A structured map of TCG's strategic decisions and everything that flows from them. Change a root node and every dependent node must be revisited. Open each node to read the detail.
Everything derives from these four. If any root changes, every dependent node must be revisited.
Stable while root nodes hold. Three have active gaps — marked with an amber border. Click any row to open.
Depend on first-tier nodes being settled. Where strategy becomes executable. Four have active gaps or urgent issues.
This is what makes the graph useful as a working tool. Each row shows which downstream nodes are forced to reconsider if the trigger changes.
| If this changes | These nodes must be revisited |
|---|---|
| Products | ICP, qualification criteria, operating model, revenue model, budget/margin, locale — almost every first-tier node |
| Archetype (e.g. scale beyond 150) | Operating model, revenue model, budget/margin, qualification criteria, locale, distribution — the boutique model and the volume model are fundamentally different businesses |
| Mission | Proposition, narrative arc, brand, KPIs/incentives, and everything downstream — the mission is the test against which everything is evaluated |
| Institutional position (e.g. Crispin writes another standard) | Proposition, counter-positioning, brand — the cornered resource is what earns the premium; any change requires repositioning what TCG claims to be |
| Locale | ICP, distribution, network/alumni, operating model — depth of relationship and trust is place-based; new geographies require new local presence |
| Regulatory / funding environment | Products, revenue model, ICP — ESFA policy and Ofsted standards shape the apprenticeship product directly; short courses are insulated |
Circular dependency: Operating model and budget/margin constrain each other. Design the operating model, check the margin, adjust, repeat. Do not try to resolve this in one pass — it requires iteration.
One needs fixing this week. The other is the work of the next six months. Both are live risks.
With 350+ leads in the pipeline and a June target of 60 learners, the constraint is not leads — it is conversion. The sales team answers product questions to prospects who have not yet seen why they would want the product. Prospects arrive curious about AI and leave uncertain.
This is the gate. Everything else is secondary until the unit economics work.
Three gaps — same root cause. The brand says "we back you" but nobody is operationally doing it during the programme. These become the priority the moment the June conversion problem is solved.
Not three separate problems — the same problem.