I stared at a blank "publish" button for longer than I'd like to admit. Not because the website wasn't ready — it had been ready for days — but because clicking it meant the thing I'd been quietly building since I left T&T was no longer a private project. It was now a company other people could find, judge, and, hopefully, call. This week I clicked it. GUC — Growth Unlimited Co. — is officially live at guc-intel.com.
Two posts ago I wrote about why I was leaving. Last week I wrote about the disorienting first week of having no structure at all. This week the structure finally started to take shape, and it took shape around one decision I kept coming back to during every conversation I had this month: GUC will not be a firm that takes projects off your plate. It will be a firm that gets on the plate with you.
That distinction sounds like branding, but it's actually the whole thesis. I spent 25 years watching how expensive external advisory work usually plays out — a PM firm parachutes in, runs the project competently, and parachutes out, taking all the hard-won judgment with them. The client is relieved for eighteen months and then right back where they started, because nothing was transferred. I've been that parachuting expert. I got good at it. And I've decided I don't want to build a company on repeating it.
So GUC's model is deliberately less convenient for me and more useful for the client: work alongside the team, not instead of it, and treat "does the client's own staff walk away better at this" as a real success metric, not a nice-to-have. It's why the services page leads with advisory work embedded inside client teams, and only gets to training and organizational development — strengths-based, in partnership with CBL — once that embedded trust is established. You can't teach an organization to run itself if you're the one running it.
The insight that surprised me, building this out over the past few weeks, is how much that philosophy is really just lean thinking applied to consulting itself. Lean says don't build more process than the work needs. Applied to advisory services, it says don't build more dependency than the client needs either. Every EPC project I ever ran taught me that the healthiest projects are the ones where, by the end, the client barely needs the outside expert anymore. I'm trying to build a business whose success is measured the same way — not by how indispensable I become, but by how quickly I make myself less necessary.
The broader takeaway: if you're building something new, the model you choose says more about your values than your mission statement does. I could have built GUC around maximizing billable hours per client. Instead I built it around minimizing them, deliberately, because that's the version of this work I actually believe in. It's a harder way to run a company. It's also the only way I wanted to run one.
The site is live. The real work — the first client conversations — starts now.
https://www.guc-intel.com/












