Ideally, you should always get paid in advance. Either completely (if possible) or partially. Committing to a project also comes with a huge opportunity cost for you. A very bad scenario for freelancers and agencies is when they block the calendar for a big project, potentially even hire people or assistance in anticipation of a big job, declining other client requests, just for the client to cancel the project at the last minute, leaving them hanging with nothing to do. For small businesses this can be ruinous. Asking for an advance payment gives both you AND the client more planning security. It prevents you from cancelling on the client ("We found a better paying client, bye") and also disincentives the client to pull out on short notice. So asking for an advance isn't pushy, it's just basic professionalism and you don't need to be apologetic about it. It's important to also get into writing what happens to the advance if the project is cancelled regardless. Something like, "the advance is forfeited if the client cancels the project within 2 weeks from the intended starting date." You can still choose to be flexible around this, if you have a good relationship with the client (i.e., you keep the advance, and allow them to reschedule to a later date). This gives you more planning security. You can split payment into an advance fee (to secure the booking) and a fee to be paid to complete delivery (e.g. of files, assets, documentation etc). It's also a cashflow issue: Another ruinous thing that happens to a lot of small businesses: You do projects that are lucrative, only for having to wait for payment for months. So even though you are at full utilization, there's no money coming in, and you end up having to get a business loan to pay your bills. This is a terrible situation to be in.

Hey @Dennis Kwan , there are several ways to achieve this. First off, expectation setting. I think this is going to be a big one. Let people know ahead of the session that the recommended default is to switch on the camera. I think it's important how you frame this. You shouldn't make it feel like there's pressure to do this. Because that's going to make people uncomfortable. Instead, you should explain the reasons for this: - First off, it's going to be more engaging for everyone if they can see the other people in the class. Even though everyone is joining the class from different locations, everyone still learns together, as a team. - Secondly, it's for their own benefit. A lot of communication is non-verbal and you, the instructor, can easier notice if the class could benefit from additional explanations, or is getting bored and would like to move on. And of course, you should also let people know that there will be breaks where they can switch off the cameras, and of course that they are free to switch off their cameras when they have to take a quick personal break (going to the bathroom, eating something, somebody is coming in the room etc.). One thing I wouldn't expect is 100% of attendants switching on their cameras. If the group is smaller, it's definitely possible, but the bigger the group the more comfortable people will feel in relative anonymity. And some people are simply not comfortable or able to be on camera, ever. For these people, you could also add a line like "if you are not able to be on camera, just let me know ahead of the class. No need to give me a reason for your preference, I just want to be aware of it during the session so I know you are still in the session even if your camera is off." During the class: I think @Puja Potdar 's idea is a good one, I would suggest to start the class with an ice-breaker, if time permits. If the group is too large, you could break them up into smaller groups and let them do the icebreaker in groups of 5-6.

Interesting! I've given these a try but I couldn't get anything useful out of them. The HMWs were either not specific enough to be useful for problem framing or the process of creating them seemed overwrought for something that's supposed to be very simple. My impression is that this is overengineering something that's very simple, and intents to get *people* to think.

Hey @James Frost ! I always like to think about company values as very tangibly connected to real-life business and individual behavior and actions. It's easy to workshop some lofty values that feel good and wholesome in the moment, but they usually don't have a lot of lasting power outside of the workshop constraints. Employees get jaded very quickly if leadership announces values that aren't lived, and don't really give anyone guidance on how to act when it's becoming difficult to make a decisions. This is really what the values should be able to help with. This is why I would always connect the thinking on values on how they are translated into reality. I would also think about values as existing on a spectrum, of which both ends are "value-neutral" (there is no "bad" value, there are only "real" and "fake" values, and you always want the values to be genuine, not fake). For example, a company that is very concerned about IP probably doesn't have "open" as a value. On a spectrum, they are likely more towards the "closed" end, and that is fine. I could imagine creating a few of these spectrums could provide a useful frame to discuss these. I would also think about ending the workshop in a way that identifies how these values would translate into the reality of the buiness: - What is it we are doing we should continue, or do more of? - What is something we aren't doing yet, that we should start doing? - And what are the things we should stop doing, because it doesn't align with our values? This is really where the rubber hits the road, because it's uncomfortable. That could be a good way to close the loop. So just as an idea to start you off, I'd spend some time in the beginning on doing a short retro on how things are going now, what has happened the past 12 months (highlights and low points), then work on the spectrums (where do participants think the business falls now on the spectrum, and where do they think it should be?), then align and keep going back to the work done at the beginning, thinking about how that scenario might have played out with the new value in place.

It was really fun! Thanks to everyone who showed up and the excellent questions! If we didn't get to yours, join the next call and get it in early so we can address it next time 🙂