Thread by @swardley

X : I’ve used your maps and they’re rubbish.
Me : They’re imperfect (being a map) and they’re wrong (being a model) but then all maps are. They can still be useful. Why rubbish?
X : Waste of time.
Me : You didn’t learn anything whilst mapping or that didn’t help in discussion?

X : Too complex and caused too many arguments.
Me : What arguments?
X : I had hoped the maps would help the group agree on an approach. Ended up with arguments over whether we should do it.
Me : And that’s a bad thing?

X : Yes, we have tight schedules and the map just caused more confusion in the team.
Me : So the maps helped bring disagreement to the surface?
X : At a time when we need to focus this was not helpful.
Me : Maybe the map isn’t rubbish, maybe what you’re doing is?

X : We have commitments that we need to meet.
Me : Ah, and mapping is supposed to help you hit those commitments?
X : Precisely. It failed.
Me : Hmmm. I don’t think mapping is the problem.

X : It doesn’t work.
Me : No, it did what it is supposed to do. It has enabled challenge. What you’re discovering is you’ve made commitments which your team disagree with and are trying to express through maps. You’ve sold a good story and you’re not listening to your team.

X : They still doesn’t help us, we need to deliver.
Me : Have you tried asking the team to map out the space and work out if there is a way to deliver your commitments in the time? What can we cut away etc.
X : There are wider political concerns.
Me : Hmmm. Have you mapped those?

X : This is like one of our meetings, constant arguments. We need everyone to pull together. Maps didn’t help, I thought I’d just let you know.
Me : Well, they’re imperfect and wrong. However, in this case I think your problem is more to do with challenge. You don’t like it.