Make the Room Right
Turn a disappointing group investment into value through targeted alliances
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 99%
Make the Room Right converts disappointment with a broad group into a focused peer-learning system. Instead of deciding that an imperfect coaching program or organization was automatically a bad investment, the participant searches its member directory for people operating in a similar industry, at a similar business size, or at a comparable pace. The participant then invites those peers into a smaller side huddle or pod. That pod regularly cross-references ideas, industry insights, current tactics, and results, creating relevance that the main program may not provide. The mechanism depends on shifting from passive consumption to active value creation: the buyer treats the existing room as a network of possible alliances and deliberately assembles the smaller room needed to produce a return.
Origin
Extracted from The Jasmine Star Show after Jasmine advised a friend who had joined a large organization and feared it might not be the right fit.
Core principles
- 01An imperfect room can still contain valuable people and knowledge.
- 02The participant shares responsibility for producing value from an investment.
- 03Small peer pods create relevance inside broad communities.
- 04Similarity in industry, business size, and operating pace improves peer exchange.
- 05Proactive invitations outperform passive disappointment.
How to run it
- 1
Diagnose the Gap
State precisely why the room feels wrong, such as excessive size, generalized teaching, mismatched business stages, or limited direct interaction. Separate unmet expectations from genuine misconduct or lack of substance.
Pro tip Describe the missing value in one sentence before trying to recover it.
Watch out Do not use this method to rationalize remaining in a fraudulent or unsafe environment.
- 2
Inventory the Room
Review the member directory, index, discussions, and available profiles. Treat the larger group as a searchable pool of potential collaborators.
Pro tip Look beyond the most visible or famous members.
Watch out Waiting for ideal contacts to approach you preserves the original problem.
- 3
Find Relevant Peers
Shortlist people with similar industries, business sizes, growth rates, or operating challenges. Prioritize enough similarity for useful comparison while retaining some diversity of experience.
Pro tip Use two or three matching criteria rather than seeking an exact clone of your business.
Watch out Status alone is a poor proxy for peer relevance.
- 4
Create a Side Huddle
Send a clear invitation to a small number of relevant peers and explain the purpose of the pod. Keep the initial commitment lightweight so people can test the fit.
Pro tip Propose a specific meeting time and discussion theme in the first invitation.
Watch out A vague request to connect is easier to ignore than a concrete invitation.
- 5
Cross-Reference Practice
Use each session to compare current tactics, industry observations, experiments, and results. Ask what is working, what failed, and what each member will test next.
Pro tip Record decisions and revisit them at the next meeting.
Watch out Do not let the huddle become unstructured venting about the parent program.
- 6
Measure Recovered Value
Track useful introductions, decisions, experiments, opportunities, and financial outcomes created by the pod. Continue, modify, or end the huddle based on the evidence.
Pro tip Review the pod's value after three meetings.
Watch out Activity and attendance do not by themselves prove that the investment has become worthwhile.
In the wild
A founder joins a large organization and quickly feels lost among hundreds of members. She searches the directory for owners in a similar industry and at a comparable business size, then invites five of them to a monthly side huddle. They compare acquisition channels, pricing experiments, and operational bottlenecks while documenting what each member will test before the next call.
→ The founder creates relevant peer learning and alliances that the broad main group did not provide automatically.
An agency owner discovers that his mastermind's teaching is too general for his immediate hiring challenge. He identifies three other agencies at a similar stage and forms a short-term hiring pod. The members compare interview scorecards, compensation structures, and onboarding failures, then report their results after each hiring round.
→ A disappointing general program produces a targeted operating resource through participant initiative.
Common mistakes
Declaring the Investment Lost Too Early
A program that misses initial expectations may still contain relevant peers, resources, or opportunities. Diagnose and test recoverable value before dismissing it.
Networking Without Selection Criteria
Connecting indiscriminately recreates the noise of the large room. Select peers using business relevance, stage, and operating needs.
Building a Complaint Group
A side huddle should exchange evidence, tactics, and experiments rather than merely reinforce disappointment. Give every meeting a practical purpose.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for proactive members of large business groups who can contact other participants and organize a focused peer pod.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for fraudulent, unsafe, inaccessible, or substantively empty programs where withdrawal or remediation is the appropriate response.
From the transcript
“it is very common for me to go into groups and create a small pod of people who are running at a similar rate.”
“Because we get to cross-reference ideas, we get to cross-reference industry insights. We get to ask what people are doing or what's working.”
“even if you're not in the right room, make it the right room.”
From the episode
Business Education and Coaching: How Much to Invest and How to Turn Around a “Bad Investment”