The evidence is geographically concentrated
10 of 11 published cases are in Alberta. National positioning should therefore rely on delivery capability and named facilitators, not a false claim that this case set represents Canada.
Published case inventory · v0
FUSE Engagement Insights
A coded view of the work FUSE has permission to publish as of 2026-08-21. This release is designed to show what the portfolio can and cannot support before anyone calls it research.
The short answer
FUSE's public proof currently supports strong Alberta delivery evidence across strategy, alignment, team, innovation, and large-group work. It does not support a representative claim about all Canadian organizations, all FUSE engagements, or causal effectiveness.
11published cases in this inventory
10Canadian cases, all currently in Alberta
4cases with a published numeric outcome or participant-rating claim
4cases that explicitly name Open Space Technology
What the published portfolio shows
These are descriptive observations from selected, permissioned pages. They are useful for choosing comparable proof and identifying evidence gaps; they are not prevalence estimates.
Methods are combined around the job
The cases describe combinations such as Open Space, ecosystem mapping, working agreements, OKRs, relationship systems coaching, value-stream mapping, and structured harvests. FUSE does not present one method as the answer to every room.
Outcome evidence is uneven
4 cases publish a numeric result or participant-rating claim. The remaining narratives publish outputs or observed outcomes without a comparable numeric measure, so they should not be pooled into an average.
Published work is selected proof
Client permission, confidentiality, historical documentation, and page readiness shape what appears here. Absence from the portfolio is not evidence that FUSE lacks experience in a sector, location, method, or group size.
Auditable case inventory
Every row links to the public narrative used for coding. The method labels below mean only that the published case names that method or activity.
Innovation Pathways Workshop for the Fortis Innovation Network
Calgary region, Alberta
Innovation and improvementEvidence type
Published numeric outcome or participant-rating claim
Methods or activities named
- case examples
- constraint dialogue
- safe-to-try experiments
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- Open Space Technology
- executive Q&A
- closing harvest
Evidence type
Published numeric outcome or participant-rating claim
Methods or activities named
- ecosystem mapping
- Open Space Technology
- group harvest
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- stakeholder evidence
- Golden Circle
- OKR drafting
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- working agreements
- visioning
- KPI prioritization
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- Open Space Technology
- participant-led sessions
- community product development
Evidence type
Published numeric outcome or participant-rating claim
Methods or activities named
- team agreements
- visioning
- appreciation loop
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- relationship systems coaching
- leadership-team model
- Agile Marketing
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- vision alignment
- portfolio choices
- roadmap design
Evidence type
Published numeric outcome or participant-rating claim
Methods or activities named
- value-stream mapping
- Lean practices
- Open Space Technology
Evidence type
Published qualitative outcome or output narrative
Methods or activities named
- prioritization techniques
- incremental delivery
- workflow adaptation
Method and limitations
We coded the eleven case pages published on this site on 2026-08-21. Geography, primary decision job, named methods, and presence of a numeric outcome or participant-rating claim were taken only from the published narrative. No unpublished client records, private notes, website analytics, or inferred client identities were used.
- The inventory is a selected portfolio, not a random or complete sample.
- Case outcomes may be client-reported, participant-reported, facilitator-observed, or output-based; they are not treated as equivalent.
- No causal claim is made. A facilitated process is one input among leadership, context, implementation, and external conditions.
- No benchmark, Canadian average, sector average, or market-size estimate is derived from this release.
- A national study requires a preregistered question, sampling frame, consent and privacy controls, analysis plan, and an independent review of the claims.
Use comparable proof, not a headline statistic
Tell us the decision job, group, context, and evidence you need. We will point to the closest published work and state where the comparison stops.
Browse the published cases