waiting.
We are trying to avoid both.
The goal is not to attend every meeting and call that progress. The goal is to use the time well. We need to listen carefully, make decisions where decisions are needed, and leave enough space to understand what has changed.
Some tasks can wait until later this week. Some can wait until Monday. A few may show us that they are no longer necessary at all.
That is useful information.
Our work in organizational development consulting depends on seeing the difference between motion and movement. A full list can create the appearance of activity. A focused conversation can create actual direction.
Today, we are choosing direction.
Tomorrow: self-development with students
Tomorrow is a self-development day for us.
It will not look like a full day away from responsibility. As a professor, I will still go in and work with my students. That is not separate from development. It is part of it.
Teaching keeps our thinking honest.
Students bring real questions. They notice where an idea becomes unclear. They ask what a framework means when it meets an actual person, a real deadline, or an imperfect room.
That matters to the work we do at LEMKTG.
It is easy to discuss systems in the abstract. It is harder to explain a system to someone who needs to use it now. It is easy to say that people move through experiences in different ways. It is harder to design a process that respects those differences while still giving everyone enough structure to move forward.
Working with students brings us back to that reality.
There is no hiding behind a polished phrase when someone asks, “What do I do next?”
That question is valuable. It is also central to good digital experience design. People need to know where they are, what is expected, what choices they have, and what happens after they act.
Tomorrow’s development work will happen in the classroom as much as anywhere else.
The larger question: what comes after technology?
We are taking a serious look at behavioral design for the firm and at the creation of experiences.
This is not a small wording change. It is a shift in how we think about our work.
Technology is the substrate. It is not the point.
A platform, device, interface, workflow, or digital tool gives us a place to build. It does not tell us what should be built. It does not explain how people will decide, learn, hesitate, return, collaborate, or change.
Behavioral design asks us to look directly at those patterns.
It is the discipline of shaping systems around how people actually think, decide, act, and change. It brings together research, psychology, design, organizational development, content, and practical observation.
The important word is “actually.”
We do not want to design for an imaginary person who reads every instruction, has unlimited attention, and follows the intended path without interruption. We want to design for people who are busy, curious, uncertain, experienced, new, distracted, motivated, tired, and moving at different speeds.
That requires more than good instincts.
It requires structure.
From device to person, and from person to person, at individual pace
The phrase we are carrying forward is:
From device to person, and from person to person, at individual pace.
We often begin with the device. We look at the screen, the software, the page, the tool, or the channel.
That is a necessary starting point. It is not the final one.
The real question is the person using the system. What are they trying to do? What do they already understand? What is making the next step difficult? What would make the experience clearer without making it patronizing?
Then we move from person to person.
People do not experience organizations alone. They experience teams, customers, leaders, partners, communities, and families. A digital experience can shape a conversation between two people. A marketing message can influence trust before a sales conversation begins. An internal process can either support collaboration or quietly make it harder.
The system is always social, even when the interface looks individual.
Pace matters, too.
One-size-fits-all systems assume that everyone adopts, learns, and changes at the same speed. They do not. Some people need a quick path. Some need context. Some need examples. Some need time before they are ready to act.
Respecting individual pace does not mean removing standards. It means designing enough flexibility for people to reach the standard through a realistic path.
That is where behavioral design becomes organizational design.
Making the practice repeatable
The serious question in front of us is structural:
How do we make behavioral design a repeatable practice inside the firm instead of a set of good instincts on a good day?
We are beginning to think about the framework around the work.
That includes:
- Shared language for describing behavior and experience.
- Clear roles for research, strategy, design, content, and review.
- Decision criteria for assessing whether an experience is useful, understandable, and humane.
- Review steps that examine behavior, not just appearance.
- Documentation that captures what we learned and why we made a decision.
- Feedback loops that help us improve the next project.
This is the work of organizational design. It is also part of a more thoughtful marketing consultancy model.
We are not only asking whether a message looks good or whether a system functions technically. We are asking whether it fits the people it is meant to serve.
That question will affect how we approach brand development, growth strategy, launch support, and online presence. It will also shape how we evaluate our own products and internal systems.
The framework does not need to be complicated. In fact, it should reduce unnecessary complexity.
We need a practical path:
- Observe real behavior.
- Frame the problem clearly.
- Design the experience around the people involved.
- Review the choices for usefulness and ethics.
- Learn from what happens next.
The goal is consistency without rigidity.
Growing bigger by getting smaller
This brings us to the phrase that keeps returning:
Growing bigger by getting smaller.
Growth does not always mean adding more.
It does not always mean more platforms, more channels, more services, more content, more features, or more people trying to reach everyone at once.
Sometimes growth means narrowing the work until it fits.
It means choosing fewer channels and using them well. It means making a message more specific. It means building a smaller experience with a deeper connection. It means focusing on the people who are actually ready for the work instead of trying to create general appeal for everyone.
Smaller surface. Deeper fit.
That matters because almost everyone seems to be everywhere these days. Organizations publish across every platform. Brands speak to every audience. Teams collect tools faster than they can establish habits around them.
Presence is not the same as connection.
A broad footprint can still feel absent if the experience is vague. A smaller, more deliberate presence can create recognition and trust over time.
This is why our growth strategy continues to favor organic, durable growth over short-term ad bursts. We want the work to be found, understood, remembered, and shared because it is useful.
We want context to beat templates.
Getting smaller helps us become more coherent. It gives us room to listen. It lets us respond to real behavior instead of assumptions.
That is how we get bigger in a way that lasts.
What we are carrying into Monday
Today, we are holding the meetings that need to happen and setting aside a few tasks that can wait.
Tomorrow, we are making space for development. That development will happen through study, reflection, and time with students.
Between now and Monday, we will keep building the structure around behavioral design and experience creation. We will move from devices toward people. From individual use toward relationships. From general assumptions toward individual pace.
The work is still taking shape. A few details will need adjustment. That is normal. We are not trying to pretend the structure is finished before we have tested it.
We are trying to make it strong enough to learn from.
Today’s meetings matter. Tomorrow’s students matter. The structure we are building now matters because it is what allows care to scale.
We can grow without becoming louder.
We can reach more people by understanding fewer things more deeply.
And we can get bigger by getting smaller: smaller in scope when needed, closer to context, and more deliberate about what we build for one person and then for the people connected to them.