Creating a Flexible Toolkit and Playbook for Unique Situations

How Can I Create a Toolkit and Playbook When I Know There’s No One-Size-Fits-All Option? This is the paradox that lives at the heart of my work: organisations crave structure, but people live in nuance.

How can I create a toolkit or a playbook—something that is accessible, practical, replicable, and scalable—when I know that every team, person, and context is different?

This tension used to keep me up at night. And truthfully, it still shows up in waves.

As I’ve delved deeper into human-centred systems work, I’ve had to come face-to-face with dichotomy and polarity over and over again. Understanding that things aren’t black and white is easy in theory. But living that tension—feeling it in your body, sitting with the discomfort that there is no perfect answer, no singular fix—is hard.

That’s why even the idea of offering “toolkits” has felt uncomfortable for me. On some days, it feels like I’m dishonouring the craft. I worry that I am pretending that I can offer a solution like a screwdriver that fits perfectly into a single slot, and boom: Problem solved. But I’ve learned to take a step back and ask myself: what is the real purpose of the toolkit?

Toolkits are not solutions.They are invitations. They are flexible frameworks meant to help people see possibilities, surface tensions, and navigate decisions in a way that works for them.

When I develop toolkits or playbooks—especially in complex areas like transitions or leadership development—the content is intended to be a conversation starter as opposed to a script. I’m not handing over a manual that dictates exactly what to do. I’m offering a set of choices, prompts, and principles that can guide teams toward what works for them.

It starts with clarity: what is the toolkit for? Who is it meant to support? What’s the moment in their journey when they’ll turn to it?

The best toolkits prioritize range over rigidity. They should include:

• Multiple entry points – A new manager and an experienced HR leader won’t need the same thing. Can the toolkit meet both?

• Contextual cues – Instead of generic templates, include “if/then” examples, reflection questions, or scenario-based advice.

• Capacity Building – A good playbook doesn't just offer pre-made answers; it teaches users how to think through challenges themselves.

A human-centred approach doesn’t mean throwing structure out the window. In fact, structure and clarity are more important than ever. But they need to serve diversity of need—not erase it.

For example, in a recent project around parental leave, the toolkit we developped included:

• A timeline template that could be customised depending on the length of leave

• A bank of optional conversation guides so managers could choose tone and timing based on relationships

• Reflection prompts for returning employees, knowing each person’s leave experience is different

• A too-long checklist with a note encouraging people to choose what’s useful

The result? A toolkit that gave people confidence and direction, without prescribing uniformity.

This is also about relinquishing control as a consultant. Not trying to own or standardise the process, but trusting the people inside the system to adapt it for themselves. Toolkits are a way to empower others to facilitate their own solutions. They can integrate ideas at their own pace, in their own language, in a way that respects their realities.

And frankly, that makes the work more accessible too. Not everyone can afford a full consulting engagement. Toolkits allow my practice to touch more people, reduce barriers to entry, and invite more experimentation and co-creation.

So no, I’m not designing the perfect tools. I’m designing helpful ones. Ones that makes space for complexity and recognise change. Ones that sparks clarity, not conformity.

And yes, sometimes it’s still uncomfortable to hand over something that feels too tidy. But I remind myself that the real power lies not in the tools themselves, but in what they unlock: reflection, agency, dialogue, and self-designed transformation.

The tools that make a difference are not perfect, but they are useful.

See below for a rigid script gone very, very wrong: