Podcasts about bill it

6/4/2025 PODCAST Episodes #1991 - #1993 GUESTS: Adam Lalone, Phill Kline, Corey Lewandowski, John McLaughlin, Rep. Morgan Griffith, Salleigh Grubbs, Nancy Babbitt, Debbie Dooley, Courtney Kramer, Vikki Consiglio + YOUR CALLS! at 1-888-480-JOHN (5646) and GETTR Live! @jfradioshow #GodzillaOfTruth #TruckingTheTruth   Want more of today's show? Episode #1991 This Is The President's Bill & It's Time For Congress To Get On Board Episode #1992 We Have To Get This Economy Going Into Full Throttle Episode #1993 Peach Crew Unplugged   https://johnfredericksradio.libsyn.com/

6/4/2025 PODCAST Episodes #1991 - #1993 GUESTS: Adam Lalone, Phill Kline, Corey Lewandowski, John McLaughlin, Rep. Morgan Griffith, Salleigh Grubbs, Nancy Babbitt, Debbie Dooley, Courtney Kramer, Vikki Consiglio + YOUR CALLS! at 1-888-480-JOHN (5646) and GETTR Live! @jfradioshow #GodzillaOfTruth #TruckingTheTruth   Want more of today's show? Episode #1991 This Is The President's Bill & It's Time For Congress To Get On Board Episode #1992 We Have To Get This Economy Going Into Full Throttle Episode #1993 Peach Crew Unplugged   https://johnfredericksradio.libsyn.com/

6/4/2025 PODCAST Episodes #1991 - #1993 GUESTS: Adam Lalone, Phill Kline, Corey Lewandowski, John McLaughlin, Rep. Morgan Griffith, Salleigh Grubbs, Nancy Babbitt, Debbie Dooley, Courtney Kramer, Vikki Consiglio + YOUR CALLS! at 1-888-480-JOHN (5646) and GETTR Live! @jfradioshow #GodzillaOfTruth #TruckingTheTruth   Want more of today's show? Episode #1991 This Is The President's Bill & It's Time For Congress To Get On Board Episode #1992 We Have To Get This Economy Going Into Full Throttle Episode #1993 Peach Crew Unplugged   https://johnfredericksradio.libsyn.com/

That Driving Beat this week brings you two similar-sounding midtempo Northern steppers about urban life in the ever-changing, anonymous concrete city. One is a sought-after valuable rarity in the scene, while the other hasn't found much love even with its more uplifting message. We love them both! We also spin some classics that the discerning rare soul scenesters might say they're sick of hearing, at least one big chart hit with a B-side worth attention, 2 favorites from Bobby Bland, a much more in this week's radio dance party! -Originally broadcast June 1, 2025- Willie Mitchell / That Driving BeatAaron Neville / Why WorryGloria Jones / Tainted LoveInez & Charlie Foxx / (1-2-3-4-5-6-7) Count the DaysThe O'Jays / I'll Never Forget YouThe Malibus / Ten Times a DayTony Clarke / Landslide Allison and Calvin Turner / Shake What Your Mamma Gave YouThe Valentines / BreakawayWilmer & The Dukes / Heavy TimeCoasters / Love Potion Number NineBetty Lavette / I Feel Good (All Over)Bobby Bland / I Pity the FoolShirley Brown / I've Got to Go On Without YouBobby Bland / ShoesTimothy Carr / Love My LoveDean Parrish / Bricks, Broken Bottles and SticksBobby Allen Poe / Concrete JungleBonnie Lou / 24 Hours of LonelinessLarry & The Mighty Storms / Eldorado SuziePeggy March / If You Loved Me (Soul Coaxing-Ame Caline)Four Tops / The KeyLaura Greene / Moonlight Music In YouBettye Swann / Lonely LoveSusan Rafey / Hurt So BadThe Endeavors / I Know You Don't Want MeAl Kent / The Way You Been Acting LatelyPic & Bill / It's Not YouLou Johnson / If I Never Get To Love YouLittle Emmett Sutton / Mom, Won't You Teach Me To MonkeyDeon Jackson / Love Makes The World Go RoundThe Intruders / Every Day is a HolidayJohnny Nash / Love Ain't Nothin'Chet "Poison" Ivey And His Fabulous Avengers / In A Little WhileAnna King / Mama's Got a Bag of Her OwnNina Simone / It Be's That Way SometimeBilly Joe Royal / Heart's DesireMaurice & the Radiants / I Gotta Dance To Keep My BabyBob Kayli / Tie Me Tight Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Patrick explores maintaining joy amidst suffering with practical advice. Joe from Mount Prospect discusses finding books on joy during hardship, while Linda from Miami looks into the importance of Masses for the deceased. Patrick recommends classic spiritual works and emphasizes the power of prayer for souls in purgatory. Patrick continues the conversation from the previous hour about the ethics of training children to use firearms for defense Gary - I served in the marines and this seems like the Polish youth are simply being trained in marksmanship (07:10) Kristoph - I am Polish. I grossly disagree with you! They are not training to kill. Just basic gun use. Biggest difference between US and Poland is that Poland has stricter gun laws. (15:49) Joe – In yesterday's reading. St Paul said we are to rejoice always. Do you know of a book to help me understand how to be joyful in tribulation? Also, what is the difference between joy and happiness? (25:49) Linda - Why do we allow priest to offer prayers for someone's deceased loved ones at Mass? (31:03) Bill - It is horrible that young children need to learn to defend themselves with firearms, but we forget in the USA how privileged we are. (33:19) Patrick shares the latest info about the recent Drones activity (40:29) Tom - I came from Poland. Thank you for touching this subject and for playing the Polish National Anthem. This training comes from a Cold War policy. I had to train growing up. (46:02)

Lois Houston and Nikita Abraham continue their deep dive into Oracle Database 23ai backup and recovery strategies with Senior Principal Database & MySQL Instructor Bill Millar.   Picking up from Part 1, they explore critical concepts such as instance recovery, checkpoint processes, and the role of redo log files. Bill shares insights into complete and incomplete recovery, flashback technologies, and lots more.   Oracle MyLearn: https://mylearn.oracle.com/ou/course/oracle-database-23ai-backup-and-recovery/141127/   Oracle University Learning Community: https://education.oracle.com/ou-community   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/oracle-university/   Twitter: https://twitter.com/Oracle_Edu   Special thanks to Arijit Ghosh, David Wright, Radhika Banka, and the OU Studio Team for helping us create this episode.   --------------------------------------------------------   Episode Transcript:   00:00 Welcome to the Oracle University Podcast, the first stop on your cloud journey. During this series of informative podcasts, we'll bring you foundational training on the most popular Oracle technologies. Let's get started! 
00:26 Nikita: Welcome back to the Oracle University Podcast! I'm Nikita Abraham, Team Lead of Editorial Services with Oracle University, and with me is Lois Houston, Director of Innovation Programs. Lois: Hi everyone! Last week, we had a fantastic chat with Bill Millar, our Senior Principal Database & MySQL Instructor. We dug into the basics of backup and recovery. We touched on everything from a DBA's role in preventing data loss to handling different types of failures, and even some common mistakes that tend to pop up when managing a database. Nikita: Yeah, if you missed that episode, definitely go back and check it out. It's packed with useful info, especially if you're in charge of keeping databases safe. 01:10 Lois: Today, we're picking up where we left off. We're going to ask Bill about instance recovery and recovery strategies. Bill, can you kick things off by explaining what instance recovery is? Bill: You can understand instant recovery by becoming familiar with the checkpoint process, the redo log files, and the role of the log writer with the redo log files. Automatically instance or crash recovery. What is it doing? What are the phases of instance recovery? How we possibly can tune that instance recovery. We can use the mean time to recovery advisor that can help us determine how we might tune the instance recovery. 01:51 Nikita: OK, so let's go through some of these concepts and procedures you mentioned. What is the checkpoint process responsible for exactly? Bill: The checkpoint process itself, it's responsible for updating the data file headers with checkpoint information. When a checkpoint is taken, it is going to write into the controlfiles. It tells the DB writer to write. DB writer writes to the data files, and the checkpoint is also annotated in the data files. So updating controlfiles with that checkpoint information also, controlfiles and database files. It signals that DB writer at full check points again, hey, it's time to write. So that way, it has the latest data written to the data files. The controlfile and datafiles, those are in sync with that. 02:40 Lois: Bill, what about the log writer process and the redo log files? Bill: With the log writer process and the redo log files, the redo log files record the changes to the database himself. It should be multiplexed. 02:53 Nikita: What do you mean by that? Bill: More than one redo log group. Now, the redo log groups, it is recommended that they should be multiplexed. Each group member should be on a different disk or in a different disk group if you're using ASM. 03:10 Nikita: And why is that, Bill? Bill: Because if I lose one, if I lose one redo log group, one member, I can continue to operate with just the one. If I only have one redo log group member and the system comes around and tries to write to it, then my system is going to come to a halt. So the log writer is going to write to those redo logs whenever somebody does a commit. When that redo log buffer is 1/3 full or every three seconds and before DB writer writes. So those are the four mechanism that tells log writer to write from that log buffer to the redo log files. And it'll also write, when we do a shut down, all the buffers will be flushed. And so that way, everything will be in sync when the system is shut down. 04:01 Lois: What are the different modes of operation for a database, Bill? And how do these modes impact the recovery capabilities of the database? Bill: So we have two different modes we can operate in. One is called NOARCHIVELOG mode. It is the default. ARCHIVELOG mode, highly encouraged. But not every environment has to be in ARCHIVELOG mode. 04:21 Nikita: So with ARCHIVELOG mode… Bill: Closed database. You have to close it, recover to the last backup. That's as far as I can go. Actually, I could, depending on what happens, I might be able to apply some redo. Suitable for training and test environments or for data warehouses, we don't have a lot of frequent changes. It's mainly bulk loading data at night and querying during the day. So it might be appropriate for that. Because ARCHIVELOG mode, it is a little overhead. Yes. So with that database, it goes down while it's open. The system, when it comes up, it can recover to the last committed transaction. And this is usually the mode we want to operate in for production environments. So we have that data in the buffer cache. We have that redo being buffered. We have the undo tablespace, keeping track of what the data was before a change. The redo keeps track of what was the change. And if we're in ARCHIVELOG mode, as we switch from one redo log to another, we will generate what's referred to as archived log files, and that's what allows us to do a complete recovery. 05:33 Lois: What happens in the case of automatic instance recovery? Bill: For an automatic instance recovery or crash recovery, our system went down unexpectedly. Because it did not do a clean shutdown, the buffers were not flushed. Everything was not synchronized. So the datafile, controlfile, everything is out of sync. 05:53 Nikita: So, how do the files get synchronized then? Bill: It uses the redo log groups to synchronize the files. It's going to roll forward. It rolls forward the changes that were made. So due to different distinct operations. Roll forward applies committed and uncommitted data. And the redo does not keep track of what was committed and uncommitted. It'll keep track of, hey, I had this transaction, hey, here's a commit for that transaction. But hey, I have a transaction. That was never uncommitted. That's the job of the undo. But rolls forward all those changes. And then anything that did not actually receive a commit, it will roll back the uncommitted data, return to the original state. And that is the job of the undo tablespace. 06:37 Lois: Bill, is it possible to tune instance recovery for better performance? Bill: You can try to tune this instance recovery. Tuning it is touchy. Be careful because you can cause more harm than what you think you might be doing good. The instance recovery, what we're doing, we're trying to-- the transactions between checkpoints. When was the last checkpoint? Because the items between the checkpoints, that's what has to be reapplied. So the last checkpoint to the last redo log, what is that time frame there between those? Well, what we're going to do, we're going to try to control that. We're going to try to control the difference between the checkpoint and the end of the redo log. There is a mean-time recovery advisor. You specify the desired times in seconds or minutes that how often you want that checkpoint to occur. There is a parameter, FAST_START_MTTR parameter that you can set. The default value is zero saying, hey, I'm going to let the system take care of it. And the maximum you can set it is to one hour. 07:46 Nikita: And why 1 hour?
 Bill: The reason being, if I set that to one hour and I have a lot of activity, how long is it going to take? How many transactions can happen within that hour? Yeah, I'm not doing a checkpoint as often, so I'm eliminating that workload. But if it has to recover, how long is it going to take? If I set it too small, the system says, hey, right now, it's going to take me 19 seconds based off statistics. If I said, OK, I want it in five seconds. So what does that mean? Every five seconds, I'm saying do a checkpoint. So what is it doing? OK, time to do a checkpoint. OK, time to go ahead and OK, DB writer write. OK, log writer write. OK, let me update the datafiles and the controlfiles. So you're just thrashing your system. So be careful if you decide to try to manually tune it. And when you go out and look at this mean time to recover, and even if you do it through the command line, you'll see that, that value is most likely going to change throughout the day, depending on the workload that you have. 08:46 Lois: How does the process of restoring and recovering data typically work? Bill: So when we restore, we're restoring our datafiles. All the datafiles, tablespace, controlfiles, archived redo log, server parameter file. Then when we recover, it involves depending on the backup that we use and other factors in there, it is going to apply the redo. So automatically done by RMAN. So I tell it, this is what I want to do. Hey, I want to restore a database. OK, RMAN says, all right, what backup are you going to use? What is it I need to restore? And then we tell it to recover. OK, I know what I need to use to recover. So RMAN can do the work for you. So when we restore and recover due to a manual process and there's different methods that we can use, and depending on the failure, we'll drive what type of restore and recovery we might perform. 09:40 Are you looking for practical use cases to help you plan and apply configurations that solve real-world challenges? With the new Applied Learning courses for Cloud Applications, you'll be able to practically apply the concepts learned in our implementation courses and work through case studies featuring key decisions and configurations encountered during a typical Oracle Cloud Applications implementation. Applied learning scenarios are currently available in General Ledger, Payables, Receivables, Accounting Hub, Global Human Resources, Talent Management, Inventory, and Procurement, with many more to come! Visit mylearn.oracle.com to get started. 10:22 Nikita: Welcome back! Can you talk about the different types of recovery scopes, Bill? How do they compare? Bill: Recovery can have two kinds of scope. All right. One is the complete recovery. We are getting the database back to the current time of the crash with no loss of data. We're going to again bring everything back to the present. Incomplete or point-in-time recovery. We're going to take a database or maybe a tablespace or even a table back to a point-in-time in the past. So from the time that we select to take it to recover, everything that was done after that is null and void, is gone missing. That's why it's called incomplete recovery, because it's not complete. 11:09 Lois: What are the steps that take place during complete recovery? Bill: We restore the datafiles. Changes are applied. We're applying the redo. The datafiles contained committed and uncommitted transactions. The undo is applied. Anything that did not receive an actual commit will take back to the original value. And we have our datafiles recovered. 11:33 Nikita: And what about point-in-time recovery? Bill: Point-in-time recovery, very similar. We're going to restore the datafiles from as far back as necessary. Changes are applied. So the data files are going to contain the committed and uncommitted up to that point-in-time. Database is open, that redo, that undo, anything that did not actually receive a commit. The undo is applied. The point-in-time recovered is complete. We're not applying all the redo, all the changes, only up to the time that we specify. 12:08 Lois: Are there any features that can make point-in-time recovery quicker? Bill: We also have the ability to use flashback database. It is an optional feature. And it can be a quick way to do that point-in-time recovery. It is an alternative to that database point-in-time recovery we just looked at. Faster. No restore is required. It's going to rewind the database. It does require some configuration in the environment. We do have to set up in order to use flashback database. 12:41 Nikita: I want to talk about Oracle's data protection solutions, particularly when it comes to backup and recovery or disaster recovery. Bill: So for physical data protection-- backup and recovery objective. Yep, that works for both physical and logical. My recovery time, hours to days. Possibly minutes to hours for the logical. And Oracle solution, we have the Recovery Manager that's out of the box, RMAN. Oracle Secure Backup, that is Oracle's media management library system backing up to tape. The logical protection, yes, flashback technologies can help me take care of that very easily. For disaster recovery, physical data protection, recovery time objective, seconds to minutes. We're not going to accomplish that with RMAN. You're going to want to use our Data Guard with the Active Data Guard feature to be able to switch over to a standby database within seconds of a failure. 13:41 Lois: Why would someone choose to use flashback technologies for recovery, Bill? Bill: With the flashback technologies, we can use it for viewing data as past dates. What did it look like? We can wind the database back and forth in time. Assist users in an error analysis and recovery, because we have different technologies. This flashback query, version query, transaction query, those allow me to view what was the value of a row at a time. I can even see what were the changes to a row over a period of time? I can also view the query that caused that change. For error recovery, I can back out a transaction. I can take a table back to a non-current time. I can also flashback a table that was dropped. And I can also take an entire database by using flashback. So the different recovery options I might have with the flashback technology. 14:44 Lois: Thank you so much, Bill. These last two episodes have been so insightful, right Niki? Nikita: I couldn't agree more, Lois! If you want to know more about backup and recovery configuration and other concepts, visit mylearn.oracle.com and search for the Oracle Database 23ai: Backup and Recovery course. Our upcoming episode is a very special one, where we'll be discussing Oracle AI in Fusion Cloud Human Capital Management. So, watch out for that! Until next week, this is Nikita Abraham… Lois: And Lois Houston, signing off!
 15:16 That's all for this episode of the Oracle University Podcast. If you enjoyed listening, please click Subscribe to get all the latest episodes. We'd also love it if you would take a moment to rate and review us on your podcast app. See you again on the next episode of the Oracle University Podcast.

In this episode, Lois Houston and Nikita Abraham explore the Automatic Transaction Quarantine feature with Senior Principal Database & MySQL Instructor, Bill Millar. Bill explains that this feature isolates transactions that could potentially cause system crashes, preventing them from impacting the entire container database. They also discuss the key advantages of automatic transaction quarantine in maintaining database stability and availability.   Oracle MyLearn: https://mylearn.oracle.com/ou/course/oracle-database-23ai-new-features-for-administrators/140830/   Oracle University Learning Community: https://education.oracle.com/ou-community   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/oracle-university/   X: https://twitter.com/Oracle_Edu   Special thanks to Arijit Ghosh, David Wright, and the OU Studio Team for helping us create this episode.   --------------------------------------------------------   Episode Transcript:   00:00 Welcome to the Oracle University Podcast, the first stop on your cloud journey. During this series of informative podcasts, we'll bring you foundational training on the most popular Oracle technologies. Let's get started! 00:26 Nikita: Welcome to the Oracle University Podcast! I'm Nikita Abraham, Team Lead: Editorial Services with Oracle University, and with me is Lois Houston, Director of Innovation Programs. Lois: Hi there! In our last episode, we looked at an Oracle Database 23ai new feature called Automatic Transaction Rollback, and we spoke about why it is such an important feature for database administrators. 00:51 Nikita: Today, we're going to talk about another new feature called Automatic Transaction Quarantine. We'll discuss what it is, go through the steps to monitor and identify quarantine transactions, explore how an issue is resolved once a quarantined transaction has been identified, and end by looking at quarantined transaction escalation, and how it helps to protect not only your PDB, but also your container database. Lois: Back with us is Bill Millar, our Senior Principal Database & MySQL Instructor with Oracle University. Hi Bill! What is automatic transaction quarantine and why do we need it? 01:27 Bill: The good news is that starting in 23c with the database quarantines, it's going to isolate a transaction or transactions that could possibly cause a system crash, so you can avoid crashes. It's going to isolate those transactions that potentially could cause a problem. However, those transactions must be manually resolved by the DBA so that the row locks are released from those bad transactions. A transaction recovery basically is going to isolate failure and also identify what is the cause of that corruption. So when a system restarts, transaction can fail to recover while the other transactions can be recovered. So with the transaction recovery, basically, we know when the system recovers, the SMON is going to use the redo and the undo. 02:27 Nikita: Can you explain that in a little more detail? How does transaction recovery work and why is it so critical for database stability? Bill: It does the redo to roll forward the database. However, at that point, it'll go ahead and open the database, allow it to start being used while it is applying the undo. And when it cannot apply that undo, that's when the system is going to mark that transaction as bad for that. That is what is transaction recovery. Whereas instance recovery is basically the same thing, except now you're in a RAC environment. And it's unable to be recovered on one of the instances within your RAC environment. Because it can be, it'll have those rows locked, and it can affect the other instances. So SMON might be unable to perform that recovery, so it could cause that PDB or the CDB to crash. OK, now, nobody can access any information. So once if that entire container crashes, recovery is going to stop. If it has a bad transaction, recovery stops. So it might be because of physical data, might be because of the index is corrupt, might be logical corruption. So it stops that interactive transaction recovery process. So not only does it stop the recovery of the transaction that is trying to be recovered by SMON, it's going to stop the rest of the inactive transactions. Those row locks are held. And it can impact critical operations. Yeah, if my system can't do anything, yes, it's going to have an impact. The DBAs must resolve what is that bad transaction, how to get rid of it, how we're going to get around it? 04:12 Lois: Bill, what's the workflow a DBA would follow when a transaction is quarantined? Bill: So in the system, when that transaction recovery failure is, OK, I've found this dead transaction. I'm going to quarantine. I'm going to say, hey, you have something you need to take care of for that. So it's not recovered by the SMON. So what's going to happen? So there is also is going to be a limit. So if it does reach that limit and the limit is three, then you're going to have to step in and try to take care of that very quickly. The shut down abort will be performed on the PDB. So the good news there is that it's going to keep it from impacting the entire container. If the limit isn't reached, well, then, OK, hey, we have this bad transaction that's going to quarantine, is going to populate. There's a couple of views that you can go out and look at. There's a CDB quarantine transactions or a DBA quarantine transactions. Those views you can look at. And then once we determine that, what are we going to do to try to recover it? If we're going to try to recover it, then we can go ahead and drop that bad transaction. It'll help free up the rows. That way, everything can start working again. That PDB can be opened. 05:30 Nikita: What can you tell us about monitoring quarantined transactions? What specific views or logs should DBAs monitor? Bill: So you can view. You'll see these quarantine transactions in several different places. One is the alert queue. It's going to be sent to the alert queue. That is what is going to notify Enterprise Manager Cloud Control, also populates it within the AWR. Back in 21c, we added the attention log. It shows critical events. Hey, you need to take a look at this. It also can populate it. It will populate it to the alert log. So remember you have the V$DIAG_ALERT that you can look at. Or, if you're familiar with or you use the ADRCI, automatic diagnostic repair recovery advisor, so you can also look at the alert log there. So there are two new views, the CDB_QUARANTINED_TRANSACTION, the DBA_QUARANTINE_TRANSACTIONS working with multi-tenant. The CDB, I can see all the quarantine transactions from the root container, the DBA_QUARANTINE_TRANSACTIONS what I see if I'm in a specific PDB. But it's going to give me the information. 06:52 Lois: What about resolving quarantined transactions? Bill: Monitoring is a must to be able to identify, hey, we have bad transactions that we need to-- quarantine transactions we need to take care of. You can apply the appropriate MOS note if you're not sure what to do. Like anything else, if something happens-- and hopefully, you're not getting quarantined transactions daily or anything like that. But once we start doing a few things, we remember how to do them. 07:21 Lois: And, how do we take care of this? Bill: Well, you always have the ability to go to My Oracle Support. There is a view called-- that CDB quarantine transaction that we talked about that we can look at, hey, here's the reason. And we might use that to go out there and search My Oracle Support and/or contact Oracle Support. 07:49 Do you have an idea for a new course or learning opportunity? We'd love to hear it! Visit the Oracle University Learning Community and share your thoughts with us on the Idea Incubator. Your suggestion could find a place in future development projects! Visit mylearn.oracle.com to get started.  08:09 Nikita: Welcome back! Bill, what are some of the common causes of quarantined transactions? Could you share some examples with us? And how do you resolve them? Bill: One could be physical corruptions. It could either be logical or physical. So maybe because media failed. Hardware bits get flipped. So that might be able to be easily fixed by using the RMAN Block Media Recovery. And that's the lowest level of recovery that we can apply. And then there's logical corruptions. This is the recommended order when trying to resolve logical corruptions. First level is the Block Media Recovery. And then, after that, if the Block Media Recovery fails, then possibly, how about re-creating that data segment? So either truncate or drop it, and then recover it from another source. So once you drop the segment, the transaction then is going to skip trying to recover it. It's no longer there. So it's, OK, hey, I'm successful now. And then, the last resort type method is to drop that undo segment. There's an offline rollback segment that you can use. But it's recommended-- it's best to avoid that-- again, kind of a last-ditch effort to try to fix something. There are other options that you might try. However, these options do end up being a loss of data. Why? Because we're going to do a point-in-time recovery. So we can go back to a table point-in-time recovery. So we start with the Block Media Recovery. OK, we can't. OK, so how about if we go back before that transaction and try to recover the table at that time? So it will be a loss of data. Then, the next level is, we can't do the table. Can we do the entire tablespace? That might be an option. Might flashback the database if we are using-- if we have Flashback Database on. Again, that's just another method of point-in-time recovery. And then also do a database point-in-time recovery. If we can do the database point-in-time recovery flashback at the PDB level, so that way it's not impacting the entire container, hopefully, we don't have to try to do a point-in-time recovery at the database level. So we wouldn't want to do that. That would something really drastic would have to happen to force us to do the entire container. But we want to do that at the PDB level. 10:54 Lois: Ok. So the issue is resolved. What happens next? Bill: So once we have the issue resolved that caused that, SMON is still going to try to do transaction recovery because why? That quarantined transaction says, hey, I've still got this bad transaction there. So once that transaction has been fixed, we need to drop that quarantined transaction. So that way, SMON says, hey, I have this transaction. I need to recover. SMON will keep from trying to do that. So there is a DDL command to drop that quarantined transaction. So remember, from the views, the quarantined transaction views, that's where we saw the undo segment. We saw the slot number. We saw the quarantined transaction slot number. So that way, we can drop that transaction by using that. 11:51 Nikita: How does the escalation process work for quarantined transactions? And why is it important to protect the PDB and the container database? Bill: So quarantined transaction escalation-- we might have multiple transactions fail, depending on the corruption level. It might have multiple blocks for that that have failed. So just to quarantine a bad transaction may not help whatsoever. It depends on what the root cause is for the failures and how many are happening at that time. So the database with these bad transactions will continuously run in an inconsistent state. So it could be dangerous if we have multiples of the same issue and that. So with that system running in an inconsistent state, things will continue to spread. Things will continue to get worse. That's why, once that level of 3 is reached, we go ahead, and we do a shut down abort on that PDB. Because if a transaction can't be recovered, there's no need in trying to do any other type of shutdown. So with this escalation process, it does benefit us because, again, SMON is going to continuously try to recover that bad transaction for that. OK, SMON's going to keep trying. It's not going to work. And at some point, it might cause it to crash. So by stopping it before it continues getting worse, damaging more, we're going to go ahead and say we're escalating this issue to where we're shutting down the PDB. Fault tolerance, so meaning that we have higher availability of the rest of the container. So it's not going to crash the entire container. So the PDB can continue to operate when we are trying to resolve transactions except in the case where it exceeds the amount, and it does a shutdown abort on that PDB. So with that escalation, we reach that limit of 3 for that. We do a Shutdown Abort on that PDB. That transaction recovery is disabled. OK. Don't try to recover any transactions. Why? Because we know we have a few of them. So it's shut down, so we're going to go out and look at our quarantine transactions views, what's the reason for that, how many do we have? And then, once we resolve the issue, we are going to enable recovery again because it turns off the recovery option before it allows us to open that PDB. It's not going to be in a consistent state, though. So now we can go ahead and alter the system and, OK, go ahead and allow recovery of transactions again. 14:42 Lois: Thank you, Bill, for walking us through the details of automatic transaction quarantine and telling us how to manage and resolve these complex scenarios. Nikita: Yeah, thanks Bill! To learn more about what we discussed today, visit mylearn.oracle.com and search for the Oracle Database 23ai New Features for Administrators course. Join us next week for a discussion on some more Oracle Database 23ai new features. Until then, this is Nikita Abraham… Lois: And Lois Houston signing off! 15:13 That's all for this episode of the Oracle University Podcast. If you enjoyed listening, please click Subscribe to get all the latest episodes. We'd also love it if you would take a moment to rate and review us on your podcast app. See you again on the next episode of the Oracle University Podcast.

Join Lois Houston and Nikita Abraham as they discuss the Automatic Transaction Rollback feature with Senior Principal Database & MySQL Instructor, Bill Millar. Bill explains that in the 23ai release, transactions blocking other transactions can now be automatically rolled back, depending on certain parameters. Bill highlights the advantages of using automatic transaction rollback, which eliminates the time-consuming process of manually terminating blocking transactions. They also cover the workload reduction benefits for database administrators.   Oracle MyLearn: https://mylearn.oracle.com/ou/course/oracle-database-23ai-new-features-for-administrators/140830/   Oracle University Learning Community: https://education.oracle.com/ou-community   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/oracle-university/   X: https://twitter.com/Oracle_Edu   Special thanks to Arijit Ghosh, David Wright, and the OU Studio Team for helping us create this episode.   -------------------------------------------------------   Episode Transcript:   00:00 Welcome to the Oracle University Podcast, the first stop on your cloud journey. During this series of informative podcasts, we'll bring you foundational training on the most popular Oracle technologies. Let's get started! 00:26 Lois: Hello and welcome back to the Oracle University Podcast. I'm Lois Houston, Director of Innovation Programs with Oracle University, and with me is Nikita Abraham, Team Lead of Editorial Services. Nikita: Hi everyone! Last week, we looked at two Oracle Database 23ai new features related to Data Manipulation Language, or DML. One was Unrestricted Parallel DMLs and the other was Unrestricted Direct Loads. Do check out that episode if you missed it. 00:56 Lois: Today, we have Senior Principal Database & MySQL Instructor, Bill Millar, with us. He's been on several times this season taking us through all the different 23ai new features. In this episode, we're going to ask him about the Automatic Transaction Rollback feature. Hi Bill! What is automatic transaction rollback and why is it an important feature for database administrators? 01:22 Bill: We can now have transactions that are blocking other transactions, depending on some settings, to automatically roll back. It does require some parameters to be set. Rows basically get locked in a single row. Each row is locked based off of what type of activity is being performed on that row, such as inserts, updates, deletes, merge, select for updates. 01:52 Nikita: And how were things before this feature? Bill: Traditionally, the database administrator had to research and manually terminate blocking transactions, or there are some things that resource manager might have been able to do. 02:05 Lois: This seems like such a game-changer for DBAs, Bill. So, how does it work? Bill: So there are some parameters that control the automatic rollback. One is the transaction priority. We're going to set that priority for a transaction either to medium, high, or low. We have the high priority wait target and a medium priority wait target that we can set. The high wait target will terminate if a medium transaction is blocking that high target based off of the values that we set, the medium transaction can be terminated. A medium transaction will terminate a low priority. So if a transaction designated as low exceeds the blocking time that we set for the medium priority wait time, then it'll be terminated. Whereas, the high priority will terminate both medium and low transactions. We have the rollback mode. We're either going to roll back or we're going to track, depending on what we're trying to do. 03:10 Nikita: So, if I decide that I want to use automatic transaction rollback… if I decide to implement it…I'll need to set those parameters, right? Bill: So we can set those at a session level. We also have some system level wait targets. What are the wait times for the medium, high transactions? How long they are going to wait for those lower transactions? And then we also have the rollback mode. Are we actually going to roll back or are we just going to track for right now? We have to determine what is going to be the wait times for those transactions that we want to wait before those lower transactions, priority transactions are rolled back? At that session level, we're going to set the session. High is the default. So if we want transactions to run at a lower, we have to set those. So we can set the medium or low because that's going to determine how they're rolled back. So, what is that rollback order? Again the low, we'll roll back any low that's blocking mediums. High, we'll roll back any mediums or lows that are blocking. So you do need to have the understanding of that application, and how critical are the different transactions, because if you start rolling back transactions, what? It does-- If you roll back the transactions, it does generate a little research, a little bit more work on why did that happen. 04:38 Lois: Yeah… you don't want to set it without really understanding what you're doing. Ok, so, what else do I need to know? Bill: So we do have the system level wait targets again. How long is the high priority transaction going to wait for a lower transaction before it rolls it back? How long that medium priority is going to wait? We use the ALTER SYSTEM SET command. It does have a range of values from one second to 2,147,483,647 seconds. That's like 68 years. Might not want to wait 68 years for a transaction to be rolled back. We can set it at the PDB level. Each pluggable can have a different value. And it can have a different value in the different RAC instances. We have those system level wait targets that we want to set. Automatic rollback. In order for it to function, all the parameters have to be set properly. What is that transaction priority? We saw the medium, high, low. What is the wait target? How long is the medium is going to wait? How long is the low is going to wait? We set that in seconds. The order of those transactions determine how they are terminated. 05:53 Lois: Earlier on, you mentioned rollback mode. Can you tell us a little more about it? Bill: So with that automatic rollback mode, there's only two valid values. It is considered advanced parameter. We can either set it in rollback, which is the default, or we can put it in track mode. Track mode gives us the ability to try it out. I guess you can say. It will say, hey, if I would have been running, if I would have been used, I would have terminated this transaction. It'll show me the number of times it would have happened for high priority, the number of times it would happen for a medium priority. It is modifiable in the PDB, but however, the track mode must be the same in each instance. So that rollback mode, again, that is the default value for that. So statistics are going to be available. So how many high priority rollbacks occurred? How many medium rollbacks occurred? In that track mode, I have to set that value. I do have to have the time set for how long is it going to wait for those, so the high and medium. And those priorities has to be set in the session. So statistics are available for the high and the medium in the track mode. Not only when we're actually rolling back, but also tracking. Again, this gives us the ability, by having it in the track mode, gives us the ability to do a little testing with it first. 07:27 The Oracle University Learning Community is an excellent place to collaborate and learn with Oracle experts and fellow learners. Grow your skills, inspire innovation, and celebrate your successes. All your activities, from liking a post to answering questions and sharing with others, will help you earn a valuable reputation, badges, and ranks to be recognized in the community. Visit mylearn.oracle.com to get started. 07:55 Nikita: Welcome back! Bill, when it comes to monitoring, how do you keep track of these rollbacks? Bill: For monitoring our rollback transactions, the data dictionary information is available to assist with monitoring our transaction priority. So from the V$TRANSACTIONS, there are columns available allowing us to do that. Based off that transaction priority shows what is the wait target for that. And then also each of the priority of those transactions. We can view this information, it will be populated to the alert log. So we can see that session ID, what was session ID of that? What was the transaction ID? What was the priority? What was the system identifier for that? It tells you-- even tells you the parameter and tells you what that wait time was set at. If it was a medium transaction that was terminated, it shows, OK, it was a medium. So we can view the alert log. And we can look for these terminations. Gives an idea of what's being done. 09:01 Nikita: And finally, what are the key advantages of using automatic transaction rollback? Bill: It eliminates a very manual process. It can be very time-consuming for the DBA to go out there and try to find what's the blocking session. Yep, I'll go ahead and do an ALTER SYSTEM. I'll kill that session trying to track it down, finding the views to look at it to say, OK, Yeah, this is the blocking one. I want to go ahead and take care of it. Resource manager doesn't really fully address blocking transactions. Some things that can do for that. We have the maximum estimate execution time. So that's the number in CPU seconds allowed for that call. It's terminated. It doesn't matter whether it's blocking another session or not in that case or even another transaction. It just says, OK, you exceeded this time. I'm going to terminate you. Then we also have the max idle time again. That's maximum session idle time. All right. You haven't been doing anything to session, we're going to terminate you. And then we have the MAX_IDLE_BLOCKER. That's the time duration of an idle session can block another session. Again, it's going to check OK, is the session actually idle? But these don't really address the issue of, hey, I have a higher priority transaction waiting for a lower transaction that's blocking it. 10:27 Lois: Thank you, Bill, for that breakdown. This feature is such a time saver. Nikita: Yeah, and such good way to reduce the manual workload for DBAs. Thanks Bill! Lois: To learn more about what we discussed today and view some of the demonstrations of this feature, visit mylearn.oracle.com and search for the Oracle Database 23ai New Features for Administrators course. Join us next week for a discussion on some more Oracle Database 23ai new features. Until then, this is Lois Houston… Nikita: And Nikita Abraham signing off! 11:02 That's all for this episode of the Oracle University Podcast. If you enjoyed listening, please click Subscribe to get all the latest episodes. We'd also love it if you would take a moment to rate and review us on your podcast app. See you again on the next episode of the Oracle University Podcast.

What can Dr. Deming's famous Red Bead Experiment teach us about quality? What happens when you only focus on the bad, and ignore the good? In this episode Bill Bellows and Andrew Stotz discuss acceptability vs desirability in the context of the Red Beads and a few of the 14 Points for Management. 0:00:02.1 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussions with Bill Bellows who has spent 31 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. This is episode 5 of the Misunderstanding Quality series and the title is "The Red Bead Experiment." Bill take it away.   0:00:30.4 Bill: Thank you, Andrew, and welcome back. Welcome back to our listeners. One thing I want to say is, one is I listen to every podcast two or three times, listening for, is there a need for clarification, reminding myself, thinking, oh, I should have said this. Or sometimes I say, oh, make sure you make this point, and I do or I don't. And. so one is, nothing comes up from the last one that I thought I missed or mispronounced, but what I do want to clarify is, I'm viewing the target audience as quality professionals in your respective organization or people that want to become a quality professional that are learning, that are trying to apply these ideas in their organization, are fascinated with it. Could be quality professionals who are consultants looking for new awareness of the Deming perspective. So, that's...   0:01:35.8 Bill: And so, some of what I have in mind is, and the examples is, things you can try at home. In fact one thing I encourage... What I encourage my students to do, undergraduate and graduate students, even the clients I consult with, companies I consult with, is develop the ability to explain these ideas, any of them, to people outside of work. So, that could be a spouse, a brother, a sister, a mother, father, son, daughter. And, why outside of work? 'Cause I view that as a safe audience. You say, hey, I just listened to this podcast. Somebody at work may not be as safe. And why are we having this conversation? So, I would say, it could be a college classmate, but one is, try explaining these things to people outside of work and then when whoever that is looks at you and says, I have no idea what you're talking about, or this makes sense, then as you develop that confidence then you're refining your explanations. And that puts you in a better position to apply, to explain it at work.   0:02:54.9 Bill: And why is that important? I'd say there's a lot you can do on your own. I mentioned that a month or so ago, my wife and I were in New England, and I met my doctoral dissertation advisor, who's 86 years old and lives in the middle of nowhere. And one of the things is the wisdom he gave us way back when it was so profound. One of the things he said, we were poor starving college students making seven bucks an hour, working 20 hours during the semester as Research Assistants or 40 hours during the summer. And what a life. Living in... This is poor starving college students. And he would say to us... We'd get together now and then, there'd be a keg on campus and we'd be... Which it wasn't all that often, but anyway, he'd say to us, "These are the best years of your life." [laughter] And we'd look at him like... Now again, I mean, we were... I wouldn't say we were poor starving college students, but I mean, we made ends meet. Now our classmates had gone, undergraduate, gone off to work and they were making real money, and we just stayed in the slum housing and doing... Just living cheap.   0:04:20.3 Bill: Then he says, "These are the best years of your life." We're looking at him like what are you saying? And what he said was, you're working on your research projects either undergrad, masters or PhDs. He said, "You will never have the time you have now to focus on one thing and not be distracted." Now a few of the classmates were married. Most were not married, but he just said this is... I mean, what a dream situation. You're in the laboratory every day. That's all of your focus. Your tuition is covered, blah, blah, blah. But it was just like, yeah, okay. So, when our daughter was in graduate school I shared that with her and she laughed at me. I said, "Allison, these are the best years of your life."   0:05:14.4 AS: If only we listened.   0:05:15.5 Bill: Right. So, that's... And well, I wanted to bring up... But the other thing I want to bring up aside from that story is, he'd say to us, when you go to work, he said trust me. He said "there will be more than enough time to get your job done. You'll have a lot of... You will have time to..." And he said, 'cause he used to brag about he'd be given a task and he can get it done in a fraction of the time that was allocated. And why I mention that is that every job has latitude. And so, to our listeners I would say, think about how to use the latitude you have to practice, to do a small scale Plan-Do-Study-Act thing. Now I really think that's what it's going to come down to is, either experiment at home or whatever, but just practice. And then as Andrew always reminds us at the end of each podcast, you can reach out to me on LinkedIn. And that's led to a number of people I'm meeting with once or twice a month.   0:06:31.8 Bill: And they are exactly who I hope to meet, is young quality professionals wanting to know more, to know more, to know more, and they're either in the States or they're living in Europe. All right. So, before we get into the Red Bead Experiment I wanna go back and talk more about acceptability, desirability which will be a focus of the Red Bead Experiment as well. But in the first series we did, there were 23 episodes before we got into the Misunderstanding Quality, and somewhere in there we discussed, you may recall the paradigms of variation. And the paradigms are labeled letters A, B, C, D and E. And we will look at them in this series. So, for those who don't know what I just said, don't worry we'll cover you. And for those who heard it before, okay, we're going to review it. And I mentioned that because paradigm A, the only one I want to talk about tonight, is paradigm A, is does it meet requirements? That's what acceptability is. Is it good? 'Cause we have this binary world in quality. Part of paradigm A is a binary world. It is good or it's bad. We talked about last time is, if it's bad can we salvage it? Which means we can rework it.   0:07:52.3 Bill: Now some of the rework means it could be we can rework it and use it. And in the aerospace industry what happens is, maybe we can't put it in a flight engine. When I was at Rocketdyne maybe it doesn't end up in a Space Shuttle Main Engine, but maybe it ends up in a test engine and a test stand, so it doesn't fly, but we're still going to use it, or it's scrapped. We have to throw it away. But paradigm A is acceptability. Another thing I want to mention is, I was commenting on LinkedIn the last couple of days over process capability metrics. And there's Cp which stands for capability of the process. And, then there's Cpk which is a little bit different. And I don't want to get into those equations tonight, maybe in a future episode. But what I want to say is, if you're looking at a metric such as yield, people say the yield is 100%. What does that mean? It means everything is good. What if the yield is 50%? That means we have to... 50% is good, 50% is bad.   0:09:06.2 Bill: So, yield is an acceptability metric. Why do I say that? Because the measure is percent good. What is a good versus bad? Also say that indices that involve the requirements. And we've talked in the past about a lower requirement and an upper requirement, the idea because we expect variation we give a min and a max. And so, if the equation for the metric you're using includes the tolerance limits, then that's a clue that that's an acceptability-based metric. Now, I don't care whatever else is in the equation, but if those two numbers are in the equation, then the inference is, what you're talking about is a measure, some type of measure of acceptability.   0:10:00.5 AS: Right.   0:10:02.6 Bill: But even if people talk about... If the metric includes the middle of the requirements, well, as soon as you say middle of the requirements, as soon as you say requirements we're back to acceptability. So, these are things to pay attention to is what we're talking about acceptability and desirability, 'cause what we talked about last time was I was trying to give everyday examples of both. And so, acceptability is when people talk about... In fact I listened to about an hour long podcast today on quality management. And one of the comments was, if you follow the steps correctly you get the right result. Well, that's acceptability. Right? If things are right as opposed to wrong. So, again, when you're in this world of good, bad, right versus wrong, that's acceptability.   0:10:58.7 Bill: Again, the reminder is this is not to say acceptability is bad, but it's not desirability. Which one is it? And then what we talked about in the last podcast number four was choose. Do we wanna to focus on acceptability or do we wanna focus on desirability? Where desirability is saying, of all the things that are acceptable, I want this one. I want that orange. I want that parking spot. I wanna date that person of all the ones that meet requirements in my search... You know, in the dating app. And so, that's acceptability. What got me excited by Deming's work in the early '90s was, I was spending a whole lot of time at Rocketdyne focusing on things that were broken. I'm trying to apply Dr. Taguchi's ideas to go, to take something that used to be good but then slipped into bad, and now we're focusing on the bad stuff to make it good. And now the good news is it kept me busy.   0:12:06.5 Bill: I was having a lot of fun. These are high visibility things and the solutions. We got the solutions working with some really wonderful people. But that led me to start asking questions. And I was once at an all-day meeting in Seattle at Boeing. Rocketdyne had been sold to Boeing Commercial Airplane Company. I got invited to a meeting up there. And it was a monthly all-day production meeting. I don't know 50, 60 people in the room. And they asked me to come up. So, I went up. And what time does the meeting start? You know 8 o'clock, 9 o'clock, whatever. And I said you know put me on a few hours into the meeting. Well, why then? Well, I want to listen to the first couple of hours of the meeting. Because in listening, now we're going back to what we talked about with Edgar Schein. And I've developed the ability... You know, I can hear are we focusing on acceptability, desirability, I can hear things you know with a Deming lens. People think of a lens as seeing, well, there's a Deming ear set as well.   0:13:10.7 Bill: And so, I listened for the first two hours and exactly what I expected. So, when I get up to speak at last I said before I got to the slides, I said, "How much time do you spend every day discussing parts that are good, that arrive on time?" And a couple of people in the front row made a circle with their fingers, zero. And I said, so why is that the case? And one of them says, if it's not broken don't fix it. And wherever I go that's what people say. I went to a big Boeing customer doing... Because they were a customer we sold them rocket engines of some size. And I was briefing that slide, had 110 people in the room for a lunchtime presentation. Before I could read the slide, the room erupted in laughter. And so, I share that because if we're spending all this time focusing on the bad but not the good, what is that? That's acceptability. That's what happens, is the economics of acceptability says, only focus on the bad to make it good. But we don't focus on the good because... And that's what we're gonna look at towards the end of tonight is, why don't we focus on the good? And so, next, I had a co-worker at Rocketdyne got a job in Chicago at a toy factory. They bottled soap bubbles. And as a kid's toy with a little wand inside and blowing bubbles and all that.   0:14:56.0 Bill: And she dramatically turned the place around, did some amazing, amazing work. She went from being the senior manufacturing engineer to the, I think plant manager. So, she called me up as she'd been promoted to plant manager. And the question was now that I'm plant manager what should I focus on? So, I said... I had known her for four or five years at that time. I had been mentoring her and the mentoring continued in that capacity. So, I said well, what do you think you should focus on? And the comment was, I think I should focus on all the things that are broken. Well, that's acceptability once again. And I said, so you're focusing on being 100% reactive. And she said, well, yeah. And I said, what you're doing then by focusing on acceptability, you're saying the things that are good I ship, the things that are bad I got to work on. But without understanding that there's actually variation in good... I mean, go back to the Boeing folks when the guy says to me if it's not broken don't fix it. My response to that was, if you use that thinking to drive your car when would you put gas in it? When it runs out. If you use that thinking relative to your plumbing system, your water system at home when would you call the plumber? When it breaks.   0:16:25.5 Bill: When would you go see the doctor? When... So, the downside of not working on things that are good and not paying attention to things that are good is that they may bite you. So, part of the value proposition of acknowledging from a desirability perspective that there's variation in good. If you pay attention to the variation in good there's two upsides. One is, you can prevent bad from happening if that's all you want to do. And two, the focus of a future episode is by focusing on things that are good and paying attention to desirability in the way that Yoshida, Professor Yoshida was talking about. That offers opportunities to do things that you can't do with an acceptability focus, which is improve how things work together as a system. And the idea being when you move from acceptability which is a part focus to desirability, which is a system focus, you can improve the system. Okay, more to follow on that. All right. So, I got some questions for you Andrew, are you ready?   0:17:37.4 AS: Uh-oh. Uh-oh.   0:17:39.8 Bill: So, Dr. Deming had how many points for management?   0:17:42.9 AS: Fourteen.   0:17:46.3 Bill: All right. Okay.   0:17:48.3 AS: I'm being set up here. I just feel it. You start with the easy ones.   0:17:52.8 Bill: All right. And...   0:17:54.3 AS: Listeners, viewers help me out.   0:17:56.9 Bill: All right. And which point, Andrew, was cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality? What number was that?   0:18:09.6 AS: I'm gonna say four or five, or six. I can't remember.   0:18:14.2 Bill: Three. Three.   0:18:14.6 AS: Really? Three. Okay. That was close.   0:18:16.1 Bill: I would not have known. That was number three.   0:18:19.1 AS: Yeah.   0:18:20.1 Bill: And it's followed by Dr. Deming saying, "Eliminate the need for inspection on a mass basis by building quality to the product." So, the first question is what point was it? And again, I had to look it up. I know it's one of the 14. Second question, Andrew, is, if Dr. Deming is saying cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality, would you think of that as an acceptability focus or a desirability focus?   0:18:55.1 AS: I don't know if I can answer that. I mean, I can only think about what he was saying, which was design quality in from the beginning and get everybody involved in quality, not just having an inspector at the end, but I'm not sure.   0:19:11.4 Bill: Yeah. No. And even as I asked the other question, I'm thinking... Well, this is great because if in the audience you think of quality from an acceptability perspective, right?   0:19:24.2 AS: Mm-hmm.   0:19:24.9 Bill: So, if you're working for Boeing, which is all about acceptability or most companies, and you hear step three, then you're thinking, cease dependence on the inspection to achieve..., you're thinking acceptability. If that's what you're used to, if you're used to quality being doesn't meet requirements...   0:19:42.9 AS: Okay.   0:19:43.2 Bill: Then what you're hearing is Deming talking about acceptability. But if you've been exposed to Yoshida's work and Dr. Taguchi's work and you're understanding that within requirements there's variation of things that are good, so it's kind of a trick question. The idea is it depends. Alright.   0:20:02.4 AS: Yep.   0:20:05.5 Bill: I got two other of 14 points to ask you about. Alright. Which of the 14 points is in the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag alone? Instead, minimize total cost. So,  first which point is that?   0:20:26.9 AS: I think it was also... I would say then four.   0:20:32.1 Bill: Yes.   [laughter]   0:20:33.6 AS: Yeah.   0:20:34.1 Bill: Yeah.   [laughter]   0:20:34.5 AS: You'd think I know. I wrote a book about it.   [laughter]   0:20:39.3 Bill: Alright. So, that's point four and...   0:20:42.1 AS: Okay. So, I got... I don't wanna be rated and ranked, but I got one right at least. Okay. Let's keep going.   0:20:49.1 Bill: Okay. And, so, is that acceptability or desirability? Let's say this. Is awarding business on price tag acceptability or desirability?   0:21:02.1 AS: Probably acceptability.   0:21:04.6 Bill: Yeah. 'Cause then you're saying...   0:21:06.5 AS: Can you hit this number? It's okay.   0:21:11.2 Bill: Yeah. Or you contact your insurance company and you say, I'm looking for a heart surgeon, and you say, and I found one, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And they call you up and say, yes, that person is a heart surgeon, but we prefer you use this one. [chuckle] What's the chance they're thinking about a cheaper option? Right? Alright? So, you're looking at from desirability perspective...   0:21:38.5 AS: This guy's really cheap on kidneys.   0:21:40.7 Bill: Right? And so you're thinking you've done a bunch of references. You've asked your friends. And why are you asking? Because all the doctors out there that meet requirements, you're blindly saying, I'll take any one. That's acceptability. And you're saying, I want this one. That's desirability. But the insurance company says, no. We consider them all to be the same in our policy. That's acceptability. Alright. Okay. And here's the last point we're gonna look at tonight. Which of the 14 points is "improve constantly and forever the system of production and service to improve quality and productivity and thus constantly decrease cost"?   0:22:23.5 AS: Isn't that number one? Constancy of... That's...   0:22:28.0 Bill: That's constancy of purpose. That's number one.   0:22:28.8 AS: Okay. Constancy of purpose. So, improve... Don't know. No. No.   0:22:39.4 Bill: That's number 5.   0:22:40.5 AS: Okay. Five.   0:22:44.5 Bill: And I was looking at, so I know those are three and one, and I thought, oh, that's three, four, and five. Alright. So, what I wanna do there is, we're gonna look at that a little bit later. So, I don't wanna ask you about acceptability, desirability, but I just wanna lay that on on the table. Alright. So, now we're gonna look at what Dr. Deming referred to as his chain reaction. The Deming Chain Reaction. Alright. So, what do you remember about the Deming chain reaction? It wasn't a motorcycle chain or a bicycle chain, right? What did Dr. Deming call his chain reaction?   0:23:31.3 AS: I can't... I mean, I'm thinking of the flowchart.   0:23:34.9 Bill: Yeah. We'll get to that. We'll get to that. The chain reaction...   0:23:36.5 AS: But that I can't remember.   0:23:39.6 Bill: And this is likely Out of the Crisis. The Deming chain reaction is, "if you improve quality, you will reduce scrap and rework, thereby reduce costs." And then he goes on to, by reducing costs, you can increase sales and expand the market. That's the chain reaction.   0:24:01.9 AS: Yeah.   0:24:02.2 Bill: So, when I ask students, again, in my either graduate, undergraduate classes is, talk about the Deming Chain Reaction, then I say, is the Deming Chain Reaction... Within the Deming Chain Reaction, Deming says, if you improve quality, reduce scrap and rework, lower cost, is that explanation of quality, acceptability, or desirability?   0:24:31.9 AS: I don't know. I'm fearful to answer nowadays because I'm not getting these right.   0:24:37.4 Bill: No. You are. You're on a roll. [chuckle] Again, the Deming Chain Reaction, if we improve quality, we reduce scrap and rework, thereby lower the cost thereby sell more and expand the market.   0:24:52.2 AS: I would say that's desirability.   0:24:56.1 Bill: Okay. One more time. If we improve quality, we reduce scrap and rework.   0:25:03.2 AS: Yep.   0:25:04.3 Bill: So, the clue is scrap. Is scrap something we talk about with acceptability or desirability?   0:25:12.1 AS: That's acceptability.   0:25:14.1 Bill: And rework.   0:25:18.2 AS: Well, we're trying to make it acceptable.   0:25:20.1 Bill: Exactly. And the reason I point that out is, I'm not sure... And I think we talked last time about things we agree with Deming or disagree with Deming. I'm not a big fan of the Deming Chain Reaction because I think... Again, if I'm in the audience and I'm working for a company that defines quality and in terms of acceptability, and he says to me, if you improve quality, reduce scrap and rework, that's what I'm used to. And my concern is, in other ways he's explaining quality in terms of constantly improving. Well, how can you constantly improve quality once you get to 100% yield? So. if all the product is good, which is acceptability, if there's no scrap and no rework, can you improve quality? Not if you're focusing on acceptability. And so, what I'm saying there is, that if Dr. Deming is in one hand defining the chain reaction and using the term quality in reference to scrap and rework, then he's projecting quality as acceptability. But if he's talking about improving constantly and forever, and then we get into, can you improve the quality forever? That's what he's saying.   0:26:49.1 Bill: What if you get to 100% yield, which is the maximum value of acceptability? Well, only if you shift to desirability can you improve forever quality, if you think it's worthwhile to do. So, that's why I wanted to go back and look at those things. One is revisit acceptability, desirability, and point out what I think are some opportunities for confusion in trying to explain Deming's work. Alright. Now we'll talk about the Red Bead experiment, which is, the very first time... I remember reading about it in the earliest books I read. I think, who is it that wrote the first books on Deming management, Deming management? She's a...   0:27:42.8 AS: Killian?   0:27:44.3 Bill: No, no, no. Cecilia Killian was Deming's admin.   0:27:48.9 AS: Mary?   0:27:50.5 Bill: Yeah. Mary Walton.   0:27:51.6 AS: Mary Walton.   0:27:52.5 Bill: Mary Walton. I remember reading a Mary Walton's book, that's when I first got exposed to this Red Bead experiment. So, The Deming Institute has a dedicated webpage, so, if you go to deming.org, or just do a Google search for deming.org Red Bead experiment, it's one of the most popular pages. I think that might be the second most popular, most visited page past the 14 Points. In there you can find short videos. There are longer videos, but there's enough on there to follow along with what I want to explain. So, Dr. Deming and the Red Bead experiment would take from the audience, and it could be four willing workers, six willing workers. He'd be the manager of the White Bead Company, and he would explain to them, he would share with them. He had a bowl, and in the bowl were 5,000 beads, maybe an eighth of an inch in diameter, small plastic beads, and there'd be 5,000 in the bowl, 4,000 white, 1,000 red.   0:29:00.6 Bill: And then there was a paddle, and the paddle could be roughly two inches by four inches, and the paddle had a little handle, and it had holes in it. So, the instructions he would provide to the willing workers, the production workers, is to take this paddle at a given angle, slide it in flat into the bowl, even the back of the beads. The beads are in one container, they get poured into another container.   0:29:27.7 AS: In a pan.   0:29:28.1 Bill: It's a mixing process, and then he pours them back in. So, just pour them from one to the other, and he would be very persnickety on pour at 45 degrees, tip from the corner. You pour back and forth, put the paddle in, and you'd end up with 50 of the beads would fill the paddle, and then you'd go to the inspector number one. And the inspector number one would count how many red beads, which is not what the customer wants. What the customer wants is white beads, but the raw material includes both. So, you go to inspector one, and they may count five beads. You go to inspector number two, and they quietly see five. The numbers get written down. Ideally, they're the same. And then you go to the, I think, the master inspector, and they say, five beads, and then "dismissed." And then write the five on a flip chart, and then the next person comes and does it, and the next person comes and does it. So, all six come up and draw beads, and then we count the number of red ones. The number of red ones go into this big table. Next thing you know we've done this over four different days. I've done this. This could take an hour. And even when you watch the videos, there's a fast forwarding.   0:31:00.1 Bill: I've done the Red Bead experiment, I think, just once, and I did it with a former student, which worked out really well, 'cause there was a lot of dead time, and the audience was watching, and so I was able to get conversation going with her. So, for those wanting to do this, boy, you've got to be pretty good on your feet to keep the audience entertained. To get to the point where you've got a table on the whiteboard, or on the flip chart, and on the table are the six willing workers on the left-hand side, and then day by day the red beads... Looking at the number of red beads. So, what are the red beads? Well, the red beads are not what the customer wants. What the customer wants are white beads, but in the production process, because the raw material includes red, well, then the red ends up in the output. So, I ask people, so, if the white beads are what the customer wants, what are the red beads? And typically, people say those are the defective, defects, scrap.   0:32:03.2 Bill: And, so now you get into this model is based on acceptability. The beads are either good, white, or bad, red. And so I would ask the students in class, in a work setting, what might the red beads be? I, in fact, asked our daughter. She said, is just moving from being a junior high school English teacher to a senior high school English teacher. Her undergraduate degree is from Cal State Long Beach.   0:32:34.3 AS: There you go.   0:32:34.3 Bill: So, her first day of school was today. She's also the varsity swim coach, which is way, way cool. Mom and dad are proud of her. So, I remember asking her a few years ago. So, I said, Allison, what are the red beads in the classroom? She said, well, the stapler doesn't work. The door doesn't close. The projector screen doesn't come down. The computer doesn't work. These are red beads in the classroom. So, I said, okay, Allison. What are the white beads?   0:33:01.1 Bill: Geez. So, we get so used to talking about the red beads are the defects or things that... Well, the white beads, by comparison, are the things that are good. So, I said, Allison, if the computer works, that's a white bead. If the door closes, that's a white bead. If you can close the window, that's a white bead. If you can pull down the screen, that's a white bead. So, the red beads are the things around us that are defects, broken, and the white beads are the others. And so, I wanna throw that out to do some stage setting. And ideally, this is a review for our listeners, and if not, you've gotta go watch as many videos as you can in The Deming Institute website. There's a lot of great content there. Watching Dr. Deming do this is pretty cool.   0:33:49.0 AS: He's a funny guy.   0:33:51.6 Bill: And I was very fortunate to be in Dr. Deming's very last four-day seminar. I did not participate in The Red Bead Experiment. I let somebody else do that, but it was classic. Well, the next thing I wanna get into is, and I would say to audiences many times, so we know... Well, a couple things. It's so easy to look at that data on a spreadsheet and say, Jill's the best performer. She has the minimum number of red beads. So, on the one hand, we can look day by day, and it could be Jill's number started off low. And we gave her an award, and then it went high, and then we started blaming her. So, there's variation in the number of beads, worker to worker and day to day. So, a given worker, their scores go up and down. So, that's called variation.   0:34:43.4 Bill: And so one of the aspects of the System of Profound Knowledge, which we haven't talked about too much, but ideally our listeners know Dr. Deming was really big about the value proposition of understanding variation. So, what Dr. Deming would talk about in his four-day seminars, and ideally anybody presenting this, is you take the data, you draw the usual conclusions. We're looking at data from an acceptability perspective. We look at the spreadsheet, and then voila, we turn it into a run chart and look at that data over time, calculate control limits, and then find that all the data is within the control limits and draw the conclusion that the process is in control. And then you move from in a non-Deming environment, looking at this data point versus this data point and drawing these conclusions that the white... The number of red beads is due to the workers.   0:35:33.7 Bill: So, the punch lines you'll find at Deming Institute webpage is that the workers are trying as best they can, that the red beads are caused not by the workers taken separately, but by the system, which includes the workers. A lot of great learning there. And a very significant piece is, in a Deming environment, where Deming's coming from is, again, this is before we go further in this in future sessions is, he's proposing that the majority of what goes on in the system relative to the performance of anything you measure is coming from the system. And if that is really, really understood, then you're hard pressed to blame people in sales for lousy sales or dips in sales or you look at grades of students in a classroom. So, for people looking at Dr. Deming's ideas, perhaps for the first time, realize that what he's talking about is coming from The Red Bead Experiment is a great eye opener for this is that, let's stop blaming the workers for the production issues and step back and look at our procurement system.   0:36:39.6 Bill: Do we have a procurement system where we're buying on price tag? If you buy on price tag, you end up with buying a lot of red beads. So, one aspect I wanna leave our listeners with today is, as you're studying this, realize there's a psychology aspect to The Red Bead Experiment. Not only the idea that there's variation up and down, but what are the implications of realizing that we can't be blaming the workers for the behavior of the system. The system includes the workers, but it also includes things that are well beyond their control. Well, where I wanna go next with this and then we'll next time get in and go further is, in appreciation of point five, "improve constantly forever the system," what I would ask audience is, so we know the red beads are caused by the system. We know the number of white beads goes up and down. But if we were to improve the system by not buying red beads or pre-sorting them out and get fewer and fewer red beads in there, then we get to the point that all the beads are white, perhaps. We have continuous improvement.   0:37:47.2 Bill: We end up with a 100% yield. Well, then we get into, again, and I've kind of set the stage in prior comments, what I would ask people is, what Dr. Deming's talking about trying to achieve zero red beads everywhere in the organization? Is that what we're striving for with the Deming philosophy, is to go around the organization, I want every single process to produce no red beads to make it to a 100% white beads? And if that's what Dr. Deming is talking about, then what does point five mean about continuously improving? Now we get into what I mentioned earlier is, you can improve the speed of operation to produce more white beads, so, we can do them faster, we can do them cheaper, but can we improve the quality of the white beads under that model? And the answer is no, because acceptability stops at a 100%. So, what we'll look at next time is, if you look at the beads and look closely, you'll see they have different diameters, different weights. They're not exactly the same color white. So, what is that Andrew? That's called variation.   0:39:00.9 Bill: And now it brings us back to desirability. So, what I encourage people to do, most of the times I see people presenting The Red Bead Experiment, they present it from an acceptability perspective. That's the starting point. But what I encourage our listeners to do is go through all that, and this becomes a great opportunity to move your audiences from acceptability focus to desirability by talking about the inherent variation in those beads. Again, we'll talk about the value proposition economically in future sessions, as well as the other paradigms of variation before we get there. So, that's what I wanna cover.   0:39:43.2 AS: Wow. Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. And for listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. If you wanna keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn, and this is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. It never gets old. "People are entitled to joy in work."

Dana and Bill Wichterman have a long history of generosity. From the onset of their marriage, Dana and Bill have practiced financial stewardship, always living below their means. Even in a one bedroom apartment with no vehicle to drive, they budgeted a specific amount they could use for spontaneous generosity, and trained their children in Spirit-led giving.   Their collective backgrounds in missions, politics, and poverty alleviation have given them a passion for impact investing, allowing God to use their money to see real change in the world. Recently the Wichtermans reached their net worth finish line, recognizing that they need nothing else for themselves. Yet the joy of giving drives them to continue in their careers simply to have more to fuel God's Kingdom. Dana is a senior advisor to the Impact Foundation, and she and Bill had some amazing insights to share about giving, stewardship, investing, and the importance of Christian community in the generosity space.   Major topics include: Their unique backgrounds and stories of coming to faith How they learned financial stewardship Thinking through an accumulation finish line vs. an income finish line A long term view of maximized generosity Budgeting in view of their callings together and individual What is impact investing and how they got involved  How to look for impact an returns in your portfolio Strategically praying for your investments to change the world and bless people The blessing of community among Christians stewarding finances The importance of hearing other people's stories QUOTES TO REMEMBER Bill: “The more you understand the nature of the Gospel and its implications for your life, the more you get the implications of generosity.” Dana: “Once we set a finish line, I entered into an abundance mindset.” Dana: “Now that we've reached our finish line, it makes our work that much more joyful. Now it's like why would we ever want to retire? We want to keep generating this amount so that we can give.” Bill: “It's so fun to help change the world with your money!” Dana: “You have your Holy Spirit radar up for needs that you couldn't possibly anticipate, but you know you have to cash to give to that when it comes.” Dana: “We can't meet every need around us, but there are certain needs that have our name on it. And when our name's on it and then God provides, there's such a joy with that.” Bill: “Most of the time, you possibility for world change is greater with for-profits, especially in poverty alleviation.” Dana: “I believe that God made us all in His image to be creators. We're either builders or backers, founders or funders. So if we're all doing what God calls us to, the success of it isn't so much on us. It's the faithfulness that's important.” Dana: “It's to God's glory that He's transforming us from selfish, self-absorbed individuals into more of the Family likeness which is more and more generous.” Bill: “What do we have to boast about? We're only giving what we've already been given.” Dana: “Sacrificial giving can actually become very joyful over time because it has become part of your DNA as God is transforming you, and then it doesn't feel sacrificial anymore. His burden becomes light, but only over time.” Dana: “One person's generosity doesn't have to look like another person's.” LINKS FROM THE SHOW Impact Foundation Crown Financial Ministries Noble Story Co. Sunshine Nut Co. Scatter by Andrew Scott Operation Mobilization The Steward Investor Masterclass The Gathering National Christian Foundation (see our interview with President Emeritus, David Wills) Generous Giving (see our interviews with cofounders Todd Harper and David Wills and CEO, April Chapman) Journey to Generosity (JoG) with Generous Giving (see our interviews with cofounder, Todd Harper and CEO, April Chapman) The Finish Line Community Facebook Group The Finish Line Community LinkedIn Group BIBLE REFERENCES FROM THE SHOW Matthew 25:14-30 | Parable of the Talents    2 Corinthians 9:7 | A Cheerful Giver   Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU! If you have a thought about something you heard, or a story to share, please reach out! You can find us on Instagram, Facebook, and LinkedIn. You can also contact us directly from our contact page. If you want to engage with the Finish Line Community, check out our groups on Facebookand LinkedIn.

James has a bunch of new 1960s 45 rpm vinyl dance tunes to share with you, and Uwe has pulled some favorite Motown and other tunes. We've got rollicking Rhythm & Blues shakers, Northern soul pounders, a couple of jazzy numbers, a boxing heavyweight champion, Willie Nelson's ex-wife, and at least one record we wish we knew more about. Originally broadcast May 5, 2024 Willie Mitchell / That Driving BeatPic & Bill / It's Not YouThe Freeman Brothers / My BabyFreddy King / Takin' Care Of BusinessJames Brown with the Famous Flames / Can't Be The SameWillie Mabon / Too Hot To HandleJoe Moore / I've Got My Sweet BabyOdessa Harris / You're What I NeedThe Marvelettes / I Need SomeoneThe Lollipops / Love Is The Only AnswerMarvin Gaye / Little Darling (I Need You)Tony and the Bandits / It's A Bit Of AlrightThe Coachmen / Don't You KnowThe Live Wires / The MaskThe U.S. Six / I Do Love YouMary Wells / Can't You See (You're Losing Me)Dee Irwin / The Wrong DirectionGeorge Jackson / So Good To MeBrenda Holloway / Starting The Hurt All Over AgainWardell and the Sultans / The Original PopeyeMarie and Rex / I Can't Sit DownBuster Brown / Two WomenShirley Caddell and the Aristocrats / The Big BounceBilly Joe Young / The PushThe Monitors / Since I Lost You GirlJanet and the Jays / Love What You're Doing To MeEdwin Starr / He Who Picks A RoseLena Horne / Love BugEtta James / DreamBilly Stewart / Look Back And SmileKim Weston / Another Train ComingJoe Frazier / Looky Looky (Look At Me Girl)The Supremes / Let Me Go The Right WayThe Trensations / Soulin' And Rollin'The Spinners / (She's Gonna Love Me) At SundownGeorge Tindley / Pity The Poor ManMarv Johnson / I Miss You Baby (How I Miss You)Bobby Moore / Chained To Your Heart Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Many businesses equate "manager" with "leader," excluding potential leaders from across the organization. In this episode, Bill Bellows and host Andrew Stotz talk about leadership in Deming organizations - with a great story about senior "leaders" making a huge error in judgment at a conference of auditors. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.0 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. The topic for today, episode number 14, is Beyond Management by Extremes. Bill, take it away.   0:00:29.7 Bill: Number 14 already, Andrew.   0:00:32.0 AS: Incredible.   0:00:32.6 Bill: It's a good thing we skipped number 13. That's an unlucky number. [laughter]   0:00:37.0 AS: Not in Thailand. It's a lucky number.   [laughter]   0:00:40.6 Bill: No, we didn't skip number 13. This is 14.   0:00:42.1 AS: Yes, we didn't.   0:00:43.5 Bill: Alright, so I just enjoy going back and listening to all of our podcasts, once, twice, three times. And then I talk with friends who are listening to them. And so I'd like to start off with some opening comments and then we'll get into tonight's feature, today's feature.   0:01:00.9 AS: So let's just, to refresh people's memory, episode 13, which we just previously did, was Integration Excellence, part two.   0:01:09.2 Bill: Yes. And that's what we called it. [laughter] So... [laughter] So last week I...   When we thought about getting together, but I had the wrong time, and it worked out well in my schedule. Last week, Andrew, I did three presentations. A two-hour lecture for Cal State Northridge, which is part of a master's degree program, where I do a class in quality management. That was Tuesday night. Wednesday morning I did a one-hour presentation with one hour of conversation afterwards with the Chartered Quality Institute, which is kind of like the American Society for Quality in the UK, and this... So this was several hundred people from the UK and also the Caribbean chapter from Trinidad Tobago, Jamaica. And so there's a bunch there. And then on Thursday morning I did a three hour session for a group in Rotterdam, which was really early for me and late afternoon for them.   0:02:25.4 Bill: And in all three, I covered similar material for all three groups, which included the trip report that we've done on the ME Versus WE, how did you do on the exam? How did we do? And so it was really neat to present that to the three. And in each case, when I threw out the question, "how did you do on the exam?" And then explained as I did one of our earlier podcasts that if you've got a long list of inputs, which includes - the woman I was talking to and, 'cause I said to her, the question is how did you draw on the exam? What are the inputs? And she said, the inputs are, my energy, my enthusiasm, my commitment that she got stuck. And I said, have other students helped you? And she said, yes, other students have helped you. I said, that's another input.   0:03:17.3 Bill: I said, given that input, how many can you see? And she said, oh my gosh. She said, my professor, my parents, my brother. And then all of a sudden there was this long list of inputs that she couldn't see. And so I explained that to the people and then say, "if you've got that long list of inputs and the original question is, how did you do on the exam? Does that long list of inputs change the question or are you okay with that question?" And what I look for is, and what we've talked about is, does the whole idea, how did we do on the exam jump out at you? No, it doesn't jump out. So, in each case, I said, here's the situation, might you reframe the question? And in all three situations, most of them that I asked said, there's essentially nothing wrong with the question. And if they did restate the question, they kept the "you," "do you think you could have done better?" Do you think... And that's what's so cool is that they just hold onto the you. Well, and for one of the groups it came a... It was kind of like what I was saying was semantics.   0:04:32.6 Bill: And I said this is not semantics. I said, there's a big difference between somebody, you know referring to our kids as my son and my daughter and our son and our daughter. And this, "my," is singular ownership, "our" is joint ownership. And so what I was trying to explain is that, saying “How did you do versus how did we do?” is the difference between being an observer of your learning if you were the student, Andrew and a participant. Those are not... Those are enormous differences. It's not, just, it's not just a simple change in pronouns. And so when I... And when I got to next, I was at a meeting years ago, I was at the annual, you ready Andrew? I was at Boeing's Annual Auditor's Conference.   0:05:40.5 AS: Sounds exciting.   0:05:41.4 Bill: 1999. So I got invited to be a speaker, Andrew at Boeing's Annual All Auditors Conference. Right? So I'm thinking going into this, that these are a bunch of people that don't feel valued. Because it's not like I get a phone call and I say, hold on, hold on. Hey Andrew, I got good news. And you say, you're a coworker, what's the good news? Annual... Andrew, we're gonna be audited next week!   [laughter]   0:06:10.2 Bill: You're like, "Holy cow. Hold on, lemme go tell everybody." So I thought going into this meeting is, these are a bunch of people that don't feel valued. I'm an auditor at least that was, so that was my theory going into this, so it's a Monday afternoon gathering with a dinner and then all day the next, all day for a couple days. So the opening speaker, speaker on Monday night was the senior executive of a big Boeing division, it might have been Boeing defense let's say. And my theory was first of all, you got a bunch of people that don't feel valued and I came away from the three days thinking there's a whole lot going on in audit whether it's financial audit, data integrity audit, quality audit, these are necessary roles. And so I came out of it with great respect for that whole organization otherwise would think right, but I'm thinking this executive is going to come in, going to do the Friday, Monday night presentation and I'm thinking it's like they drew straws and they say well okay I'll go, I'll go up there and talk with them.   0:07:22.8 Bill: Within minutes of him speaking I'm thinking this guy's excited to be here. So I'm thinking he's going to kind of phone it in, now I'm watching this I'm thinking he is, he is really engaged with the audience. He's talking about, the future role of the audit organization being partners and all this and he's talking, I mean he's giving them an enormous bear hug and I'm thinking this is not what I thought and again and so... I'm still thinking he's either a really good actor or he really wants to be here. Then my theory was and I thought, holy cow, now I get it. How many people in the room Andrew would it take to leave the room with their nose out of joint and shut down the F18 program by noon tomorrow? How many people would it take?   0:08:21.3 AS: Not many, one.   0:08:22.9 Bill: Right, so then I'm thinking these, he needs these people to love him, because if he disrespects them, it's a bad day. So I went from thinking why would you want to be here if you were here, then I'm thinking, oh no. Now I'm thinking this is brilliant so then I look at the program and I'm thinking which other executives have figured out how valuable this is and I see the next day at lunch is Boeing Commercials I'm thinking they figured it out but the organization I was within was Boeing Space and they weren't on the program so I contacted a friend that was connected high up in Boeing Space, I said we've got to be in this program, right? So the program ending, it ended nice and I'm thinking wow, wow. So then just prior to lunch the next day is the number two guy for Boeing Commercial. Not the number one. The Monday night guy was the number one. The number one guy for Boeing Commercial at the time was Alan Mulally, it wasn't Alan Mulally, it was his number two person.   0:09:33.7 Bill: So he's up on stage, he's up on stage, he's up on stage. And he's talking to the audience and in parallel Jim Albaugh who at the time was CEO of Boeing Commercial, no Boeing Space and none of Jim's people were there, Jim wasn't there. Jim a couple weeks prior he had asked me to get with his speech writer at a presentation he was doing and he wanted some words in there about investment thinking and all the things we've been talking about in this. He said get with him and put some of that stuff in there put there some of that stuff in there. I said okay. So as I'm listening to the number two guy speak there's a lot of "we" and "you" but who's the we? And who's the you? So I'm making notes to myself to tell Jim don't say "you." Say "we" and make the "we" inclusive, 'cause the guy on stage is, the you and the we and the you and the we, and I said no no stay away from "you" focus on we but make sure they understand that "we" is all of us, right?   0:10:35.1 Bill: So this is what's going through my head and I'm writing it all down, writing it all down and then this guy says and I'll paraphrase. I wish I had the exact words and the paraphrase is pretty close to what he said as judged by what the audience heard, right? So when I heard the comment and I'm thinking to myself, you said what? Then I look around the room and I thought he did. Here's what he said again the paraphrase is: he made reference to those within Boeing that do the real work, and he said it in a way that was present company excluded right? Right, so I hear him say 'cause I'm getting, I'm making literally I'm making notes to myself and then I hear that comment and I'm like, did you just say what I thought you said? And I look around the room with 300 people and I'm thinking, Oh my gosh, you did and I'm seeing I am seeing people irate, you see the body language, right?   0:11:44.3 Bill: And I thought wow, how could you say that? So then the lunch speaker was Harry Stonecipher, the chief operating officer. And he was up, walking around the stage. I don't think he knew anything about what happened prior so he's up there talking, okay. After Harry we're getting back to the program and the guy running the entire event is now up on stage and he's very deliberately he's got a, he's got a piece of paper rolled up, he's walking around on stage, "yeah Scott misspoke no doubt about it. He misspoke, I hear you." I hear you, you are ready Andrew? You are ready, you are ready?   0:12:36.8 AS: Give it to me.   0:12:37.4 Bill: And then he says then he says "But let's be honest we don't make the airplanes." And I thought, really? And as soon as he said that, I had this vision of 250,000 employees, which was about the employment at the time. And so as soon as he said that, I just imagined being at the Everett facility, which is huge, where all the twin-aisle plants are made. And I had this vision of 250,000 people in the building. And the CEO Phil Condit says on the microphone, "Okay, I'd like all of you who make the airplanes to move to the west end of the building."   0:13:26.4 AS: And everybody else.   0:13:27.4 Bill: And it's what you get, is all the flight line mechanics move all the way over there. And then you show up and somebody looks at you and they don't see any grease on your hand, and they say, "ahhh you don't make the airplanes." And you say, "you see that tool in your hand? Who do you think ordered it?" And so this "we" and the "you" stuff, how did "you" do? How did "we" do? It was just, it was...   0:14:00.3 AS: He wasn't deliberately setting up the auditors to be pissed and then to be really, really tough on the rest of the organization. I'm teasing with that.   0:14:12.7 Bill: It was, it is just, I shared that with you and our audience as how uniting language can be and how divisive language can be. And so how did we do, how did you do, and what, with just, this is what I find fascinating is - these words bring people together. What I love, I love watching politicians or State Department people speak and 'cause what dawned on me is they are very deliberate on, I mean they to great lengths to not be divisive.   0:14:57.1 Bill: That's their job. And so they introduce people in alphabetical order, countries in alphabetical order. But they, and I thought, what a neat way of not inferring that the first one I list is the most important one and I just thought there's a just an art of diplomacy. And that's what, to me, that's what diplomacy is, is that the art of uniting, not dividing.   0:15:25.7 Bill: Alright. So now I wanna get into, in the three different groups last week we were doing the trip report and we got down to the hallway conversations and the ME Organization versus a WE Organization. And then a question I asked him was, who are the managers in a ME Organization and what do they do? And you got, those are the ones that set the KPIs. Mark the KPIs, beat you up, sit in their office. Okay. Who are the managers in the ME Organization? What do they do? Who are the managers in a WE Organization? And what do they do?   0:16:01.8 Bill: They are mentors. They're out there on the shop floor, they're working with people. People work for managers in a ME Organization. They work with managers in a WE Organization. So I get that and I think "Okay, pretty good. Pretty good. Pretty good." And then I follow with "Who are the leaders in a ME Organization and what do they do?"   0:16:26.4 Bill: And what's really cool is you get the same answers as the managers. And that's when I started noticing in a ME Organization, we'll refer to the senior leadership team, the senior management team, and we're talking about the same group of people. And I said, what we've just said is that manager and leader are the same. And then I say to people, so what is that message in a ME Organization? The message is, if you're not a manager, Andrew, then you're not a leader. Which means what? Which means you have permission to wait for direction.   0:17:12.5 Bill: Boeing had a leadership center in St. Louis. It was called the Boeing BLC, the Boeing Leadership Center. Yeah, Boeing Leadership Center. And in order to go there, you had to be a manager. You either had to be a first level manager, you would take frontline leadership, a middle manager, which I was, which is leading from the middle or an executive. But the model... So then I think part of the confusion is in a ME Organization, on the one hand we say, our managers are our leaders. If you're not a manager, wait for the direction, wait to be told.   0:17:49.7 Bill: But then we said, we want our managers to be leaders. But that's the ME Organization. In a WE Organization, in a Deming organization, I think of leadership is the ability to bring forth a new order of things, a new order of designing hardware, a new order of designing software, a new order of marketing, we're talking earlier and the ability to create a new order of things and the ability to create a path for others to follow.   0:18:20.6 Bill: And so then in a WE Organization, it's like show and tell. When we were in elementary school, you go in and say, I have discovered this. And I thought, in a WE Organization, everyone has the ability to be a leader on something within their realm. And why would you, why would you make leadership incl...exclusive, which is the ME Organization. And when I tell companies that I consult for I said, when you make leadership exclusive in a ME Organization, to me, that's a kiss of death 'cause you're telling a few people, you're in charge and you're telling everyone else, you're inferring that everyone else, you wait for direction, again.   0:19:09.0 Bill: And I'm not proposing, everyone's all over the place doing it. No. There's got, this is not chaos. And if I have an idea on something and it's not my assigned responsibility, then I know to reach out to you because you're the marketing guy and I just throw the marketing idea to you and then you do with it what you want. But I look at leadership in a WE Organization as being inclusive. And then we get into this idea of, driving...driving change.   0:19:38.0 AS: Let me just ask you about that. Would this really be down to the core principle of Appreciation of a System? That somebody who appreciates a system knows that there's all kinds of components to that system?   0:19:55.5 Bill: Yes, yes.   0:19:55.6 AS: And that you can't say, oh, well this system really is only the people that are working on the production line, when in fact we know that there's all kinds of people working in that system. If I think about my coffee business as an example, we have a hundred employees and not all of them are working on production. And some are moving paperwork and making phone calls and others are out in the field. So an appreciation of a system brings you to the "we" rather than....   0:20:23.0 Bill: Yes.   0:20:23.5 AS: And a person who gets up and says about me, or, tries to identify that there's a certain number of people that are really driving the performance of this company are, they just have no appreciation for a system.   0:20:39.1 Bill: They have a narrow, a narrow view, a narrow view. So what you just said triggered another thought. But, um, the thing I wanted to add to this, in a ME Organization, it's about driving change. And we've talked about this in prior podcast. I go to, you put a gun to your head and I say, I want this KPI by Friday, Andrew. And you're like, yes, sir. And then I said to people in the past is, if driving change is the mantra of a ME Organization, like you're driving cattle driving, driving, and which is not an endearing concept. It is, it is, this is the where we're going. And I say to people, so what would you call it if driving is the ME construct, what is, what's the language of a WE Organization? And people will be wondering "ah," I say "lead, lead, lead." And if we like where you're going, we will follow. That's you creating the path that we will follow.   0:20:40.0 Bill: So I just wanna throw that out. But the other thing you mentioned about the metrics and the design of the organization and the thinking that, these are the critical people. At lunch with an old friend today, and I was sharing with her I taught a course at Northwestern's Business School, Kellogg Business School in the late '90s. And Kellogg then, and today is the number one or number two business school in the country. And I had a friend who was a student there in..., they liked what I was saying. So they hired me to teach a five week course for four years. And I presented, these ideas to them and it was pretty cool. I was, what was exciting is one of them told me that, what I was sharing with them about Deming, you are ready Andrew? contradicted what they were learning in their other classes.   0:22:46.2 AS: Huh. Funny that.   0:22:48.7 Bill: Yep. And so I did that for four years. There were three classes in quality. One was the use of control of charts, mine was called Quality Management, or TQM or something like that. And so there were roughly 80 students in the program, and they had to take two of the three, five week courses. So I got two out three students in the program. Then after four years, they waived the requirement. And so nobody signed up. And so I, um, after, right after 9/11 was when this happened, they invited me back because the person I was working with really liked what the course was about. But they wanted to, make it optional for people to attend. And he said, why don't you come out and talk with them and, that'll inspire them to sign up for the following year. I said, okay, fine. So I went out and he says there'll be 80 people there. I said, why are you so confident? He said, well, we've made it mandatory for everyone to show up. I thought, well that's, I said, that's one way to get people in the room. I said, do me a favor. I said, let them know I'm coming out and I'll have breakfast, I'll have lunch with whoever would like to meet with me beforehand.   0:22:50.7 Bill: So a dozen of them show up. And one of them says to me he says, you're gonna have a, he says something like, it's only fair to say we had a presenter like you last week. And to be honest, it's gonna be a really hard act for you to follow. So I'm thinking, "well, tell me more." "Well, we had a presenter last week who works for a company that makes pacemakers," I'm thinking, okay, "he had a video and showing people before and after their pacemaker one of the fellow students fainted. It was emotional." And I'm thinking, I'm talking about rocket engines. I don't even have a video. It's not gonna be emotional. I let the guy talk. And at one point he says "they keep track." He said "they keep track of who makes each pacemaker." I said "what do you mean?" He says, "they have a list of the people."   0:23:42.9 Bill: Every pacemaker is associated with a team of people who made the pacemaker. And part of what they saw on the video is people who have received a pacemaker now and then go to that company and they meet the people on their team, Andrew, who made their pacemaker. How do you like that concept? Right? Does that, when you graduate from this MBA program, Andrew, isn't that a neat idea that you can take away and use with you? Right? Right? Isn't that a takeaway? Right? So I'm hearing this [laughter] so I said, "let me see if I got this straight. So you're saying they keep track of who makes each pacemaker?" "Yeah, they do." And that's because, when people come well, people come to visit and they keep track. So let's say I said to the student, "let's say I'm the guy who orders the plastic that goes into the pacemaker. Would I be on the list?" you know what he says, Andrew?   0:26:01.9 Bill: No, you didn't make it.   0:26:04.0 Bill: He says, "no," let me try this. I'm the one who wrote the check, Andrew, that paid for the plastic. Would I be on the list? What he says Andrew? "No, you wouldn't be on the list."   0:26:20.2 Bill: So, I said, "well, why not?" And he says, "you have to draw the line someplace." So, I had with me, post 9/11, ready? I had with me a United We Stand two-foot by three-foot poster, which were all over Los Angeles and likely all over the rest of the world, at least the States. So, I held up the poster, and I said, "Have you seen this before?" He said, "Oh, yeah, United We Stand. I'm all about that." I said, "No, you're not." [laughter] I said, "You think you can draw the line and know who contributes and who doesn't, right?"   0:27:02.8 Bill: And you can suddenly see him kind of back up. I said, "Well, let's be honest." I said, "If teamwork doesn't matter, then draw the line any way you want. It doesn't really matter. But if teamwork does matter, be very careful where you draw that line." And to me, in a WE Organization, "we" is, who is the "we"? It's a big list of people. It's the employees, it's the suppliers, it's the customers. And so anyway, it's just that, so what's neat is, go ahead, Andrew.   0:27:41.6 AS: While you were speaking, I was able to go online and find the website of North, what was it? North?   0:27:49.5 Bill: Northwestern.   0:27:50.3 AS: Western, yes. And I was able to actually find the course that you're talking about that was the one that the students said that what you're teaching is contradicting.  The name of that course, I just found it, here it is, "How to apply KPIs to drive in fear and division in your company." No, no, I just made that up. [laughter] "How to apply KPIs to drive in fear and division in your company?"   0:28:16.7 Bill: All right. And so, and we're gonna get to that. So, so as, so I look at management, there's management as a position, but I look at management as an activity of how we allocate resources. And so, are the resources mine or are they ours? And are we proactive or reactive? And then we talked in the past about purposeful resource management, reflective resource, reflexive resource, resource management, which is being highly reactive. Another thing that came to mind. Well, actually, let me jump to the loss function. We looked at last time because I was going through and listening to it. And I thought, let me, let me clarify.   0:29:00.7 Bill: And so when Dr. Taguchi would draw his, his parabolic loss function, a parabola is a curve that goes higher and higher as you get farther and further away from the center. It's like a bell and it just gets steeper and steeper and steeper. And his loss function would be an upward facing bell. And, and then, and he would draw it sitting on the, on the horizontal axis. The idea of being, when you're at the ideal, the loss is zero. And that's, if you're getting exposure to this for the first time, that's okay. But in fact, let me even throw in here a quote from Dr. Deming. Do I have it right here?   0:30:00.4 Bill: Oh, gosh. Anyway, Dr. Deming made reference to, he said, the Taguchi loss function is a better description of the world. And he talks about how loss continuously gets higher and higher and higher. The point I wanted to make is, what I tell people is, once you get used to that concept that loss gets higher and higher, and what matters is how steep that curve is. And so if that curve is very flat, then no matter where you are within the requirements, nobody really notices. And in that situation, you could have a lot of variation 'cause it doesn't show up. It's not reflected in terms of how...   0:30:40.2 AS: And maybe just to help the listener to visualize this, imagine a V.   0:30:44.6 Bill: Yes.   0:30:45.1 AS: And imagine a U. And a V has a very tiny point that is at zero loss. And it very quickly rises to both sides where loss is getting higher and higher. Whereas a very, kinda, let's say, a deep U could have a tiny little loss that's happening for a distance away from the minimum loss point, and then eventually turn up.   0:31:14.4 Bill: Well, but even, even Andrew, and I like the idea of the V. We could also be talking about a V where the sides, instead of being steep, are very flat. So it's a very wide V, and it never goes high because there's situations where, where the impact on integration is very minimal no matter what. All right. So anyway, um, the point I wanted to make is, I would say to our listeners and viewers, loss, the consequences of being off target, are the difference between what happens downstream at integration. And what I love, I went back and listened to the podcast, the one, you talked about your partner in the coffee business.   0:32:12.2 Bill: The point of integration is when they drink the cup of coffee. And that's integration. I mean, the point when they're, when we're eating a food, that's integration. So the piece of coffee is out there, whatever it is. But when the customer's using it, drinking it, that's integration, Andrew. And a...   0:32:32.2 Bill: And so... What I look at is what the loss, loss is the difference between what you see happening at integration and what you think is possible. So if we're at the Ford factory banging things together with rubber mallets day after day after day and you're the new hire and I show you how to do this, as soon as you begin to believe this is how we do things, then loss is zero. Because that's what we think is the norm. But if you have the ability to rise above that and say, I don't think it needs to be that difference, when you look at it and say, I don't think it needs to be the difference between what you think is possible and what it could... Difference between what is and what you think could be that's loss. And what I also say to people is it takes a special eye that you have to see that. It's like your coffee business, somebody's tasting that coffee and you're thinking this is pretty good. Then they say, "well, try this", whoa.   0:33:40.1 Bill: So it takes a special eye to see loss. But then it takes a whole lot of other people to make that happen. So whether that's people in engineering, manufacturing. So a WE Organization is where someone has the ability to see that opportunity, but it's dependent upon all the others to make it happen. So now let's talk about Beyond Management by Extremes. And these are... Has a lot to do with KPIs and also say in one of our last, wasn't the last one, it was a couple before that you had made clear your firm belief that KPIs need to be thrown away in the morning trash. And I remember on the call listening to you and I'm hearing you, we ought to get rid of them, we ought to get rid of them, we ought to get rid of them.   0:34:38.5 Bill: And I'm thinking they aren't bad, it's how they're used. And so I wasn't sure I was in agreement with you on that call. But when I went back and listened to it and that's what what I, what I told the friend is, I said, if you listen to what Andrew says, I don't say anything at the end. And the reason I didn't say anything is I wasn't sure I agreed. But when I went back and listened to it most recently, I said, yes! yes! yes! 'Cause what you said is: if they can be used without an incentive system. And I thought, yes, yes, yes, yes. And so we are in agreement on KPIs, [laughter] they are... But what we have...   0:35:25.2 AS: Which, which my, which my point is, number one, that as long as you don't attach some kind of incentive or compensation system, then, you're not that, you've eliminated a lot of risk that they're causing damage. The second part is a lot of times what I'm looking at is individual KPIs. And what I'm trying to say is that even if you don't add in compensation, it's, it's, it's a fool's errand to try to set up, three KPIs for a thousand people, three thousand KPIs individually and think that now we've got that set. Our organization is going to really rock now.   0:36:06.0 Bill: Well, then what you get is the KPIs are always round numbers. We want to decrease by 5%, increase by... And you're thinking, so how much science getting to these numbers anyway? And you're thinking, but early on in your career, you look at this, you think, well, somebody's thought about this and you realize, no. And so what management by extremes is about is KPIs that are extreme. And so I my PhD advisor in graduate school, I was studying heat transfer and fluid mechanics and and before each of us graduated, went to work in corporations, he'd pull us aside and he'd say, he'd say, "Bill, he said you're gonna be in a situation one day where your boss is gonna come by and is gonna give you.... He's going to give you an assignment, that gives you, he's gone give, that gives you five minutes to figure it out."   0:37:05.7 Bill: And he says, "so, if he or she comes he comes to you, she comes to you and they give you five minutes to figure out, he said there's only three possible answers and I'll tell you what they are and you got to figure out which of them it is and so it'll take you a minute to figure out which one it is. And then the rest of the time you're going to explain it." I remember saying to him, I says, so, "Okay, so what are the three possible answers?" And he says "zero, one and infinity", 'cause it turns out in the world of heat transfer and fluid mechanics, those three numbers show up pretty often as ideal solutions for different cases. And so what he's saying is when your boss comes to you and says, boom, then you have to say, which case is that? 'Cause if that's this case, it's zero.   0:37:51.0 Bill: This case, it's one. This case is infinity. So I thought, okay. Well, in Dr. Taguchi's work, he talks about quality characteristics. So we're running experiments to improve something and a quality characteristic could be as large as possible, infinity being the ideal, the strength of the material. We want to make it stronger and stronger and stronger. But it's referred to as larger is best, meaning infinity is the ideal, smaller is best I'm trying to reduce leakage. I'm trying to make something smoother and smoother.   0:38:25.9 Bill: That's smaller is best. Zero is the goal. And the other one is to get your first who is nominal as best, where a finite number is the answer. And so what I had in mind with this management by extremes, inspired by my Ph.D. advisor, inspired by Deming, Dr. Taguchi, is that, if the KPI is driving to zero or driving to infinity, we want the inventory Andrew to go to zero. We want sales to go to infinity. I said, if you're thinking about things systemically, I don't think zero or infinity is what we're going to do. And so I throw that out as not all the time, but I think quite often if the KPI, if you're working on something where you're heading to zero, heading to infinity, to me, that's a clue that you're looking at something in isolation. And I would say to people.   0:39:25.2 Bill: Let's say you're, you call me in Andrew and you say, "Bill, we need your help getting the cost down of this project." And I say, "well, what'd you have in mind?" You say, "Bill, we'd we'd love to get 10% out of this cost. Boy, 10%." I said, "Andrew, I can double that." "No way. No way" And I say, "Andrew, on a good day, I could do more than that." And then what I say is that the more you get excited by how much we could lower that cost, eventually I'm going to say, "Andrew, gotcha." And you say, "what do you mean?" "Gotcha. Andrew, you're looking at cost in isolation." What's the clue? You'd love it to go to zero. Or... And that's what we end up doing is we want to drive variation to zero. That's the Six Sigma people. Well, first of all, cloning does not produce identical.   0:40:30.6 Bill: Photocopies don't create identical. Dr. Deming would say that of course there's variation. There'll always be variation. And then there are people, and and I cringe. But Dr. Deming was once asked. He was interviewed by somebody I believe with the BBC back in the '80s. And the interview ends with "So Dr. Deming, if we can condense your philosophy down to two, down to two words, what would it be? Or down to a few words, what would it be?" And he said, "reduce variation" or something like that. And I said, "no, it should be manage variation. We should have what the situation needs." And so I'm going to absolute agreement with you. On how can we have KPIs without goals which make make things even more isolated. And then we talk about by what method are we going to achieve those goals? But I think if we're talking about driving variation to zero, then you're looking at things in isolation. If you are driving waste to zero.   0:41:20.8 Bill: then you're looking at things in isolation. If you're talking about, the non value added efforts driving to zero. I'd say value shows up elsewhere. I had somebody within Boeing once say to me "Bill, you know, being on target, you know being on that ideal value, I've had people tell me that once you achieve the minimum size of a hole, going further doesn't add value." And I'd say "If all you're doing is looking at the hole, I can understand that. But if you're focusing on what goes in the hole, that's different." And the other thing I throw out is I was doing some training years ago. There was a guy in the room that I, I mentioned the term "value engineering" 'cause I remember when I got excited by Taguchi's work and Deming's work, somebody said, "The last big training, big thing was value engineering." "What do you mean?" And they pulled out their "That was the wave of the sixties was value engineering." So I asked this guy in class. I said, so, he mentioned he worked at GE back in the '60s and value engineering was really big. So I said, well, "So tell me about that. What was behind that?" He says, “We were taught to look at a contract and all the deliverables. And our job in the value engineering department was to figure out how to, how to meet each deliverable minimally because anything more than that doesn't add value." And I thought, you can't make that up!   0:42:53.0 Bill: Let's look at all the requirements and how do we go to? What's the absolute minimum we have to deliver on the term paper, on the project.   0:43:06.5 AS: How could we kill this through a thousand cuts?   0:43:10.8 Bill: So that's KPIs. Driving to zero driving to infinity. But, but we're in agreement that if you, in a Deming organization where we're not driven by incentives then KPIs are measures of how we are doing. And why isn't that enough to be able to say, how are things? How are things? We can talk about how might we improve this? But then we're going to look at: Is that a local improvement that makes it worse elsewhere? Are we driving costs to zero and screwing this up? So that's what, that's what I wanted to throw out on this management by extremes zero and infinity, and getting beyond that.   0:43:47.6 AS: Well, I think that's a great point to end it went through so many different things, but I think one of the biggest takeaways that I get from this is the idea of appreciation of a system. When you have a true appreciation of a system and understand that there's many parts and, you know, adding value in that system basically comes from more than just being on a production line, for sure and creating value in an organization comes from not only working on improving a particular area but the integration of the many different functions. And if you don't understand that, then you end up in not a Deming organization, not a WE Organization, but more of a ME Organization. That's kind of what I would take away. Is there anything you would add to that?   0:44:51.9 Bill: Well, what, what reminds me of what you're just saying is I was doing a class years ago for a second shift group in facilities people, painters, electricians, managers, and one of them says, he says "so Bill, everyone's important in an organization." I said, "absolutely. Absolutely everyone's important."   0:45:13.2 Bill: Then he says, "everyone's equally important" right? And as soon as he said that, I thought to myself, "I remember you from a year ago." So he says, "So so everyone's important." "Yeah, everyone's important!" "Everyone's equally important." So as soon as he said that, within a fraction of a second, my response was, "No, if you wanna get paid what a quarterback gets paid, you better, you better train to be a quarterback." So what Dr. Deming is not, he's not saying everyone's paid the same. We're paid based on market rates for quarterbacks, for linemen, for software people. And the, and the better we work together, ideally the better we manage resources, the better the profit, we get in the profit sharing, but we're not equal. Our contributions are not equal. The contributions cannot be compared. They are, they're all part of the sauce, but we don't get into who contributed more." Right, and I think that'... We're all contributors.   0:46:28.3 AS: The more you learn about Dr. Deming's teaching, you just realize that there's an appreciation of a system, but there's also an appreciation of people.   0:46:40.1 Bill: There we go.   0:46:43.2 AS: That's really where, as I have said before, when my friend was working with me on my book, Transforming Your Business with Dr. Deming's 14 Points, after many many weeks of working together, he's like, "I figured it out. Dr. Deming is a humanist. He cares about people." It's pretty true. So appreciate the people around you, appreciate the contribution that everybody makes. Nobody makes equal contributions. And even great people who are making amazing contributions could have down months or years where there's things going on in their family or other issues. They're not contributing what they did in the past.   0:47:17.1 AS: That's a variable that we just can't control. But ultimately, appreciation of the system is what I said in my summary. And now I'm gonna add in appreciation of the people.   0:47:30.6 AS: Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I wanna thank you again for this discussion. Again, entertaining, exciting, interesting. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And if you wanna keep in touch with Bill, just find him on LinkedIn. This is your host, Andrew Stotz. And I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming. "People are entitled to joy in work".  

In this episode, Dan welcomes translation and localization expert Bill Lafferty, the founder of Loc Navigator, a resource-rich newsletter that helps readers understand translation and localization as drivers of business growth. An accomplished Japanese-to-English legal translator, enterprise localization project leader, and localization technology consultant, Bill has lived at the intersection of technology and translation for nearly three decades. And full disclosure: he's been one of Dan's best friends for over 25 years, so he knows…quite a lot about the host of the show.   He and Dan reminisce a bit and then dig into the evolution of translation and localization and the proliferation of technology in the field. Perhaps more than any other profession, translators have had to deal with ever-improving AI tools, and adaptation and skill enhancement have been par for the course. Now, with ChatGPT and LLMs performing better translations than any previous disruptive development, will translators survive?    Find out as Bill and Dan uncover some of the misconceptions about where AI is taking the translation profession - and by extension, other language-intensive jobs. In this episode:   Delve into the crucial role localization has in enhancing global business performance. Understand the influence human proficiency has on the nuance-rich translation industry. Scrutinize the landscape of the translation field in the new age of AI and machine translation. Ascertain the advantages and pitfalls of forging a career path in translation and localization. Embrace the importance of fostering continuous learning in the dynamic tech-driven world. Listen in and hear… All about the world of translation The concept of localization of languages Perceptions about Google Translate Human-oriented tasks in translation What makes Bill so interested in language translation  The beauty of the Japanese language The intersection of software and local translation Legal translation and the room for growth  Where machine translation fails  ChatGPT and how it is impacting translation Neuro-machine translations, usages, and limitations On-the-fly speech translation and pixelation The difference between localization and translation Understanding taxonomy and how it plays within your business  The Block Chain and opportunities it brings How AI helps increase the capacity and quality of communications Notable Quotes: “A lot of language learning comes from an openness to rhythm and sound.” – (12:49), Bill “There's different levels to feeling accomplished when speaking a second language.” – (17:11), Bill “It was more important for me at the right age to make this really big career change into something different because I felt life would be a little less heavy.” – (20:07), Bill “Savvy, freelance translators are learning to use these technologies and harness them and use them as accelerators.” – (30:28), Bill “Low level jobs that would've been steps along the way are not exactly necessary anymore.” – (33:58), Dan “The amount of words being created everyday is just incredible.” – (35:58), Bill  “New tools require new operators.” – (36:28), Dan “Localization is one of the key drivers for global growth for any business.” – (51:03), Bill  “Translation is an industry that has always been shaped by infusions of technology.” – (57:23), Bill “Making something less complex is a huge value-add in this economy right now.” – (1:00:18), Bill “The better you can be at helping your customers or stakeholders to escape complexity, the more they're going to thank you.” – (1:00:32), Bill “In my opinion ChatGPT promotes better mental health.” – (1:02:26), Bill “For freelance translators, don't let all this noise about technology be something that is going to derail your career. Do what you love.” – (1:12:33), Bill Dan Nestle Links The Dan Nestle Show (libsyn.com) Daniel Nestle | LinkedIn The Dan Nestle Show | Facebook Dan Nestle (@dsnestle) | Twitter Bill Lafferty Links Loc Navigator Bill Lafferty - Twitter Bill Lafferty – Linkedin Timestamped summary of this episode, courtesy of Capsho: 00:00:00 - Introduction, Dan introduces the podcast and his guest, Bill Lafferty, who has a long career in translation and localization. They discuss the importance of translation in today's global economy. 00:02:37 - The Perception of Translation, Dan and Bill talk about the misconception that translation is a commoditized service and the challenge of overcoming this perception. They highlight the need for human-oriented tasks in translation and the importance of delivering translations that feel natural to the target audience. 00:06:09 - The Commoditization of Translation, Bill discusses the commoditization of the translation industry and the long tail of language service providers. He emphasizes the importance of understanding clients' goals and finding solutions that fit their budget. 00:07:52 - AI and Translation, Dan and Bill touch on the advancements in AI and its impact on the translation industry. They discuss the complexities of translating multiple languages and character sets, and how translation has been grappling with these challenges for a long time. 00:11:02 - Bill's Journey in Translation, Bill shares his journey in translation, from studying Japanese in college to being enchanted by the language. He discusses his experience as a legal translator and the rewards of learning to read Japanese at a high level. 00:15:13 - The Meticulousness of Translation, The guest discusses the meticulous nature of translation, where one stroke or change in a character can completely change the meaning. They also highlight the challenge of finding the opposite meaning from the same character given a different conjugation. 00:15:50 - Curiosity and Connection, The guest emphasizes the importance of curiosity and an innate sense of curiosity in learning a second language. They also express the desire to reach out and connect with others through language. 00:16:26 - Shades of Meaning in Japanese, The guest compares languages like Japanese and Chinese to Romance languages, highlighting the complexity and multiple shades of meaning in characters. They discuss the challenge of translating legal contracts and documents from English to Japanese. 00:18:20 - Missing the Social Dynamic, The guest shares their reason for stopping their translation career, expressing a desire for more socialization and connection with people. They enjoy talking and developing relationships, which led them to their current role in sales and client development. 00:19:47 - The Desire for Hands-On Translation, The guest expresses a desire to return to translation and be hands-on, as they enjoy diving in and being tactile. They mention the possibility of translating short stories or engaging in more creative translation in the future. 00:30:57 - Impact of Technology on Solopreneurs and Small Business Owners, Technology advancements like Chat GPT can disrupt industries, potentially putting solopreneurs and small business owners out of business or forcing them onto new career paths. 00:32:21 - Disruption in the Creative World, The creative world, including industries like copywriting, marketing consulting, and translation, is experiencing disruption as technology continues to advance. Jobs that were once necessary may become obsolete as AI tools like Chat GPT become more sophisticated. 00:34:15 - The Role of Supervised Learning and Machine Translation, In machine translation, there is a distinction between supervised learning and unsupervised learning. While Chat GPT goes through a filtration process, unsupervised machine translation can still be improved with technology advancements like neural machine translation. 00:35:33 - Balancing Machine Translation and Human Translation, When expanding into new markets, companies must consider the balance between using machine translation and human translation. While machine translation may be budget-friendly, it's important to ensure that the first impression of a product or brand is accurate and well-translated. 00:38:43 - New Skills and Opportunities, The introduction of AI tools like Chat GPT creates new opportunities for those who possess skills in manipulating and guiding these tools. Curiosity and a command of language are valuable assets in utilizing AI for oneself or clients. 00:46:38 - The Potential of Machine Translation, The guest discusses the potential of machine translation, mentioning the possibility of real-time translation and the ability to overlay mouth movements in different languages. However, he notes that the marriage of technology and translation is still not fully developed. 00:47:56 - The Advancements in Machine Translation, The guest acknowledges that developments in machine translation are already happening, citing examples such as instant translation on LinkedIn. He emphasizes that while machine translation has improved, it still comes with certain limitations and caveats. 00:49:49 - Localization vs. Translation, The host and guest discuss localization, highlighting its importance in global business growth. They explain that localization goes beyond translation as it involves adapting content to different languages, cultures, and markets. They note that localization should be considered early on in the development process. 00:51:18 - Historical Challenges in Localization, The guest explains that the historical paradigm of starting in a single market and expanding later has led to localization being an afterthought for many businesses. However, he mentions that forward-thinking companies are now incorporating localization into their product development from the beginning. 00:56:21 - The Future of Localization, The guest sees a positive future for localization, as technology continues to advance and automation becomes more desired. However, he highlights the need for strategic consulting and human involvement to ensure accurate and effective localization. The challenges ahead include keeping up with evolving technology and untangling the complexities of AI in localization workflows. 01:02:41 - Promoting Better Mental Health, The conversation starts with both Dan and Bill sharing their experiences of unhappiness in various positions throughout their careers. They discuss how using Chat GPT has helped them explore new ideas and perspectives, leading to a sense of fulfillment and better mental health. 01:03:26 - Empowering Website Development, Bill shares a specific example of how Chat GPT helped him enhance his website, Loknavigator.com. He explains how he was able to program interactive tiles and generate personalized suggestions based on user inputs. This experience opened his mind to new possibilities and boosted his confidence in web development. 01:04:51 - Chat GPT for Code Generation, The conversation highlights the effectiveness of Chat GPT in generating code snippets. Bill mentions that he used Chat GPT to find the snippets of code he needed to improve his website's functionality. They discuss the power of AI in code generation and its potential for improving workflow efficiency. 01:06:11 - Mindset Shifts and Pivoting, Dan and Bill discuss how using Chat GPT has helped them shift their mindsets and approach tasks and projects from new perspectives. They also mention the importance of having someone to bounce ideas off and validate their thinking. Chat GPT serves as a helpful tool in moments of panic or uncertainty. 01:09:12 - Overcoming Learning Hurdles, The conversation emphasizes how Chat GPT accelerates the learning process and helps overcome learning hurdles. Bill shares his personal accomplishment in using Chat GPT.   *Notes were created by humans, with help from Capsho, my preferred AI show notes assistant.

I am joined by best-selling author, digital transformation leader, successful CIO, and founder of StarCIO, Isaac Sacolick. Recognized as a top 100 social CIO, blogger and industry speaker, Isaac has over 20 years of experience delivering innovative solutions, leading IT teams, and transforming underperforming businesses.  On this episode, we discuss his new book, “Digital Trailblazer: Essential Lessons to Jumpstart Transformation and Accelerate Your Technology Leadership,” his journey to becoming a digital transformation leader/CIO, how the audience can employ their skills as a digital leader, and more.  Here are some of the top takeaways you will receive from this episode:  The impact of generative AI from both an opportunity and a risk perspective  Navigating your role as a transformational CIO  Isaac's transformational journey  How to use data and analytics to a strategic advantage  Developing and refining your ‘vision'  The clash between CIOs, sales leaders, and marketing leaders  Driving transformation and aligning with your organization's offense   As a CIO and Business IT Leader here are More wins you will get by listening: (4:32) Isaac: “So that was neural networks back in the ‘90s. We had no algorithms, there's no tensor flow, there was no cloud, it was all very slow. But we were trying to solve some interesting things around computer vision, around predictions, a little bit of natural language processing.”  (5:19) Isaac: “Three years ago we went from growth to resolving a pandemic set of issues, to supply chain issues, to hybrid working issues. We did this huge pivot in 2020 that I talk about in chapter 10 of the book. I think we're on the cusp of another major inflection with AI. What's the impact of generative AI from both an opportunity and a risk perspective?”  (6:06) Bill: “What are the ways that you can have private AI within your organization versus public AI?”  (6:49) Isaac: “We need to look at the horizons and the frequency. Whatever that frequency was before, double it because things are just happening too fast.”  (7:20) Isaac: “Marketing departments are going to really be the first group hit with a whole set of point solutions that can help them generate graphics, videos, and content.”  (9:11) Bill: “It seems to me that ChatGPT and Microsoft's investment is sort of the first interface that is real practical for human beings to use.”  (9:39) Isaac: “We're going to have to see how that plays out, especially with Copilot. I think that's going to change how people work. It'll be interesting to see where the big four are going to start making their AI explainable or are we going to put regulations in place around that. Are companies going to firewall off this capability because they're afraid of IP being leaked out to it?”  (11:04) Isaac: “If you don't say anything to your employees, they're going to see a green light there. They're not going to know where to stop in terms of what they should and shouldn't do because you haven't provided guidelines.”  (14:47) Isaac: “I was a bit of a go getter in my young days. I joined a startup that was a hosting provider for applications provider for newspapers. And I tell people, that's where I really learned transformation. We were looking at an industry that went through massive disruption. I got to see that front row in seat with my board.”  (19:16) Isaac: “10 years of being CIO in companies that were trying to figure out how to use data and analytics to a strategic advance and involve their products considerably from what they were doing before.”  (21:15) Isaac: “I used to say CIOs knew more about the boxes that hosted the data than the data itself. I think a lot has changed in the last 10-15 years. CIOs learned to build up their strengths and build up their vocabulary and understand the analytics space a little better.”  (22:18) Isaac: “The reality is that whatever we come in from our backgrounds when we become CIOs, we come in from a single or maybe two lanes of understanding. I think the biggest challenge for CIOs is expanding their own capabilities by hiring lieutenants who are highly versatile, who are two-way learners so that they can educate but also continuously learn.”  (23:24) Isaac: “Digital Trailblazer is a book of stories so that when you're facing an issue, an opportunity for the first time, you've never had a blow up moment, a shock and awe moment. You've never stood in front of the board before. You've never had to convince an executive group to go and do an investment in an area they necessarily don't want to do.”  (24:16) Bill: “Which percentage of the folks that are in there agree with you are going to be on your side? Which are the ones who are going to take shots at you? And then which percentage of that audience doesn't really care? And then who is going to take ownership?”  (25:59) Isaac: “People like the idea of products until you really have that conversation around product management. It isn't about taking everybody's wishlist and coming up with a shiny object that checks all the boxes. It's about trade-offs.”  (27:20) Isaac: “When you see alternatives, when you see new experiences coming in play and business models to the incumbent, that's what disruption is right? You throw in new technology and that's the accelerant.”  (28:42) Isaac: “The track that CIOs have had, we've come in from the operating world right? And now we're trying to influence strategy. We're trying to influence experience, both customer and employee experience.”  (29:26) Isaac: “How do you figure out how a salesperson is being incentive? How am I going to help you in your journey and what parts of your journey am I going to have to go and combat the status quo?”  (30:39) Isaac: “The best salespeople come in and say, “Okay I understand what your problem is. Let me connect you with people who have had similar problems. Let me show you what the outcome of a solution looks like if we implement the solution.” Best salespeople aren't selling, they're developing relationships and they're explaining the value.”  (34:56) Isaac: “Any single solution area, any single technology has a bunch of labels underneath it to get sorted through; lots of choices, compliance factors, multiple vendors, etc.”  (35:33) Isaac: “The level by which we're connecting the dots is no longer a three-tier application living on a couple servers right? We're getting into how business is operating.”  (38:33) Bill: “You need a vision for your career and for the role and the position and speed of which we're changing.”  (39:19) Isaac: “This isn't an area where there's a predefined playbook right? You're always going to be looking at how your organization's operating and saying, “I got to do things differently.” The world is changing in some fundamental way.”  (41:13) Bill: “Why do CIOs have so many problems with sales leaders and marketing leaders?”  (41:24) Isaac: “I don't know if it's a problem or have they struggled to develop relationships with them, is a little bit more work for them to understand their world. I think it again, goes back to our roots. We reported to CFOs, we were asked for ROI. And now we're flipping the equation and saying, ‘Look I can't transform the organization just by finding cost.'”  (43:59) Isaac: “What are your assumptions built into your growth model? What are you trying to sell? What are the unknowns for you to be able to hit those numbers. What are your risks and pain points?”  (45:52) Isaac: “If you're a CIO driving transformation, you've got to align yourself with the offense. And part of the reason is, I know I can get help on the defensive side.”  (47:27) Isaac: “I hear it from CEOs and I hear it from boards. When are we going to be done with this? They say it in a fatigued way, they're all just tired of the effort of doing two jobs. You have to run today's business, transform with what you're executing today and then think about the next horizon.”    Resources  Connect with Isaac Sacolick on LinkedIn  StarCIO  Digital Trailblazer: Essential Lessons to Jumpstart Transformation and Accelerate Your Technology Leadership  Driving Digital: The Leader's Guide to Business Transformation Through Technology  Subscribe to Driving Digital Newsletter  Coffee with Digital Trailblazers   

“I always try to make sure I'm contextualizing what I do on a day-to-day basis. And my personal priority is my family all the time,” shares Bill Ryan, SVP. Bill is the Assistant GC of AT&T Services, Inc., but has held many roles from working as a bilingual educator to becoming an attorney and working in-house at DirectTV. Today, he shares his professional journey and how he has built a sustainable career through contextualizing work and family. The divide between work and personal life can cause your job to become unsustainable. If your priority is your family, but your job keeps you away from them all the time, then eventually you will resent it. In order to be an authentic leader, it is important to show up to work in a way that honors your values. Bill comes from a multicultural family, with his wife being from Mexico and his children being adopted from Korea. So for him, diversity is inextricably linked to his family and is one of his largest priorities. By incorporating his values, being mindful of his obligations as a leader, and recognizing the privileges he has been afforded in life, Bill has made strides in his own professional development and in that of his team members.  It's easy to get so caught up in the day-to-day that you forget to prioritize your values. If you don't prioritize showing up and leading from a place of authenticity, you will be a less effective leader. By contextualizing your work in regard to your values, you will create a more sustainable work environment for everyone.  Quotes “Success all of a sudden pivoted and is now defined as the success of everyone else around you.” (9:23-9:29 | Bill) “It's really great to be able to connect people and at least make an effort to connect in the native of language and build relationships on a different level and help understand the culture and things of that nature.” (17:14-17:23 | Bill) “I always try to make sure I'm contextualizing what I do on a day-to-day basis. And my personal priority is my family all the time.” (25:43-25:51 | Bill) “My commitment to diversity is nothing more than my commitment to my family.” (37:22-37:26 | Bill)  “What I try to bring is being mindful of the obligations that I have as a leader and as an ally and someone who's benefited from a lot of privileges, and not everyone has.” (39:57-40:05 | Bill)   Links Connect with Bill Ryan: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-ryan-685b521/   Connect with Chris Batz: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisbatz/  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theliongroupkc  Instagram: @theliongroupllc Podcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm  

Welcome back to my podcast. On today's episode, I am joined by “Pro Troublemaker,” professional business coach, and president of Stefanie Krievins & Co., Stefanie Krievins. Since earning her trained coaching certification through Erickson's International in 2014, Stefanie has built a company and team of “troublemakers” that provide tools for others to help them define their organization's vision, work with trust and accountability, and communicate clearly to advocate for their own ideas.  Here are some of the top transformational wins you will receive as an IT leader:  How to Navigate Multiple Generations within the Workforce  The Power of Seven Messages, Seven Channels, Seven Times  Using the DISC Behavioral Method to Better Understand Your Team  How to Build Self Awareness  How to Run a Better and Effective Meeting  How to Start Small and Build Stronger Leadership Skills  Tune in and hear how you can transform your skills as a leader and create actions that leave an impact. As a CIO and Business IT Leader here are some wins you will get by listening: (1:05) Stefanie: “We get to work with ambitious, fast growing scaling companies when they have messy, middle, growing pains." (2:10) Bill: “What is happening that there's an opportunity for you and your organization to work for people to solve their particular problems?” (3:13) Stefanie: “I'm seeing a lot of leaders trying to use a consensus model of decision-making, which can be the fastest way to get nothing done.” (3:50) Stefanie: “For folks who want to run a high-performance team, hard times call for bold decisions.” (5:01) Stefanie: “We need to, as leaders, broaden our skillset when it comes to who makes the decision, how do they make it, who's involved so that our organization can continue to grow.”  (5:42) Bill: “What's the genesis of consensus decision making?”  (10:18) Stefanie: “There are new ways for you to be more transparent in your company in a way that makes sense for your business.”  (10:47) Stefanie: “One of my goals is to help people understand those nuances that create friction every single day. Seven messages, seven channels, seven times.”  (14:17) Stefanie: “Repetition is the magic of making your messages stick.”  (14:28) Bill: “Is that sort of the empowerment you're trying to establish if you don't have the view of the CEO in mind but rather an individual leader within their company?”  (15:46) Bill: “If you're coming in from a technical orientation versus an analytical, do you find that people have different things you have to coach them up on?”  (16:17) Stefanie: “We are big fans of the DISC behavioral assessment.”  (20:40) Bill: “You're essentially using this model to make sure that we know where we all are from our own style.”  (21:46) Stefanie: “Just recognizing that you need other people to help you make decisions.”  (22:18) Stefanie: “You need a high performing team that knows how to leverage all styles so they can make the best decisions possible.”  (23:14) Bill: “It is one thing to make a fast decision, but it is another thing to make a fast implementation.”  (25:09) Bill: “Is there a recommended meeting style or cadence that gives a framework for people?”  (27:39) Bill: “How do you coach a team or an individual on how to hold people accountable?”  (28:36) Stefanie: “We have to remember that the accountability is the other person's responsibility.”  (32:08) Stefanie: “You have to define what kind of meeting it is so people understand how to best participate.”  (37:54) Stefanie: “Spend the first 20% of every single workday being completely unavailable to anybody else to do your deepest, most important work.”  (38:38) Stefanie: “Start with the work where you add the most value.” Resources: Stefanie Krievins' LinkedIn  Stefanie Krievins & Co.  Stefanie's Podcast: Hot Mess Hotline  

Fr. Frank Pavone has been removed from the priesthood Leo - Family member left the faith and doesn't believe in the Eucharist because Christ said He had to leave for the spirit to come Jose - Can I sponsor a non-Catholic group in College? Bill - It seems like whenever we have someone who speaks out about life is removed by the bishops E-Frank - What is the difference between Christmas and Epiphany? I don't understand why we celebrate the epiphany. Lori - My son was brought up Catholic but is thinking of leaving the Church. What can I do to bring him 

【句子】So the flowers were just a ruse. Figures. 【Desperate Housewives S02E03】【发音】/səʊ/ /ðə/ /ˈflaʊ.ər(z)/ /wɜː(r)/ /dʒʌst/ /ə/ /ruːz/ /ˈfɪgjərz/ 【发音技巧】just a连读；【翻译】所以这些花就是一个幌子，跟我想的一样。【适用场合】今天我们学习一下这个关键句中出现的两个口语表达：1. ruse看起来非常简单的一个名词：可以理解成：a trick intended to deceive someone“诡计；招数；幌子”eg: He used a ruse to get past the sentry.他使了一招，越过了哨兵。eg: This was a ruse to divide them.这只是一个为了离间他们的诡计。eg: She tried to think of a ruse to get him out of the house.她想找到一招，把他哄出房子。2. Figures.很多同学看到这会有点懵，其实这是It figures. 或者是That figures.但是本期视频中省略了第一个词。这个短语是什么意思呢？可以理解成：“有道理；讲得通；跟我预期的一样；跟我之前猜的一样”或者“描述某件事情符合情理”；It makes sense.或者It is as I expected or might have guessed.或者看这条英文解释：It is used to say that you are not surprised by something unpleasant that has happened.eg: A: "Sally already broke up with that new boyfriend of hers."B: "Yeah, it figures. The dude looked like a total creep!"A：“莎莉和她的新男朋友分手了。”B：“哈，我早就知道会这样，那家伙看起来就让人讨厌。”eg: Fired from another job, huh? Well, it figures. You were showing up late most days of the week!又被开除了？哈，肯定了！上周大部分时间你都迟到了！eg: Bob: Tom was the one who broke the window.Bill: It figures. He's very careless.鲍勃：“是汤姆打碎了那扇窗户。”比尔：“不意外，他毛手毛脚的。”eg: Ann: Mary was the last one to arrive.Sally: It figures. She's always late.安：玛丽是最后一个到的。莎莉：不意外，她总迟到。eg: A: “We're going to need new offices when the company expands next year.”B: “That figures.”A：等明年公司扩张了，我们要新的办公室了。B：没毛病。/说得对。eg: A: “Dad, Sally spilled her milk all over the floor.”B: “It figures.”A：爸爸，莎莉把她的牛奶全撒到地板上了。B：我并不感到意外。eg: A: I think he killed her to get the insurance money.B: That certainly figures.A：我觉得是他杀了她，以便获取保险赔偿金。B：那当然是说得通的。而且这样的短语后面还可以跟从句，比如说大家来尝试翻一下今天的英译汉。 【尝试翻译以下句子，并留言在文章留言区】It figures that I'd break my leg as soon as the ski season started.

Episode Notes:A discussion recently concluded 20th Party Congress and what to expect ahead in US China relations. I'm pleased to welcome back Chris Johnson, CEO of Consultancy China Strategies Group, Senior Fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute Center for China Analysis and former Senior China analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency. This is the 7th Party Congress that Chris has analyzed professionally.Links:John Culver: How We Would Know When China Is Preparing to Invade Taiwan - Carnegie Endowment for International PeaceTranscript:Bill: Welcome back to the very occasional Sinocism podcast. Today we are going to talk about the recently concluded 20th Party Congress and what to expect ahead in US China relations. I'm pleased to welcome back Chris Johnson, CEO of Consultancy China Strategies Group, Senior Fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute Center for China Analysis and former Senior China analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency. This is the 7th Party Congress that Chris has analyzed professionally. So we have a lot of experience here to help us understand what just happened. Chris, welcome back and thanks for taking the time.Chris: My pleasure. Always fun to be with you, Bill.Bill: Great. Well, why don't we jump right in. I'd like to talk about what you see as the most important outcomes from the Congress starting with personnel. What do you make of the leadership team from the central committee to the Politburo to the Standing Committee and what does that say about.Chris: Yeah, well, I, think clearly Xi Jinping had a massive win, you know, with personnel. I think we see this particularly in the Politburo Standing Committee, right, where on the key portfolios that really matter to him in terms of controlling the key levers of power inside the system. So we're talking propaganda, obviously, Uh, we're talking party bureaucracy, military less so, but security services, you know, these, these sort of areas all up and down the ballot he did very well.So that's obviously very important. And I think obviously then the dropping of the so-called Communist Youth League faction oriented people in Li Keqiang and Wang Yang and, and Hu Chunhua being  kind of unceremoniously kicked off the Politburo, that tells us that. He's not in the mood to compromise with any other  interest group.I prefer to call them rather than factions. Um, so that sort of suggests to us that, you know, models that rely on that kind of an analysis are dead. It has been kind of interesting in my mind to see how quickly though that, you know, analysts who tend to follow that framework already talking about the, uh, factional elements within Xi's faction, right?So, you know, it's gonna be the Shanghai people versus the Zhijiang Army versus the Fujian people. Bill: people say there's a Tsinghua factionChris: Right. The, the infamous, non infamous Tsinghua clique and, and and so on. But I think as we look more closely, I mean this is all kidding aside, if we look more closely at the individuals, what we see is obviously these people, you know, loyalty to Xi is, is sort of like necessary, but not necessarily sufficient in explaining who these people are. Also, I just always find it interesting, you know, somehow over. Wang Huning has become a Xi Jinping loyalist. I mean, obviously he plays an interesting role for Xj Jinping, but I don't think we should kid ourselves in noting that he's been kind of shunted aside Right by being pushed into the fourth position on the standing committee, which probably tells us that he will be going to oversee the Chinese People's Consultative Congress, which is, you know, kind of a do nothing body, you know, for the most part. And, um, you know, my sense has long been, One of Xi Jinping's, I think a couple factors there with Wang Huning.Sinocism is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.One is, you know, yes, he is very talented at sort of taking their very, uh, expansive, um, theoretical ideas and coming up with snappy, um, snappy sort of catchphrases, right? This is clearly his, um, his sort of claim to fame. But, you know, we had that article last year from the magazine, Palladium that kind of painted him as some sort of an éminence grise or a Rasputin like figure, you know, in terms of his role.Uh, you know, my sense has always been, uh, as one contact, put it to me one time. You know, the issue is that such analyses tend to confuse the musician with the conductor. In other words,  Xi Jinping.  is pretty good at ideology, right? And party history and the other things that I think the others had relied on.I think the second thing with Wang Huning is, um, in a way XI can't look at him I don't think, without sort of seeing here's a guy who's changed flags, as they would say, right? He served three very different leaders, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and now Xi , um, and, and continued on and I think at some level, uh, and we look at the rest of the appointments where it appears that, uh, loyalty was much more important than merit.Um, where that's also a question mark. So there's those issues I think on the Politburo. You know, you mentioned the, the Tsinghua clique it was very interesting. You had shared with me, uh, Desmond Shum of Red Roulette fame's Twitter stream sort of debunking, you know, this, this Tsinghua clique and saying, well, it turns out in fact that the new Shanghai Municipal Party Secretary Chen Jining can't stand Chen Xi, even though, you know, they both went to Tsinghua and were there at the same time and so on.Um, you know, who knows with Desmond Shum, but I think he knows some things, right? And, and, and it just a reminder to us all, I think, how little we understand right, about these relationships, especially now, uh, with Xi's concentration of power. And also a situation where we've had nearly three years of covid isolationBill: Right. And so it's really hard to go talk to people, even the fewer and fewer numbers, people who, who know something and can talk. Back to the standing committee. I, I think certainly just from friends and contacts the biggest surprise you know, I think, uh was Li Keqiang and Wang Yang not sticking around. And as that long explainer said without naming them they were good comrades who steps aside for the good of the party in the country,Chris: Because that happens so often,Bill: whatever that means. Um, but really the, the bigger surprise was that, oh, Cai Qi showing up. Who I think when you look at the standing committee, I think the general sense is, okay, the, these people are all, you know, not, they're loyal, but they're also competent, like Li Qiang, Chris: Right, Bill: The likely new premier number two on the standing committee is pretty competent. The Shanghai lockdown, disaster aside, Cai Qi on the other hand, was just, looks more like, it's just straight up loyalty to Xi. I think he was not really on anybody's short list of who was gonna make it on there. And so, it does feel like something happened, right?Chris: Yeah. Well, um, a couple things there. I think, um, one, let's start with the. The issue you raised about the economic team cuz I think that's actually very important. Um, you know, I, at some level, sometimes I feel like I'm sort of tiring my, of my role as official narrative buster or a windmill tilter.Uh, whether, whether it's pushback from Li Keqiang or the myth of the savior premier as I was calling it, which, uh, we didn't see, or that these norms actually aren't very enduring and it's really about power politics. I, I think I'm kind of onto a new one now, which is, you know, Xi Jin ping's new team of incompetent sycophants.Right? That's kind of the label that's, uh, come out in a lot of the takes, uh, since the Congress. But to your point, I mean, you know, Li Qiang has run the three most important economic powerhouses on China's east coast, either as governor or as party chief. Right. He seems to have had a, a good relationship with both.Private sector businesses and, and foreign, you know, people forget that, you know, he got the Tesla plant built in Shanghai in a year basically. Right. And it's, uh, responsible for a very significant amount of, of Tesla's total input of vehicles. Output of vehicles. Excuse me. Um, likewise, I hear that Ding Xuexiang, even though we don't know a lot about him, uh, was rather instrumental in things.Breaking the log jam with the US uh, over the de-listing of Chinese ADRs, uh, that he had played an important role in convincing Xi Jinping it would not be a good idea, for example, to, uh, you know, we're already seeing, uh, sort of decoupling on the technology side. It would not be a good idea to encourage the Americans to decouple financially as well. So the point is I think we need to just all kind of calm down, right? And, and see how these people perform in office. He Lifeng, I think is perhaps, you know, maybe more of a question mark, but, But here too, I think it's important for us to think about how their system worksThe political report sets the frame, right? It tells us what. Okay, this is the ideological construct we're working off of, or our interpretation, our dialectical interpretation of what's going on. And that, I think the signal there was what I like to call this fortress economy, right? So self-sufficiency and technology and so on.And so then when we look at the Politburo appointments, you can see that they align pretty closely to that agenda, right? These people who've worked in state firms or scientists and you know, so on and forth.Bill: Aerospace, defenseChris: Yeah, Aerospace. Very close alignment with that agenda. I'm not saying this is the right choice for China or that it even will be successful, I'm just saying it makes sense, you know,Bill: And it is not just sycophants it is actually loyal but some expertise or experience in these key sectors Chris: Exactly.  Yeah, and, and, and, and of interest as well. You know, even people who have overlapped with Xi Jinping. How much overlap did they have? How much exposure did they have? You know, there's a lot of discussion, for example, about the new propaganda boss, Li Shulei being very close to Xi and likewise Shi Taifeng.Right? Uh, both of whom were vice presidents at the party school when, when Xi also was there. Um, but remember, you know, he was understudy to Hu Jintao at the time, you know, I mean, the party school thing was a very small part of his portfolio and they were ranked lower, you know, amongst the vice presidents of the party school.So how much actual interaction did he have? So there too, you know, I think, uh, obviously. , yes these people will do what Xi Jinping wants them to do, but that doesn't mean they're not competent. On Cai Qi, I agree with you. I think it's, it's, it's difficult. You know, my speculation would be a couple of things.One, proximity matters, right? He's been sitting in Beijing the last five years, so he is, had the opportunity to, uh, be close to the boss and, and impact that. I've heard some suggestions from contacts, which I think makes some. He was seen as more strictly enforcing the zero Covid policy. Right. In part because he is sitting in Beijing than say a Chen Min'er, right.Who arguably was a other stroke better, you know, candidate for that position on the Politburo standing committee. And there, you know, it will be interesting to see, you know, we're not sure the musical chairs have not yet finished. Right. The post party Congress for people getting new jobs. But you know, for example, if Chen Min'er stays out in Chongqing, that seems like a bit of a loss for him.Bill: Yeah, he needs to go somewhere else if he's got any hope of, um, sort of, But so one thing, sorry. One thing on the Politburo I thought was really interesting, and I know we've talked about offline, um, is that the first time the head of the Ministry State Security was, was. Promoted into the Politburo - Chen Wenqing.  And now he is the Secretary of the Central Political Legal Affairs Commission, the party body that oversees the entire security services system and legal system. and what do you think that says about priorities and, and, and where Xi sees things going?Chris: Well, I think it definitely aligns with this concept of Xi Jiping's of comprehensive national security. Right. We've, we've seen and heard and read a lot about that and it seems that the, uh, number of types of security endlessly proliferate, I think we're up to 13 or 14Bill: Everything is National Security in Xi's China.Chris: Yeah. Everything is, is national security. Uh, that's one thing I think it's interesting perhaps in the, in the frame of, you know, in an era where they are becoming a bigger power and therefore, uh, have more resources and so on. You know, is that role that's played by the Ministry of State Security, which is, you know, they have this unique role, don't they?They're in a way, they're sort of the US' Central Intelligence Agency and, and FBI, Federal Bureau of Investigation combined, and that they do have that internal security role as well, but, They are the foreign civilian anyway, uh, foreign intelligence collection arm. So perhaps, you know, over time there's been some sense that they realized, yes, cyber was great for certain things, but you still need human intelligence.Uh, you know, we don't know how well or not Chen Wenqing has performed, but you know, obviously there, this has been a relentless campaign, you know, the search for spies and so on and so forth. Um, I also think it says something about what we seem to be seeing emerging here, which is an effort to take what previously were these, you know, warring, uh, administrative or ministerial factions, right, of the Ministry of Public Security MPS, the MSS, uh, and even the party's, uh, discipline watchdog, the, uh, Central Commission on Discipline inspection, you know, in an effort to sort of knit those guys into one whole.And you know, it is interesting.Chen wending has experience in all three of those. He started off, I think as a street cop. Um, he did serve on the discipline inspection commission under, uh, Wang Qishan when things were, you know, really going  in that department in the early part of, Xi's tenure and then he's headed, uh, the Ministry of State Security.I think, you know, even more interesting probably is. The, uh, formation of the new secretariat, right? Where we have both Chen Wenqing on there and also Wang Xiaohong as a minister of Public Security, but also as a deputy on the CPLAC, right? And a seat on the secretariat. And if we look at the, um, The gentleman who's number two in the discipline inspection, uh, space, he was a longtime police officer as well.So that's very unusual. You know, uh, his name's escaping me at the moment. But, um, you know, so in effect you have basically three people on the Secretariat with security backgrounds and, you know, that's important. It means other portfolios that might be on the secretariat that have been dumped, right? So it shows something about the prioritization, uh, of security.And I think it's interesting, you know, we've, we've often struggled to understand what is the National Security Commission, how does it function, You know, these sort of things. And it's, it's still, you know, absolutely clear as mud. But what was interesting was that, you know, from whatever that early design was that had some aspect at least of looking a bit like the US style, National Security Commission, they took on a much more sort of internal looking flavor.And it had always been my sort of thought that one of the reasons Xi Jinping created this thing was to break down, you know, those institutional rivalries and barriers and force, you know, coordination on these, on these institutions. So, you know, bottom line, I think what we're seeing is a real effort by Xi Jinping to You know, knit together a comprehensive, unified, and very effective, you know, stifling, really security apparatus. And, uh, I don't expect to see that change anytime soon. And then, you know, as you and I have been discussing recently, we also have, uh, another Xi loyalist Chen Yixin showing up as Chen Wenqing's successor right at the Ministry of State SecurityBill: And he remains Secretary General of the Political and Legal Affairs Commission too.Chris: Exactly. So, you know, from, from a, a sheet home where Xi Jinping five years ago arguably had very loose control, if at all, we now have a situation where he's totally dominant. Bill: I think the, the official on the Secretariat, I think it's Liu Jinguo.Chris: That's the one. Yes. Thank you. I'm getting old…Bill: He also has, has a long history of the Ministry of Public Security system. Um, but yeah, it does, it does seem like it's a, it's a real, I mean it, I I, I don't wanna use the word securitization, but it does like this is the indication of a, of a real, sort of, it just sort of fits with the, the general trend  towards much more focus on national security. I mean, what about on the, the Central Military Commission? Right? Because one of the surprises was, um, again, and this is where the norms were broken, where you have Zhang Youxia, who should have retired based on his age, but he's 72, he's on the Politburo he stays as a vice chair of the CMCChris: Yep. Yeah, no, at, at, at the rip old age of 72. It's a little hard, uh, to think of him, you know, mounting a tank or something  to go invade Taiwan or whatever the, you know, whatever the case may be. But, you know, I, I think here again, the narratives might be off base a little bit, you know, it's this issue of, you know, well he's just picked, you know, these sycophantic loyalists, He's a guy who has combat experience, right?And that's increasingly rare. Um, I don't think it's any surprise that. That himself. And, uh, the, uh, uh, gentleman on the CMC, uh, Li, who is now heading the, um, Joint Chiefs of Staff, he also has Vietnam combat experience, not from 79, but from the, uh, the border incursions that went on into the80s. Um, so it's not that surprising really.But, but obviously, you know, Zhang Youxia is very close to Xi Jinping, their father's fought together, right? Um, and they have that sort of, uh, blood tie and Xi is signaling, I want, uh, I. Political control and also technologically or, or, um, you know, operationally competent people. I think the other fascinating piece is we see once again no vice chairman from the political commissar iatside of the PLA.I think that's very interesting. You know, a lot of people, including myself, were betting that Miao HuaWould, would, would get the promotion. He didn't, you know, we can't know. But my sense is in a way, Xi Jiping is still punishing that side of the PLA for Xu Caihou's misdoings. Right. You know, and that's very interesting in and of itself.Also, it may be a signal that I don't need a political commissar vice chairman because I handle the politicsBill: And, and, and he, yeah. And in this, this new era that the, the next phase of the Xi era, it, it is, uh, everybody knows, right? It's, it's all about loyalty to Xi.Chris: we just saw right, uh, today, you know, uh, yet, yet more instructions about the CMC responsibilities, Chairman, responsibility systems. Bill: Unfortunately they didn't release the full text but it would be fascinating to see what's in there.Chris: And they never do on these things, which is, uh, which is tough. But, um, you know, I think we have a general sense of what would be in it, . But, but even that itself, right, you know, is a very major thing that people, you know, didn't really pick up. Certain scholars, certainly like James Mulvenon and other people who are really good on this stuff noticed it. But this shift under Hu Jintao was a CMC vice chairman responsibility system. In other words, he was subletting the operational matters certainly to his uniformed officers, Xi Jinping doesn't do thatBill: Well, this, and here we are, right where he can indeed I mean, I, I had written in the newsletter, um, you know, that she had, I thought, I think he ran the table in terms of personnel.Chris: Oh, completely. Yeah.Bill: And this is why it is interesting he kept around folks like Wang Huning, but we'll move on. The next question I had really was about Xi's report to the party Congress and we had talked, I think you'd also, um, you've talked about on our previous podcasts, I mean there, there seems to be a pretty significant shift in the way Xi is talking about the geopolitical environment and their assessment and how they see the world. Can you talk about a little bit?Chris: Yeah, I mean, I think definitely we saw some shifts there and, uh, you know, you and I have talked a lot about it. You know, there are problems with word counting, right? You know, and when you look at the thing and you just do a machine search, and it's like, okay, well security was mentioned 350 times or whatever, but, but the, you know, in what context?Right. Um, and, uh, our, uh, mutual admiration society, the, uh, the China Media project, uh, I thought they did an excellent piece on that sort of saying, Remember, it's the words that go around the buzzword that matter, you know, just as much. But what we can say unequivocally is that two very important touchstones that kind of explain their thinking on their perception of not only their external environment, but really kind of their internal environment, which had been in the last several political reports, now are gone. And those are this idea of China's enjoying a period of strategic opportunity and this idea that peace and development are the underlying trend of the times. And, you know, on the period of strategic opportunity, I think it's important for a couple reasons. One, just to kind of break that down for our listeners in a way that's not, you know, sort of, uh, CCP speak, , uh, the, the basic idea was that China judged that it's external security environment was sufficiently benign, that they could focus their energies on economic development.Right? So obviously that's very important. I also think it was an important governor, and I don't think I've seen anything out there talking about its absence in this, uh, political report on this topic, It was a, it was an important governor on sort of breakneck Chinese military development, sort of like the Soviet Union, right?In other words, as long as you were, you know, sort of judging that your external environment was largely benign, you. Didn't really have a justification to have a massive defense budget or to be pushy, you know, in the neighborhood, these sort of things. And people might poo poo that and sort of say, Well, you know, this is all just rhetoric and so on. No, they actually tend to Bill: Oh, that's interesting. Well, then that fits a little bit, right, Cuz they added the, the wording around strategic deterrence in the report as well  which is seen as a, you know, modernizing, expanding their nuclear forces, right?Chris: Exactly, right. So, you know, that's, uh, an important absence and the fact that, you know, the word, again, word searching, right. Um, strategic and opportunity are both in there, but they're separated and balanced by this risks and challenges, languages and, and so on. Bill: Right the language is very starkly different. Chris: Yeah. And then likewise on, on peace and development. This one, as you know, is, is even older, right? It goes back to the early eighties, I believe, uh, that it's been in, in these political reports. And, uh, you know, there again, the idea was sort of not only was this notion that peace and economic development were the dominant, you know, sort of trend internationally, globally, they would be an enduring one. You know, this idea of the trend of the times, right? Um, now that's missing. So what has replaced it in both these cases is this spirit of struggle, right? Um, and so that's a pretty stark departure and that in my mind just sort of is a real throwback to what you could call the period of maximum danger for the regime in the sixties, right? When they had just split off with the Soviets and they were still facing unremitting hostility from the west after the Korean War experience and, and so on. So, you know, there's definitely a, a decided effort there. I think also we should view the removal of these concepts as a culmination of a campaign that Xi Jinping has been on for a while.You know, as you and I have discussed many times before, from the minute he arrived, he began, I think, to paint this darker picture of the exterior environment. And he seems to have always wanted to create a sort of sense of urgency, certainly maybe even crisis. And I think a big part of that is to justifying the power grab, right? If the world outside is hostile, you need, you know, a strongman. Bill: Well that was a lot of the propaganda going into the Party of Congress about the need for sort of a navigator helmsman because know, we we're, we're closest we have ever been to the great rejuvenation, but it's gonna be really hard and we need sort of strong leadership right. It was, it was all building to that. This is why Ci needs to stay for as long as he wants to stay.Chris: and I think we saw that reflected again just the other day in this Long People's Daily piece by Ding Xuexing, right, Where he's talking again about the need for unity, the throwback, as you mentioned in your newsletter to Mao's commentary, there is not to be lost on any of us you know, the fact that the Politburo standing committee's. Uh, first field trip is out to Yan'an, right? I mean, you know, these are messages, right? The aren't coincidental.Bill: No, it, it is. The thing that's also about the report that's interesting is that while there was, speaking of word counts, there was no mention of the United States, but it certainly feels like that was the primary backdrop for this entire discussion around. So the, the shifting geopolitical, uh, assessments and this broader, you know, and I think one of the things that I, and I want to talk to as we get into this, a little bit about US China relations, but is it she has come to the conclusion that the US is implacably effectively hostile, and there is no way that they're gonna get through this without some sort of a broader struggle?Chris: I don't know if they, you know, feel that conflict is inevitable. In fact, I kind of assume they don't think that because that's pretty grim picture for them, you know? Um, but I, I do think there's this notion that. They've now had two years to observe the Biden administration. Right? And to some degree, I think it's fair to say that by certain parties in the US, Xi Jinping, maybe not Xi Jinping, but a Wang Qishan or some of these characters were sold a bit of a bag of goods, right?Oh, don't worry, he's not Trump, he's gonna, things will be calmer. We're gonna get back to dialogue and you know, so on and so forth. And that really hasn't happened. And when we look at. Um, when we look at measures like the recent, chip restrictions, which I'm sure we'll discuss at some point, you know, that would've been, you know, the, the wildest dream, right of certain members of the Trump administration to do something that, uh, that's that firm, right? So, um, I think the conclusion of the Politburo then must be, this is baked into the cake, right? It's bipartisan. Um, the earliest we'll see any kind of a turn here is 2024. I think they probably feel. Um, and therefore suddenly things like a no limits partnership with Russia, right, start to make more sense. Um, but would really makes sense in that if that is your framing, and I think it is, and you therefore see the Europeans as like a swing, right, in this equation. This should be a great visit, right, for Chancellor Scholz, uh, and uh, I can't remember if it was you I was reading or someone else here in the last day or so, but this idea that if the Chinese are smart, they would get rid of these sanctions on Bill: That was me. Well, that was in my newsletterChris: Yeah. Parliamentary leaders and you know, Absolutely. Right. You know, that's a no brainer, but. I don't think they're gonna do it , but, but you know, this idea definitely that, and, and when they talk in the political report, you know, it, it's, it's like, sir, not appearing in this film, right, from Money Python, but we know who the people who are doing the bullying, you know, uh, is and the long armed jurisdiction and , so on and so forth and all, I mean, all kidding aside, I think, you know, they will see something like the chip restrictions effectively as a declaration of economic war. I don't think that's going too far to say that.Bill: It goes to the heart of their sort of technological project around rejuvenation. I mean, it is, it is a significant. sort of set of really kind of a, I would think, from the Chinese perspective aggressive policies against them,Chris: Yeah, and I mean, enforcement will be key and we'll see if, you know, licenses are granted and how it's done. And we saw, you know, already some, some backing off there with regard to this US person, uh, restriction and so on. But, but you know, it's still pretty tough stuff. There's no two ways aboutBill: No, and I, I wonder, and I worry that here in DC. You know, where the mood is very hawkish. If, if people here really fully appreciate sort of the shift that's taking, that seems to be taking place in Beijing and how these actions are viewed.Chris: Well, I, I think that's a really, you put your hand on it really, really interesting way, Bill, because, you know, let's face it really since the Trump trade war started, right? We've all analysts, you know, pundits, uh, even businesses and government people have been sort of saying, you know, when are the Chinese gonna punch back? You know, when are they going to retaliate? Right? And we talk about rare earths and we talk about Apple and TeslaBill: They slapped some sanctions on people but they kind of a jokeChris:  And I guess what I'm saying is I kind of worry we're missing the forest from the trees. Right. You know, the, the, the work report tells us, the political report tells us how they're reacting. Right. And it is hardening the system, moving toward this fortress economy, you know, so on and so forth. And I wanna be real clear here, you know, they're not doing this just because they're reacting to the United States. Xi Jinping presumably wanted to do this all along, but I don't think we can say that the actions they perceive as hostile from the US aren't playing a pretty major role in allowing him to accelerate.Bill: Well, they called me. Great. You justifying great Accelerationist, right? Trump was called that as well, and, and that, that's what worries me too, is we're in. Kind of toxic spiral where, where they see us doing something and then they react. We see them do something and we react and, and it doesn't feel like sort of there's any sort of a governor or a break and I don't see how we figure that out.Chris: Well, I think, you know, and I'm sure we'll come to this later in our discussion, but you know, uh, yes, that's true, but you know, I'm always deeply skeptical of these inevitability memes, whether it's, you know, Thucydides trap or, you know, these other things. Last time I checked, there is something called political agency, right?In other words, leaders can make choices and they can lead if they want to, right? They have an opportunity to do so at in Bali, and you know, we'll have to see some of the, you know, early indications are perhaps they're looking at sort of a longer meeting. So that would suggest maybe there will be some discussion of some of these longstanding issues.Maybe we will see some of the usual, you know, deliverable type stuff. So there's an opportunity. I, I think one question is, can the domestic politics on either side allow for seizing that opportunity? You know, that's an open.Bill: Interesting. There's a couple things in the party constitution, which I think going into the Congress, you know, they told us they were gonna amend the Constitution. There were expectations that it, the amendments were gonna reflect an increase in Xi's power, uh, things like this, this idea of the two establishments, uh, which for listeners are * "To establish the status of Comrade Xi Jinping as the core of the Party's Central Committee and of the whole Party"* "To establish the guiding role of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the New Era"The thinking, and I, I certainly believe that, I thought that they would write that in. There was some talk that, uh, Xi Jinping Thought the longer version would be truncated to just Xi Jinping thought. that possibly he might get, a, a sort of another title like People's Leader. None of those happened. One thing that did happen, What's officially translated by the Chinese side in English as the two upholds- “Uphold the 'core' status of General Secretary Xi Jinping within the CC and “Uphold the centralized authority of the Party” those were written in. And so the question is, was there some kind of pushback or are we misreading we what mattered? And actually the two upholds are more important than the two of establishes.Chris: Well, I, and I think it, this may be a multiple choice answer, right? There might be elements of all the above in there. Uh, you know, I think it is important that he didn't get the truncation to Xi Jinping thought. You have to think that that was something he was keen on. In retrospect, it may be that it was something akin. I've always felt, you know, another thing that was on the table that didn't happen was reestablishing the party chairmanship. My view had always been he was using that largely as a bargaining chip. That, you know, in some ways it creates more trouble than it's worth you. If you're gonna have a chairman, you probably have to have vice chairman and what does that say about the succession? I mean, of course he could have, you know, a couple of geezers on there.  as vice chairman too. , But I, my view was always is he was holding that out there to trade away. Right. You know, at, at the last minute. Um, maybe that's what happened with Xi Jinping thought. I don't know.You know, uh, there have been some media articles, one of which, You and I were discussing yesterday from, uh, the Japanese, uh, publication Nikkei, you know, that suggested that, you know, the elders had, this was their last gasp, right? So the Jiang Zemins and the Zeng Qinghongs and Hu Jinataos, so on. Um, I'm a little skeptical of that. It is possible. Uh, but, um, I, I'd be a little skeptical of that. You know, it's, it's not at all clear that they had any kind of a role, you know, even at Beidaihe this year and so on, Jiang Zemin didn't even attend the Party Congress so clearly, you know, he must be pretty frail or he thought it was not with his time. You know, a little hard to say, but, you know, I kind of struggle with the notion that, you know, the 105 year old Song Ping gets up on a chair or something and starts,  starts making trouble. Right. You know, uh, the poor man's probably lucky if he stays awake during the meeting. Bill: One question, and again, because of the, just, you know, how much more opaque Chinese politics are than the really I think they've ever been. Um, but just one question. It mean, is it possible, for example, that you know, it's more important to get the personnel done. It's more, and then once you get your, you stack the central committee, you get the politburo, you get the standing committee, that these things are sort of a next phase.Chris: yeah, it's entirely possible and, and I think it, it, it does dovetail with this idea that, you know, another reflection from both the political report and the lineup in my mind, is Xi Jinping is a man in a hurry. Right? And he's kind of projected that, as you said, the great accelerator since he arrived.But I think he sees this next five years is really fundamental, right in terms of breaking through on these chokepoint technologies as they call them. You know, these sort of things. And so maybe therefore having the right people in place to handle, you know, uh, speedier policy, execution, you know, was more important.Likewise, I mean, he's sort of telegraphing, He's gonna be around for a while, right? No successor, no visible successor anywhere. Bill: A successor would need likely need five years on the standing committee. So we're looking at ten more years.Chris: Yes, exactly. And so there will be time. The other thing is, um, Xi Jinping is a, is a sort of determined fellow, right? You know, so of interest, even before the 19th Party Congress, I'd been hearing very strong rumors that the notion of lingxiu was out there, that he was contemplating it, right? And so then we see the buildup with, uh, Renmin lingxiu and so on and so forth.And, you know, it didn't happen clearly at the 19th. It didn't happen. But it doesn't mean it won't, you know, at some point. And I think it's really important also to think about, you know, We just saw a pretty serious, um, enterprise of the, you know, quote unquote norm busting, right? So what's to say that mid-course in this five years, he doesn't, uh, hold another sort of extraordinary conference of party delegates like them, Deng Xiaoping did in 1985, right, to push through some of these. You never know, right? In other words, these things don't necessarily have to happen. Just at Party Congresses. So my guess is, you know, this isn't over yet. Uh, but you know, at some level, given how the system was ramping up with those articles about Navigator and the people's leader stuff and so on, you know, that's usually a tell, and yet it didn't happen. And, and so something interesting there. Bill: now they're in the mode of, they're out with these sort of publicity, propaganda education teams where they go out throughout the country and talk about the spirit of the party Congress and push all the key messaging. Um, you know, so far none of those People's leader truncation have happened in that, which is I think an area where some people thought, Well, maybe that could sort of come after the Congress.Chris: What is interesting is it's all two establishments all the time in those discussions, so that's been very interesting since it didn't make it into the, uh, into the document. I guess the other thing is, At some level, is it sort of a distinction without a difference? You know, I, I haven't done the work on this to see, but my guess is short of, you know, the many times they've just junked the entire constitution and rewritten it, this is probably the most amendments there have been, you know, in the to at one time. You know, to the 1982 constitution, and most of them are his various buzzwords. Right. Um, and you know, I think you've been talking about this in the newsletter, there may very well be, uh, something to this issue of, you know, which is the superior thought two establishments or to upholds/safeguards?Bill: and even if the two establishes were superior and then it didn't go in, then somehow it will be theoretically flipped to what got in the ConstitutionChris: I mean, I guess the, the, the thing though where we, it's fair to say that maybe this wasn't his ideal outcome. To me, there's been a very clear and you know, structured stepwise approach on the ideology from the word go. Right? And the first was to create right out of the shoot, this notion of, you know, three eras, right?The, Mao period, Deng  and those other guys we don't talk about it anymore, period.  and Xi Jinping's new era, right? And then that was. You know, sort of crystallized right at the 19th Party Congress when you know, Xi Jinping thought for horribly long name went into the Constitution. And so, you know, the next step kind of seemed like that should be it.And as we've discussed before, you know, if he's able to get just Thought, it certainly enhances his ability to stay around for a very long time and it makes his diktats and so on even more unquestionable. But you know, you can say again, matter of prioritization. With a team where there's really no visible or other opposition, does it really matter? You know, in other words, no one's gonna be questioning his policy ideas anyway.Bill: Just an aside, but on  his inspection, the new standing committee will go on group trip right after the Party Congress and the first trip sends key messages. And group went to Yan'an, you know, they went, they went to the caves. Um, and you know, in the long readout or long CCTV report of the meeting, the visit, there was a section where the tour guide or the person introducing some of the exhibits talked about how the, the famous song, the East Is Red was,  by a person, written by the people sort of spontaneously, and it w it definitely caused some tittering about, well, what are they trying to signal for?You know, are we gonna be seeing some  Xi songs? there's some kind of really interesting signaling going on that I don't think we quite have figured out how to parse Chris: My takeaway on all this has been, I, I need to go back and do a little more book work on, you know, what was, what was the content of the seventh party Congress? What were the outcomes? I mean, I have the general sense, right? Like you, I immediately, you know, started brushing up on it. But, you know, Xi delivered a, an abridged work report. Right, A political report, which is exactly what Mao did then. I mean, in other words, they're not kidding around with the parallelism here. The question is what's the message?Bill: Just for background, at the visit last week to Yan'an, and the first spot that was in the propaganda was the, the, site of the seventh party Congress which is where…to be very simplistic, the seventh party was really moment, you know, as at the end of the Yan'am rectification came in, it was the moment where sort of Mao fully asserted his dominance throughout the system. Mao Thought etc. Right? The signaling, you could certainly, could certainly take a view that, you know, he doesn't do these things by coincidence, and this is. This is signaling both of, you know, can through anything because they, livedin caves and ended up beating the Japanese and then won the Civil War. You know this, and we can, and by the way, we have a dominant leader. I mean, there are ways, again, I'm being simplistic, but the symbolism was not, I think one that would, for example, give a lot of confidence to investors, which I think is, you know, one, one of the many reasons we've seen until the rumors earlier this week, a, pretty big selloff in the, in the Hong Kong and manland stock markets rightChris: most definitely. And I think, you know, this is the other thing about, about what I was trying to get at earlier with, uh, forest and trees, right? You know, in other words, . Um, he's been at this for a while too. You know, there's a reason why he declared a new long march right in depths of the trade war with Trump.Bill: And a new historical resolution, only the third in historyChris: Yeah. And they have been stepwise building since then. And this is the next building block.Bill: The last thought, I mean, he is 69. He's. 10 years younger than President Joe Biden. He could go, he could be around for a long timeBill: well just quickly, cause I know, uh, we don't have that much more time, but I, you say anything about your thoughts on Hu Jintao and what happened?My first take having had a father and a stepfather had dementia was, um, you know, maybe too sympathetic to the idea that, okay, he's having some sort of a senior cognitive moment. You know, you can get. easily agitated, and you can start a scene. And so therefore, was humiliating and symbolic at the end of the Communist Youth League faction, but maybe it was, it was benign as opposed to some of the other stuff going around. But I think might be wrong so I'd love your take on that.  Chris: Well, I, I think, you know, I, I kind of shared your view initially when I watched the, uh, I guess it was an AFP had the first, you know, sort of video that was out there and, you know, he appeared to be stumbling around a bit. He definitely looked confused and, you know, like, uh, what we were discussing earlier on another subject, this could be a multiple choice, you know, A and B or whatever type scenario as well.We don't know, I mean, it seems pretty well established that he has Parkinson's, I think the lead pipe pincher for me though, was that second longer one Singapore's channel, Channel News Asia put out. I mean, he is clearly tussling with Li Zhanshu about something, right. You know that that's. Yes, very clear. And you know, if he was having a moment, you know, when they finally get him up out of the chair and he seems to be kind of pulling back and so on, you know, he moves with some alacrity there,  for an 80 year old guy. Uh, I don't know if he was being helped to move quickly or he, you know, realized it was time to exit stage.Right. But I think, you know, as you said in your newsletter, I, we probably will never know. Um, but to me it looked an awful lot like an effort by Xi Jinping to humiliate him. You know, I mean, there was a reason why they brought the cameras back in at that moment, you know? Unless we believe that that just happened spontaneously in terms of Hu Jintao has his freak out just as those cameras were coming back in the stone faces of the other members of the senior leadership there on the rostrum and you know, Wand Hunting, pulling Li Zhanshu back down kind of saying basically, look buddy, this is politics, don't you don't wanna, that's not a good look for you trying to care for Hu Jintao. You know, I mean obviously something was going on, you know? No, no question. Bill: Right. And feeds into  the idea that Hu Chunhua, we all expected that he at least be on the Politburo again, and he's, he's off, so maybe something, something was going Chris: Well, I, I think what we know from observing Xi Jinping, right? We know that this is a guy who likes to keep people off balance, right? Who likes to keep the plate spinning. He, this is definitely the Maoist element of his personality, you know, whether it's strategic disappearances or this kind of stuff. And I think it's entirely plausible that he might have made some last minute switches right, to, uh, the various lists that were under consideration that caused alarm, you know, among those who thought they were on a certain list and  and no longer were.Bill: and then, and others who were smart enough to realize that if he made those switches, they better just go with it.Chris: Yeah, go along with it. Exactly. I mean, you know, in some ways the most, aside from what happened to Hu Jintao, the, the most, um, disturbing or compelling, depending on how you wanna look at it, part of that video is when Hu Jintao, you know, sort of very, um, delicately taps Li Keqiang on the shoulder. He doesn't even look at it, just keeps looking straight ahead. Uh, and that's tough. And as you pointed out in the newsletter and elsewhere, you know, how difficult must have that have been for Hu Jintao's son Hu Haifeng, who's in the audience watching this all go on? You know, it's, uh, it's tough. Bill: And then two two days later attends a meeting where he praises Xi to high heaven.Chris: Yeah, exactly. So, so if the darker narrative is accurate, I guess one thing that concerns me a bit is, as you know, well, I have never been a fan of these, uh, memes about comparing Xi Jinping to either Stalin or Mao in part because I don't see him as a whimsical guy. They were whimsical people. I think because of his tumultuous upbringing, he understands the problems with that kind of an approach to life, but this was a very ruthless act. If that more malign, you know, sort of definition is true and that I think that says something about his mentality that perhaps should concern us if that's the case. Bill: It has real implications, not just for domestic also potentially for its foreign policy.Chris: Absolutely. I mean, what it shows, right to some degree, again, man in a hurry, this is a tenacious individual, right?  if he's willing to do that. And so if you're gonna, you know, kick them in the face on chips and, you know, things like that, um, you should be taking that into consideration.Bill: And I think preparing for a more substantive response  that is more thought out and it's also, it happened, it wasn't very Confucian for all this talk Confucian definitely not. and values. One last question, and it is related is what do you make of this recent upsurge or talk in DC from various officials that PRC has accelerated its timeline to absorb Taiwan, because nothing in the public documents indicates any shift in that timeline.Chris: No. Uh, and well, first of all, do they, do they have a timeline? Right? You know, I mean, the whole idea of a timeline is kind of stupid, right? You don't, if you're gonna invade somewhere, you say, Hey, we're gonna do it on on this date. I mean, 2049. Okay. Bill: The only timeline that I think you can point to is is it the second centenary goal and, and Taiwan getting quote unquote, you know, returning Taiwan to the motherland's key to the great rejuvenation,Chris: Yeah, you can't have rejuvenation without it. Bill: So then it has to be done by 2049. 27 years, but they've never come out and specifically said 27 years or 2049. But that's what No. that's I think, is where the timeline idea comes from.Chris: Oh yes, definitely. And, and I think some confusion of. What Xi Jinping has clearly set out and reaffirmed in the political report as these important, um, operational benchmarks for the PLA, the People's Liberation Army to achieve by its hundredth anniversary in 2027. But that does not a go plan for Taiwan make, you know, And so it's been confusing to me trying to understand this. And of course, you know, I, I'm joking, but I'm not, you know, if we, if we listen now to the chief of naval operations of the US Navy, you know, like they're invading tomorrow, basically.My former colleague from the CIA, John Culver's, done some very, you know, useful public work on this for the Carnegie, where he sort his endowment, where he sort of said, you know, look, there's certain things we would have to see, forget about, you know, a D-day style invasion, any type of military action that, that you don't need intelligence methods to find out. Right. You know, uh, canceling, uh, conscription, demobilization cycles, you know, those, those sort of things. Um, we don't see that happening. So I've been trying to come to grips with why the administration seems fairly seized with this and and their public commentary and so on. What I'm confident of is there's no smoking gun you know, unlike, say the Russia piece where it appears, we had some pretty compelling intelligence. There doesn't seem to be anything that says Xi Jinping has ordered invasion plans for 2024, you know, or, or, or even 2027. Um, so I'm pretty confident that's not the case. And so then it becomes more about an analytic framework. And I, from what I can tell, it's seems to be largely based on what, uh, in, you know, the intelligence community we would call calendar-int.. calendar intelligence. In other words, you know, over the next 18 months, a lot of stuff's going to happen. We're gonna have our midterm elections next week. It's pretty likely the Republicans get at least one chamber of Congress, maybe both.That would suggest that things like the Taiwan Policy Act and, you know, really, uh, things that have, uh, Beijing's undies in a bunch, uh, you know, could really come back on, uh, the radar pretty forcibly and pretty quickly. Obviously Taiwan, nobody talks about it, but Taiwan's having municipal elections around the same time, and normally that would be a very inside Taiwan baseball affair, nobody would care. But the way that KMT ooks like they will not perform, I should say,  in those municipal elections. They could be effectively wiped out, you know, as a, as a sort of electable party in Taiwan. That's not a good news story for Beijing.And then of course we have our own presidential in 2024 and Taiwan has a presidential election in 24 in the US case.I mean, look, we could end up with a President Pompeo, right? Or a President DeSantis or others who. Been out there sort of talking openly about Taiwan independence and recognizing Taiwan. And similarly, I think whoever succeeds, uh, President Tsai in Taiwan, if we assume it will likely be a a, a Democratic Progressive party president, will almost by definition be more independence oriented.So I think the administration is saying there's a lot of stuff that's gonna get the Chinese pretty itchy, you know, over this next 18 month period. So therefore we need to be really loud in our signaling to deter. Right. And okay. But I think there's a risk with that as well, which they don't seem to be acknowledging, which is you might create a self-fulfilling prophecy.I mean, frankly, that's what really troubles me about the rhetoric. And so, for example, when Secretary Blinken last week or the before came out and said  Yeah, you know, the, the, the Chinese have given up on the status quo. I, I, I've seen nothing, you know, that would suggest that the political report doesn't suggest. Bill: They have called it a couple of times  so-called status quo.Chris: Well, Fair enough. Yeah. Okay. That's, that's fine. Um, but I think if we look at the reason why they're calling it the so-called status quo, it's because it's so called now because the US has been moving the goalposts on the status quo.Yeah. In terms of erosion of the commitment to the one China policy. And the administration can say all at once, they're not moving the goal post, but they are, I mean, let's just be honest.Bill: Now, and they have moved it more than the Trump administration did, don't you think?Chris: Absolutely. Yeah. Um, you know, no president has said previously we will defend Taiwan  multiple times. Right. You know, um, and things like, uh, you know, Democracy, someone, I mean, this comes back also to the, the framing, right, of one of the risks I think of framing the relationship as democracy versus autocracy is that it puts a very, uh, heavy incentive then for the Biden administration or any future US administration to, you know, quote unquote play the Taiwan card, right, as part of said competition.Whereas if you don't have that framing, I don't think that's necessarily as automatic. Right? In other words, if that's the framing, well Taiwan's a democracy, so we have to lean in. Right? You know? Whereas if it's a more say, you know, straight realist or national interest driven foreign policy, you might not feel that in every instance you've gotta do that,Bill: No, and and I it, that's an interesting point. And I also think too that, um, I really do wonder how much Americans care, right? And, and whether or not we're running the risk of setting something up or setting something in motion that, you know, again, it's easy to be rhetorical about it, but that we're frankly not ready to deal withChris: Well, and another thing that's interesting, right, is that, um, to that point, Some of the administration's actions, you know, that are clearly designed to show toughness, who are they out toughing? You know, in some cases it feels like they're out toughing themselves, right? I mean, obviously the Republicans are watching them and so on and all of that.Um, but you know, interesting, uh, something that came across my thought wave the other day that I hadn't really considered. We're seeing pretty clear indications that a Republican dominated Congress after the midterms may be less enthusiastic about support to Ukraine, we're all assuming that they're gonna be all Taiwan support all the time.Is that a wrong assumption? You know, I mean, in other words, Ukraine's a democracy, right? And yet there's this weird strain in the Trumpist Wing of the Republican party that doesn't wanna spend the money. Right. And would that be the case for Taiwan as well? I don't know, but you know, the point is, I wonder if the boogieman of looking soft is, is sort of in their own heads to some degree.And, and even if it isn't, you know, sometimes you have to lead. Bill: it's not clear the allies are listening. It doesn't sound like the Europeans would be on board withChris: I think very clearly they're not. I mean, you know, we're about to see a very uncomfortable bit of Kabuki theater here, aren't we? In the next couple of days with German Chancellor Sholz going over and, um, you know, if you, uh, read the op-ed he wrote in Politico, you know, it's, it's painful, right? You can see him trying to, uh, Trying to, uh, you know, straddle the fence and, and walk that line.And, and obviously there are deep, deep divisions in his own cabinet, right? You know, over this visit, the foreign minister is publicly criticizing him, you know, and so on. So I think this is another aspect that might be worrisome, which is the approach. You know, my line is always sort of a stool, if it's gonna be stable, needs three legs, right.And on US-China relations, I think that is, you know, making sure our own house is in order. Domestic strengthening, these guys call it, coordinating with allies and partners, certainly. But then there's this sort of talking to the Chinese aspect and through a policy, what I tend to call strategic avoidance, we don't.Talk to them that much. So that leg is missing. So then those other two legs need to be really strong. Right. Um, and on domestic strengthening, Okay. Chips act and so on, that's good stuff. On allies and partners, there seems to be a bit of an approach and I think the chip restrictions highlight this of, look, you're either for us or against us.Right? Whereas I think in, you know, the good old Cold War I, we seem to be able to understand that a West Germany could do certain things for us vis-a-vis the Soviets and certain things they couldn't and we didn't like it and we complained, but we kind of lived with it, right? If we look at these chip restrictions, it appears the administration sort of said, Look, we've been doing this multilateral diplomacy on this thing for a year now, it's not really delivering the goods. The chips for framework is a mess, so let's just get it over with and drag the allies with us, you know? Um, and we'll see what ramifications that will have.Bill: Well on that uplifting note, I, I think I'm outta questions. Is there anything else you'd like to add?Chris: Well, I think, you know, something just to consider is this idea, you know, and maybe this will help us close on a more optimistic note. Xi Jinping is telling us, you know, he's hardening the system, he's, he's doing this fortress economy thing and so on. But he also is telling us, I have a really difficult set of things I'm trying to accomplish in this five years.Right? And that may mean a desire to signal to the us let's stabilize things a bit, not because he's having a change of heart or wants a fundamental rapprochement, so on and so forth. I don't think that's the case, but might he want a bit of room, right? A breathing room. Bill: Buy some time, buy some spaceChris: Yeah, Might he want that? He might. You know, and so I think then a critical question is how does that get sorted out in the context of the negotiations over the meeting in Bali, if it is a longer meeting, I think, you know, so that's encouraging for that. Right. To some degree. I, I, I would say, you know, if we look at what's just happened with the 20th party Congress and we look at what's about to happen, it seems with our midterms here in the United States, Who's the guy who's gonna be more domestically, politically challenged going into this meeting, and therefore have less room to be able to seize that opportunity if it does exist.Exactly. Because I, I think, you know, the, the issue is, The way I've been framing it lately, you know, supposedly our position is the US position is strategic competition and China says, look, that's inappropriate, and we're not gonna sign onto it and forget it.You know, my own view is we kind of have blown past strategic competition where now in what I would call strategic rivalry, I think the chip restrictions, you know, are, are a giant exclamation point, uh, under that, you know, and so on. And my concern is we're kind of rapidly headed toward what I would call strategic enmity.And you know, that all sounds a bit pedantic, but I think that represents three distinct phases of the difficulty and the relationship. You know, strategic enmity is the cold, the old Cold War, what we had with the Soviets, right? So we are competing against them in a brass tax manner across all dimensions. And if it's a policy that, you know, hurts us, but it hurts them, you know, 2% more we do it, you know, kind of thing. I don't think we're there yet. And the meeting offers an opportunity to, you know, arrest the travel from strategic rivalry to strategic enmity. Let's see if there's something there/Bill: And if, and if we don't, if it doesn't arrest it, then I think the US government at least has to do a much better job of explaining to the American people why we're headed in this direction and needs  to do a much better job with the allies cuz because again, what I worry about is we're sort of heading down this path and it doesn't feel like we've really thought it through.You know, there are lots of reasons  be on this path, but there's also needs to be a much more of a comprehensive understanding of the, of the costs and the ramifications and the solutions and have have an actual sort of theory of the case about how we get out the other side of this in a, in a better way.Chris: Yeah, I think that's important. I want to be real, um, fair to the administration. You know, they're certainly more thoughtful and deliberative than their predecessor. Of course, the bar was low, but, um, you know, they, they seem to approach these things in a pretty. Dedicated and careful manner. And I think they really, you know, take, take things like, uh, looking at outbound investment restrictions, you know, my understanding is they have been, you know, seeking a lot of input about unintended consequences and so on. But then you look at something like the chips piece and it just seems to me that those in the administration who had been pushing for, you know, more there for some time, had a quick moment where they basically said, look, this thing's not working with multilaterally, Let's just do it, you know? And then, oh, now we're seeing the second and third and other order consequences of it. And the risk is that we wind up, our goal is to telegraph unity to Beijing and shaping their environment around them as the administration calls it. We might be signaling our disunity, I don't know, with the allies, and obviously that would not be a good thingBill: That's definitely a risk. Well, thanks Chris. It's always great to talk to you and Thank you for listening to the occasional Sinocism podcast. Thank you, Chris.Chris: My pleasure. Sinocism is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit sinocism.com/subscribe

Overview Bill and I met at a writer group - Finish, Polish, Publish - in Cleveland. He has written most of his life, but has had a web development career. Bill talks about his book and working with his daughter. We discuss the group also. Finish, Polish, Publish His Book https://www.amazon.com/Songs-Befuddled-Muse-Divergent-Inspiration-ebook/dp/B09RF78495?crid=14RTRSIBHZEJR&keywords=songs+of+a+befuddled+muse&qid=1659626768&sprefix=songs+of+a+befuddled+muse%2Caps%2C487&sr=8-1&linkCode=li2&tag=discoveredwordsmiths-20&linkId=5cad928c63ffc37fab7733cc84001ded&language=en_US&ref_=as_li_ss_il Favorites https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000SEIFGO?storeType=ebooks&qid=1659627083&sr=8-2&linkCode=li2&tag=discoveredwordsmiths-20&linkId=bd9da9099f08cced27455d91853b1e58&language=en_US&ref_=as_li_ss_il Website https://befuddledmuse.com/ YouTube https://youtu.be/ChcdelVu_Ss Transcript All right, bill. Welcome to today's. Discovered wordsmith. Good to have you on how you doing. I'm doing great. [00:00:25] Bill: It's a pleasure to be here. I've been listening to your podcast and really enjoying them. Oh, thanks. Great. I'm glad. Pretty [00:00:30] Stephen: inspirational. Oh, that was the whole idea. That's what I wanted to get out of it. I hope, and now you're up in the Cleveland area, so we're not too far apart. So you've enjoying the weather today. Oh, definitely. [00:00:41] Bill: Sure, sure. Beats last few days. [00:00:43] Stephen: Yes. I was just gonna say it's a lot nicer today. I got the window open, just a little. Last couple I had to close mine cuz there were trucks going by, so oh yeah. Yeah. That's always a problem, but all right I know you a little bit. We're in one of the same groups in Cleveland, we meet once a month with Dave van horn published Polish repeat or no published Polish. Something I keep getting them confused, publish, polishing, get the damn thing done. Yeah. That's basically it. Yeah. But why don't you tell everybody a little bit about you some of the hobbies and things you like to do in your life other than writing. [00:01:18] Bill: Okay. I'm all born and raised in Cleveland area. Moved away for quite a while. Never expected to come back, came back due to family matters, met my wife. Pretty much stayed. In my spare time there's a few things that I like to do. I like everybody else you have on your podcast. I like to hike, but I also like to kayak a lot. Nice. And more, more just recreationally than going crazy. I have a daughter who's a sea kayaker trains in sea. Kay. I don't do that. Quite to that level. The other kind of interesting thing I do is I've been a photographer for a lot of years. Slipped into this weird little niche of stereo photography. Oh, cool. So I'm doing primarily stereo stills. I belong to local group national group as part of a national group. And it's a lot of fun. It's harder than regular. Photography cuz you have two cameras that are always not going off at the same time. And two, two ways for things to go wrong, at least every time. I ha one of my daughters is an artist. In fact will talk about her when we get into the meat of things. But we do painting parties. That's kind of part of the way we've paid her way through Cleveland Institute of. Wow. So we do a lot of painting parties. My wife is the MC I'm the photographer. And they're just a blast to do. We do 'em on the kind of the valley scene railroad among other places, as well as the people's homes and clubs. Oh, cool. We always say, if you can paint, if you can paint a picture on a moving train, you can do it anywhere. [00:02:56] Stephen: And my stuff normally looks like it was painted on a moving train. So side fit right in . It, it actually improves a little bit with a couple glasses of wine, so [00:03:04] Bill: That's another one of our famous things the more wine you drink, the better [00:03:07] Stephen: you're painting. Yeah.

Let's sit and take a sip from a Royal Cup of value with Bill Smith III in this latest edition of The Disruptive Successor show. Jonathan Goldhill welcomes Bill and they will be unpacking the story of Royal Cup's humble beginnings, its succession through generations, and each generation's disruptive strategies that evolved the company from a regional to a national scale.HIGHLIGHTSRoyal Cup Coffee and TeaFrom grocery shelves to office coffee spacesFrom grandfather to father to BillBill's Immersion at a young ageGenerational Transitions In the FamilyInternal Growth by promoting withinQUOTESBill: “Royal cup today is a national roaster and distributor of fine coffees and teas, literally across the country, primarily to restaurants, hotels, resorts, as well as offices.Bill: “We invested heavily in the capability and capacity of our campus, and most importantly, made a commitment to a strategic rebranding of our products.”Bill: “It was important for me as a leader in the third generation of the family, to really immerse myself into the business in all aspects of the business.”Bill: “It wasn't always a wonderful ride, because family members have strong opinions. Sure. And so we had to figure out how to balance that.”Bill: “I'm very proud of the fact that we as a family figured out the best way to establish a national platform for that nonfamily executive team to take charge and take the company to its next phase of growth.”Connect with Bill and learn more about his work using the links below: Double Iron Consulting LinkedInDouble Iron Consulting WebsiteIf you enjoyed today's episode, please subscribe, review and share with a friend who would benefit from the message. If you're interested in picking up a copy of Jonathan Goldhill's book, Disruptive Successor, go to the website at www.DisruptiveSuccessor.com.

In this episode of Quah (Q & A), Sal, Adam & Justin coach four Pump Heads via Zoom. Mind Pump Fit Tip: Food quality matters most in this order: Fats, proteins, and then carbohydrates. (4:17) How the guys are switching up their Butcher Boxes. (15:09) Getting intense with Justin Andrews. (18:35) The NFL is aiming to disrupt the streaming wars. (22:00) Mind Pump's special talents. (26:19) How Ned's Mello has dramatically helped Adam's magnesium deficiency. (30:52) Mind Pump Debates: Is sexual orientation malleable through culture and environment? Or is it genetic? (36:13) Disney is in a pickle over its CEO's latest comments. (41:13) Why Adam is a new fan of Chris Distefano. (48:44) The guys rate Britney Spears' latest workout. (55:05) #ListenerLive question #1 - What are some of the best exercises to strengthen hands and wrists? (58:32) #ListenerLive question #2 - Any tips or strategies going into “peak week”? (1:07:15) #ListenerLive question #3 - Advice on breaking through a plateau? (1:20:52) #ListenerLive question #4 - How would you structure a fitness routine for troubled middle school kids? (1:31:05) Related Links/Products Mentioned Ask a question to Mind Pump, live! Email: live@mindpumpmedia.com Priming Kit – Mind Pump Store April Promotion: Get MAPS Anywhere, MAPS Prime and Prime Pro all for $99.99! Visit Butcher Box for this month's exclusive Mind Pump offer! NFL considers creating a streaming service of its own – The Athletic Joseph Pujol, World Famous Farter Mind Pump #1780: Why Blood Tests Are Overrated With Dr. Stephen Cabral Visit NED for an exclusive offer for Mind Pump listeners! LGBT Identification in U.S. Ticks Up to 7.1% New Study Finds Genetics Influence LGBTQ Sexuality, But Still No 'Gay Gene' Former Disney CEO Iger On Opposing Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' Bill: It's Not 'Political' Visit Organifi for the exclusive offer for Mind Pump listeners! **Promo code “MINDPUMP” at checkout** MAPS O.C.R. MAPS Fitness Anabolic Mind Pump #1630: Ten Ways To Break Through A Plateau How to Undulate Your Calories for Faster Weight Loss & an Improved Metabolism – Mind Pump TV MAPS Fitness Performance MAPS Strong HANDGRIP DYNAMOMETER – Mind Pump Store Mind Pump Podcast – YouTube Mind Pump Free Resources People Mentioned Dr. Stephen Cabral (@stephencabral)  Instagram Chris Distefano (@chrisdcomedy)  Instagram Britney Spears (@britneyspears)  Instagram

@Matheiu & @maxjacobson - Genetic Memory / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@ peshkamusic - Trip Activity M / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

Orbit - Vox Planet Mixing / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

Ilya @yansima - Danaza / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@maayan Nidam featuring @life-on-planets - Taking the night / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@odette-official - Free Zone / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@nilsweimann - Atmorise / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

Pîrvu - Deep Into The Dust / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@ramonayacef, @bill_it - Physical Interface / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

Shato - Obelisk [Dub Muzik] / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@unissonro - RandOhm / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@Valeria-Croft - Alli (original mix) / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@ramonayacef, @bill_it - Physical Interface (@enzo-16 remix) / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

@lenzyak-yaroslav - Inabada / PEACE IN UKRAINE VA - vol I As music is a universal language that connects cultures beyond borders and we are an independent platform focused on underground electronic music and arts, at this time we stand for peace, so we curated a Various Artists compilation to raise money to help Ukrainian artists during these hard times. A lot of producers from many countries responded to our initiative, swiftly building on an archive that incorporates various shades and styles of electronic music, from laid-back and serene soundscapes to driving rhythms and textures. The first volume features 15 tracks signed by Ilya Yansima, Maayan Nidam feat. Life on planets, Matheiu & Max Jacobson, Nils Weimann, Odette, Orbit, Paul K, Peshka, Pîrvu, Ramona Yacef & Bill It, Shato, Unisson, Valeria Croft and Yaroslav Lenzyak. All revenues collected from the sales will be directed to the bank accounts of the Ukrainian artists with whom we managed to get in touch, such as Animated Sounds, Peshka, Komponente, Yansima, Ilya Cheise, Vlad Barocco, Orbit as well as the initiative launched by Antipina Anna and Silat Beksi. Grab your copy from Bandcamp.

Israel is abandoning their plan to extend their National Park borders to include the Mount of Olives. Mario - Is Vladimir Putin justified in invading the Ukraine? Bill - It seems like men are being left out of the pro-life movement. Chicago Mother recognizes son as a robbery suspect and turns him into police. Luba - The Ukraine was established in 890. This is long before Russia was a major power. Eric - comment on the difference between music then and music now. Music of today has more calls for violence and sexuality than in the past. Patricia - Invited to a baby shower for a lesbian couple who are having a kid via IVF. needs some advice on how to approach it. Ophelia - It is so easy to morally justify aggression when it comes to invasions.

Thank you for tuning in for another episode of Life's Best Medicine. Mayor Bill Wells was first elected to the El Cajon City Council in 2008 and then once again in 2012. He was selected by his fellow Council members to serve as the Mayor Pro Tem during 2009 and 2013. In October of 2013, the Mayor of El Cajon resigned and Wells was appointed to serve out the rest of that term as Mayor. He was then elected as Mayor of El Cajon in November of 2014. In 2013, Mayor Wells was awarded the San Diego County Republican Party Elected Official of the Year. He has been a mental health professional, working mostly with the severely mentally ill, in both clinical and administrative roles. Additionally, Mayor Wells teaches classes at a local college. In this interview, Brian and Bill discuss the recently imposed state-wide mask mandates in California, why Mayor Wells is not enforcing the mask mandate in his city of El Cajon, what it is like being openly Christian in political office, the importance of weighing the evidence for yourself and making your own health decisions, and the harm of surrendering common sense and reason to party ideology. Life's Best Medicine According to Bill: “It is knowing who I am. Who I am is based on decisions I've made all throughout my life. Living a Christian life has been a great framework for having a happy life. Putting other peoples' feelings ahead of my own; the more I do that the happier I am.” Thank you for listening. Have a blessed day and stay healthy!   Links:   Mayor Bill Wells: Email: bwells@elcajon.gov Lockdowns Natural Immunity Fentanyl Dr. Brian Lenzkes:  Website Low Carb MD Podcast   Simply Snackin'

Episode Notes:Today's guest is Chen Long, co-founder and partner of Plenum, a research firm covering Chinese economy and politics. Prior to that, he was a China economist at Gavekal Dragonomics. Chen Long is a Beijinger, and graduated from Peking University. Welcome to the podcast. It's great to have you.2:20 - I think the economy is a little bit like ice and fire, for now. There are certain areas certainly doing pretty poorly. Of course, everyone always talking about the property market, Evergrande, and basically every couple weeks we see a property developer default… 6:00 on the power generation problems - usually December is a peak of Chinese electricity consumption. I'm not sure the current supply of coal is not ... I mean, it's better than a month ago, but they probably have to do a little bit more. So I think it's still too early to say that we have totally overcome the end of the shortage.13:07 on whether this time is different with the real estate market - a year after Beijing and many local governments introduced restrictive policies, finally, we had three months in a row of property sales volume falling by double digits, on a year on year basis. But this is just three months, right? If you look at the previous cycles, especially 2015, 16, we could have the down cycle for 15 months. But this is just three, right? So Beijing has not blinked yet, because it's only three months.16:30 on Evergrande - I think there was a little bit of overreaction, especially when you see headlines linking Evergrande to Lehman Brothers, and this sort of thing. And I have to say that this is at least the third time I hear a Chinese Lehman moment in the last ten years.35:50 on the 6th Plenum and likely historical resolution - The previous ones were all about resolutions on certain questions of the party's history. Right? And this one is not uncertain questions. There is no question. It is resolution on the party's accomplishments over the last 100 years, and the lessons. So I guess it's a big, big summary about what he has done. And, of course, this one I think will cement him as the core, right? And we have to follow whatever he thinks we should do soLinks: The Plenum website. Transcript:Bill:Hi everyone. Today's guest is Chen Long, co-founder and partner of Plenum, a research firm covering Chinese economy and politics. Prior to that, he was a China economist at Gavekal Dragonomics. Chen Long is a Beijinger, and graduated from Peking University. Welcome to the podcast. It's great to have you.Chen:Thank you, Bill. It's my honor to be your third guest.Bill:Oh, well, third time is the charm, I hope. And I hope things are well. And I hope things are well in Beijing. I have to say, I very much miss this time of year in Beijing. There is something really special about autumn in Beijing.Bill:So, to kick off, today, I think we want to talk about the state of economy, and various themes related to that, including common prosperity, and real estate, the sixth plenum that's coming up. But, to start out, could you just give a brief intro about yourself, and more specifically what Plenum does?Bill:Just for listeners, it's a high end research service. The website is at Plenum.ai. And it's really terrific. It's one of my top most favorite research services on China now. They're really sharp on economy and politics.Chen:Yeah. Thank you, Bill. I think, Bill, you have done basically all the marketing I need to do. So we are a pretty young firm. I mean, we were founded two years ago, almost exactly two years ago. And that's when we first started to publish reports. And we write on Chinese economy, policies, politics, geopolitics, other stuff. And we serve institutional clients. Some are financial institutions, some are non-financial corporations.Chen:And I think where we are a little bit different from others, is the team is basically entirely Chinese nationals. But, of course, we'll come from different backgrounds. A lot of people work in the US for many years. And, right now, I'm based in Beijing. Yeah.Bill:And I first came across your work, I think, because you were working with Arthur Kroger, over at Gavekal DragonomicsChen:Yes. I was at Gavekal for almost six years. Yeah.Bill:Right. And I think that's where I first started reading your work. So, anyway, it's great to have you. I've always been a big fan. So-Chen:Yeah. Thank you, Bill.Bill:From a top level, could you just give us your view on what's going on in the economy in China, and where things are?Chen:Yeah. I think the economy is a little bit like ice and fire, for now. There are certain areas certainly doing pretty poorly. Of course, everyone always talking about the property market, Evergrande, and basically every couple weeks we see a property developer default.Chen:But, on the other hand, you also see this energy crunch, which actually was because energy demand was really strong, right? And industrial demand was strong. And then the grid and then the power plants could not meet up with that demand. So you basically have one big sector of economy, and actually several big sectors, apart from the real estate, you have the automobile market actually shrinking this year, general consumption were pretty mediocre, right? Because whenever there's a COVID cluster, you have local governments will restrict travel, or implement some sort of lockdown for two or four weeks. So consumption will be affected.Chen:But, on the other hand, the export is really strong, right? We're probably seeing the best export performance since 2011. That's the best we have in a decade. And there's no sign that this is putting off. A lot of people have said, "No, this is just temporary. Not going to be sustainable." I've been hearing that argument since a year ago. And, right now, it's still really hot. So that's why you have certain sectors ... So that's a little bit special, I think, compared with any time in the last decade. Yeah.Bill:And, certainly, specifically around the energy challenges, you said it was really because demand was so high. How quickly do you think that the ... There have been a whole flurry of measures from the NDRC, and other government bodies, about making sure that the coal supply increases, and cracking down on price speculation.Bill:And, I mean, how quickly do you think that these regulatory actions are going to solve the problem? And, the reforming or the changing in the price mechanism, is that enough to make the power generators actually make money now, so they're more willing to produce energy? Or are we still going to be looking at probably fits and starts over the next few months?Chen:Yeah. I think a lot of the power plants may not be losing money at this point. The government basically did several things at the same time. One, they told all the coal miners just to increase supply as much as you can. And, two, they told the coal miners also to restrict the prices. Basically, they set a cap. And there's a debate on what exactly is the cap, because there are several different versions of the cap.Chen:But whatever version you believe in, there's a cap. And the cap is a lot lower than the market price we had two weeks ago. That's why we had this Zhengzhou thermal coal future price, basically halve in two weeks. And they also allow the power plants to raise the electricity prices by up to 20%, and more if the users are high energy intensity sectors.Chen:So there are flurry of changes happen just over the last months or so. And I think the coal supply has probably improved quite a bit. And we are hearing a lot less stories on companies running ... They face blackouts, or they were just told in very short notice that they have to cut production. We hear a lot less that sort of story. But that still exists, it's just a lot less than a month ago, or at the end of September.Chen:But with this winter heating season coming again, usually December is a peak of Chinese electricity consumption. I'm not sure the current supply of coal is not ... I mean, it's better than a month ago, but they probably have to do a little bit more. So I think it's still too early to say that we have totally overcome the end of the shortage.Bill:Thanks. I mean, it is interesting how it really seemed to have caught a lot of people by surprise. I think both policy makers, but also investors. It's just interesting how that happened, and how so many people seemed to not understand what was going on, including myself.Chen:Yeah. Because, for 20 years maybe, people talk about China has over capacity in IPP, this is actually the power plants. China invested too much in some coal power plants. And I think, at one point, like 2015 or 2016, when over capacity got really serious. And then that was one of the sectors that local and others had to work very hard to cut capacity.Chen:So we never really thought for a second that China would have electricity shortage, because there's always huge supply, maybe oversupply. But I think a lot of things changed since the beginning of the pandemic. The services sector used to be growing a lot faster. But, so far, it's underperforming, while the industrial sector, which were slowing for many years, has suddenly started to outperform.Chen:So, basically, since the second quarter of last year, we have a Chinese economy moving further away from a service driven economy, to a more industrial driven economy. So that's a completely reversal of the trend since 2010, or even 2005.Bill:That's also a reversal of what a lot of economists have recommended China do, right?Chen:Yeah. I mean, people say, "No, yeah, China should become more service driven, and less industrial driven. And also, of course, more consumption driven, less investment driven." But I would say this whole rebalancing theme has somewhat reversed over the last year or so.Chen:And this just, again, has to do with this fire and ice, as I mentioned earlier. So this is just one sector doing really well, it's industrials. And the manufacturing facilities are just all pretty at fully capacity, demand from the rest of the world is really strong. And while the domestic consumption is very mediocre. And service sector, of course, the people just go out a little bit less than they were, in 2019 or earlier.Chen:So basically the economy itself is consuming much more electricity than it used to be, that means two years ago. So, suddenly, we have this issue.Bill:Interesting. And just on that stronger industrial, weaker consumption service sector, is that by design? Is that something that the policy makers want? Or is this just more of an outgrowth of the pandemic changing global dynamics, potentially consumer spending dropping because of concerns about consumer debt, for example? I mean, what's driving that?Chen:I don't think it's intended or planned, or even foreseen by Beijing, by the leadership, I think when China started to get out of the pandemic, in April or May 2020, I mean, there was a real fear, because the rest of the world is experiencing the worst of the pandemic. So the worry, at the time, was China is going to face a demand collapse from the rest of the world. So you got a double whammy economic crisis. So just get out from the domestic demand collapse, you're going to see an external demand collapse.Chen:But somehow that external demand collapse didn't really happen, or just basically happened for one month or so. And turned out to be that the export was really strong. And people in Beijing could hardly believe that. And people say, "Oh, this is just temporary. Because this supply chain was disrupted. But maybe when the things get better next year, the demand will go away. And somebody might has to do with this stimulus checks, given by US government, European governments. Once that effect expires, the demand will go away."Chen:But, so far, it still hasn't gone away. And with Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe, Latin America, lot of developing manufacture hubs in trouble, China basically became the only manufacture hub that can still maintain enough supplies. So I think that really caught a lot of people, including the Chinese government, by a big surprise.Bill:No, it is. It is really interesting. And so as you talk about the economy, I think you called it fire and ice, I mean, one area that seems a bit icy is real estate. And, obviously, Evergrande's been in the news. But there are plenty of real estate developers that have violated the three red lines, or seem to be in various states of default or near default on some of their debt.Bill:One thing that's been interesting is we've seen real estate stresses that are over the last 15 years or so. Every few years, it seems like there's a cycle, and it's usually policy driven. Because the policy makers want to crack down on real estate speculation and unproductive investment. But then when things start getting bad, and stressed, and companies start having problems, and prices maybe start looking like they're going to drop in some places, the policy makers always blink and pull back, and basically find ways to loosen things up, and let the market return.Bill:It seems like, this time, they've been much more disciplined, I think surprising a lot of people, in terms of being willing to ride out a lot more pain around the real estate sector. Is that a fair assessment? And, if it is, why is that? And if it's not, how do you see what's going on?Chen:Yeah. I tend to believe that this time is not that much different from previous episodes. I mean, I know there's the argument there, saying, "Xi really wants to reduce the share of the real estate in the economy, and wants to curb housing prices." But I don't think this is new. We have this episode, like you just mentioned, multiple times in the last 15 years. Basically every three years, we have a property cycle, from trough to peak to trough. Right? And the Chinese government, in both central and local, that will change policies very, very quickly.Chen:And this time is no different, right? Because you talk about the three red lines, the three red lines really were just introduced a year ago, last August. Right? And, well, the background of that was the PBOC, along with other policy makers, the property market recovered too quickly, and think they're doing too well. And housing prices in cities, especially big cities like Shenzhen or Shanghai, were rising too fast. And that was a little bit unanticipated. So they said, "No, we have to restrict the area, this kind of bull run."Chen:And now a year after Beijing and many local governments introduced restrictive policies, finally, we had three months in a row of property sales volume falling by double digits, on a year on year basis. But this is just three months, right? If you look at the previous cycles, especially 2015, 16, we could have the down cycle for 15 months. But this is just three, right? So Beijing has not blinked yet, because it's only three months. Right?Chen:And we are seeing a little bit some early signs, like PBOC two weeks ago said, "Oh, some banks misunderstood our intention, when we told them to restrict the lending. And some of the normal projects would not be restricted," blah, blah, blah. And then I think today, or yesterday, one of the state-owned media, Economic Daily again published article about these housing regulations. So I think we're seeing some signs that those things are easing a little bit. So it's not like they are just letting the market die.Bill:Right. Well, and I mean, there are real risks. I mean, there are real risks around ... I mean, I owned property in China for a while, and certainly had lots of friends, including some real estate developers, and people with lots of ... I mean, there was just this sense that, in these previous cycles, they would go until prices started dropping, and there was a risk of people getting really pissed off because they were losing money again.Bill:And so is that one of the things ... I mean, again, it doesn't seem like the prices have dropped that much yet in most places. Is that one of the things to look for, where if we start seeing housing prices actually go negative, is that one of the triggers that makes the government maybe start loosening faster, just because they're worried about how ... I mean, they have their constituency, and people who own property. They do care what they think, right?Chen:Yeah. That's certainly one thing they care about. And I think another thing they care about is the impact on economy, like the GDP, right? The housing and the real sector as a whole, if you found all the upstream industries all together, it'd account for probably one third of Chinese economy. Right? So if you kill the real estate sector, basically you kill the economy. And they can't do that. That's suicide.Bill:No. It's still a quarter of the economy. Right? So somewhere around there, if you add up all the various-Chen:Yeah. Depending on how you estimate, anywhere between 20% to a third, that's kind of the estimation. Yeah.Bill:So, Evergrande, there was a massive freak out over Evergrande. And I think it's maybe even a month ago, or a little longer. Did people overreact to what's going on at Evergrande. And what is going on there? And how do you think it gets resolved?Chen:Yeah. I think it has a little bit of sense that people were a little bit overreacting. I got called by Al Jazeera twice in two days, saying, "We need you to comment on Evergrande." I was like, "Come on, guys. You guys, yeah, are very respectful media TV, but you don't need to tell your audience in Qatar what's going on in Evergrande, in two days in a row. And one of that is a Sunday."Chen:So I was like, "Oh, this is really everywhere. Right? It's not just Bloomberg or Wall Street Journal. This has gone to non-financial media as well." And that was basically the main theme in the last week, or last two weeks of September. Right? So I think there was a little bit of overreaction, especially when you see headlines linking Evergrande to Lehman Brothers, and this sort of thing. And I have to say that this is at least the third time I hear a Chinese Lehman moment in the last ten years.Bill:I was just going to say, is the default analogy when ... Oh my God, China's Lehman moment. And we saw it. I remember it was, I think, 2013, when the interbank market basically went crazy, the end of Q2, early Q3. And I forget the other one. But, no, every time I see someone say, "China's Lehman market," basically, just to be honest, I just tune it out. Because it doesn't fit. And it never has. And if China has a big problem like Lehman Brothers, it won't be like Lehman brothers. It'll be something else, is my view.Chen:Yes, totally. And I don't know that even if Lehman Brothers exist today. I mean, if the same thing happens today, with the current federal reserve, with the current Fed chairman, that this will not have happened. Because they would just do QE.Bill:So what does happen with Evergrande? I mean, how does this thing get resolved?Chen:Evergrande, on the surface, just a very large company, over leveraged, and had a liquidity problem, maybe has solvency problem. We don't really know how much of its assets is real, or how much liability is real. Maybe its liability is a lot more than is stated. It says it has 2 trillion RMB liability, but if it has 2.5 trillion, then the company is insolvent, right? So we don't really know.Chen:And the thing is, we just start to see that this company started to have funding problem, since PBOC introduced the three red lines, because it failed in all the three. Banks were afraid of giving it money, and couldn't refinance in the bank market either. And the trust company, and the trust world that everyone saw, started to have problems. So, basically, with leverage at that size, you have to keep borrowing. To Evergrande, they're reducing the debt. And once that snowball stops moving, then basically you collapse, right? So I guess that's basically what it faced.Chen:And how we're going to resolve it, I think, in the best case scenario, that a lot of the estate projects will just ... First, they have to get it finished. And some of the land, or some other projects be sold to other developers. And Evergrande will downsize to a much smaller developer, and then will start to exist.Chen:And that's quite similar to what Wanda did. Wanda was a much bigger property developer five years ago. But then since has sold a lot of the projects, both in China and overseas. And, basically, right now, it's like a property management company, and doesn't have a lot of power assets. So that's what Wang Jianlin did to save himself, basically, and his company.Chen:So maybe, on Evergrande, if you're rational, you think that's a good scenario. But I think Hui Ka Yan doesn't want to give up. I think that he is betting on another big easing from Beijing. Right? Because he has been in this, I would say, in the live or die moment, at least twice in the last 15 years. Right? The first time I heard about Evergrande was 2007, right? I saw news that Hui Ka Yen was having drinks with the Hong Kong tycoons, and playing mahjong together. And, finally, he received a lot of money from the Hong Kong tycoons. And then that saved him in 2008, when the company was on the edge of collapse.Chen:And the second time was 2015. The company was again on the edge of collapse. And then it bet on a big easing from Beijing, and then property market turned around. It became much bigger. And I think, this time, Hui Ka Yen doesn't want give up. But he did say two weeks ago that he wants to move further from property developing, wants to become electricity car company. God knows whether he can succeed or not, but he's not going to just give up.Bill:Right. Right. No, he's the kind of ... I mean, that's why he's been so successful, and why he's been able to pull this off, right? I mean, he's just going to go until he can't go anymore. And it will be-Chen:Yeah, yeah. I think that the government ... Yeah. Sorry.Bill:No, go ahead. Go ahead, please.Chen:Yeah. I think from the government's perspective, the government would just want Evergrande to downsize, finish the existing projects, pay off your debt. It becomes a smaller company. And then your risk also is a lot smaller. But I'm not sure that's something that Hui Ka Yen has decided to do. Because then he will become a much less relevant person. Right?Bill:Right. And the government does also seem concerned now about the risks of defaults in the overseas debt markets. Right? I mean, it seems like this is the constant tension, right? They want introduce some discipline, and they want to avoid moral hazard, but they can't have a bunch of offshore bonds default in a short period of time. Right? Because then that potentially really screws up the market for them for a while, doesn't it?Chen:Yeah. That's actually an interesting point. Because when people ask me about Evergrande like a month and a half ago, and I was basically saying, "I think the dollar bond market matters the least for Beijing." Right? Because you have a different kind of creditors of Evergrande, right? You have the home buyers, who've paid, but they haven't received the houses. And then you have the construction firms and their workers. And you have the domestic banks, the domestic WMP holders, domestic trust companies. And they all matter a great deal for the Chinese financial system. And the last one is a hedge fund or someone who bought a bond in Hong Kong. But all of a sudden, they had a meeting a week ago, saying, "Hey, guys, we have to have a little bit discipline. Don't just run away. And you have to also take care of your offshore debt." I still haven't figured out why, what changed in their thinking. Maybe this is just a way to calm down the Wall Street. But why did they suddenly feel they have to calm down the Wall Street, six weeks after the crisis happened? I haven't figured out.Chen:My hypothesis is maybe some Wall Street bosses put some pressure on Chinese leadership. I did notice that a lot of the big bankers, and the big American company, and the senior executives had a video conference with Wang Qishan two or three weeks ago, in the name of the Xinhua advisory board.Bill:Right. Right, right, right. That's interesting. And I have to say, I find it very, very strange that the US Secretary of State, Blinken, brought up Evergrande a couple weeks ago, which he made some comment about hoping the Chinese manage ... I forget exactly, but it just-Chen:Well, he was asked by CNN, or someone. Yeah, he was asked.Bill:Oh, was it a response? He was asked? Okay. It just seemed like it was very out of his lane, in terms of what the Secretary of State would talk about. So-Chen:Yeah. He basically said, "People have to act responsibly."Bill:Interesting. I mean, I think it is interesting though. It definitely does seem to be a shift. So, speaking of shifts, I know we only have a few more minutes, but I'd love to get your thoughts on ... Again, this is something lots of people ... Outside of China, I know we're scratching their heads, but certainly folks I've talked to inside China too, are trying to really get their hands around, what does common prosperity mean? And, really, what changes, what policy direction are we really going to see around common prosperity? And there was that strange WeChat post that was from a very sort of Neo-Maoist-Chen:Li GuangmanBill:Yeah, yeah, the very Neo-Maoist blogger, that was picked up over the weekend by the online properties of Xinhua big state media properties, which caused a lot of consternation outside China, but I think inside China as well. And so it seems like the messaging is a little bit mixed, and there's obviously a lot of politics involved. But what do you see, or what's your guys' view, the point of view on what common prosperity means going forward?Chen:Well, we tend to think that common prosperity is next step after President Xi completed the poverty alleviation campaign, right? So after poverty alleviation, in theory, China should have no absolutely poorer people, right? Nobody's living in poverty anymore. And then what's the next step, right? That's not the end. Right? You get out of poverty, but you should get richer, and you have a better life.Chen:So I think that's something that he came up with after that, that we want everyone to have a more decent lifestyle. And, of course, he chose Zhejiang province, a province he spent five years as party secretary to be this pilot program, or pilot area for common prosperity. And the thing about Zhejiang was ... The thing Zhejiang published was rather, I would say, a standard, right? It basically said, "No, we want to increase the household time by one percentage point, or increase the GDP by certain percentage point. And then the equality among different cities should be restricted within a ratio, and people should be able to find the jobs very easily," blah, blah. So a lot like that.Chen:So it's still very pro growth, the Zhejiang plan. But we all know the common prosperity is not only about growth, it's also about redistribution, which is something Zhejiang did not mention very much in his own report, which is understandable. Because that requires tax policy changes that Zhejiang has no say. So Beijing has to decide what kind of tax, what you have to introduce, right? People talk about this property tax, and more pilot programs for property taxes. And then we talk about the consumption taxes. So this kind of stuff, Zhejiang has no say, right? So Beijing has to decide what exactly they're going to do with all these taxes.Chen:So there's certainly an element also about redistribution, restricting certain super rich, and especially those who got rich without behaving, how to say, legally, or you operate in gray area. For many years, there was no law or no regulation. You got rich, but maybe you broke the law. Right? So if you got rich through that channel, then maybe you have to rethink a little bit. Yeah. Or at least you have to change your model completely, because that's no longer tolerated. Right? Because the President did say, "We encourage everyone to work very hard to get rich. And that's great. But we also want to restrict people from getting rich using dodgy channels."Bill:Right. And I think that's what has certainly freaked out a fair number of people. Right? Because it's always unclear what the definition of dodgy or not legal actually is, and how far back they might go. And, that, I think also ties a bit into ... I know you guys have written a fair amount about all these various regulatory actions, and specifically around anti-monopoly policies and regulatory decisions, and also the changing approach to internet platform regulation.Bill:Are we in a new normal, when it comes to regulation? I talk to some people who think this is all passed, and it's going to get better again. But, to my perspective, it really feels like we're in a new era of this kind of stuff. And so, the big internet companies, their businesses are still good, but they're never going to be the same. And it feels like, their costs, they're going to have a lot higher cost base, because they're not going to be able to exploit workers and customers, like the way they used to be able to.Chen:Yeah. I think the compliance cost will certainly be a lot higher than before. And these regulations have passed. And they will stay here. They'll not go away. They'll not be rolled back. So I don't think there's anything like the end of the regulation, or the end of the regulatory competitor. There will be no end.Chen:But I do think maybe the peak is behind us. Think about the largest internet companies in China, Alibaba and Meituan were already punished for antitrust. And the Tencent was not directly affected by the trust, but the gaming thing was also mentioned, and a lot of other guys also name checked, like ByteDance, or Pinduoduo, they were also a little bit worried. So it is hard to say who will be bigger than Alibaba, who will be a bigger victim than Alibaba, it's very hard to ... Unless Tencent suddenly runs into a big trouble. But nobody else is bigger than Alibaba in the Chinese internet domain.Chen:So I guess, after these campaigns, maybe since we settled down a little bit, it will not be over, but we're likely to suddenly see another company find 18 billion RB immediately, or another large fintech company saying, "You have to dissolve, or you have to be separated into different arms." Nobody else is really as big as Ant Right? So I guess maybe we have passed a peak.Chen:And especially, this year, again, I think there's something different about this year, is since the very beginning, Xi made it very clear that this is a year that we don't have to worry very much about economic growth, because it's very easy. Right? They said the growth is targeted at 6% intentionally, which is a target they're going to reach anyway. Right? So, basically, they can do a lot of other things, like structural reforms, and some things they wanted to do in the past, but didn't have the time or the capacity. But, finally, this year, you can spend all your efforts in these things.Chen:But next year will be different again. But next year, actually, we'll go back to the normal China, that you have to be worried about growth target, right? Where is Beijing going to set the growth target? People are debating. I think it's still being something like five and a half percent. And I definitely don't think it'll be lower than 5%. And given the current trajectory, they have to change policy quite a bit to reach either target, especially…Bill:So you're saying, if they decide the target for next year is 5%, they'd have to ease up on some things for next year?Chen:Yeah. I think, five, there is a little bit. And if five and a half, they have to ease quite a lot. And that means you have to be a little bit nicer to companies in general. Right? So, last year in 2020, Xi had several symposiums with various people, and at least two with large companies, right? One, there was a foreign company, the other was all Chinese private firms.Chen:But, this year, at least on the record, I haven't seen any of these kind of symposiums with companies. Right? So he only does that when he's worried about the corporate sector. And, this year, he's not worried, apparently. But, next year, if he's worried again, he could come up, and then they'll have a conversation with these guys in person. And if he does that, then the crackdowns will be a lot softer, at least. Right?Bill:Interesting. So last question, I know you got to go, is what do you think we're going to see out of the sixth plenum, that investors and others should really be paying attention to, that starts ... I guess it starts on Monday and runs through, I think, Thursday next week, right?Chen:Yeah. Yeah. Well, the sixth plenum is all about one thing, right? It's this resolution about the accomplishments of the party in the last one, two years. Right? And I think the previous two resolutions, we had one in 1945, another in 1981, right? Maybe the 1981 one is more relevant, because of course that's more recent, and that was done by Deng Xiaoping. And, without the second, we wouldn't have known there would be another resolution. Right?Chen:But I think this time it's quite different. Because both in the first resolution, basically written by and approved by Chairman Mao, and the second one basically drafted and finally approved by Deng and Chen Yun and other old comrades. But they had to fight with a different ideology. Right?Chen:So in the first resolution, Chairman Mao was basically saying that the party made a lot of mistakes in the 1930s. Right? And ended up then with the Long March. And then we had the Zunyi conference. And then I had to be this poor core. And then the party was saved. Right? So there was a real fight between Mao and a lot of other guys, from Wang Ming and others. So he used that resolution to cement what happened in the party over the past 20 years or so, which was right and which was wrong. So that was basically that resolution was all about.Chen:And the 1981 resolution was similar. Right? So this old comrades had to ... They felt they had to come with something to summarize what happened since 1949, what was right, what was wrong? Where did chairman Mao did right? And where did he did wrong? And what we should do next? Right? So there was a lot of that. And also of course Hua Guofeng at the time was still relevant. Right? So he had to make sure that this 两个凡是, that whatever Mao said, we had to follow. Right? This is...Bill:Yeah, the two whateversChen:Yes. Yeah. So he had to crack that. So, in both occasions, there were clear things they had to correct. But, this time, I really don't think there's a clear thing that President Xi has to correct. Because no one is really arguing something else. And I think they usually talk about their mistakes, or some problems the party had since 1981. Maybe the biggest thing was what happened in the late '80s. Right?Chen:But since 1992, when Deng did this sudden speech, and everything was basically all about the reform, and open up, blah, blah. Of course, we had a little bit of chaos during the 18th party Congress, Bo Xilai and all these guys. But that, I think, was so minor, if you compare all the other accidents the party had over the last 100 years, right? Maybe it's only relevant in the last 40 years. So I think this all ...Chen:And also the name was a little bit different, right? The previous ones were all about resolutions on certain questions of the party's history. Right? And this one is not uncertain questions. There is no question. It is resolution on the party's accomplishments over the last 100 years, and the lessons. So I guess it's a big, big summary about what he has done. And, of course, this one I think will cement him as the core, right? And we have to follow whatever he thinks we should do so, and that's something definitely right.Bill:That's an interesting point, about if it's not actually about certain questions. And probably, certainly, if people want to ahead of this, I think reading that document ... I think it came out in August. It was basically a long piece about the party's accomplishments. I'm guessing that there'll be a lot in this resolution that is very similar to that language.Chen:Yeah, yeah.Bill:Right? I mean, it seems like it's a draft almost. And, really, like you said, it's not about settling a fight that's been going on, so much as more forward working. But so what does that mean? I mean, I assume this will tie into common prosperity. And I guess, this plenum, it really is going to be about this. There's probably nothing from a policy perspective that's going to affect the economy, or how investors should look at China in the near term, right?Chen:Yeah. I guess not that much in the near term. Well, of course, this one will set a stage for next year, where the big thing will happen. So the 20th party Congress, will get them to say, "No, we're going to follow this revolution, and then do whatever we should do in the next few years." Right.Bill:Great. Well, hey, I really appreciate your time. I think really want to thank you for being one of the first guest of Cynicism. And I will put a link to the Plenum website in the show notes. And I highly recommend anyone who is a financial market professional in China, you should go sign up for trial. Like I said, these guys, Chen Long and his team, and the Plenum research product is really quite terrific. So thanks again for your time. And I hope everything stays safe in Beijing. We see lots of headlines about COVID in Beijing right now. But I-Chen:Yeah, it is absolutely safe. If I go out, I may not be able to come back. So it's absolutely safe to stay here.Bill:Right. So you're probably not leaving Beijing until February, right? I mean, is it possible that you really can't leave before the Olympics?Chen:I think I can. I think, after next week, things may be a little bit relaxed. I think it's just partly because of next week, the sixth plenum.Bill:The plenum.Chen:And partly because the COVID clusters are still on the rise. But I think after next week, I might be able to travel a little bit.Bill:Great. Well, anyway, thanks again for your time. And I hope to talk to you soon.Chen:Yeah. Thank you, Bill. Yep. Get full access to Sinocism at sinocism.com/subscribe

Episode Notes:Today's guest is Joanna Chiu, a long-time journalist covering China from both inside and outside the country, co-founder and chair of the editorial collective 'NüVoices 女性之音', and the author of the new book "China Unbound." She now covers Canada-China issues for the Toronto Star. Joanna, welcome to the podcast.4:20 on Huawei, Meng Wanzhou and the two Michaels - when the whole Huawei, Meng Wanzhou saga was unfolding, I got so many questions from not just Canadian journalists, but media around the world about what was going on. I think it's surprising to us because we've been in the China-watching bubble, but more broadly, what happened was very shocking for a lot of people all over the world23:20 people like me and my family aren't fully accepted as Canadians or as Australians or as Americans, it's always like a hyphen, like Chinese-Canadian, Chinese-American. That just plays into what Beijing wants. When people of Chinese descent are taken as political prisoners or get calls from Chinese police saying, "Stop supporting Hong Kong on social media or stop doing this," these people get less attention. They're not taken seriously when they try to report what's happening because unfortunately a lot of people in the West have accepted the CCP's myth that we're still essentially Chinese36:20 on Canada-China relations - in Canada, the mood after the Michaels returned and the Meng case was resolved is that they really want to go back to business as usual. To not have any kind of plan in place on how to prevent Canadian hostages from being taken in the future. The Prime Ministers office really steering this even though other parts of government was like, "We need some sort of plan, we need some sort of update to foreign policy in general." There's very little political will.Links: China Unbound on Amazon. Joanna Chiu’s websiteNüVoices 女性之音Transcript:Bill:Hi everyone, today's guest is Joanna Chiu, a long-time journalist covering China from both inside and outside the country, co-founder and chair of the editorial collective 'NüVoices', and the author of the new book "China Unbound." She now covers Canada-China issues for the Toronto Star. Joanna, welcome to the podcast.Joanna:Thank you Bill, thanks for having me on your new podcast, very exciting.Bill:Thanks, yeah you are the second guest, and so I'm really happy to have this opportunity to speak with you. Before we dig into your book, could you tell us a little bit about yourself and how you ended up where you are and doing what you do?Joanna:Okay. I guess my bio is that my family is one of the many who left Hong Kong after the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests because my parents were worried about what would happen going forward. So growing up in Canada, I felt that China was actually part of my whole family story because what happened led to my family uprooting themselves. So I was always really interested in China and studied Chinese history and wanted to return to be a reporter to chronicle what was happening in the country, which I was so fascinated by.Joanna:So I started reporting on the ground in Hong Kong in 2012, covering all the things that happened there including the Occupy to pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong. I moved to Beijing in 2014 and that's where I started covering basically everything in the whole country for European media outlets, including German, Deutsche Presse-Agentur, and AFP (Agence France-Presse). And I guess my career was a bit unique in that I also free-lanced for several stints. So I got to kind of get a sense of what many different jurisdictions and countries wanted to know about China in my time there writing for all sorts of outlets.Bill:Interesting and so I was there until 2015 and I think we overlapped for just about a year. When did you actually leave China to go back to Canada?Joanna:Yeah, I left China in late 2018. I wanted to stay for longer because even seven years on the ground I felt I barely got to scratch the surface of all the things that I could write about in China. Especially because I had such a broad remit where I was a front-line reporter for all of these major events but also could do basically any feature story I wanted. So it was just totally open and I could have stayed there for decades, but I had to go back to Canada. I got asthma from the smog and I think my Canadian lungs just couldn't handle air. I was just like really allergic to Beijing as soon as I landed and I stuck it out for four years. But back in Canada, I felt I would have to move on from my passion and interest in China, but a couple of months after I returned, Meng Wanzhou, a Huawei executive was detained in the Vancouver International Airport. And just over a week later, two Michaels were detained. So definitely I think that was the biggest China story at the time, and it continued to be very impactful around the world.Joanna:So I started covering that and it just led to basically being a reporter for the Toronto Star, focusing on China. And that's what I've been doing since then. I have also been working on my book since early 2019. So not my plan, but definitely the past decade has been very China focused, including my last few years.Bill:It's great, I've always been a fan of your work, and I will say, it's very interesting how many foreign correspondents used to live in China have left the country. Some willingly, some not willingly, but how it turns out how most of them have found jobs covering how China's impacting the world wherever they're now based.Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Bill:I think that's a good segue into talking about your book because it really is true that the China story is everywhere now. And that's something, I think, you try and capture in "China Unbound." So tell us who you wrote it for, why you wrote it, and what do you hope that the readers take away from it?Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative). So when the whole Huawei, Meng Wanzhou saga was unfolding, I got so many questions from not just Canadian journalists, but media around the world about what was going on. I think it's surprising to us because we've been in the China-watching bubble, but more broadly, what happened was very shocking for a lot of people all over the world. They didn't know the context of Beijing's political system and its increasing ... how its authoritarianism translates also into its foreign policy and its stances towards different countries and diaspora groups all over the world. But these things were not just stories I covered, but stories that were close to my life. Because growing up, my father worked for a Chinese-Canadian radio station and people were talking already then about pressure to self-censor, pressure from the Chinese embassy on Canadian media outlets. This was happening in the 90s and people of Chinese descent around the world were trying to have discussions about this, but basically not really getting much traction or broader public attention.Joanna:It did seem ... I will ask you if this is what you felt, but it took two white men from Canada being taken hostage over this high-profile executive's arrest in Canada for a lot of people in the world to be like, "Wait, what's going on? How will Beijing's political system and authoritarianism possibly impact me and my family or my country or my business?" So I wrote this book for basically everyone, targeting the general reader because I really try to be as immediate as possible in my writing. Most of the reporting is eyewitness reporting from myself in collaboration with journalists around the world and looking at how we got to this point. Western countries and China, how we got to this point where it seems like a lot of obstacles that seem insurmountable. All of these tensions, all of these worries.Joanna:I wanted for people to start with this book and then I provided this long reading list at the end so they can continue to be engaging with these issues. Because I feel that we might not have really noticed, but a lot of the narratives around China in the mainstream public have been very very simplified. And that is a disservice to all countries. And especially to the people who end up being targets and whose lives end up being affected by some of these big conflicts going on.Bill:What you said earlier about it really taking two white men, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig to get people's attention. It's interesting because these pressures have existed, as you said talking about your father and his experience, but these pressures on the diaspora have existed for decades. They've certainly intensified, and you have multiple instances of ethnic Chinese who are jailed in China, American, Australian, where it didn't seem to kind of capture the national attention the way that the detention of the two Michaels did. And that's unfortunate, but it does feel like the conversation and awareness now has shifted and so there's a lot more awareness that these kind of pressures are existing across all sorts of communities. You can tell me I'm wrong, but the Chinese government has also shifted its approach, hasn't it? Sort of widened its net in terms of how they pressure?Joanna:Yeah, so in the past, you know the united front, a lot of that work of foreign influence in both intimidation and providing carrots and sticks. Flattering global politicians and global members of the elite among the diaspora have been going on, but the most harsh efforts of influence in the past I think were mostly directed at people of Asian descent. It was only in more recent years where the really harsh tactic, the detentions, have been applied to foreign nationals who are not of Asian descent. It seems like that is a deliberate shift in tactics, would you agree?Bill:No, I would. And I think it's interesting when you look at sort of who they've targeted, especially around the Meng Wanzhou case. Two Canadians were very quickly arrested, a third Canadian who had been convicted of dealing drugs had a re-sentence to death. There's still no word about Schellenberg's fate in the wake of the Meng Wanzhou deal. But I think that one thing that's interesting is they've yet to target Caucasian Americans. And so far, certainly what I was fearing in the Meng Wanzhou incident was that ... someone had told me that they had put together lists who they might target but they held back because part of the messaging is they're at least today not quite ready to go toe-to-toe with the U.S.. But willing to penalize countries and the citizens of the countries that are seen as effectively being U.S. allies or lackeys depending on who you're speaking with. Does that make sense?Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah, that makes sense. And my book, people have said that because I'm Canadian and I spotlight countries and experiences like Australia, Italy, Greece, Turkey. So so-called middle powers, that middle-power perspective, whereas many books out of the U.S. and China have it from the U.S. perspective.Bill:Right, right.Joanna:And I think that's important context for Americans to understand because in America, it seems like a lot of it is about this almost glorious competition with China where the U.S. has to win. I have been kind of mortified that people commenting on my book have said things like, "We need to read this so that we can win and not let China win." Things like that. But if they had actually read it, they would have probably seen that that's not right. I criticize the Western nations' handling and attitudes towards China as much as I criticize Beijing's actions. So I would also point out that Australian journalists who are white were affecting. Bill Birtles and Michael Smith spent days holed up in their Australian embassies in China. Basically fleeing because they got tipped off that otherwise they might get detained. Related to Australia's more aggressive critical stance towards China as of late.Bill:And also-Joanna:It does seem-Bill:Sorry, was it also related to the detention of Australian Chinese ... Australian journalist Cheng Lei who was originally Chinese then naturalized into Australian citizenship. And she's disappeared into the system in China, right?Joanna:Yeah, so Cheng Lei ... Again, while she's not a global household name like the two Michaels, she is actually detained. Her case ... we know very little about it, but it seems very clear it's related to the political situation between the two countries. And also Bloomberg journal Haze Fan ... and I think actually Haze's case might be as close as China has gotten so far to targeting Americans because even though a Chinese national, she worked for Bloomberg. She was a prominent journalist for Bloomberg. So it's interesting because writing this book, I'm trying to provide this nuance and context for the public but under so much pressure because of global contexts. Things are so tense that it could get worse at any moment and you don't know. You're hearing from your sources about a list that they were preparing of Americans they could possibly target. The stakes are so high.Joanna:Both of us, these are people we know. I don't know if you knew Kovrig, but it's a relief that he's back.Bill:Not well, but I did know a little bit.Joanna:For the more than 1,000 days he was in detention, I was writing this book and that was always on my mind. It's so immediate and it's so urgent for more people to understand what's going on rather than I think fanning the flames or making things worse or not using the opportunities there are to engage more productively with China. But we see the dialogue on China becoming so toxic right now, where it's almost as if there's two camps. The more extreme on both sides seem to get more airtime and interest. And people want those nuggets of talking points on China that really signify this is how we fight back. Rather than the people who are trying to provide a lot more context. It's not as easy as doing this or that to resolve everything or get what you want.Bill:Well with what you said earlier about sort of "we have to win," I have yet to see a clear definition of the theory of victory and what it is. The other thing I'd say, and this will lead into my next question is, we talk about in many ways how toxic the discourse has gotten in the West. It's also incredibly toxic inside China in very worrisome ways. And in many ways, sort of state-supported and state-encouraged ways. One of the questions I want to ask you is how we ... So first question is as you talk about in the book and you've talked about in other places, this whole discussion around Chinese Communist Party influence or interference in other countries ... Whether it's through the United Front or other means or vectors ... How do we differentiate what we should actually, "we" being the countries that are targeted ... How should you differentiate what actually matters that people should be concerned with versus that's the normal thing that a foreign government would do to try and improve other countries' perceptions of that country and advance their interests in those countries.Bill:And related, as this discourse does get more toxic, how do we talk about these things without tipping into racism? In the U.S. certainly, we have a really long and nasty history of anti-Asian and specifically anti-Chinese racism. And there are a lot of reasons to be very worried about going too far where we're back in a very dark place in terms of how people of Asian and Chinese descent are treated in this country. But at the same time, there are real issues and potential threats coming from some of these PRC activities. So how do we talk about that in a way that effectively deals with the problems but also makes sure that people are safe and able to enjoy the rights that they deserve and have?Joanna:Yeah and that's why I try to provide a lot of that history concisely within each chapter of the book because we need to know what happened before to know to be a lot more careful with our language and our actions now. Because definitely it just seems like history is repeating itself during the McCarthy era. Chinese-Americans' loyalties are constantly questioned, they lost their jobs. And now former President Trump has said that he thinks basically all students are possibly Chinese spies. We've seen these prosecutions of certain Chinese national scientist professors in America that were basically pretty embarrassing.Bill:Yes.Joanna:It seemed a lot of the suspicions were unfounded and it was almost like a witch-hunt which is really difficult. When things seemed politicized and politically motivated and you put a blanket suspicion on all these people, it's exactly what happened in the past.Bill:Mm-hmm (affirmative)Joanna:And it's not just America. It was in Canada, Australia, Europe. In Canada, we had internment of Japanese Canadians during World War II. And people know that this is in the background. And even before things got more tense when a lot of the approach among Western countries towards China was that the goal was to expand trade ties and economic ties as much as possible, there was still a lot of racism. Walking down the street, I got called slurs like the c-word in downtown Vancouver multiple times.Bill:Recently?Joanna:Throughout my life living in Canada. In Vancouver, particularly, there was a long-standing stereotype of the crazy rich Asian that was ruining the city with our Maseratis and condo buying.Bill:Wasn't there a reality show that was based on rich Chinese in Vancouver, I think?Joanna:Yeah, there was that and there's a lot of scapegoating against East Asians for lots of problems with COVID-19 and all this with the two Michaels in Huawei. This just really spiked particularly in countries like Canada, U.S., Australia with the large Chinese diaspora in many places. People who weren't even Chinese, like an indigenous woman in Canada, she was punched in the face. Things like that. And its not like we can throw up our hands and be like, "People are just going to be racist, this is just going to happen." I think a lot of people in positions of influence and politicians need to take responsibility for what they've done to stoke this behavior and not condone it. So talking to certain politicians in Canada in the conservative party, they tell me that there's been a shift in strategy to talk about China as the Chinese Communist Party, the communist regime, to deliberately stir up a red scare. In the U.S. definitely, the FBI in an announcement about one of its investigations into a Chinese American scientist said the words "Chinese Communist regime" or "Chinese Communist government" five times.Bill:That was the announcement about the MIT professor, was it Chen Gang, I think?Joanna:Yeah, I think so.Bill:The prosecutor or the FBI folks up in Boston, I believe.Joanna:Right. Yeah, that was the one. And it's just not necessary. You don't need to ... My argument is that the facts about what Beijing is doing are urgent and sobering enough. You don't really need to embellish it with this language of trying to get people scared of this Communist entity. But perhaps it's more to do with domestic politics in each place. Someone explained it to me in the U.S. where pretty much everyone is critical of China. You don't get more attention by just being moderately critical, you have to be really more extreme. It's as if it's like a competition to be as hawkish as possible to get that acclaim and public support.Bill:And as you said, it's unnecessary because as you just said, the facts can speak for themselves in many areas. And it again, it goes back to how do we have rational discussion about what the problems and challenges are without tipping over into something that's really nasty and scary. It's something I struggle with, obviously in my newsletter, I have ... It's funny when you write about China, I have people who think I'm a CCP apologist and people who think I'm way too hawkish. You sort of can't win, it's such a fraught topic that it is something I struggle with. Because you certainly don't want to be in a position where you're stirring things up, but at the same time you can't just throw up your hands and say, "Well we're not going to deal with this because it's too dangerous." I mean, it's too dangerous the other way too, right? But it's really difficult, and the question I have is, do you think the powers in Beijing understand this? Is this something they try to use or leverage?Joanna:Oh yeah, I think so. I think it plays right into what Beijing wants. Because the myth it has been promoting for years is that China is the center of Chinese civilization even if your family has been away from China for generations, you're still Chinese. And since you're still Chinese, your de-facto leader is still the CCP. It's a legitimate power for all Chinese people. Because people like me and my family aren't fully accepted as Canadians or as Australians or as Americans, it's always like a hyphen, like Chinese-Canadian, Chinese-American. That just plays into what Beijing wants. When people of Chinese descent are taken as political prisoners or get calls from Chinese police saying, "Stop supporting Hong Kong on social media or stop doing this," these people get less attention. They're not taken seriously when they try to report what's happening because unfortunately a lot of people in the West have accepted the CCP's myth that we're still essentially Chinese. It's in the law, if there's dual-nationality, they don't accept the second nationality.Joanna:But even more than that, I still worry that ... it's happened to people like me. I actually gave up my Hong Kong citizenship, I'm only Canadian. But just because of my Chinese blood, I'm at greater risk of whatever repercussions. I've definitely been singled out when I was a foreign correspondent in Beijing for writing too much about human rights. And they did not say the same things about other people in my office. So by not listening to people in the diaspora and still treating them as they're still outsiders, we're with this connection to China whether we agree or not, that's really playing into it. And also when there's this racism, Chinese media, Chinese embassies, they've been really up front about condemning this and using it as a way to shore up loyalty among overseas Chinese, especially people who are more recent immigrants to get that support. There's so many of these China Friendship associations around the world. It's tough to understand their impact because it's all basically legal. They are these groups that openly support Beijing's policies all around the world. And they have, in my reporting, taken part in basically trying to make friends with politicians around the world and using those interviews, events, photographs to turn into propaganda to say, "We got support from this politician." There were groups that have offered money for people to vote for certain candidates in other countries' elections.Joanna:So it's complicated because when these groups are alienated, when they still feel that ... On a pragmatic level, it makes better sense for them to have good relations with Beijing. These groups are going to increase and proliferate and it's hard to understand what they're doing because you don't want to villainize it. In a way it's very natural for people, say, with business ties in China to try to hob-nob with Chinese embassies and try to support them. When I do report on some of these activities like the potential vote buying and interfering in elections, people use it as an excuse to say, "Oh, everyone's like that. All recent immigrants are working for the CCP." And that just puts a lot of reporters and researchers in these really tricky situations where you want to report on what's going on, but because discourse just fails to be nuanced enough, people just kind of take it as a reason to be more hostile and to not really open up their minds that there's a diversity of opinions among Chinese people and the Chinese diaspora.Bill:And it's also hard I think because so much of it happens in Mandarin or other Chinese dialects, so most people who don't speak the language have no idea what's going on.Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative). But it's been such a rich field of potential reporting for me, going back to Canada. It's really, really resitting. I have been able to read all of these reports. I've been able to translate these posts into English for audiences who found it really interesting. But I would argue that it's not actually that hard because there are so many Chinese speakers all over the world. It's not like it's a niche population, like a small population. In these stories where Steve Bannon and Miles Kwok's like cultish group was protesting outside a Canadian journalist's house accusing him of being a Chinese spy, when he was actually critical of Beijing. There were death threats.Bill:They did that to a bunch of people in America too. They had a whole program of targeting people.Joanna:Yeah, New Jersey.Bill:Yeah.Joanna:Yeah, so in that case. In Texas, with Pastor Bob Fu, he was one of the targets. And the FBI came in, the bomb squad, they put him and his family in a safe house. But in Canada, police monitored it, checked in once in a while. I actually sent them videos, like this looks like a death threat. And I actually ... Me and my colleagues, we translated some of this information and we posted it on YouTube to explain what was going on. But then it took three months later, this going on in Canada ... Two of these protestors just savagely beat one of the target's friends. And the police were responding to questions of why didn't you step in earlier, there were death threats? They admitted that they were slow with the investigation because they didn't have Chinese language resources. And that doesn't make sense really, in Vancouver, when there are so many people of Chinese descent. It's not hard to find someone to look at something and translate it to understand it.Joanna:In the conclusion of my book, one of the points I make is that information in Chinese language is treated like a secret code that can't be cracked. Instead, people like Newt Gingrich and other kind of just make things up. In his book, Newt Gingrich ... I don't quite remember but he just provided nonsensical translations of Chinese words and then extrapolated a whole bunch of theories about China based on that. Which is insulting to all of the people, not just of Chinese descent, but people like you who have taken the time to learn Mandarin and to understand China.Bill:There's a lot of that here in the U.S., I don't know how much it exists in other countries. But certainly the taking stuff out of context or just crappy language skills. And then, like you said, extrapolating something much bigger and darker and nefarious than in many cases it actually is, for sure.Joanna:Yeah. In the U.S. people tell me that they do have Chinese speakers, but lower down in the chain who provide reports and information. But going up the chain, the politicians and the pundits, they pick and choose information to support what they believe already. So these researchers feel like they're not even being heard because politicians are just grabbing what they want anyways. In many cases, people of Chinese descent are worried about even going to China or talking about their family in China because they're not going to get promoted to more influential positions. They're not going to get security clearance because the assumption is that if you have any sort of China ties that you might be compromised. And that's a very prejudicious trend in D.C.Bill:When I moved back to D.C. after ten years, I had no interest in working for the government, but I had a funny conversation with someone who does have security clearance. He says, "Don't even bother to apply, you'll never get a security clearance because you lived in China for too long."Joanna:That's crazy.Bill:That's fine, but there are reasons for governments to be concerned with ties to other foreign governments, but certainly for folks of Chinese descent it's much more pernicious. And it does seem like in many places the assumption is that you're potentially at risk of compromise. One of the problems is how people's families are being leveraged back in China. You see it in the way the persecutions of the Uyghurs and Tibetans. But you see it also in Han Chinese, people who are doing things that are considered controversial or anti-China outside of China. It's a very common tactic, right, to harass, hassle, otherwise make difficult for family members back in China, right?Joanna:Yeah, and that is a major ... There's no solution to that. I tried to spotlight a lot of these voices in the book. I spoke with people like Vicky Xu, the campaign against her has just been ridiculous. People made fake porn of her, thousands of accounts were basically attacking her, doxxing her.Bill:I feel like that story didn't get as much attention as maybe it should have. She was just so brutally targeted by very obviously state-backed campaigns.Joanna:Yeah. Very personal and they started with her family. She's been open about that, how her family and parents have been pressured. But she didn't stop her work, so they went further. They sent thousands of accounts and they made fake pornography about her so that when people search in Chinese, that's what comes up. And trying to completely smear her character. But that story did not get that much attention.Bill:This is because of her work at the ASPI down in Australia, right? Specifically around XinjiangJoanna:Xinjiang, yeah. I think she's one of the main researchers in Australia that focused on Xinjiang. The bigger issues looking at supply chains, looking at forced labor, and where internment camps are. Recently she found a trove of police documents about the repression. And because of her fluent Chinese and her networks, she was able to find this and provide this information. So people like her, I think, Beijing wants the most to silence and has the means and leverage to try to do so. I think she's unique in that she continues to do this work. We're not sure for how long because you have to wonder how long someone can take this.Bill:Right.Joanna:More people that I know of are either operating anonymously, they're really providing subtle advising roles to governments in a very very anonymous manner. Because they're worried about their families. Or they're writing under pseudonyms and they don't get a lot of attention because no one knows who they are. They're worried about ... not even access. I think a lot of researchers worry about being able to go back to China. At different levels, people who are worried about the safety of themselves and their family members.Bill:So just given the trajectory of China under Xi Jinping, is there any reason to think this is going to get better? Or are we sort of more close to the beginning of where this trajectory goes?Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative) I think we're kind of at a pivotal point. A lot of it isn't waiting for what Beijing does, but there's a responsibly on Western countries to at least be smarter about China and to have proper expertise in places of governments to try to even have some well thought out policy on these issues. In the U.S. Cabinet, very little China experience. And like we talked about, the people with experience ... They have trouble having influence. And in Canada, the mood after the Michaels returned and the Meng case was resolved is that they really want to go back to business as usual. To not have any kind of plan in place on how to prevent Canadian hostages from being taken in the future. The Prime Ministers office really steering this even though other parts of government was like, "We need some sort of plan, we need some sort of update to foreign policy in general." There's very little political will. I think the amount of criticism in different countries' media doesn't reflect the lack of political will of governments to even put the basic structures in place to understand China better. To be able to translate basic things from Chinese into English to be aware of.Bill:And in Canada, why do you thing that is? Especially given the diversity of Canada and the number of people of Chinese descent in the country. But also what just happened over the last close to three years. Why wouldn't the government have had a bit more of a shift in views of how the relationship in China should go?Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative) I think it's related partly to what we were talking about before where politicians are worried about stoking racism, losing support from Canadians of Chinese descent. Partly an election issue, and I think traditionally in Canada, the main government advisors on China have been people in the business world who do have a vested interest in making sure that tensions are as low as possible to facilitate smoother business interactions. But that's also not even the case where if you ... I think the idea in the West has been reformed through trade. Through interactions, economically, China will naturally liberalize, become more democratic. But in recent years, we've seen political tensions move over to economic coercion, economic retaliation. Not just from China but back and forth, with America, Australia, other countries have also did tit-for-tat trade tariffs. Different ways where the political situation can impact the economic relationships. So it's not even necessarily the case that just by focusing on business, everything will be all good. I think a lot of politicians are trying to put their head in the sands about that and not trying to understand the really complex situation unfolding. And Canadians on the whole, surveys show, pretty frustrated about the situation in action and just passiveness that they see from Ottawa.Bill:I guess the Huawei decision will be interesting, whether or not Huawei is allowed into the Canadian 5G network construction. Certainly here in D.C., there's all the factors you talked about and there's a lot of opportunity for lobbyists from various industries and companies to sort of shift Biden administration and Capitol thinking to policies that are more likely to make money dealing with China. And that certainly has an impact on the policies. So just shifting gears quickly because we're almost out of time and this has been a really great conversation. One of the things we were talking about was lifting up and getting more diversity of voices. Can you tell the listeners about NüVoices and what you helped create there? I found that to be a really wonderful and useful project that's been up for a couple years now? Or has it been three years? Time just sort of blended away with the pandemic, right?Joanna:So actually we were founded in 2017.Bill:Oh my gosh, okay.Joanna:In Beijing, so it's almost under five years. It's been like a daily kind of passion project in the community for me. We kind of wanted to create a more open and accepting China space, both in person with events and chapters around the world and also virtually. And it started in reaction with panels and book deals. The people who get platformed on China are often white male experts. No offense to yourself.Bill:People like me. No, no, I get it. I get it.Joanna:You're one of our longtime supporters and our patrons and we've spoken about how this helps to create a better world for your kids, for your daughters. Because we want to remove any excuses that people have for not even having one woman on their panel. Five years ago, people just kept saying to us and our co-founders, "We tried to find a female expert, but we couldn't find one." Or "We couldn't find a woman on this topic." Which is ridiculous because looking around, actually people we know, I see more women than men entering these fields. Definitely being a journalist in China, there's more women than men. And women who can speak Chinese and doing great work. So we created this open-source directory. Now it has more than 600 people all around the world who are women or non-binary on all sorts of topics. And speaking all sorts of languages in all sorts of time zones. I think just that project alone helped to remove those excuses. Any time someone makes an excuse that they couldn't find a woman, someone just has to send that person the link to this directory. No more excuses.Joanna:And on top of that we have a twice monthly podcast which I co-host sometimes and events all around the world. And basically social groups and networks and it's a platform so that people can benefit from this supportive atmosphere. We really try and celebrate diverse voices on China, experts on China. I find that women tend to ... because they're facing so much discrimination, women experts often have to fight harder to provide unique insights and reporting. So the kind of good quality you get just reaching out to any female expert in China, its a pretty good bet on fresh and interesting perspectives. And definitely I found that the case with my book. Because you know I tried to practice what I preach and most of my sources are coming from diverse backgrounds, women and minorities ... I shouldn't even use the word "minorities", people who aren't white basically.Bill:Mm-hmm (affirmative) right.Joanna:In each country, and I think that provides a different layer than people who enjoy positions of more power in those countries, who might not see some of the more uglier sides or the more complicated sides because that's not their experience. They're not getting the five star treatment when they go to China that a lot people in power do.Bill:It's definitely one of the things I enjoy about your book, it does have these different perspectives that are so important as we are all sort of trying to figure out what's going on and start thinking about what we can do. Specifically, NüVoices, I was looking at the directory last week. I think it's like 620 entries or something, I'm certainly planning to mine it for guests for the podcast because it's a really tremendous resource. And I will put a link to it in the show notes when we publish the podcast. Well thank you so much, is there anything else you'd like to add or say to the audience? Other than buy your book, "China Unbound", it's a great book. Please go ahead and go buy it and read it. It's a great book.Joanna:Just asking yourself, being based in the U.S., what are the best avenues for a more productive conversations on China? Instead of going to people who are more simplistic, what are some more resources you'd recommend? Including, of course your newsletter and that community. But who's doing the work to make up more well-informed approaches?Bill:That's a great question, and I'm not actually sure I have a good answer. I'm struggling with that and part of it is maybe that I'm based in D.C. where it is quite ... It's difficult to be in D.C. and to be not hawkish about China if you want to get ahead in certain parts of the government here. And so, I'm not actually sure. I know that there's China Twitter ... I mean Twitter in general is just kind of a cesspool and China Twitter is not a productive or constructive place for discourse about anything. I don't know, I wish I had a better answer for you, I need to think about it more.Joanna:Mm-hmm (affirmative)Bill:Do you have any guesses or any suggestions?Joanna:I was expecting a more simplified reaction to my book, but actually all the events I've been doing so far are conversations with academics and fellow reporters have been really nuanced. And it seems like there's a hunger for people who want to admit there are no simple solutions and to talk about that. But it doesn't' seem like here's a particular space or a think tank that has that approach. It seems-Bill:The think tanks probably are the place. I mean there are other ... The folks at SupChina are trying to do that. I don't know if you've talked to them. Kaiser's got his podcast and they do their conference. I think their conference ... We're recording on the 1st of November so they're I think next week. But in general, I don't know, it's also ... Like anything, it's hard to have a more textured or kind of deeper discussion in these 30 minute chunks or when you're sitting on a panel. It's just putting in the time and having ... Like you're doing, talking to me and you're talking to lots of people for your book. And this is a topic that has probably come up in most of your conversations and it's just something we're going to have to keep talking about. I know over the next few months there are at least two more books that are coming out about China's influence in the world. And so it'll be interesting to see where those goes in terms of how they impact or move the discourse and how those get played. And again, I think it's like I said, me struggling with how do you address these issues that are very real and influence interference without going overboard and over-exaggerating and destroying innocent people's lives. Which I think has already happened and continues to be a big risk.Joanna:I do think simple answers that people need to pay better attention and not just to get a shallow understanding, but to really understand the nitty-gritty and try to untangle complexities. And support the people who are trying to do this work. A lot of their names are in my book. If you don't want to buy it, flip to the back of the notes and you'll get their names and look up those articles. People like Yangyang Cheng, Helen Gao. People who are straddling both worlds, Chinese and Western. Because of those real lived experiences, their perspectives are just naturally very nuanced and insightful, I think. So people are doing this work, its just they're not the ones on CNN and getting book deals because of structures power. So support NüVoices.Bill:Absolutely. Like you said, I'm a supporter of NüVoices, I'm very happy to put a link to that as well. Support you through Patreon, right? We should move you over to Substack, but that's a different discussion. That's my bias. Well look, thank you so much. It's really been a pleasure to speak with you and I hope that many of you listeners will go out and buy the book. It's really a worthwhile read and Joanna really has great reporting, great perspectives. And this book is really important contribution to the conversation we all need to be having about China and the future and China's role in the world. So thank you and hope to talk to you again soon.Joanna:Thank you so much for all of your work, really platforming those more quality, well-informed sources on China. You've run the newsletter for a long time, so I think that makes a big difference as well because you use your expertise to point people to credible, good sources. So I'll also subscribe to your newsletter.Bill:Thank you. Get full access to Sinocism at sinocism.com/subscribe

Pop Radio UK Show #153 Songs that I handpicked for this show!  Songs that struck me as needing to be played…for you…maybe, but I know SOMEONE SOMEWHERE is supposed to be hearing these songs!  Why would I want to do that?  Variety!  Unpredictability! It is my show and I play what I like!  It is VARIETY, VARIETY, VARIETY!!  What's NOT to like?  Give A Listen!  Like, Download, Comment, Share, Repeat.  Lame-stream radio... Variety...I do not think they TRULY know the meaning of the word!  That's why I do what I do here... Pop Radio UK!!  The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast bringing Power Pop, Rock, Soul, Rhythm & Blues to anyone and everyone who wants to expand their rock and roll radio knowledge!  Shows NOW on Listen Notes, Google Podcast Manager, Mixcloud, PlayerFM, Stitcher, Tune In, Podcast Addict, Cast Box, Radio Public, Pocket Cast, Apple iTunes Podcasts!!  Please! Follow me on Twitter JimPrell@TMusicAuthority  The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast!    https://fastcast4u.com/player/jamprell/    The Podcast can also be heard here - https://themusicauthority.transistor.fm/   Radio Candy Radio Mon, Wed, Fri 7 PM ET, 4PM PT.  Rocking The KOR!  www.koradio.rocks 7PM UK, 2PM ET, 11AM PT Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday!  Also, Pop Radio UK Friday, Saturday, & Sunday!  Research and reach out to the bands let them know you heard me playing their songs! Pop Radio UK Show #153!!  @Super 8UK - Music-Authority-ThemeThe Airport 77s - 06 Girl of My Dreams [Rotation]Official Emitt Rhodes - Fresh As A Daisy [The Emitt Rhodes Recordings (1969- 1973)]Screen Test - Notes From Trevor [Through The Past Brightly] (@Northside Records)SoulBird- The Music Authority JingleThe Reign (Feat. Joe Caravella) - Emotional Design [Storm]Ry Cooder - I Think It's Going To Work Out Fine [Bop Till You Drop]Christopher Thomas - Forever Again@Bruno & Bill - It's A ShameMaura Kennedy - Father To The Man [Villanelle: The Songs Of Maura Kennedy And BD Love]Nolan Voide - The Music Authority JingleRoy Wood and Wizzard - Why Does Such A Pretty Girl Sing Those Sad Songs [The Best Of]@The Newds - 55 Mr Happy Sunshine [Got It Licked] (Ice Cream Man Power Pop and More)The Catenary Wires - 06 Liminal [Birling Gap]Kevin Winks Music - Peace By PieceHegarty - Broken Soul [Selling Your Soul To Sanity]

Radio Candy Radio Show #28 Songs that I handpicked for this show!  Songs that struck me as needing to be played…for you…maybe, but I know SOMEONE SOMEWHERE is supposed to be hearing these songs!  Why would I want to do that?  Variety!  Unpredictability! It is my show and I play what I like!  It is VARIETY, VARIETY, VARIETY!!  What's NOT to like?  Give A Listen!  Like, Download, Comment, Share, Repeat.  Lame-stream radio... Variety...I do not think they TRULY know the meaning of the word!  That's why I do what I do here...Radio Candy Radio!!  The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast bringing Power Pop, Rock, Soul, Rhythm & Blues to anyone and everyone who wants to expand their rock and roll radio knowledge!  Shows NOW on Listen Notes, Google Podcast Manager, Mixcloud, PlayerFM, Stitcher, Tune In, Podcast Addict, Cast Box, Radio Public, Pocket Cast, Apple iTunes Podcasts!!  Please! Follow me on Twitter JimPrell@TMusicAuthority  The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast!    https://fastcast4u.com/player/jamprell/    The Podcast can also be heard here - https://themusicauthority.transistor.fm/   Radio Candy Radio Mon, Wed, Fri 7 PM ET, 4PM PT.  Rocking The KOR!  www.koradio.rocks 7PM UK, 2PM ET, 11AM PT Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday!  Also, Pop Radio UK Friday, Saturday, & Sunday!  Research and reach out to the bands let them know you heard me playing their songs! Radio Candy Radio Show #28!!  SUPER 8 Music - Music-Authority-ThemeThe Airport 77s - 06 Girl of My Dreams [Rotation]@Emitt Rhodes - Fresh As A Daisy [The Emitt Rhodes Recordings (1969- 1973)]Screen Test - Notes From Trevor [Through The Past Brightly] (@Northside Records)SoulBird - The Music Authority JingleThe Reign (Feat. Joe Caravella) - Emotional Design [Storm]Ry Cooder - I Think It's Going To Work Out Fine [Bop Till You Drop]Christopher Thomas - Forever Again@Bruno & Bill - It's A ShameMaura Kennedy - Father To The Man [Villanelle: The Songs Of Maura Kennedy And BD Love]Nolan Voide - The Music Authority JingleRoy Wood and Wizzard - Why Does Such A Pretty Girl Sing Those Sad Songs [The Best Of]@The Newds - 55 Mr Happy Sunshine [Got It Licked] (Ice Cream Man Power Pop and More)The Catenary Wires - 06 Liminal [Birling Gap]Kevin Winks Music - Peace By PieceHegarty - Broken Soul [Selling Your Soul To Sanity]

Rockin' The KOR Show #170 Songs that I handpicked for this show!  Songs that struck me as needing to be played…for you…maybe, but I know SOMEONE SOMEWHERE is supposed to be hearing these songs!  Why would I want to do that?  Variety!  Unpredictability! It is my show and I play what I like!  It is VARIETY, VARIETY, VARIETY!!  What's NOT to like?  Give A Listen!  Like, Download, Comment, Share, Repeat.  Lame-stream radio... Variety...I do not think they TRULY know the meaning of the word!  That's why I do what I do here... Rockin' The KOR!!  The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast bringing Power Pop, Rock, Soul, Rhythm & Blues to anyone and everyone who wants to expand their rock and roll radio knowledge!  Shows NOW on Listen Notes, Google Podcast Manager, Mixcloud, PlayerFM, Stitcher, Tune In, Podcast Addict, Cast Box, Radio Public, Pocket Cast, Apple iTunes Podcasts!!  Please! Follow me on Twitter JimPrell@TMusicAuthority  The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast!    https://fastcast4u.com/player/jamprell/    The Podcast can also be heard here - https://themusicauthority.transistor.fm/   Radio Candy Radio Mon, Wed, Fri 7 PM ET, 4PM PT.  Rocking The KOR!  www.koradio.rocks 7PM UK, 2PM ET, 11AM PT Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday!  Also, Pop Radio UK Friday, Saturday, & Sunday!  Research and reach out to the bands let them know you heard me playing their songs! Rockin' The KOR Show #170!!  SUPER 8 Music - Music-Authority-Theme@The Airport 77's - 06 Girl of My Dreams [Rotation]Official Emitt Rhodes - Fresh As A Daisy [The Emitt Rhodes Recordings (1969- 1973)]Screen Test - Notes From Trevor [Through The Past Brightly] (@Northside Records)SoulBird - The Music Authority JingleThe Reign (Feat. Joe Caravella) - Emotional Design [Storm]Ry Cooder - I Think It's Going To Work Out Fine [Bop Till You Drop]Christopher Thomas - Forever Again@Bruno & Bill - It's A ShameMaura Kennedy - Father To The Man [Villanelle: The Songs Of Maura Kennedy And BD Love]Nolan Voide - The Music Authority JingleRoy Wood and Wizzard - Why Does Such A Pretty Girl Sing Those Sad Songs [The Best Of]@The Newds - 55 Mr Happy Sunshine [Got It Licked] (Ice Cream Man Power Pop and More)The Catenary Wires - 06 Liminal [Birling Gap]Kevin Winks Music - Peace By PieceHegarty - Broken Soul [Selling Your Soul To Sanity]

Full Transcript   In episode 4 of Manager Minute, Bill Robinson, Director of the Michigan Bureau of Services for Blind Persons, and Cora McNabb, Executive Director at the Kentucky Office of Vocational Rehabilitation, join Carol Pankow, host of Manager Minute, to lend their experiences on navigating the critical DSA/DSU relationship so that VR's mission doesn't slip through the cracks.   Learn how Bill and Cora dealt with the challenges and the most significant challenges they faced. These challenges included cultural challenges and keeping the blind agency identity alive. Find out how the mergers are going today and what Bill and Cora share about the successful strategies that worked for their agencies.   You can find out more about VRTAC-QM on the web at: https://www.vrtac-qm.org/                                                                       Stay up to date by following VRTAC-QM on Facebook and follow us on Twitter @VRTAC_QM   About VRTAC-QM Partnering with State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies (SVRAs) to enhance service delivery and maximize outcomes through quality program and resource management.  The purpose of the VRTAC-QM is to provide training and technical assistance that will enable State VR agency personnel to manage available resources, improve effective service delivery, and increase the number and quality of employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities. The VRTAC-QM provides TA and training in VR program and performance quality management, fiscal and resource quality management of the VR program, and general quality management of organizations. You can request technical assistance from the VRTAC-QM by contacting your TA Liaison directly, contacting any member of the Center you wish, or by filling out the information on our main website and clicking on submit. While on the main website, join our mailing list to receive updates on training and new activities occurring within the center.    Full Transcript: VRTAC-QM Manager Minute: Bridging the Gap Between the DSA and the DSU so that VR's Mission Doesn't Slip Through the Cracks.   Speaker1: Manager MINUTE brought to you by the VRTAC for quality management conversations powered by V.R., one manager at a time, one minute at a time. Here is your host, Carol Pankow.   Carol: Well, welcome to the Manager Minute. Today, I'm joined by Bill Robinson, director of the Michigan Bureau of Services for Blind Persons, and Cora McNabb, executive director at the Kentucky Office of Vocational Rehabilitation. I know you are both so busy. Bill, you're the president of NCSAB and Cora, you're in the midst of federal monitoring right now. So thanks so much for taking the time to come on the show. So, Bill, how are you and how are things in Michigan?   Bill: It's great to be here. And I want to thank you for this opportunity.  In Michigan, we've actually returned to the field as of July 12. And so our line rehab instructors or field teachers are out there serving the blind VR customers and pre-employment transition customers. And then our training center has been open and our counselors are also seeing people in person. We're hoping to continue that and continue to serve our customers.   Carol: Very cool. Good to hear you're back. I'm sure folks are really enjoying that in-person training and interaction. So, Cora, always a pleasure to talk with you. How's it going in the Bluegrass State of Kentucky?   Cora: Carol, it's going great. Like Bill here. As of June 11th, we went back to in-person services and brought everybody back. Everyone's on a hybrid schedule that they're all working and serving individuals. Both of our centers are open and serving individuals, day students. But we haven't brought anyone back residentially as yet. And we have been talking about it. And of course, the rise in numbers is concerning. And so we would make sure we do the right thing. And then, as you said, we're in the middle of federal monitoring. So things have been very busy here.   Carol: Things are happening for sure. Well, I thought of you both as we're unpacking the topic today of navigating the critical DSA and DSU relationship so that VR's mission doesn't slip through the cracks. I know both of you have undergone changes in the past five years and have some really good expertise to lend to this topic. Both of you oversee a designated state unit that is housed within a larger designated state agency. Bill, you came from a recent change in DSA's and Cora, you just lived through the combining of the blind and general agency as well in the last three years. I was doing a little digging and since 2014, there have been two states where the VR agencies combined the blind and the general together and 12 agencies moved DSAs with you being the 12th, 10 of those DSA moves were to the workforce Labor Department. So it does make some sense. And coinciding with the foundation that was set by WIOA that really forced the issue for VR to partner with the other core partners. The VRTAC for Quality Management is working on a webinar in conjunction with RSA to unpack the Technical Assistance Circular 12-03, which is organizational structure and non-delegable responsibility of the DSU for the VR program, and then also TAC 13-02, which is reorganization of the DSA and DSU for the VR program, and we hope to have that webinar out this fall. So, Bill, I want to start with you. Can you tell us a little bit about the change you most recently lived through with your shift in DSAs? And where were you located before? And where are you now?   Bill: We started out in a State Department that was very unique for rehabilitation. It was the Licensing and Regulatory Affairs Department. So we were asking, hey, this is great being in this department. The department was very supportive, but at the same time, it was kind of interesting because we really didn't have much to do with licensing businesses or regulatory affairs, but yet there we were. And so when the governor changed over to the new administration, so we went from Republican to Democrat, the new administration looked at some reorganizations and the move ended up going from law or licensing and regulatory affairs to the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity.   Carol: So you're one of those labor moves as well? That's interesting. Yeah, really interesting that you started out. I don't think I've heard of any other state agency being in a department quite like you were in Bill.   Bill: Yeah, it was kind of interesting. And our general agency was actually in DHS. So neither of us were really sitting at labor at the time.   Carol: Cora, I can still remember back when Kentucky was going through the idea of combining the blind in general agency, and I remember that was going on for quite some time while the fine details were worked out. And unlike Bill's situation, your situation was a little different in that your two separate agencies were now combining together under one DSA. So can you tell us a little bit about the changes you went through and what designated state agency you are under?   Cora: We are under the Department of Education and Workforce in Kentucky and it did go on for quite a while. We actually took our time in combining the two agencies and involved a lot of the stakeholder groups that were involved, especially the blind advocacy organizations. And of course, I had been with the blind agency for at that time around 12 years. So we wanted to make sure that we protected those specialized services. And so we worked together. And about the time that we merged and combine the two agencies, they decided to abolish our fiscal unit in our agency and they moved it to the Department of Workforce. They moved it under the department later, which a couple of years later down the road, they actually moved it to a cabinet level. And so we had more change. But that resulted in the loss of a lot of veteran staff and veteran knowledge. So we not only went under a combining of two agencies, we also went under an additional change that involved our fiscal unit at that time.   Carol: Wow. I know you've lived through a lot there, so I want to take you back to that moment. You were notified the change was definitely going to happen. How were you notified? Cora, I'm going to start with you. And how much lead time were you given saying, all right, we're going to combine these agencies now?   Cora: Well, we knew that there were some discussions that were occurring. And at the time, the leadership was they also at that time? Well, it was a little bit later. They also moved adult Ed under the workforce program. But they wanted to have all the workforce programs under one department, which they were successful in doing at that time. And then also they wanted to centralize the operations, those back door operations. So we had kind of heard the rumors a few months before they actually approached us and told us about it. So at that time, I had a call with the Rehab Services Administration and the commissioner of workforce at that time was on the call and I was on the call along with Becky Cabe, whom at that time I was the interim director over at the blind agency, and Becky Cabe was the interim director over the general agency. So they talked to us in person. And then we had a call with our RSA to inform them of the changes.   Carol: So, Bill, how about you? How were you notified and how much lead time were you given?   Bill: That's a pretty funny story. In June of 18, the general agency director and I were giving a presentation for the leadership forum for CSAVR. And I had just finished on stage and was stepping down and my cell phone goes off and it's my immediate department director of Laura calling me and she says, hey, you're going to see a press release in about a half an hour, then announces the fact that you're moving from LARA to this new Department of Labor and economic opportunity. And I was like, oh, how is this going to work? So it was a complete surprise to me and the general agency director.   Carol: Holy smokes, Bill. That is a crazy story. So you literally found out with a half hour notice that boom, you're moving.   Bill: Yes. And then that was June. And the actual moving day for the department was August 12 and the fiscal year for us ended September 30th. So we just had a couple of months to try to figure out what the heck are we going to do here? Plus, we were looking at two closings within our fiscal year and we didn't know how that was going to work.   Carol: Holy smokes. Cora, I know you said you had reached out to RSA right away. Bill, did you reach out to RSA right away to help you with this move?   Bill: I think I was in such shock that the general director and I got together and we just got our teams together and pulled out that TAC 13-02 and started going through it together as. Leadership on both sides. We also had contacted RSA to set up a joint call. I don't know if I remember calling, but I called as many directors as I could that had gone through something like this. I know I talked to Alan McClain at the time because Arkansas was in the middle of it. And I talked to Cheryl Fuller, who was about two years into it. So I was reaching out to everybody at that point.   Carol: Smart move. I know in I work on the webinar we're developing, we're stressing how important it is to involve RSA early to ensure that that transition can happen smoothly and that all your bases are covered. Things like you got to change the state plan and ensuring your grant award is set up so you can draw down money in a new agency and more so what were one or two of the biggest challenges that you had to overcome and I'm going to start with you.   Cora: I think that because we were not very happy about them moving our fiscal unit. And so we did have a conversation about that, but we knew that it was going to happen. So the best thing that you can do is figure out how you can make it work and for your agency to get through the changes and accomplish what you need to. And we did work with our state liaison at RSA through the whole thing. And it is a lot of work to get your state plan updated and depending on when needed, your comprehensive needs assessment, all of that things don't always come together and match the way that you would like them to. So you just have to figure out what the best way is to make it work. And then I think it was probably involving the stakeholders in the process because it was a really difficult for the staff to come through those changes and adjust.   Carol: Yeah, I can imagine that was really tough dealing with all of that. So, Bill, how about for you? What are one or two of the biggest challenges you had to overcome in this move?   Bill: Well, I would echo some of what Cora said and just build off of that, because the short time frame we had, we had to really get moving in. RSA was very helpful in that process. Our state liaison, the fiscal folks at that point, there was not a RSA commissioner. So we were working closely with Carol Dobak as well as our liaison staff. And I think Cora touched on one key point is that for staff, this is a big change. And we had to over communicate with staff. We had, like we said, we have to open up the state portal for the state plan amendment. We had to communicate to our stakeholders. We have to ensure our vendors that they would get paid despite the kind of awkward closing within a fiscal year and how that was going to work. And then we had to make sure our counselors and our staff understood how to stop services within one period of performance and take that little six week period of performance that we had to the end of the grant year and make sure that that was handled correctly. So logistically, there was just a lot of logistics and we actually had spreadsheets and checklists and all kinds of a set up. And we were running that stuff by RSA and our fiscal folks and collaborating with our general agency to make sure we're on the same page. And that we were not missing something. So it was a lot of communication and collaboration.   Carol: But I think your background was well suited then with your accounting background for dealing with all of that, because you had that added weird complexity of that little bit of time, you know, where the switch over in the period of performance and all of that. So you knew how to address that. I don't think everybody could have done that.   Bill: Yeah, I think also in my business experience, I was in charge of a lot of mergers and acquisitions with different companies and would take operational control of the acquired entity before merging. And then this was no different than a merger or acquisition. And you're putting together organizations that don't know each other very well and accounting systems that are different, procedures that are different. It's really it can be overwhelming. And I think the checklist certainly helped.   Carol: I'm glad- glad to hear that. So I know many times when we think a change, I think we think about change at a higher level. We think about those concrete things, such as change in structure or the hierarchy. We think about changes in the fiscal activities like you were talking about Bill, and all of those are relevant considerations, but it's also critical to consider those smaller, abstract, but really important details, such as the shift in culture. So to start with, you might imagine that combining of two of our agencies has completely altered the identity of blind services in Kentucky. Cora, can you speak to that is a huge shift?   Cora: And we had separate agencies, separate policies and practices. Sure, both of us were a VR agency but it was very different. We had two separate categories for order of selection, so we had to look at that and come up with the best of the best in moving forward is how we kind of presented it to the staff. There was a huge loss of at least the staff felt like from the blind agency, a loss of identity. They spoke of that quite often. And I would try to emphasize with them that you're the same. The services that you're delivering are the same. So the only way that you can lose your identity is if you lose who you are. And you're not going to do that because the consumers are still there and you're still serving them. So that was probably one of the most difficult things. And they talked a lot about how even now there are still things that come up and there are still things that we're dealing with. And they mentioned obviously we always hear there isn't enough communication. But I realize that for the staff that we're in the smaller agency, communication happened a lot differently in the smaller agency than it does in the large general agency. And so a lot of times when they would say that we're seeing that smaller organizational feeling of family that was there. So that's a big thing for individuals to adjust to. And then they want to make sure that you still emphasize how important those specialized skills are so that they don't lose that sense of who they are in their profession and what they do.   Carol: I love that you said that, Cora, and you were the right person to be in that role with that transition. You came from that blind agency. All of us here came from that kind of blind agency experience. And we get that small sense of family and rolling in. I just love that you were we're talking with staff about not losing themselves and what they do and how critical that was. So you both were in the right place at the right time with this move. So, Bill, you were able to maintain your identity, but has your culture shifted in any way due to the reorganization into a new DSA?   Bill: Yeah, I don't know if our culture shifted because we've had a really good culture. When I came on board, we kind of did a shift at that point. And we've stayed true to our mission, vision and core values. But what was interesting is we had to shift in terms of how we communicate with our department and also how we work with our department. And just to give you an example and common touch, small, specialized services, which certainly is where VR is and especially where blindness, as I remember sitting down in a team with the new department director and I was talking to him about our services and I mentioned the training center where we do adjustment to blindness and we serve two hundred and fifty one and the prior fiscal year. And he looked at me and said, two hundred and fifty one thousand. I said, oh no, no, two hundred and fifty one individuals. And it is kind of that work force kind of thought where we serve the masses. Whereas Cora pointed out VR is very specialized services, especially blindness services. And because the specialization, we look at the individual and we're laser focused on the needs of the individual and customizing those services around the individual, where I think from workforce standpoint, it's more about how many people can we serve and what kind of mass data can we accumulate to tell our story. That was kind of the cultural shift for me. When he said two hundred and fifty one thousand, I said, well, wait a minute, I think we're going to have to have more discussions.   Carol: Oh, yeah. I bet that was a big shift for the DSA folks when they're talking about that. I came from a workforce agency too, and I always remember the people in Title one your and the Wagner Peyser side, when you think they've got massive numbers of people they're dealing with and our small numbers of consumers. They just they didn't always get that we did so we led a little exercise with our DSA staff where we had them actually just do a little simulated exercise under sleep shades. And it was led by one of our instructors. And it was really interesting just to give them a little peek into what we were dealing with. And it did help. It helped that whole group have a little better understanding of what we were about, thinking about all the changes you've both undergone, both larger concrete changes, also smaller abstract changes like culture shifting. How did you navigate through the challenges you faced and what were some successful strategies you used? And, Bill, I'm going to start with you.   Bill: The biggest thing I could think or recommend to individuals is you have to communicate, communicate and communicate. And really, you're looking at all your customers from internal customers to external customers to your stakeholders and your community partners. And you're really having to make sure that there's an understanding of how this is all going to work. And also, you know, I move to labor with the other core of your WIOA partners was very impactful and could be for the future and for a positive spin on that. That was a really great thing. And to be co-located with our general agency as well. We thought there was some really good things that came out of this. But one of the things I think was helpful was RSA and the problem solving that they engaged with us as well as just our DSA and helping us in that transition process and then the whole collaborative effort that it took.   Carol: I can't think of a better person to do that, Bill, than you like. You are the master at communication and collaboration for sure. So Cora, how about you? What were some successful strategies that you used?   Cora: I think that we tried to be as transparent as possible. We tried to share and involve everybody as much as possible in the processes. We made sure the field staff were involved in the policy development and the state rehab council. So I think that keeping it as simple as possible, I think probably knowing that you're not going to make everybody happy no matter what you do. We certainly had a lot of problem solving and decision making that we had to make. And you have to sit with that and be comfortable with it because you just can't please everybody and not everyone is going to come through on the other side after you're like that and all that change. You have those people that have a difficult time dealing with change anyway, but maybe do the best that you can and just know that there are going to be people that aren't going to be happy. And you can do a lot of time trying to make them happy and they're never going to get to that happy place. So you can hope that they'll maybe go somewhere else and find that happiness. Those would be the two things that I would remember from everything like that.   Carol: I really like that. So. So I know some time has passed now since all of this happened for both of you, cause I think you've been in there like three years now and I think it's been over a year for you. So how are things going now? Cora, I'm going to have you take that one first.   Cora: Well, I did mention the year that are combining of the agency was in two thousand and eighteen, so we did it effective October 1st 2018. So we are now three years past. And I think that you have to give yourself time because you'll have list after list after list. You have to do this. You want to begin to check things up. But I think we've tried to take our time. We do have policies that we're still working on, still writing policies and procedures, still working on the vendor process. Lots of things that we have in play. And one of the things that happened with the fiscal reorganized mentioned that then a couple of years later, they moved the fiscal operations to a cabinet level. And now we've undergone another reorg in our cabinet where they split the workforce programs. And so part of them are under labor and then part of us under the department and in the Department of Workforce. So that's been a major upheaval that's just happened over the last year or so. It was more change, and especially with the fiscal operations the way that they were, there were a lot of things that. The cracks because of how complicated the VR program is, still trying to pick up the pieces of that as well, and then by them doing another reorg where they have moved part of the program under labor, they moved to line Wagner Peyser, farmworker,  veterans, but they moved the operations under the Department of Workforce. It's kind of split right down the middle. So that's change that culture from what it was 30 years ago. So we're still undergoing lots of changes and then you put the pandemic on top of that. So just a lot of changes. And we've had to be very, very flexible even when we weren't happy about it.   Carol: So how has that impacted you with the partnership? So it seems like they wanted to have the people all together and now you're sort of split up again, which is really interesting. How's that going with partnerships?   Cora: Well, I think the partnerships on the local level have continued. It's probably more on a state level where there are still lots of things to be worked out and it's kind of in flux. But then with the onset of the pandemic, it's disrupted things as well. So right now, it's kind of hard to tell exactly what will be there after the clouds clear, you might say. We're dealing with so many different big factors that are going on.   Carol: Sure. And I completely understand that. So, Bill, how about you in times past? So how are things going now?   Bill: Yeah, so it was probably been about a little over two years and really the first eight months or so. And the new department was really about the new department just adjusting, everybody adjusting, because there was a lot of movement of not only V.R. but other agencies. And then as we had that first full year, I think the main thing was that we found like at the higher level working on the MOU use that we were all interested in, those seemed to work very smoothly because everybody was under the same umbrella department. The one thing that I think was the benefit of the pandemic was we were so new to each other. The pandemic increased all this extra communication via teams and the ability to meet more often. And so all of a sudden, we're getting to know each other better, even down to the counselor level. We're starting to know each other and the other programs a lot better. And I think that's been one of the benefits, as well as the fact that being in the Department of Labor during the pandemic with a lot of states were cutting other programs in the Pentagon or wherever it was, they were not immune to that. Our area was somewhat protected because labor was so important in terms of coming out of the pandemic. So it's going well. I mean, we're still learning from each other and we still have our growing pains, but it's going pretty well.   Carol: That's good to hear. That's good to hear. At least there were some upsides from the pandemic as well. Holy cow. So looking back on all this, what we've talked about, are there any other lessons you've learned or any words of wisdom you have for folks out there that might be facing this? Because it seems like this is a continued trend if the state hasn't done it yet. There are these continued moves that keep happening over time. So, Bill, I'm going to I'm going to give you the floor on any other parting words of wisdom.   Bill: Well, great. Thank you. I was just reading an article about successful business the other day. It wasn't about the structure or where the business grew out of. It was about serving the customer. The bottom line was, if you're serving the customer, you will be successful. I think the main thing is for us wisdom. I would pass on to anybody going through this to be true to yourself. Make sure that your mission as vocational rehabilitation does not get lost in this process. And also there's mission creep and mission drift. And it's easy to get into a new department. And there's a lot of excitement, a lot of other things going on. And you can have mission creep and mission drift. But if you're serving your customer and you're staying true to that, your mission, I think you can come out of these types of reorganizations really well.   Carol: I had a write that down-mission creep and mission drift. I like that. Holy cow. That's a good thing. Yeah, I love that. Good words for folks. How about you, Cora? Any parting words of wisdom?   Cora: And I think that Bill said. Very well, and that's really what I tried to emphasize, what we merged into the two agencies, that you're still here, you're still serving people and people are still benefiting from those services. I think that it's important you can dig your heels in and resist or you can work with everyone that's around you to make the change and make it work. And I think that's very important that you work together collaboratively to figure it out and make it work for the VA program.   Carol: Well, as always, it was such a pleasure to speak with you both. I sincerely hope that today's conversation helps our community think about navigating that DSA relationship.  We hope to see gaps bridged in a meaningful way. Thank you so much for joining us, and have a great day.     Speaker1: Conversations powered by VR one manager at a time, one minute at a time, brought to you by the VRTAC for Quality Management. Catch all of our podcast episodes by subscribing on Apple podcast, Google podcast, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening.

Bill Durrant is President at Exverus Media, a paid-media agency (TV ads, print advertising, sponsorships, and other types of media) that serves culture-creating, growth-stage brands. The agency's focus is not so much on big-budget, long-term brand building as it is on consulting with clients and recommending “how best to invest” to produce significant, trackable and measurable short- to medium-term results. Bill says, “all media is performance media” and that it can be very challenging to quickly determine the effectiveness of branding efforts and traditional marketing media. To address this, his agency tries to establish a “performance mindset” and “a structure to capture things that aren't directly trackable.” Bill finds it exciting that today's solutions for modeling are “significantly less expensive” than those that were available in the past. He says modeling has been “democratized” – that you can build and launch a model in weeks, update it continuously with sales and investment data, and track performance across a variety of marketing channels. Work that used to be done over a period of months by costly data scientists and analysts can be done now by utilizing a combination of artificial intelligence and machine learning. The agency's name, Exverus, is Latin for “from the truth.” In this interview, Bill explains how the name reflects the agency's values and the importance of transparency in how the agency conducts business, manages its clients' finances, and builds, over time, trust-based and truth-based client relationships. In a typical engagement, the agency consults with growing-brand clients and follows a step-by-step process that involves: understanding at a deep level client needs and stakeholder goals curating campaigns rooted in science and best practices  incorporating customized measurement solutions that prove campaign impact even when immediate, vendor-driven measurements aren't immediately available. The agency's “roots” are in a consumer-facing infrastructure. Over the past year, B2B clients have increased as brands “tired of being bland” seek to get more involved in being “adjacent to culture, creating culture, or participating in culture” in order to increase their visibility and cultural involvement. Bill can be reached on his agency's website at: www.exverus.com or on Linkedin at Bill Durrant (with two “R's.”) To make it easier to find him, add “Exverus.” Transcript Follows: ROB: Welcome to the Marketing Agency Leadership Podcast. I'm your host, Rob Kischuk, and I am joined today by Bill Durrant, President at Exverus Media based in Los Angeles, California. Welcome to the podcast, Bill. BILL: Hey, how are you? Thanks for having me. ROB: I'm excellent, and it's good to have you here. Why don't you start off, Bill, by telling us about Exverus and what the firm's superpowers are? BILL: Yeah, we do like to think of ourselves as superheroes every now and again. The first question we always get is “What does Exverus mean?”, so I'll start there. Exverus means “from the truth” in Latin. I think that as a paid media agency, which is our area of expertise, that can extend to things as rational as transparency in how we do our business and how we manage our finances for our clients to really the crux and the core of how the agency has been able to thrive over the past several years, which is trust-based and truth-based relationships with clients, building that over time. As we think about the mission for the agency and what the agency stands for, it's right there in the name. As I mentioned, we are a paid media agency. We like to think of ourselves as the paid media agency for culture-creating, growth-stage brands. I guess that's really where our superpower comes in. Our superpower is growing culture-creating brands that don't necessarily have the eight and nine figure budgets to invest in paid media and need their dollars to work harder. That's not only what we've found we're best at, but it's also what we've found gives us the most personal fulfillment as an agency team and as a leadership team within the agency. So it's something that's really easy to stick to, and that's something that we're very proud of as well. ROB: Does that pull a little bit more then towards consumer? Or do you also see some B2B brands you would also dub as culture-creating in their own way? BILL: It's funny; we've been having more interesting conversations with B2B brands probably over the last year. So it does extend to that space, even if it certainly has its heart, and certainly our roots, in more of a consumer-facing type of communications infrastructure. But yes, it's really interesting to see how B2B brands are now saying, “The idea of being adjacent to culture, creating culture, or participating in culture is to help stand out, to help gain association and equity from existing cultural platforms; why does that necessarily exclude us? Why does everything that we do need to be so bland, so to speak?” It's been really fun having those conversations. ROB: You mentioned a judiciousness required around the resources. Is it possible maybe for you to dive down into a client or two and share what it looks like to spend those budgets in a way that really has to deliver in a near- to midterm-way, where they can't just say “We're investing in brand, we're investing in brand”? I assume you're not posting Coke ads for Coca-Cola, right? BILL: We do some work with Coke. We can't say exactly where or how, but we do some work with some of their brands in Atlanta, your hometown. But yes, you're right; it's not about having that long-term branding campaign that's on a very long leash from organizations that are used to having the discipline and the budgets, frankly, to be able to support that and not stress about what their investment's immediate return was. That's a constant conversation that we're having with our brand partners, and helping them understand how best to invest. As we think about that, there are two axioms that we like to share with our clients. Number one is “all media is performance media.” Whether it's something that feels like a longer term-ish, traditional branding campaign, there is still a performance that's being associated with that. There is still a short-term lens that is almost always associated with that. So we want to make sure we're understanding that to satisfy and appease the stakeholders in their organization who are looking for those short-term or more “prove it to me” type results. As we think about what the science tells us, what an analysis of the world's most successful and least successful and average-success brands tells us about how to invest dollars, we know there is a huge economic argument to be made from having that kind of brand-led communications. It really comes down to how you measure it. If you have appropriate measurement in place that can measure things that aren't as immediate as “tell me what the return on ad spend was for my campaign on Amazon,” for instance, then you're going to be in solid shape. So what we try to do with our clients is really understand what their needs are, what their stakeholders are looking for, and then curate a campaign that is rooted somewhat in science and in what works best at growing brands, but does that in a way that also has measurement incorporated so they can prove the impact of what they're doing if it's something where that immediate, vendor-driven measurement isn't right away available. That's how we approach that, and it is absolutely central to our conversations with our brand partners. ROB: Does that focus on measurability in any way impact the selection of marketing channels? You mentioned selecting for the measurement and thinking about the measurement of the channel correctly. Is there anything that's completely out from a measurement perspective? BILL: That's kind of the knock on a lot of traditional media, that it's very challenging to measure them in a more immediate way. Really what you're looking at there is you're trying to put a structure in place that can capture things that aren't as directly trackable. That's where you're looking at, what kind of marketing mix model is my organization using? If my organization spends $10-20 million plus on media or on other important marketing channels, I may already have a marketing mix model in place. Let's figure out how we can align with that and ensure the decisions that we're making are able to be picked up by that measurement. But if you're not, then you might say “I need something that can help me understand what the impact was of a TV spot or radio spot or an outdoor ad” – all things that we know work but are really hard to pin down exactly how they worked for me exactly last month. That's where we're looking at more customized measurement solutions, and that's stuff we can provide directly to a client, to one of our brand partners. We're very proud of being able to do that, but it does require some – we'll call it hoop-jumping. I think that the prize is absolutely worth it, because you've now got a more balanced media mix that's proven to be more effective, 100%, in driving a return for the brand. So jumping through those initial hoops around measurement and setting that up is always worth the investment of time and energy and money. ROB: That's such a neat area to pull in on. I do think a lot of marketers, when they hear “media mix modeling,” it sounds like a high-class tool. Is there a size of brand or a size of budget where it's more viable? Or is it really just a limitation on thinking and it can start from just one or two channels? BILL: I grew up in my career to some degree working with Nestlé. Nestlé has a number of billion-dollar brands and significantly more nine-figure annual sales brands. Those brands very often had access to marketing mix models, and it did feel like a high-class tool, especially at that time. What we've actually been able to figure out over the last three years is that there are now solutions in place for modeling that are significantly less expensive. They're essentially utilizing what we hear about when we hear about AI and machine learning. They're essentially utilizing machine learning in a very efficient and democratized way where you don't need to have expensive data scientists and data analysts running analyses over the course of months. You can now actually build a model over the course of weeks and then have that model in market and be continuously updating it with sales figures and investment figures across different marketing channels, not just media. The fact that that's now democratized is a huge win for brands who aren't spending $10 million plus in their advertising and marketing efforts. We've actually had success modeling out the impact of a campaign that was in the low six figures for an extremely well-known national client, a Fortune 5 client that was really looking to drill down for one of their subsidiaries and understand what the impact was of their spend so that they could then scale it out further, but didn't know where to scale it. To be able to show this channel versus this channel versus the third channel, and this was the relative impact and this is how they all work together – which is another important element – in a way where they spent five figures to have that analysis and had it done in less than eight weeks is a very powerful example of how that works best. ROB: It certainly seems democratizing not only for the brand, but also on even the agency side, because this sort of tooling sounds like the thing that you had to be in a holding company agency at some point, or a very large brand or house of brands, to even consider having access to. BILL: Yeah, that's exactly right. I grew up in that space, working with Nestlé, working in a large holding company for whom I still have a lot of heart and love, and that was the case. It was also the case back then that you really needed to be in part of one of those infrastructures in order to get strong rates for your brand. That's shifted now as so much of our media inventory has become biddable. The standards around how we negotiate, how we manage media for clients, have changed. It really is a golden age for the small- to medium-sized brand or marketer, the growing marketer or brand, to get into the marketplace and to be a meaningful player from Day 1 and not feel like you're being outgunned by these massive organizations. It's very exciting for us. ROB: Indeed. Let's pull on that origin story thread for a moment here, Bill. How did you go from that Nestlé, that holding company agency world, and decide to jump off the cliff and start Exverus? BILL: This is always an interesting question to answer because there was no real one point where it all happened, which is usually the case for most agencies. It happened very organically. I had decided to shift from going full-time, working in one space, to freelancing and to working as a consultant, maybe 10 years ago. As I was doing that, within about three or four months of doing that, I got a phone call from one of my favorite people on Earth, a client of mine from Nestlé, who said, “Hey, I'm over at Clif Bar now. We're really shaping up how we look at media and advertising across our brands. Would you be interested in taking a stab at essentially being a one-person media agency for Clif Bar?” Of course, in my mind I was thinking “there's no possible way I could do that,” and my mouth was somehow saying, “Yes, I'll give it a shot.” [laughs] That began a really wonderful relationship with Clif Bar, and that relationship grew as their investments grew and their need to grow new brands and new product formats grew. Between them and Creative Artist Agency (CAA) and their extremely wonderful, award-winning marketing team, which is now known as Observatory, I think they hit a point where the amount of work was too much for one person plus a few helpers on the side to handle. We had a lot of built-in credibility, working with an organization that's probably over a billion dollars in sales annually in Clif Bar, and CAA, which is the world's best-known talent agency from a marketing standpoint. Impeccable reputation. So there was a lot of built-in credibility. There was new demand. We just made the decision – I still remember my Head of Operations saying, “We have to go for it,” driving to a soccer match one Wednesday night. And thus Exverus was born. We said “we're really going to give this a go” about five and a half years ago now. ROB: Wow. Congrats. A lot of companies don't even make it that far. You've got a team around you now, and it feels probably pretty real. I think the timing that a firm starts always confers some advantages and disadvantages. Your firm started around I guess 2012-2014, depending on where you are in that slow-motion window that you referred to; in performance marketing, that's an interesting time within the evolution of the different channels. How do you think that timing informed how you attacked the market? BILL: It did a few things. At a macroeconomic level, I think unfortunately it created a scarcity mindset because we had just gone through a massive crash in 2008. By the time I really started, there was no very clear boom and very clear recovery happening. That was a more recent thing. So there was a bit of a scarcity mindset, which took a long time to work out of and to shift into more that abundance mindset. I think that can keep you conservative, which is a good thing sometimes, in some years. In some years that holds you back. So from a macro standpoint, that's how the timing maybe helped and maybe slowed things down over time. As I think, too, about where the industry was, really from Day 1, it reaffirmed that even though it was much more straightforward to start a media agency and to focus on digital channels – there was much more access; it was a much more equitable system with a lot less in the way in terms of gatekeepers like there are with some traditional media – even though it was a little bit more challenging to have those other mediums in place, being media-neutral and being able to offer all media, even if we were still digital-first, was a really smart strategic decision. As the rise of performance media has come in, and now for many organizations performance media has overtaken brand media by multiple times over – knowing that that trend was happening and having a strategy and a perspective of neutrality really helped us a lot. It helped us to build more trust-based relationships with our clients because we weren't trying to push them into the latest fad or the latest channel or the latest tactic for its own sake. We were always trying to do that based off of what was best for their business, what was best to grow their brand. That helps build trust rather than saying “We're focused in this particular area which is hot right now.” So I think that can be great to be a particular specialist, even within the specialty of paid media, but I think that our timing really reaffirmed our strategy and our approach to market, and it's one that's seen us continue to grow and be successful into and beyond 2021. ROB: For sure. It's an interesting time. You got to start past the social for the sake of social, social as the source of infinite free growth, but also social as the bucket of infinite budget without accountability. It's interesting you mentioned the gatekeepers. It's almost easy to forget the times when if you wanted to manage let's say your Facebook ads, there were only a handful of companies you could talk to about that. BILL: That's right. ROB: That's a whole different world. BILL: And to see how much – at one point I was doing the Facebook ads, 9 or 10 years ago, and it was exhausting keeping up with the changes. Every three months, something minor would change that you used daily, and every six months it seemed like they were completely renovating and revamping the entire process. It was so funny to see that TV couldn't change fast enough, print certainly couldn't change fast enough, and here you had social and other channels that were changing so fast that it was almost impossible to keep up with them. It was certainly an interesting time to start things up. ROB: A friend of mine used to work for one of those vendors. They had to keep up with all the changes, and they used to call every Tuesday “new bug Tuesday,” because there would be something new they had to go out and fix. You probably had to deal with the other end of that stick. BILL: That's right. ROB: Bill, as you reflect on the journey so far with Exverus, what are some lessons you've learned along the way that you might do a little bit differently if you were starting clean, from scratch? BILL: Things that I would do differently. I think that we were never slow to meet our clients' needs, but we were sometimes slow to say, “This is a macro trend and we should have a whole staff around it.” One of the examples is more performance-based media. The reason I say that is because we have plenty of team members, particularly today, who are world-class experts in performance, but a few years ago we kind of missed the boat a little bit because we thought that by satisfying our clients' immediate needs and performance, we were doing our jobs. What I missed was that this was a strategic exercise. There needed to be a strategic team of people that were focused in the performance space. One of the reasons why was that it wasn't that they needed to have a particular technical skillset; in many cases we're talking about the same media channels that can be used for very different purposes, like search, like social, like digital video and digital display. But what we were doing was missing the mindset. Those folks who really excel in performance have a completely different mindset and approach to how they manage media and how they manage client relationships to get to specific results. There's plenty of reasons for that, which all make sense. But missing that mindset was number one in terms of what we could've done better, going back probably 3-5 years ago. The other thing, too, is I think really understanding the business and the business side of being an agency leader. The ups and downs are not communicated to you when you are working at an agency in a way that's terribly transparent, or frankly often necessary. You're usually hearing the very big undulations of the waves. “Things are amazing. We won this huge account” or “Things aren't great and we need to have layoffs.” Those are the types of things you're hearing. What you don't realize is that as an agency owner, things are up and down on an hourly basis, some days on a quarter-hourly basis. There is a mindset and there is a psychological helmet that you need to put on to be able to manage that in the context of doing all of the wonderful work that your clients are contracting you to do. I think that is one thing that I certainly didn't know about, and that's something that lives alongside what all business owners learn, which is that you're responsible now for every element of the business. I was ready to do the accounting. That's easy. [laughs] I went to an accounting school for college. But it was the psychological aspect of being in our business and being comfortable with the way that our business works that, if you're someone without a very risk-tolerant mindset, might be a bit jarring. ROB: How do you process that over time? I know certainly initially, a lot of your team, you feel like you can't tell them a lot of the gusts. Sometimes they'll surprise you and they'll have a great solution, and sometimes they won't know what the heck to do and you might just freak them out a little bit. How do you think about processing, learning some of these blind spots, those shifts that we all have to make? BILL: That's a great question. From my standpoint, we try to be as transparent as possible with our team. Today we actually just had our quarterly state of the union. This time we didn't go into as much detail as normal, but we try to be transparent. “This is what's going on. This is where we're struggling. We're struggling to fill this particular role. Do you have any solutions? Do you think you might be able to help? Or if nothing else, please know that we're working on it still, because we know that's had an impact on some people's workloads.” We'll be very forthright with everything that we can. Without being obligated to or sharing specific numbers financially, we will share where we are in terms of reaching our goals and what it means to reach our goals. Is it just profit for the sake of profit? Or does profit open up new doors and new opportunities to all of us for strategic partnerships? That's a very different conversation, and it's one that I think our team appreciates hearing. One great piece of advice that I got during COVID was actually from Simon Sinek, Start with Why, very famous guy. Incredibly intelligent. Everyone knows his public persona. He's a family friend; he's been good friends with my wife for over a decade. We were chatting about there are certain things that we just don't know what to do and how to move forward in COVID, and he said, “Put it on your team. Share it with your team. Do that in a thoughtful way and say, ‘I don't know the answer to this. I'm not going to pretend that I'm the person who has all the answers all the time, and I'd love to hear what your input is and what your feedback or solutions are.' You'll be surprised as to what you get back. Your team isn't necessarily thinking about your business all day long, but they are working in it, and they are people that you hire specifically for their intelligence. So see if that helps.” And it really did. I also think it made for more open dialogue, which in today's age of transparency is really valued by employees and by myself and the rest of the leadership team. ROB: All such really good points in there. Reminds me of a very recent experience where for a long time, I had been suggesting a certain sort of client engagement model. I tried to communicate why, but I maybe wasn't really getting my point across. In a totally different conversation, I expressed a particular business goal in terms of margin – and to your point about profit margin, the key of telling people where that goes and what that gets us when you're growing – you need cash just to be in cash reserves. You need to have good financial cushion on the business. You need to invest in growth. You need all those things. Helping them know why you need profit helps instead of just thinking you should break even and everybody should take all the cash out. But I shared a particular goal in terms of profit margin, and I had somebody super brilliant on my team who said, “Oh, why don't we engage more in this model?” It was exactly pretty close to what I had suggested before, but without the full picture and the rationale and the transparency, it was just hanging empty. And everybody does things better when they think it's their idea, and that's okay. I don't have any problem with that. So really good point. BILL: From your standpoint, where do you feel the line is in terms of transparency, in terms of how you communicate with team members? ROB: That's a great question that I'm still learning. I have typically been a tremendously private person on these sorts of things, and over the past year I engaged with a business coach about a year ago who came recommended by people who have billion-dollar companies. That was good enough for me, and I could still afford them. He's just continued to push me on the value of what I'll get by sharing more with the team. Where that stands for us right now, to be real specific about it, at an exec team level, we're talking about – in a services organization, on our services side, we're talking about revenue per employee. We're talking about target profit margin. We're talking about what that actually looks like. And that's uncomfortable for me. I could regret it. I could learn something from it. But it's going in the right direction. BILL: That's great. I think we've probably had a very similar experience. I may not dig into some of the KPIs that you do quite as in-depth, but sharing that information can be liberating when it's done properly, and it can show a lot of faith in the team. For me it was a great learning experience, and it was a great moment of growth starting to share that information. ROB: I'm glad to hear and gain some comfort. The worst story we ever had on here about somebody sharing stuff was someone who had an employee suck out $300,000 in payroll taxes that they were personally liable for, and they had to drive ahead and build the business and dig their way out. But that's a different lesson to be learned. BILL: Yes, and I don't necessarily think we should be giving access to the finances to everyone. [laughs] ROB: Totally agree. Bill, when people want to track you down and track down Exverus, where should they go to find you? BILL: Probably the best place for Exverus is our website. It's www.exverus.com. For me, I can be found on LinkedIn. I'm Bill Durrant with two R's. No relation to Kevin. I'm pretty easy to track down if you add “Exverus” to the end of that in the search queue. ROB: That's good. It's good to know we can't track down KD through you. We'll have to find our own way. BILL: Just want to set expectations. ROB: [laughs] Thank you so much, Bill. Congratulations to everything you and Exverus have accomplished so far, and I wish you the best. BILL: Appreciate it. Thanks, Rob. ROB: Take care. Bye. Thank you for listening. The Marketing Agency Leadership Podcast is presented by Converge. Converge helps digital marketing agencies and brands automate their reporting so they can be more profitable, accurate, and responsive. To learn more about how Converge can automate your marketing reporting, email info@convergehq.com, or visit us on the web at convergehq.com.

I had the opportunity to sit down with celebrity cosmetic dentist, Dr. Bill Dorfman. We chatted about how he came up in the world from childhood to creating one of the most famous dentist practices in Studio City, CA. On top of the practice he created, he also started Discus Dental with a dear friend of his, which was a global leader in professional tooth whitening products with brands such as Zoom®!, BriteSmile®, and NiteWhite® and they eventually sold the company to Royal Philips Electronics for millions. Dr. Bill has appeared on Larry King Live, Oprah, The Doctors and was the only dentist to appear on ABC's Extreme Makeover. Now with his extremely successful career, he has turned some of his focus towards philanthropy and the LEAP Foundation for high school and college students. You're going to see this side of Dr. Bill and his passion towards entrepreneurship, success, giving back and his foundation. As always, thanks so much for listening to the podcast and I would so appreciate a rating of 5 starts and a review. It would really mean the world to me. Much love, Joe Dr. Bill Dorfman Celebrity Cosmetic Dentist, Partner of Discus Dental, Inventor of Zoom! and Founder of the LEAP Foundation Author of: Billion Dollar Smile: A Complete Guide to Your Extreme Smile Makeover Website: https://www.billdorfmandds.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drbilldorfman/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrBillDorfman LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drbilldorfman/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/DrBillDorfman Podcast Music By: Andy Galore, Album: "Out and About", Song: "Chicken & Scotch" 2014 Andy's Links: http://andygalore.com/ https://www.facebook.com/andygalorebass If you enjoy the podcast, would you please consider leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts/iTunes? It takes less than 60 seconds, and it really makes a difference in helping to convince hard-to-get guests. For show notes and past guests, please visit: https://joecostelloglobal.libsyn.com Subscribe, Rate & Review: I would love if you could subscribe to the podcast and leave an honest rating & review. This will encourage other people to listen and allow us to grow as a community. The bigger we get as a community, the bigger the impact we can have on the world. Sign up for Joe's email newsletter at: https://joecostelloglobal.com/#signup For transcripts of episodes, go to: https://joecostelloglobal.lybsyn.com Follow Joe: https://linktr.ee/joecostello Transcript Joe: Ok, my guest today is Dr. Bill Dorfman. Dr. Bill, welcome.   Dr. Bill: Thank you. How are you?   Joe: Great. So it's a pleasure to have you here with a lot of the guests that I have on, I really like to give the audience an idea of who you are and not just jump in to where we are today. So if can you give us some background of your time line, how you decided to get into dentistry where you grew up, just kind of bring us up to today is is slow, slower, as fast as you want to.   Dr. Bill: Sure, I am a native of California, I grew up in Granada Hills as a little kid, I happen to have an accident where I knocked out my baby teeth. We had a great family dentist. And at some point I just thought this would be a cool thing to do and help people the way he helped me. And so at the age of about three, I said, I'm going to be a dentist. And it just never wavered. I was a weird kid. I mean, how many kids want to be a dentist? Right. But I've always been weird and I've always kind of marched to the beat of a different drum. I never felt like I fit into any, like, group or peg. I just kind of always did my own thing. I was like the Switzerland of a kid. I was friends with everybody, but not really part of anything, you know, like I swam. But I wasn't always with the swimmers and I played football, but I wasn't with the football players and student government. But, like, I just was kind of a free spirited kid that didn't really I didn't really, like, do what most normal kids do. I don't know. It was funny. I had this conversation with my parents recently and I said, you know.   Dr. Bill: How was I as a kid, like was I easy to raise, hard to raise, and they're like, you are perfect like you. And, you know, and I honestly don't ever remember I never argued with my parents. I never got into trouble. I was a weird kid. I just I always just kind of did what I was supposed to do. I guess it was in my mind, like the path of least resistance. I didn't smoke. I didn't drink. I didn't do drugs. Like I mean, I always kind of just did what I was supposed to do and I was happy go lucky guy. And, you know, I went to school and it's funny because I was always voted most likely to succeed in kindergarten, in grade school and junior high and high. And I was like, why do people always say that? I don't know. It was just a weird thing, even in dental school and. You know, we grew up really poor. I mean, I was one of five kids, I started working when I was five years old. I had a job. I worked in in the in the yard for neighbors. I would go pick weeds. And then when I was old enough to push a lawnmower, I would pull weeds and do the lawn mower.   Dr. Bill: And then when I got a little bit older, I got a job working at Ralph's, which is a grocery store. And then I worked as a janitor. My mother was a nursery school teacher. And so I would go to school and I would work as a janitor and clean the schools. And, you know, my parents, I would say we were rich, rich, rich in love, poor monetary things. And maybe that was good, you know? I mean, I literally supported myself. I mean, outside of buying food, all my clothes, everything I wanted, I just I bought you know, it's funny because I have three daughters and I almost feel like when they got into college, I got into college, too, because I was so active in helping them write their entrance stuff and did it. But my parents had no idea. You know, one day I got a letter, I'm like, Hey, Mom, Dad, I'm going to UCLA. They're like, Oh, that's great, sweetie. Then they'll clue, you know? I mean, it was just that's just how it was. I was the independent kid. I just did my own thing. I remember. Graduating UCLA, I got a call from the dean's office and I was awarded the outstanding senior award, which is kind of a big deal, right?   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: So I call my folks and my mom, dad, I get on the phone, they're both on the phone. I'm like, you won't believe this. I said, well, I just got a call from the dean's office and I'm going to be the outstanding senior at UCLA graduating class. My mother says, What's not to believe? A lot. They picked me, there's ten thousand students,   Joe: Right.   Dr. Bill: She goes, darling, do you really think there's somebody better?   Joe: That's awesome.   Dr. Bill: I'm like, Mom, you're like totally missing. My parents had no idea. And it was actually kind of funny, you know, and, you know, so, you know, I kind of went through and I graduate UCLA. I finished that, you know, going to UCLA. And then I got in a dental school. My first choice is dental, which was a great school. It was a three year program. And as I was entering my senior year, I realized, you know, I've never seen the world or anything. Actually, I had never even really been on an airplane. And it's like I need to open up this practice and be tethered to a specific area. Like I didn't want to do that. So I did some research and I found a program in Switzerland that was the only clinic literally in the world that wasn't a third world country where an American dentist could work legally. Problem is, there were four hundred applicants and only one position, and I was bound and determined to get that. So I had every professor in my dental school write me a letter of recommendation. And they were amazing letters, you know. I know. I wrote them all I   Joe: That's   Dr. Bill: Mean,   Joe: Right.   Dr. Bill: Basically, I would say, can you write me a letter and they do I know I have to   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: Write another letter and then say I'll write it if your personal lives. So I did that and I soon realized that was getting me nowhere. So then I started calling the director of the clinic back in nineteen eighty three. This was not easy. We didn't have cell phones. You know, I, you know, I couldn't make long distance phone calls from my dental school, you know, what am I getting like keep putting quarters like a lot of your millennialist. Don't you know that you actually used to have to put money in a pay   Joe: Exactly,   Dr. Bill: Phone. Right.   Joe: I was there.   Dr. Bill: Right. So there is and you can use a credit card and none of this. So I would have to time it at home. And and even then, it wasn't easy. A lot of times you couldn't get through. It didn't work at the bank. I start calling him and calling him and I tell kids and we'll talk about my leave program a little later on, there will be life defining moments in your life. Sometimes you plan on, sometimes you don't. Sometimes they just happen. And this was one that I really didn't plan, but it was so fortuitous that it happened. And I'm on the phone with the director. His name was Mr. Schreyer. And I said as I realized I was getting nowhere with these phone calls. Can I take you to lunch? Because I had heard somewhere that, like, you should take people to lunch   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: And the crazy thing is and he said it, he goes, But you're in San Francisco and I'm in Switzerland, I'm like, no problem, I'll fly there. Which is even crazier because I was broke like I had no money. I couldn't even afford, like the 30 cents to go on the bus every day of school. That's how broke I was. I would walk like two miles. And so he said yes. And I figured out a way to borrow money. And I went to Switzerland   Joe: Wait, but don't   Dr. Bill: And   Joe: Go past   Dr. Bill: I.   Joe: This point. Wait, I want to know what you told your parents when you said I'm going to Switzerland to take the head of the department at the dental school. Out to lunch. I want to know what your parents said to that.   Dr. Bill: They thought it was a great idea.   Joe: That's incredible.   Dr. Bill: Good luck. You know,   Joe: That's   Dr. Bill: I mean,   Joe: Awesome.   Dr. Bill: They had no clue. So anyhow, I did it. There was a girl that I had been friends with my whole life that, you know, I had kind of hoped that I would marry one day. That never happened. But we're still best friends. But I took her with me and I figured if I got stuck on words, she was very talkative and she could help me out. But the two of us took him to lunch and he hired me.   Joe: That's   Dr. Bill: And   Joe: Incredible.   Dr. Bill: It literally changed my life. I mean, I got an opportunity to live in Europe. For two years, I learned how to ski trip about salesmanship of the scandal to I'm completely fluent in French. I   Joe: Wow.   Dr. Bill: And I was really not gifted in languages in school. I mean, and I still I have a godson in Switzerland. I mean and I still have very close friends there. So it was a great, great, great experience for me. And it really gave me an opportunity to see the world. I came back to L.A. I really became enamored with cosmetic dentistry as opposed to just general dentistry. And so I did something that we also teach Italy. It's called Kopi Genius. I realized that the last thing Beverly Hills needed was another cosmetic dentist. So I found the five most successful cosmetic dentists and I called all of them and I said, Can I come in Chattanooga? Shadowing wasn't even a thing back then like they were what do what   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: I'm like now coming to watch you. And I did. And, you know, there weren't a lot of students at the time doing this, but they all five of them said the same thing to me. You're really different. I think what they were saying in a nice way is you're weird, but they're really different, you know, because students would come in and watch me do dentistry. And that's not what I did. What I did was I went in, I wanted to see how they brought the patients in the intake forms, what they said to the patients, how they brought them back to the treatment rooms, how they presented the treatment, and then how they performed the treatment, and then how they took the patient out of the room, how they collected money. I wanted to get paid and I didn't know how to collect money from people working in dental school. They teach you how to drill teeth. And in the clinic in Switzerland, I didn't have to deal with money. I just did the work. So I wanted to learn how a business ran and all that. And I sat there like a sponge in these offices. And my goal was to make an office better than theirs, to take the best of the best from all of these these guys and make a better dental office.   Dr. Bill: And within two years I did it. You know, I had the busiest and probably still have the busiest dental office in all of Beverly Hills because I copy Genius and that's what I did on Instagram and Instagram became popular. I didn't just do it. I hired a whole team. I'm only going to in the world with a million followers on Instagram. You know, I didn't just do it. One of the things I teach, at least when you go go big and that's what I do, if I'm going to do something, I commit and I do it. So, you know, I started this dental practice soon after that, I started a company called Discus Dental where I invented Zoom. And we grew that company from zero to one point three dollars billion in sales. And I did it by hiring a great team. My best friend, Robert Heyman, was my business partner and he was a genius. And his father was Fred Hammond, who created Beverly Hills Giorgio Cosmetics, two seven, three of all Fred.   Joe: Well.   Dr. Bill: So Robert grew up in that industry. So he knew marketing and manufacturing and advertising. I knew dentistry and advertising. And together we built the largest tooth whitening company in the world. Zoom became Q to became the number one to fly new product in the world. And then we sold that company to Phillips back in 2010. And since then, I've been the featured dentist on ABC's Extreme Makeover, CBS of Doctors New York Times, best selling author, 20 Lifetime Achievement Award. Three Children, two ex-wives. This Thrill Ride.   Joe: Incredible. So I have to ask you, and this is for the entrepreneurs in the audience, because the question that would come to my mind is you're fresh back in the states from Switzerland and you decide that you're going to plant roots and probably one of the most expensive real estate areas in the world. How do you start up a dental office in the heart of Beverly Hills?   Dr. Bill: So I basically didn't put all my eggs in one basket, I grew up in Granada Hills, the difference between Granada Hills and Beverly Hills is astronomical. The only commonality is the word Ilze. Right. But I didn't know where I would usually drive more. I had the advantage holes of all the people I grew up with living there and coming to me. But I loved the allure of Beverly Hills. So I worked as an associate in two different dental offices. So it didn't cost me anything. I was a hired gun. I would go in and work and bring in patients. And I soon realized that I loved cosmetic dentistry. I love the mentality of people in a business area like centricity and, you know, and not so much kind of like family dentistry. And so I pretty much closed down the office and Granada Hills worked in in Century City. And the plan was I was working with an older fellow to buy him out. Well, as soon as we started getting closer and closer to the buyout date, I think my enthusiasm became infectious. And he decided he didn't want to quit anymore.   Joe: Oh.   Dr. Bill: And he was very sweet. And he said, you know, Bill, he said, you can do this by yourself. He said, you don't need to buy my practice. I'm going to stay here, open up your own practice. You have enough pay. I had more patients than he did   Joe: Oh,   Dr. Bill: After   Joe: Wow.   Dr. Bill: Just two years. And so I did. It was really fortuitous that the dentist right next door to us moved out of the building. And so there was a completely furnished dental suite. I didn't have to do any build out at all. All of the plumbing, the gas, the soft, everything was there. So I was really lucky. I moved into that suite is on the 11th floor, my building, and the only thing I needed was all the dental equipment, the chairs and the   Joe: Mm   Dr. Bill: Lights   Joe: Hmm.   Dr. Bill: And this and then another stroke of luck. There was a dentist in our building who was four or five flights above me who passed away. And there was a fully furnished dental office up there of all this equipment. And the building didn't know what to do with it. And it was a mess. It was a mess. So I went up there and and I had it evaluated and assessed. I was going to try and take out a loan or something. And the appraisal came in at close to seventy five thousand dollars for all that. I had three thousand dollars in the bank at the time. I mean, that's it. And so I, I went and I spoke to the owner of our building and I said, listen, I've been up on in that suite and it's it's a mess. I mean, and it was it was really disgusting and dirty. And I said, I will empty the suite. I will take all of the equipment, I will clean everything up and get it ready for you to read. And I'll give you three thousand dollars cash. And he said, fine.   Joe: Wow, that's   Dr. Bill: And   Joe: Chris.   Dr. Bill: I still I still have a lot of those instruments, and I this is 40 years I've been practicing. I have all the surgical like four extractions and I have all that stuff still in my office with that doctor's name engraved in it. But that was how I really opened up my office. I had no budget. I had no ad budget. Like, I couldn't advertise, but I realized something. And as an entrepreneur, I would say you need to sit back, look at your situation and really think outside the box. And this is what I did. I thought, OK, I'm in Century City. There is a five block radius of buildings around my office with 20000 thousand people coming to work every day. Right.   Joe: Hmm.   Dr. Bill: We know on average that 50 percent of those people don't have a regular dentist. OK, so that's you know, what was I'm sorry. It was fifty thousand people in that area. So that's twenty five thousand people don't have a regular dentist that work for me. Of those, twenty five thousand eighty percent of them work in companies with dental insurance so they don't even have to pay anything. They just need to come in and because I'm so close, they can walk over, they wouldn't have to drive. So what I did is I hired five kids from Beverly Hills High School, which is right next door to my dental office. And I made up these flyers for I think I paid three hundred bucks and I had them put a flyer in every single office in Century City. Now, this was way before 9/11, so there was no restrictions   Joe: Right.   Dr. Bill: You could go. And so basically by doing that, the flyer gave people a great first time offering to my office. If they had dental insurance, it was free. And I got something like 80 patients the very first month. And if we continue to do that and so we were basically getting patients in two ways, internal and external. Internal was taking the patients that came in, giving them the greatest dental experience we could and asking them to refer friends and then externally going out and putting out more and more and more flyers and bringing in patients. The next month I got something like one hundred new patients. And honestly, since then I have probably had no less than 90 new patients a month my entire career. And there were I mean, and the average dentist gets like 20. But I have never not been busy even during the pandemic. We've been busy. I'm busier now than I've been in years because I always say I invented Zoom when people think I the video conference, what it was. But people are sitting on Zoom looking at their smile,   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: Going, I'm not really happy with that. I'm doing more cosmetic dentistry right now than I've ever done in my life. It's it's a   Joe: That's   Dr. Bill: Boom.   Joe: Crazy. And when you said when you started your practice you were going to concentrate on cosmetic surgery, so were all of these new patients coming in just for cosmetic stuff, not for cleanings, or were you doing   Dr. Bill: Well,   Joe: That also?   Dr. Bill: First of all, it wasn't cosmetic surgery, it was cosmetic dentistry,   Joe: Ok.   Dr. Bill: But as a cosmetic dentist, yeah, we do regular dentistry too and do   Joe: At.   Dr. Bill: Fillings and crowns and cleanings and everything else that you need to do to maintain your oral care. But the focus of my of my practice, the thing that really differentiates me from most dentists is the fact that I do, you know, cosmetic dentistry. And I have a very high profile clientele for that.   Joe: Yep, so that's my next question, you get right into it perfectly. How did you get   Dr. Bill: Ok.   Joe: Like with any entrepreneur? Obviously, if you provide a really great service, you're going to get talked about right. And automatically you're going to get known. And like for my business, I have an entertainment booking agency here in Scottsdale and Phoenix. Somebody writes to me, calls me. They have an answer. Within an hour or so, I'm known for my response time. And then the product I deliver is a very high product with you. How did you get that first step into a clientele that you now have?   Dr. Bill: So there's a few things. First of all, you said something, you said you automatically get no wrong. You don't automatically   Joe: No,   Dr. Bill: Get   Joe: You   Dr. Bill: No.   Joe: Do it yourself, you write.   Dr. Bill: You know, it takes work,   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: You know, I was really fortunate early on in my career, there's a woman that I went to high school with as very close. But if you came in and needed a lot of dental work and said, hey, do you want to barter what I got, even though the barter was   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: I was so naive when it came to business. And then I said, well, what do you do? She goes, I'm a publicist. I'm like, I don't need one of those. She goes, Yeah, you do. I'm like, I don't even know what one was. So I don't leap of faith. I thought, OK, fine, we'll barter and we'll do it. She was genius. I mean, she got me in magazines, journals. She got me listed as the best dentist in L.A. in L.A. magazine, which was huge that, you know, she she was friends with the editor. She got the whole editorial staff to come in and be my patient. They loved their experience. And so they ranted and raved about my practice. And those things started building up my practice. And, you know, I can get more into the whole PR thing, but that was really a big mindshift for me. I never thought as a dentist I would have like a publicist. I mean, and the crazy thing is today I'm probably the best known dentist in the world. Go figure.   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: Right. But a lot of things happen. And, you know, I always tell kids when they come to leak, if there's only two concepts that you walk away from from this whole program, these are the two that I think are most important. Number one, don't wait for opportunities in life. Make them, you know, I mean, if I meet another millennial who's sitting there waiting for the universe to do something, I want to scream and pull my hair out. Like the universe doesn't care about you at all. You need to care about you. And number two, when you get an opportunity in life, don't take it. M. it. There's a big difference   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: When ABC put me on Extreme Makeover dentistry, great TV, not so good. You know, if I watch the first two episodes of that show, I literally stunk like they should have fired me. But at least I was smart enough to know how bad I was. So instead of waiting to get fired, I was proactive. I took acting classes, hosting classes, teleprompter in class. I hired the woman who worked with all the kids on American Idol to sit down with me and teach me how to do what we're doing right now. To interview, to talk. I mean, this was not natural for me. It wasn't at all. But, you know, if you practice and you practice and you practice, you get better at things. And there's a big misconception. We always think practice makes what?   Joe: Perfect.   Dr. Bill: Ron.   Joe: Right.   Dr. Bill: Practice makes permanent.   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: So with your practicing in, you're not getting the results you want, don't keep doing that, get a mentor, get a coach, hire somebody and learn how to do it right, because you need to practice it the right way. Right. To make it perfect. And   Joe: So.   Dr. Bill: So there was a lot of learning for me. But, you know, at the end of the day, it paid off.   Joe: Then would your grandmother say you look thin? Is that what she said? She looks.   Dr. Bill: The first time I was on TV, I said, Grandpa, this is a woman who never said anything bad to anybody. I said, Gramps, did you see me on TV? She goes, Of course I did. I said, What do you think? She says? You look very   Joe: If   Dr. Bill: Skinny.   Joe: It's.   Dr. Bill: I'm like, But what do you think about what I did? She goes, I'm telling you, you were skinny.   Joe: I want to talk a lot about Lee, because even though you said, like, the universe doesn't care, I I also believe and I'm a big Dave Meltzer fan and he's sort of my mentor at this point that we get in our own way. And so there is abundance out there. And if we get out of the way and we just know what we want and we ask for it and we act accordingly, things come. So this connection with you means a lot to me because of Lee. Before we get to that, do you want to talk a little bit about your own podcast? Just because the lead part of it for me is huge and I really want to concentrate on that until our time runs out, so.   Dr. Bill: Well, I mean, the know the way that my podcast ties in the league is, Leape is a motivational leadership program for high school and college students that we do every summer. And it's always been at UCLA Live. Obviously, last year it was virtual. This year, I think we'll have probably one hundred students live and maybe ten thousand virtual.   Joe: Oh,   Dr. Bill: But   Joe: My gosh.   Dr. Bill: It's been amazing. And if any of your listeners have kids or no kids, fifteen to twenty five will be July 18th to the twenty fourth. They could get more information at w w w dot leap foundation dot com. We've had amazing speakers Paula Abdul, Mark Wahlberg, Anthony Hopkins, Kathy Bates, Michael Strahan, Usher, Apollo Ohno, Jason Alexander. I mean, I could go on and on and on. And these people come, they speak to these kids and they they give them their pearls. They give them their words of wisdom to help these kids become successful. And it's it's an amazing program. And, you know, I was always fearful that people would look at is like one and done like we have them for a week. But by putting out content continuously, we're able to stay in touch with the kids and we have the students stay in touch with each other. And so because I've been able to interview all these amazing people, I started this podcast. It's called Meet the Mentor. And every week I. I interview another person. A big part of Leape is mentorship. The program culminates on Friday with a mentor workshop where I bring in doctors and lawyers and firefighters and writers and actors and actresses, you name it, and the kids get an opportunity to sit and talk to these people one on one and ask them about their careers. And it's so valuable. And it's it's literally the highlight of the week for these students. So I continue that throughout the year by doing this. Meet the Mentor podcast. How is it done? Crazy. I mean, we're number one in Yemen. We're number two in Iceland, number three in Finland. And I think I'm ninety fourth in the category of forty seven thousand of these podcast in the US. And it's it's it's been phenomenal. And the purpose is twofold. One, to keep students engaged and keep, you know, exposing them to different mentors and to to expose parents and friends and family to lead. And hopefully they'll send their kids to the program.   Joe: So how did this come about? What was the light bulb that went off for you to say? This really speaks to me. I mean, I can imagine you are with all the things that you've done, your super busy, and then then all of a sudden have this light bulb go off and say, this is how this is. I want to give back and this is how I want to do it.   Dr. Bill: You know, I've always been very philanthropic and it's funny because I had this common theme in my life where every time I've committed to do something purely for philanthropy, it's ended up becoming incredibly successful for me on a monetary basis with literally no hidden agenda. And I can give you an example after example after example. The first one being discussed, you know, I was working at at the sports club L.A., which is now an equinox. And a woman came up to me named Cynthia Hearn, who I didn't know and said, would you like to help raise money for children's cancer research? Well, I wasn't wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, but how can you say no to that? Right.   Joe: Absolutely.   Dr. Bill: So I said, sure. You know, she said, you are a dentist. I said, yes. And she goes, and you're single, right? I'm like, Yeah, but this is weird. She goes, Well, we're doing a bachelor auction and   Joe: Oh,   Dr. Bill: We need 10 bachelors that we can auction off to a thousand women for this charity,   Joe: Oh.   Dr. Bill: To be honest with you. That was stupid and humiliating. But out of that, I met Robert Hamit Robert Heyman with the other bats are standing in line beside me. By the way, Robert was over last night. We had dinner. We became instant. Best friends were brothers.   Joe: A   Dr. Bill: And   Joe: Simple.   Dr. Bill: Robert and I started discus dental and we literally brewed that company zero to one point three billion dollars. And along the way we've raised over forty five million dollars for children's charities. I mean, a lot of really cool things. But I was exposed to lead through another program that was very much like it was a precursor to lead. And that program was a program for students where they brought mentors in and they asked me to come as a mentor. And unfortunately, the founder of that program passed away. And when you did, I thought, you know, I can make this a nonprofit and keep it going so that that's how I actually got introduced to Lee.   Joe: Wow, that's really interesting. So when did this start? By the way?   Dr. Bill: So LEEP has been going this summer would have been our 13th, so the fourth theme fleet will come up this summer, but I've been doing the program prior to leave for probably 10 to 15 years before I started.   Joe: That's incredible. And when they go out to you said it's on the UCLA campus and where are they staying in dorms, if they.   Dr. Bill: Right, so students come from all over the world. We get kids from Australia, from New Zealand, from Europe and Asia and Africa, you name it, it's like a mini UN. It's really fun. And we get about five hundred kids. They all live in the dorms and we put on, you know, I think the best program of its type in the world. And a lot of the success of the program is the community. I mean, I get amazing speakers and they don't charge us. I mean, you couldn't afford to pay, you know, Anthony Hopkins, Mark Wahlberg. I think we'll get Katy Perry this year. I mean, I we couldn't pay, but when I when I talk to him about the program and they see how much passion we put into this, they say, I'll do it, doc, I'll do it. And now with Zoom, it makes everything so much easier because they don't even have to show up prior to the pandemic. If I had told kids. Oh yeah. Mark Wahlberg told Zoom in maybe like and   Joe: Yeah.   Dr. Bill: Now it's like it doesn't it's like live or Zoom. They're happy to see him.   Joe: That's incredible. It's just really the reason this speaks to me is because I feel like in the world that we're in and I'm I just turned fifty nine in February. So next year is a big year for me. And I think about all the time and I don't want to say it was wasted or regret or anything, but I think about that we end up trying to repair ourselves as adults on things that might not have happened. You had your life a little different. You knew exactly what you wanted to do. You followed your path that you're wired differently, your DNA, and you were able to just literally do all of these things. And I'm sure you've had your struggles. So I'm not I'm not painting this picture of, you know, none of that. But it would be so nice to get to these young minds early and explain that the world literally is your oyster. And you need to follow your. And sometimes I don't know. Right. So you say follow your heart. Sometimes they're confused about it. But I love the fact that you're getting to these young minds earlier and you're helping them to understand things sooner. And that's why this program speaks to me so much. I think it's incredible.   Dr. Bill: Well, I'll tell you what I have found empirically to be one of the most important factors in all of this. When I sit back and I say, you know, what am I most thankful for, you know, from my parents now, they never bought me a car. They never gave me money. But you know what? They did give me confidence. And confidence is currency, if you are a parent, the greatest, greatest gift that you can give your kids is confidence. And the very first thing we do, at least when a kid walks in that door and I open the program, I say to them, hey, when you woke up this morning, whether you think you did this or not, you put a number on your forehead once the lowest 10, Zayat said. How many of you did not put a 10 on your head? They raised their hand. I said, Who picked the number? You did have to take a test. No, did have to do anything. No, I said wipe it off and put a 10 on that. I said, from now on, I want you to walk like a ten top like a 10, act like a ten. But most importantly, surround yourself with other kids who are tense because you're trying to be a 10 and everybody around you use it to guess what, you become a two. So we give the kids these pop soccer   Joe: It's also.   Dr. Bill: Support on their phone ten. And you might hear something super crazy. Joe, we sold discus dental on ten, ten,   Joe: Oh,   Dr. Bill: Ten   Joe: Well.   Dr. Bill: At 10 a.m. to Philipps.   Joe: That's crazy.   Dr. Bill: I think about October 10th, 2010, at nine a.m., the merger documents came on like this is you can't write this stuff. I'm waiting till exactly ten o'clock so that when I go to sleep in 2011, I could tell the kids what a perfect ten day looks like. And we I signed that paper and, you know. It was an emotional moment for me. I always knew as against. I'd be comfortable, I had no idea. That I had the ability. To make the kind of money I made when we sold my company, that was like funny money to me, I didn't even think something like that could happen. I didn't grow up that way, you know? And, you know, and I thank my lucky stars every day for for meeting Robert Haymond, for participating in that charity auction, for, I mean, all the things that led up to that. Because I wouldn't I mean, you should see where I'm sitting right now. I'm I'm on the 30th floor of this beautiful condominium in in Century City. I wake up every morning the happiest guy I know. And so, so grateful for everything. It's it's really it's really been amazing.   Joe: Well, you know what? Good for you. Well deserved. I can just tell by I do a little bit of research up front for these. I want them to be somewhat spontaneous. But I when I went and looked at what I felt, I wanted to figure out more about who you are. I can tell I can tell from just how you look at the kids that are part of the program. I watched one of your talks to them, and I can tell it really it's super important to you and and your generous and loving and giving back. And it just it's very, very cool. And I appreciate you.   Dr. Bill: Well, I think my my my mantra is. Learn so you can earn and then return. And I feel if you can really accomplish those three things, you'll have a lot of happiness and and self satisfaction in life. So that's really what I focus on.   Joe: I agree. Well, I literally could talk with you forever. This is amazing. I'm honored that you came on my podcast. What is the best way for someone to get my guests in touch with you in regards to what do you prefer? And also, the lead program has   Dr. Bill: Yeah,   Joe: The best.   Dr. Bill: I mean, believe it or not, I'm the only person I know with probably a million followers who actually answered all of their demands. So Instagram, I don't do tick tock or even Facebook, but if you really want to reach me, it's super easy. It's Dr. Bill Dorfman, D.R Bilel Dorfmann on Instagram. I promise. I answer one hundred percent of my DBMS. If if you're interested in the program, please go to Sleep Foundation dot com. You can sign your kids up right now. And yeah, I think that's.   Joe: Well, thank you so much, I appreciate it. I look forward to to seeing more about what happens with LEEP, and I definitely want to stay in contact with you. And I wish you all the best.   Dr. Bill: Well, thank you.

As we shift our way to other places in our universe, we are experiencing the quickening of time. ALWAYS BE KIND! Appreciate your friends and family! Validate their parts in your life. Communicate...for this maybe the last time you have that chance! Tomorrow is a concept, not a promise. Reach out and say THANK YOU every chance you have. PLEASE search these artists out...SEND THEM MESSAGES! Let them know YOU HEARD THEIR ART HERE! Variety is KEY to what I do here for you here on The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast on Pop Radio UK! NO TWO SHOWS ALIKE! Please, help me help all these fine talented musicians to get listened to! Share it! Share it!! Share It!!! SHARED! The Music Authority LIVE STREAM Show & Podcast! Hear my daily show here: usa7.fastcast4u.com:2199/start/jamprell Also hear the Podcast recorded versions - https://themusicauthority.transistor.fm All my shows are NOW on Mixcloud, Player FM, Stitcher, Tune In, Podcast Addict, Cast Box, Radio Public, Pocket Cast, Apple iTunes Podcasts, and Google Play Music Podcasts!! Follow me on Twitter JimPrell@TMusicAuthority. Hear The Music Authority Friday, Saturday and Sunday on Pop Radio UK 6PM UK, 1PM ET, 10AM PT! PLEASE, reach out to the bands and let them know you heard them here, Pop Radio UK and The Music Authority! Show # 96!!!!!Super8UK – Music-Authority-ThemeThe Producers - What's He GotFARRINGTON featuring Eric Dover and Roger Joseph Manning Jr - - Life Is A StereoAthanor - 11 Under The Sun [Hills Of The Universe] (koolkatmusik.com)The Orange Humble Band - Ain't Tougher Than MeKekker - 03 Parachute [Greatest Hits Volume 1 & 2] (koolkatmusik.com)Nolan Voide - The Music Authority JingleNo Parking For Caravans - There Must Be More Than This [Where The Fire Escape Touches The Ground]Kimberly Rew & Lee Cave-Berry - Happy Anniversary [Sunshine Walkers - The Best Of Kimberly Rew & Lee Cave-Berry]The Alfas - 02 - Slide Machine (Beluga Records)Screen Test - What Is Wrong With This Picture [Inspired Humans Making Noise - An Anthology 1980-1986]The Crazy Squeeze - 05 All LiesThe Floor Models - Following UpSoulBird - The Music Authority JingleThe Posies - 16 - Oh Michael (Demo) [At Least At Last (1993-1994)]Bruno & Bill - It's A ShameFallon Cush - 01 Tell Me Once [Tell Me Once]Gleeson - 10 She's Starting to Feel It [The Years Have It]

What's the best - and quickest - way for a B2B business to gain marketing traction and turn contacts into customers? This week on The Inbound Success Podcast, boomtime CEO Bill Bice talks about his approach to word of mouth marketing. A serial entrepreneur, board advisor and one-time venture capitalist, Bill has seen what works across a wide range of companies, and now his company boomtime is helping B2B businesses grow by leveraging content and LinkedIn to generate buzz. Check out this episode to get the details of Bill's process and learn how you can use it to improve your own inbound marketing results. Highlights from my conversation with Bill include: Bill says that the three main objectives of word of mouth marketing are to build our audience, follow up on all of the prospects that you're generating, and stay top of mind with that audience. The easiest way to generate new business is through referrals, and the key to getting referrals is to give your audience something to talk about. Bill says most companies make the mistake of talking all about themselves on social media, when in reality they should be focused on educating their audiences. The two most common mistakes that companies make when it comes to marketing are to not make it a top priority and not be consistent with it. Three keys to successful marketing are building a response mobile website, having a robust email marketing program, and making a lot of connections on LinkedIn. In a crowded content landscape, one of the best ways to stand out and attract qualified leads is to build an audience and then invest in educating them through your content. Boomtime helps companies use this same process by outsourcing content creation for them to 300+ subject matter experts. They also help manage their clients' LinkedIn strategies. Bill says that with a well optimized profile, he'll get between a 35 and 50% acceptance rate on connection requests, sending 40 to 50 connection requests a day, and 6 to 8% of those people will start a conversation either from the connection request or he will often send a followup message with whatever the best performing piece of content is. Resources from this episode: Visit the boomtime website Connect with (or follow) Bill on LinkedIn Check out Bill's B2B Marketing podcast Listen to the podcast to learn how word of mouth marketing can help you increase the ROI of your marketing strategy. Transcript Kathleen Booth (Host): Welcome back to the Inbound Success Podcast. I'm your host Kathleen Booth and this week my guest is Bill Bice, who is the CEO of Boomtime. Welcome to the podcast, Bill. Bill Bice (Guest): Kathleen it's great to be with you. Thanks. Bill and Kathleen recording this episode. Kathleen: Yeah, thanks for joining me. I love your story because you scratched your own itch and solved a problem that you were having and I always find that those are some of the most interesting conversations. So I'm really excited to dig into it. Can we start by having you tell my audience a little bit about your story, who you are, what you're doing now with Boomtime, and what led you down that path? Meet Bill Bice Bill: So I feel like I was born an entrepreneur. I started my first company when I was 18, a software company, and of course I had no idea what I was doing, but over enough time, got a great team, and built a great company, and out of that we had enough success in selling that company that I got to be part of an early stage VC fund. And so I have founded and invested and been on the board of a whole host of companies. I actually sat down and counted them up so I could say it's 27 companies, and there is a not shocking correlation in those companies, which are the ones where we've had the most success are where we really focused on going to market and nailed that. And so you do all this really hard work to create an amazing product or service, and yet how good you are at marketing is going to determine what kind of reward you get for doing that. And I just got really frustrated in trying to get great marketing for my own companies, and so I decided to tackle that problem. Kathleen: I love it. And I think probably most of the people who listen to this podcast would agree that great marketing is important for growing your company. So that's awesome. So can you talk a little bit about specifically what Boomtime does? Bill: Yeah, so we've really focused in on B2B, we have a history in doing some work in B2C, but most of my experience has been in B2B. And the thing that I really like about B2B is that we've been able to take sort of the core framework or playbook and apply it to really any sort of highly complex, valuable transaction. So it doesn't really work for things that are volume-based. But if you're selling something high value, then the approach, I mean, I'm really a programmer at heart, so to me it was all about the data. And one of the things that I have found really challenging about marketing is unlike every other discipline in our businesses, here we have one that just refuses to accept scale and efficiency. It's just a core problem with marketing. And we do it everywhere else in our business, and it really has to happen in marketing also. And so I just tackled that from the standpoint of following the data in a very iterative process and learning what works. We don't really have to, although experimentation is key, we don't have to you, you've got bigger competitors who have spent millions of dollars figuring out how to do exactly what you need to do. You've just got to figure out what's the smaller version of that for my business that's going to work for me. And so that's what we've been doing in the B2B world. It's very much a B2B content marketing inbound approach that is what's really compatible with most of the sort of small, that two to $20 million a year business that really does a great job of taking care of their customers, but would like to grow. Or maybe has been growing in that sort of plateaued and didn't really quite understand what was making that work before, and what was making it work was word of mouth. And so we now live in this great era where we can actually really amplify the effect of word of mouth because we're all connected digitally. And so that's the thing that we have focused on. Word of mouth marketing Kathleen: So let's take it to another level of detail. I love that you said that the challenge that you're trying to solve is making companies go-to-market strategies repeatable, scalable, more efficient and really focusing that around the power of word of mouth. What does that look like in practice? If somebody is using boomtime for example, and this isn't necessarily a commercial for the product, but obviously you were trying to solve a problem that you saw through the product. So I'm curious to know, in detail, what does that really look like? Bill: Well, so the three things we want to accomplish is we want to build our audience, we want to follow up on all of, we would be much better at capturing and following up on all of the prospects that we're generating. And then we want to stay top of mind with that audience. And if you do those things really well and you do it with this focus on, let's take the thing that's already working, word of mouth, and let's just leverage digital tools to accomplish the same thing. So we think of it as social currency, like we're going to create a lot more referrals. So let's assume that referrals are really valuable to your business. And the vast majority of business owners I sit down with and I say, well, one of my favorite questions is, where'd your last couple of new clients come from? And the answer, 99% of the time is, "Oh, it was a referral from so-and-so." Because that's what really works. And if you focus on giving your audience social currency, giving them a reason to talk about you, there's a really wonderful thing happens, which is you get more referrals. And the way you do that is just flip your content, flip your marketing on its head. So most marketing for most companies, 100% of what they do should be 10%, because it's all about them. It's the number one mistake in marketing is talking about yourself. Nobody cares. I mean, honestly, your clients just don't care about the new person you hired, the new client that you won. That should be 10% of your marketing. If you put 90% of your effort into sharing your expertise, then suddenly your marketing becomes this really valuable way to communicate with your audience and you give them reasons to talk about you. Word of mouth marketing in practice Kathleen: So can you give me an example of a campaign, for example, that either you've done or that one of your customers has done using the system that you have in place, just so that we can maybe have a mental model through which to understand how it all works? Bill: Yeah, I'm going to use ourselves as the example, because we had the classic problem that a lot of, we don't really consider ourselves a traditional agency, but you see agencies do this all the time, which is you're really good at marketing and yet you don't apply it to yourself. Kathleen: Our first child. Bill: Yes. The thing that's really helped us grow is when we, we actually changed our internal processes to be able to treat ourselves as a client and give one of our marketing strategists credit for us as if we were paying ourselves as a client. Because only by doing that did we actually put the priority in our own marketing. We're literally having the same problem that every business has, which is marketing's always the fourth or fifth thing that you think about, and everybody gets stuck in this same cycle of you focus on marketing when things are kind of slow and then they pick back up. And yet the second biggest mistake in marketing is inconsistency. And it's just clear in the data that being consistent in your marketing is the number one thing you can do to make it pay off. Whatever you're going to do, do it consistently. Pick a longterm strategy you can really commit to and be serious about it. And so when we started doing the same thing for ourselves, which is literally just laying out everything we've learned and following the data, I mean, it's amazing what happens when you bring several hundred like clients together, put them on one platform, be able to aggregate that data and see what's happening. It's so difficult, even if you can have the best marketing director in the world, you only have the data in your one company to work with. Being able to multiply that across several hundred companies, it's incredible what you learn. So we've just taken that and started sharing what we've learned. I'm very passionate about small businesses. It's where innovation comes from, it's what drives our economy. I would love for every small business owner to be doing exactly these things. And our version of this is to share our expertise and what we've learned and layout exactly what you want to do in your marketing. It's the best way to promote what we do, just to share. I mean you can literally take this and go do it yourself. You will be better off if you do that. And that's my number one goal with every one of our clients is we want their prospects to be better off because sat down and got exposed to that company. Whether they ever choose to use their product or service or not, because that's what's going to create word of mouth. Kathleen: So you guys used it for yourselves and what did that look like? Talk me through your campaign that you did. Bill: So it's very content oriented. So in B2B, one of the things that I love about it, it's actually pretty simple. Because if you do three things well your marketing is going to work. If you build a responsive mobile website that really pays attention to the customer journey, if you do really good email marketing and you build an audience on LinkedIn, and if in particular, if you stitch those together and understand the customer journey across those three channels, you will really understand what's working, what's creating engagement and you will be able to get new prospects and pull them down the funnel. And so when we started doing that for ourselves and putting out regular content that was just sharing what we know how to do, it created a different perspective in our audience about who we are and what we do. And it started bringing to us prospects that are much better educated, that were ready for much deeper conversations when we got started. It's one of the core problems in marketing today, which is our prospects have access to so much information, and there's so much that they can learn. You've really got to decide do you want to be an order taker or do you want to be part of that educational process? And the only way you can really create new sales opportunities is to start at the very top of the funnel and be part of that educational process. So that was the change that happened for us when we really started talking about here's what works, here's what we've learned, and just laying that out and doing that consistency thing. When we started doing that really, just week in and week out, every single week. It takes a while. That's the problem with it. I don't believe there are any miracles or short term fixes in marketing, but if you commit to it and then the results start to come in over time and it really changes the trajectory of your company. How content fuels word of mouth Kathleen: Now, how does the content that you're creating feed into word of mouth? Bill: Well, that content is that social currency. It's giving people really concrete things that they can do. So let's take LinkedIn, for example. Like no matter how much effort you're putting into LinkedIn, you should be putting more. If you just look at the engagement data and the growth over the last two years, it's incredible what's happening on LinkedIn, and they really made the switch to getting people to really put time in depth into LinkedIn. And I look at LinkedIn as the ideal networking event, right? I get to meet exactly who I want. I don't have to eat high calorie food at the same time, and you need to approach it like a networking event, which is you're really there to build your network and be helpful, to that note. And if you take that approach and you say, "Okay, I've got an audience now that I'm going to build on LinkedIn, I'm going to run an aggressive connection campaign to get connected to every great prospect for me that's in the market." And then you say, "Okay, now I'm going to share the thing that I know, that I'm an expert at because I've got perspective across..." You might be the CEO or CIO, whoever your decision maker is in your prospective company, you're running your one company. But I work with hundreds or thousands of companies like you, which means I can bring perspective to you that's really valuable to you. And if you're willing to share that, to give away whatever you consider the most valuable thing that you have, give that away as your marketing. That will dramatically change how prospects see you and it will create sales opportunities that didn't exist before. And so executing it on that on LinkedIn is the primary way that we grow. This is very meta, because that's how we grow and the way we do it is to describe exactly how you should do it. Kathleen: Got it. So it's an education play through LinkedIn, then? Bill: If you're in B2B, it's really the best way to grow your company. You'd have to be in a really strange niche for the prospects you want to not be sitting out there on LinkedIn today. Now there are quite a few other software platforms that help B2B and other types of companies with content marketing, with inbound marketing, companies like HubSpot, you've got SharpSpring, there's a ton of them out there. How does the solution that you've built fit within that ecosystem? Well, sort of the short answer is HubSpot with help. So we're not selling a piece of software. What we're doing is selling the end result, the service. So the big surprise with HubSpot, and HubSpot's a great platform, there are a ton of really good marketing automation systems out there, and if you're going to do this internally, you absolutely should implement one of them. The problem, the surprise, after you start paying for that subscription is then the two people you have to hire to get any value out of HubSpot. And a lot of companies, what they really want is just the end result of that as opposed to having to go through all of that process. And one of the things I've seen over and over again, so if you're going to do that internally, one of my strongest recommendations is everybody tries to create the content internally and unless you really put tremendous focus and resources behind that, it almost never works. You really need to go. So the way we've done it is we've built a network of 300 subject matter experts. We don't do any writing internally. There's always somebody out there who already knows your audience really well. Go find that person who you don't have to teach them your market, they've been writing for it, they have been working with the industry pubs or the events in that area, and you can, half hour brainstorming session, you can come up with six months of editorial. What you need is a great stream of regular content that doesn't require you sit in front of a blank screen and have to come up with it yourself. So you can implement all of this yourself, you just, you need to put in the marketing automation system. You need to find the resources that know how to do that. And then you've got to follow the data to really understand what's creating engagement and keep testing every piece of it so you get better with every turn of the cycle. Kathleen: So if somebody is using Boomtime, do they also need to have these other platforms or is Boomtime really a replacement for these things? Bill: So if we're doing that as a service for somebody that you don't really need a marketing automation system. It's great if you have a CRM. One of our biggest challenges is that nobody really uses their CRM the way that they should. And so our approach is to integrate with the CRM and put the end results in the CRM system. One of the challenges with that building your audience part is that your sales team always has many more opportunities that they're working on than what ends up in the CRM. CRMs are really designed for sales managers. And if you put somebody in the CRM, you're going to get questioned about it. So what most sales people do is they only put people who are fairly deep into the funnel into the CRM, which means we're not building our audience and we're not following up with all of the prospects that we have. So one of the tricks that we do is go mine the email boxes of everybody who's customer facing in your company and feed that into your CRM so we're getting that central database. Because particularly if you're in B2B, your sales people are talking to those early prospects via email. So there is a record of it and we can go capture it and we can make their job easier by filling that information in for them. And it's amazing what happens if you just follow up on all those prospects that are already in your firm. It's great low hanging fruit, you just got to go get it. Kathleen: So do you typically work with smaller companies? Because it sounds like really this is a solution for companies that don't have a large marketing team, for example, that really need the external help and that don't have a super sophisticated tech stack already in place. It sounds like it's a good way for a company that recognizes that they need to be able to make their marketing more scalable to really get started with that. Is that accurate? Bill: Yes. So you sort of have two groups. It's the kind of $2 to $5 million year company where we're really doing it for them. And then once you get to the point where you have a marketing director, often we're just working under their direction doing this one piece that I recommend you get automated and process around it no matter how big you are, which is just this regular flow of really great content. The ideas come from in the company, come from the executive team, but we get the content creation outsourced because it's so expensive to do it internally. And if you do this well, that of course is the hard part. Doing it well is difficult. But if you do, then having this regular flow of great content come in, no matter how big your company is, just feed your whole marketing operation in a really wonderful way. So unless you're to the point where you can have a full time staff of writers doing that for you, and even then I would argue it's going to be really cost effective to supplement that with outside resources. So we'll often work with a larger company where that's the piece that we do, because we've gotten really good at it, and there's just, there's a ton of value for you getting that piece essentially automated. From the marketing director standpoint, you just have this great flow of content that shows up and gets distributed and you get data behind it. So I recommend making that happen no matter how big you are. Kathleen: So it's very interesting, because there's a lot of debate around this topic of should you insource or outsource content creation and you are definitely falling on the outsource side. It's interesting, I am building a team right now at my company and I've chosen to totally insource it. So I've hired a writer. For me- Bill: You know what you're doing. Kathleen: Well, let's just say for me it's also that we're in a very technically complex industry and I feel like I need somebody who can, it's a big learning curve and I want somebody who's full time in it, really learning it. Have you found success in addressing that through outsource content? Bill: Yeah, but you have to avoid the copywriter problem, which is the somebody who was working, really good writer, but was working on a car dealership last week and he's going to figure out your very niche enterprise SaaS solution this week. And so the way to do that, we do a lot of work in professional services, law firms. So if you're going to work in a law firm where the partner, the practice head for that area of law is very particular about that content. The only way you can do that is to go find a JD who's practiced in that area before. But the law firms never going to create it internally because they could be billing $600 an hour instead of writing the blog article you want them to create, but you can go find somebody who's been in that practice area, didn't enjoy the practice of law, understands the area really well. Get the ideas from the practice head in that 30 minute brainstorming session, give them five bullet points about the things that they need to cover. They can go do the research, and then all we have to do is get the voice right, which frankly is really difficult. We've ended up dividing that into two levels. The expertise to get the content and then an editor who's really good at capturing the voice. Kathleen: Yeah. I will say that when I've seen outsource content creation work, the only way I've seen it work is when you have a writer who's interviewing your subject matter expert. Anytime I see companies say, Oh, here's a topic, go run with it, I just see crappy, crappy results. because honestly whenever you're outsourcing and you're just giving somebody a topic, I feel like with that person is doing is they're Googling that topic. And so by definition you're not going to have anything new to add in your content, because it's coming from aggregations of other sources. Whereas if you interview a subject matter expert, you can get something original. But that does take a very strong writer and a very strong editor to really be able to do that well and in a way that is unique. Bill: Absolutely. And if you just wanted a content farm, I mean 90% of the efforts should be on creating great content. And so by definition, you're not going to get there if you're cutting the corners there. If we don't have great content, all the tactics that we talk about aren't going to matter one bit. We have to start with really capturing the unique expertise that you have and finding interesting ways to communicate that. Kathleen: So if somebody is listening and they're thinking, I want to improve my marketing results, I'm a B2B company, what are some really concrete things you think that they could do right now to get started? Getting started with word of mouth marketing Bill: Well, what everybody always wants is more leads, and the easiest solution is to go spend money on ads to generate those leads. And yet one of the reasons it's so difficult for that smaller company to ever get an ROI on that is that without the marketing foundation in place, that's never going to pay off. So don't take the easy route. You got to focus on those core pieces first and build that funnel and actually be capturing and following up on all your prospects. And then the easiest way to expand your audience is to focus on LinkedIn. If you take the same approach and you're very helpful and you're sharing expertise, then you can run a LinkedIn connection campaign where you're adding 1,120 new connections a month, every single month, growing this audience of exactly the right prospects that you're now sharing really valuable insight with and that will do a wonderful thing for you. It will create sales opportunities you didn't have before. It'll be the right sales opportunities with people who are much further down the process and are really ready to have a serious conversation with you. So what we see in the data is with a well optimized profile, we'll get between a 35 and 45%, sometimes in the low 50% acceptance rate on on the connection requests, sending 40 to 50 connection requests a day, and six to 8% of those people will start a conversation either from the connection request or we will often send a followup message with whatever our best performing inside driven piece of content is. None of this can be salesy at all, we all get those kinds of connection requests. Kathleen: I was going to say, are you doing an InMail? What are you doing there? Bill: It's not InMail. It's really building the network of people you should be connected to, because you have expertise that's directly relevant to them. And it's sharing that, it's not selling them. I mean, I see that all the time of we get something back from a client who just wants to dive right into the sales pitch. And that would be the same thing as walking into a cocktail party, meeting somebody for the first time, and then starting to give them a sales pitch. Until they ask for it, that doesn't work. You've got to build the relationship first. But if you take that approach, this is the easiest, most concrete thing you can do in B2B to get more sales opportunities. But ironically, the way you do that is stop selling. What kinds of results can you expect? Kathleen: So what kinds of results have your clients gotten from doing this? Bill: So that those are kind of aggregate numbers across the hundreds of of connection campaigns that we're running in just sort of any kind of high value B2B, a lot of professional services, a lot of high end products. And so the thing that we really look at is how many new opportunities are we creating and so, oh, a really good campaign, so my connection campaign, I'm running at about a 54% acceptance rate on connections, which is great. One of the things you often have to do is optimize your profile specifically for that audience that you're going to go after. If you're going after multiple niches, do one at a time, because you'll get a much higher connection. And then we're getting our primary source of new clients is off of the connection campaigns that we run for myself and our chief revenue officer. So this works much better for the executive team in your company, particularly for smaller companies. It's really not about your company profile at all. That's just not where we're going to get the activity. And even in a larger company, the more you can get the executive team and people higher up in the company to participate, the better the results that you're going to get. People want to connect with other people on LinkedIn and it just, it works so much better. And so that six to eight percent of new conversations, when you think about that coming from a thousand new connections a month, this is really the new form and you can run this yourself. You can take an hour a day and do a golden hour of prospecting around LinkedIn connections and you will get much more value out of that than making cold calls for that same time period. But if you're a salesperson who's responsible for doing that for your company, you will get better results if you can get the VP of sales or CEO to do that and let you run it for them. Kathleen: So you have about a 54% connection acceptance rate. And you mentioned that those turned into clients. What is your conversion rate from the people who accept your connection to your leads and then to your customers and how are you measuring that? How are you, how are you tracking? Bill: So there's a plus and minus to LinkedIn, which is the data's really easy to follow, but for personal profiles, the only way you can get it is logging in and looking at it, and it disappears after three months, which is kind of annoying, but it's really easy to see what's working to create engagement. And the LinkedIn algorithm is really simple. Likes and comments are essentially equal value and then you can just chart it and see how many likes and comments you get versus the percentage of your network that gets exposed to that feed. It's just a direct relationship. So I call it going everyday viral. Like our goal isn't to come up with the one piece of content that just explodes. It's to have regular content that does well over and over again in this really specific audience is exactly the people that you want to talk to. And that gives you two bites at the apple. When you make the initial connection request and sometimes you just happen to be reaching out to somebody right when they need your expertise and so you get lucky. But now, because they belong to your network, if you follow that up with a regular flow of insightful content, then you get to talk to them forever so you get a second forever bite at the apple, and both of those are really effective. You get sales opportunities that come right out of the gate and then it just comes with that regular followup. As long as you're good at getting exposure to this audience that you've created. And so many people do work on LinkedIn where they only focus on the first part, building the network, and they don't really focus on the regular updates to that network that really leveraged having created it. And if you do both, you'll get a much better pay off from that effort. Kathleen: How quickly should somebody expect to see results from something like this? Bill: You're going to get early positive indications. So you'll get some wins that show you you're in the right direction. We typically see it within the first 30 to 60 days. But the real payoff comes when you've been doing this for six months, 12 months, 18 months. We really put a focus internally ourselves on LinkedIn starting two years ago and we're seeing a much more significant pay off today than we did in the first six months. Because you really get a reputation for providing valuable information. then one of the great things you can do, somewhere about 5,000 connections, you should switch your LinkedIn button from being connect to follow, because you'll get enough organic traffic now that people will just start following you because of the content that you're sharing. And they won't even show up as asking for connection requests. They're just following you, you're not following them. And that's really when you sort of hit the point of getting a real payback on what you're doing. Kathleen: And you do that in your LinkedIn settings? Bill: I do. Yeah. And you need a big enough following where it makes sense that people would come and start just following you because because of what you're doing and you need to be doing those content updates very regularly. But I get about, right now, about 40% of the additions to my network come from people just following me as opposed to the connection requests that we're sending out. Kathleen: Got it. Very cool. Well that's an interesting tip I haven't heard somebody mention before, so there's a new one for you. Switch your button from connect to follow. Kathleen's two questions Kathleen: Before we get too close to out of time, quick questions for you that I always ask all my guests. The first one is, we've talked a lot about inbound marketing here and content marketing. I'm curious, who do you think, company or individual, is there somebody that you think is doing particularly well right now? Bill: What I want to do is, is turn that into a suggestion for, because there's somebody in your market that is doing that really well. And what I always find very valuable, anytime I'm starting to work with in a new area, is I want to go find whoever is the, I'm not looking for the biggest player, I'm looking for sort of the mid size company that is big enough to have weight behind what they're doing, they're really good at it and they're showing innovation. So I want to flip that around just a little bit and say there's somebody doing, I mean, I've always been able to find one in every single market we've gone into. So even in legal, this enormously conservative market, there's always, we start working with an intellectual property law firm. We found a firm that is doing an excellent job of content marketing in that area and I find it so much faster to learn from somebody who's already doing a really good job of that then to figure it all out ourselves. And somebody is doing that in your market, so spend the time to go do that. And every single market we work in, we have found somebody who's really great at it, who's already doing it, that we've learned a ton from. Kathleen: Anyone in particular who stands out, anyone who somebody wants to go online and see someone who's really best in class that they should look at? Bill: So the IP example, Fish and Richardson does a really good example of, that's one of these really niche-y examples. That's a deep technical area that's tough to do well. And so seeing somebody do it well, it's really the best answer to the question you asked before, which is how do you pull that off? Kathleen: Okay, great. And digital marketing obviously changes so quickly. How do you personally stay up to date on everything that's going on in that world? Bill: So I've become a huge fan of podcasts, now. I'm finally following in your footsteps and doing a podcast. So I've learned from your podcasts, there's about 20 different marketing related podcasts that I listened to. I really like, particularly in the sort of email marketing and LinkedIn side, I like Growth Hackers, because there's always somebody who's already run a test that's doing the thing that you're thinking about doing. So I'm just a big, so unlike when I was 18 and I thought I knew it all and it took me a really long time to figure anything out, I think it makes so much more sense to take advantage of this unique attribute we have of being able to find somebody who already is doing what we're doing, put ourselves in their place and learn from them. Like our ability to get where we want to go so much faster, because of that is amazing. So let's learn from everybody who's already done it before and Growth Hackers is just full of people who are doing exactly that. And I love, a lot of it's very data-driven, which obviously I'm big on, and just great way to learn. How to connect with Bill Kathleen: Bill, if somebody wants to reach out and learn from you or has a question and wants to get in touch, what's the best way for them to do that? Bill: So I'm a CEO of boomtime.com. I love talking about marketing. Happy to have you reach out if you want to. If you want to see the thing that I'm talking about, I'm easy to find on LinkedIn. Go look up my profile. You'll see exactly what we are talking about and of course we're at boomtime.com. You know what to do next... Kathleen: Great. All right, well if you are listening and you learn something new or liked what you heard, please stop what you're doing, take a minute, and go to Apple podcasts and leave a five star review for the podcast. It makes a huge difference. That's how people find us and I would greatly appreciate it. And if you know somebody else who's doing kick ass inbound marketing work, tweet me @workmommywork, because I would love to make them my next interview. Thank you so much, Bill. Bill: It's been a lot of fun. Thanks. Kathleen: Thanks.

For this episode, Ty and Daphne discuss recent news and politics. After catching up on life (00:30), the hosts discuss political “Oh Lawd” news (3:50), including a Louisville photographer’s challenge to LGBT rights (4:25), the rise in opposition to the impeachment among independents (6:08), the RNC’s latest $100K purchase (9:00), Deval Patrick’s struggle campaign (11:33), and the introduction of male birth control (13:47). They then turn their attention to the latest Democratic debate (15:35). They begin by discussing Pete Buttigieg’s performance as an emerging front-runner (17:15), whether women are held to a different standard in regard to political experience (18:50), and the possibility of Hillary Clinton joining the race (22:33). Next, they share their opinions about Tulsi Gabbard’s motivation for joining the race (24:04), Corey Booker’s strike against Biden (28:48), Joe Biden’s debate performance (32:36), the dwindling Democratic field (36:50), and the possibility of Stacey Abrams for VP (43:02). Ty and Daphne close the episode by discussing the latest news and events, including Colin Kaepernick’s recent NFL workout (43:58), Judge Joe Brown’s controversial comments about the Harriet Tubman $20 bill (51:10), whether British actors should portray historic African American characters (54:40), and a shocking undercover investigation that revealed unequal treatment of minority homebuyers (1:02:40).  Resources:  Photographer who opposes gay marriage sues over Louisville's Fairness Ordinance - https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2019/11/20/lgbtq-rights-photographer-sues-over-louisville-fairness-ordinance/4250507002/ Poll finds sharp swing in opposition to impeachment among independents - https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/471542-poll-finds-sharp-swing-in-opposition-to-impeachment-among-independents Republican National Committee spent nearly $100K on Donald Trump Jr.'s book: report - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/22/report-rnc-spent-nearly-100-k-donald-trump-jr-s-book-triggered/4270869002/ Deval Patrick would like to be president. Only two people showed up to his event at Morehouse - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/11/21/deval-patrick-would-like-be-president-only-two-people-showed-up-his-event-morehouse/ First male birth control injection almost ready for penises - https://nypost.com/2019/11/19/first-male-birth-control-injection-almost-ready-for-penises/ Buttigieg Campaign Used Stock Photo of Kenyan Woman to Illustrate Plan for Black America - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/18/us/politics/buttigieg-stock-photo-kenya.html Judge Joe Brown Believes Harriet Tubman Has No Place on the $20 Bill: ‘It’s Insulting to the Black Race’ - https://www.theroot.com/judge-joe-brown-believes-harriet-tubman-has-no-place-on-1839983594 Legalese, mistrust and late negotiating: How Colin Kaepernick and the NFL broke apart on workout - https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2019/11/21/colin-kaepernick-nfl-workout-waiver-teams-quarterback/4259272002/ Undercover Investigation Reveals Unequal Treatment of Minority Potential Homebuyers - https://projects.newsday.com/long-island/real-estate-agents-investigation/

Improving Donor Relations: Getting The Right Message To The Right People With The Right RhythmInterview with Wordsprint CEO Bill Gilmer Read the Interview Hugh Ballou: Hey, folks, it's Hugh Ballou. Another chapter of The Nonprofit Exchange. Russell David Dennis, last week you and I were in Florida. It's a good thing we're not there this week. Russell Dennis: Yes, it's a bit windy down there now. I'm hoping everyone is okay. It's looking like the storm is turning off and it's not going as far inland as they initially thought. Hopefully all of our friends and the wonderful people down at Kaiser who made us feel so welcome are okay. Hugh: It's called a hurricane, but it's really a slowcane. It's going slowly through there. Welcome folks to this episode. We have a special guest today, Bill Gilmer. He has been on the ride with us ever since we started the magazine. I think over five years ago. Bill Gilmer, welcome to The Nonprofit Exchange. Bill Gilmer: Thanks. Glad to be here. Unlike Russell, I am in chillier Blacksburg, Virginia. No hurricane on my horizon, I don't think. Hugh: Yeah, we just are down the road in Lynchburg. Bill, we ask our guests to say a little bit about themselves. Some background. Why is it you're doing this important work you're doing today? Bill: My background, I used to be a printer. I used to run a printing company. Over the years, we discovered that most of the work we were doing was for nonprofits. Over the years, we started tracking response rates on donor relation campaigns. We have put together a system of marketing to donors, and that's what we do every day. Help folks build relationships with their donor base. Hugh: You've been working with SynerVision five or six years ago. Let's declare up front that Wordsprint, Bill's company, is a sponsor of Nonprofit Performance Magazine and SynerVision's work in general. We talk about you often on these podcasts. It's a pleasure to have you here live and in person. This is not an infomercial for Wordsprint, but we know the value of your work. We talk about the 30/30/30. That's the secret for success. Just to be clear, people can do this on their own. They don't need you. But if they want to do it the very best way possible, you know how to do that. I want to be clear on that. Explain what this 30/30/30/10 is all about. Bill: What we discovered, and this is lots of data, we started tracking this back in the early 2000s. I think we're up to 20 million touches, 15,000 campaigns. What we discovered is that there are three things that matter. It's our three-bit marketing system. There are three things that matter when it comes to donor relations. The first is having the right message. The second is getting that right message to the right people. The third is getting the right message to the right people with the right rhythm. We help clients focus their message, stay consistent with their message, stay on message. We help them with the right people by helping with database cleansing, database acquisition, all kinds of demographics and predictive analytics. But most importantly, we have developed a system for staying consistent and rhythmic with your donor touches. We've observed through all our data that is where many nonprofits fail. It's the rhythm and consistency. The right message to the right people with the right rhythm. That's the 30/30/30. Hugh: What do you say to people who say, “I've tried mailing. It didn't work. We tried sending out a mailing at the end of the year, and we got a little bit of money, but it doesn't work, Bill.” Bill: I tell them that I tried dieting once last year, and it didn't work either. Hugh: I tried working out once, and it didn't work either. Bill: I tried to exercise once, and it didn't work. It really is like diet or exercise or physical therapy. These are things that work if you implement them rhythmically. It's not a quick fix. Rhythm doesn't become rhythm right away. It needs a few cycles. In fact, on average, for most of our clients, it's really in the third year of repeated rhythmic touches that the donations start to snowball, that it really begins to build. This is not a showhorse thing. This is drip marketing, if you will. But it works. Hugh: It works. I've seen it work. Dig a little deeper into the right person and the right message. I want to know more about how I can do this. Bill: The right message, the first pillar, is your brand. It's who you are. It's why you go to work every day. It's your mission. It's your elevator speech. What we found that nonprofits who stay on message, who stay true to themselves about who they are, are the ones more successful over time as opposed to those who try to be all things to all people or try to repackage it or try to rebrand every year. I'm not saying you can't rebrand, but you need to do so carefully. The right message is mainly a matter of consistency and articulating it clearly. Having the right taglines, having the right logo, having the right paragraphs. The right people gets more complicated. It is all about relationships. We find that the nonprofits who succeed are those who create a database culture, where they take those relationships and get them into the database that everyone in the organization is empowered to update. Your best donors are the people you know. People donate to people. People donate to you because they trust you to fulfill your mission. It's the people you know, the people you run into, the people who come to your open house. These are the best potential donors. The organizations who know how to capture that and bring them into their database so they get rhythmic touches and notifications are the ones who succeed. You can also acquire data. We do a lot of this. Using some fancy predictive analytics, we can acquire names of people who are more likely to donate to your cause than others. That is almost a whole topic in itself. Hugh: Talk a little bit about that. We constantly run across people who say, “I don't know anybody.” If we do have people who are in nonprofits that maybe they get donations, but they don't have a donor management program per se, or they work with a number of early stage. Talk a bit about how you acquire names legally. Is there a magic database program that I can use to connect them with? Bill: It's all legal. There are about six or seven big players in this game called compilers. These are companies who do nothing but purchase, massage, and resell databases. You've heard of some of them. Dunne & Bradstreet does this mostly with businesses. Experian. Equifax, the one that had the big data breach. InfoUSA. There are others. There are literally thousands of brokers and people who take the information from these larger players and resell it to folks like us and you. Demographics are available. We as a society click a lot. We are on our computers and are clicking. We go to Amazon. We read the paragraph. We look at another book. We order this. We fill out a warranty card. We subscribe to a magazine. We join a club. All of those are data transactions that are public and can be sold and resold. The hard demographics have always been there, things like the value of your home, the car you drive. That's public information. But these compilers gather so many data points on all of us as consumers that they are able with artificial intelligence help to see patterns and build logorhythms. They know if you've done this and this and this, then you are more likely to support a nonprofit that focuses on children and especially disabled children. That is how detailed it can get. Or you are more likely to support a local nonprofit that works in the music arts, like an orchestra or a symphony. We call this predictive analytics. This is data that indicates the likelihood of someone supporting your cause. This has gotten way better than it even was six months ago. What we usually do—and Hugh, you have had some recent experience with this with one of your organizations—when we do a database acquisition like this, we then compare it to the organization's existing donor database. If the predictive analytics have been accurate, there will be considerable overlap. Your organization had 3,000 names. We bought another 700-800. Three years ago, you'd expect 10-12 of those to be an overlap. We had a 250-name overlap in that case. Those analytics were extremely accurate. These are folks not just demographically speaking but in terms of propensity are more likely to support your cause. You still have to touch them and touch them rhythmically. That is where the rhythm thing comes in. That is where you need to establish a system of cadent touches over the course of several cycles. At the end of the second or the beginning of the third year, that is where you will start to see donations come in, and it will start to snowball over time. Hugh: When you are talking about clicking, we're talking about mail in the U.S. We are not talking about email with our computer. Bill: I don't think I caught the last part of your question. In terms of what we advise for donor relations, it's a combination of mailing and emailing. Russell: It's so systematic to your approach to keeping and maintaining donors. Especially small nonprofits will be overwhelmed when they start thinking about all this data, and maybe a little confused as to what a touchpoint is. Lots of folks like me get lots of mail and email from a lot of the same folks. Maybe they think, “Oh, I don't want to be this person who is bombarding something with emails a day.” When you talk in terms of touches, there are certain things you are accomplishing with each touch. Let's take a generic year or quarter and talk about what touchpoints there are and the methods behind them. Bill: Let me give you a common example of a mid-sized local nonprofit. Let's say they have 10-12 staff. On average, our clients would have several touches. They would probably have one event every year. In the spring, they will do a luncheon where they talk about their cause and ask people for money while they are there. They might have a monthly blog. The first Monday of every month, they put something out on social media. They might have a fall appeal mailing. Here is where they write a letter. “Dear Dr. Smith, Here is what we do. Please give us money.” If they are smart, they will have that appeal mailing coupled with an auto trigger email, where the day after Dr. Smith gets the letter, he gets an automatic email that says, “Hey Dr. Smith, did you get our letter yesterday? I bet you trashed it, didn't ya? You can still click here to support our cause.” Once in the winter and once in the summer, they will do an e-newsletter. They are sending out information two or three times a year. Information only. They are asking for money in a hard ask twice a year. In the example I gave, once with a mailer/email and once with an event. Something like that. We have some clients who do mailers and ask for money every month. We have others who do it once a year with a hard mailing. What we don't have is much success with straight email solicitation. People do like the convenience of donating online, but they don't trust it unless it has something based in the physical world, whether that's a letter they got and threw away, then they get the mail. They will trust it a lot more because they have the mail piece. They go to an open house, and they then trust the email because they associate it with the real-life physical experience they had. That would be typical. A hard ask twice a year, information only two or three times, and maybe something monthly on social media. What we find does not work is the single big blast. So many people want to put all their eggs into one basket. We will have this big shindig and send out 200,000 invitations. It doesn't do that well. It is better to touch 200 people rhythmically than 200,000 in a blast. Is that helpful? Russell: The key is to spread these over with ask, non-ask. Give them information about the programs they were talking about in the newsletter. How the dollars are impacting, how many people were served, what the shift is. Bill: Impact is huge. Russell: If we're talking about contacting 200 people at a time, this probably means for a medium-sized nonprofit they are sending stuff out weekly to different donors.   Bill: Most of our clients, an average database for our clients is in the range of 2,000-10,000 donors. We often do mailings of 3,000. Sometimes we do 100,000. On average, let's say 5,000. Most of our clients would do one or two mailings a year. A fall appeal and a spring appeal. In lieu of the spring appeal, sometimes they would do a spring event. The other touches, the social media and the e-newsletter when they are not asking are information only. That would be a balanced mix. Let me get to another key point. This is the magic right here. Rhythm is important. Understanding the rhythm that your clients respond to. Most of you know this. Most nonprofit organizations have a pretty good understanding of how often their donors and potential donors want to be asked. Once a year, twice a year, once a month sometimes. The organization usually knows what the rhythm should be. Rhythm is so important that you sustain it over the years that our biggest piece of advice is adjust the scale to match your budget so that you can sustain the rhythm. We actually help clients with spreadsheets so it says we want to mail to 20,000 people twice a year. The postage alone exceeds your budget. You can't do that. “Let's try it one time.” Don't do it. Adjust that scale. If you can't afford the postage of 20,000 appeal letters, can you do 10,000? No. 5,000? You play with that spreadsheet and settle on we can sustain 2,500 twice a year. That's the amount you go with. You have this pool of 10,000. How do you target down to the 2,500? That's how you do predictive analytics. Mail to the 2,500 who are most likely to donate to your cause. It's a budget thing. You adjust your scale to match your budget so you can sustain that rhythm because if you sustain the rhythm through several cycles, it works. This is based on data of what actually works, not what makes you feel or look good, but did the donations come rolling in. Russell: What is the best path to help a new organization or client when they come to you? They may have some stuff they kept on Excel, but they don't necessarily have a donor database or CRM. They looked at these things and thought they were hard to use. They know they need to get better information. Talk about that process where you help them look at the most important factors and how to organize that data and how you guide them to build that so they get effective data from what they are collecting. Bill: There are lots of databases out there as you know. We deal with lots of them. People are constantly asking us which one is the best. All I can honestly say is the best one is the one that someone in your organization is willing to dive into. The right operator, any of these databases can sing. They really can. Some of our biggest clients use Salesforce for their nonprofit data. There is a whole spectrum. It's not so much which CRM system you use. It's do you have someone and a back-up or two who know how to use it? If you have no money and can't do anything, use Excel. It's not so much what you use as how you use it. We can assist. We understand a lot of the databases. We love working with Excel in terms of immediate back-and-forth with our clients. They will export their database to a CSV or Excel file, and we will update the addresses and run through a deceased person's filter. Make sure that list is scrubbed and clean. But we do all that from Excel. Russell: It's a robust program. Microsoft itself. What trips people up more than anything else is understanding what are the most important pieces for me to collect, and then once I collect all of these, what is the best way to categorize or shift my people around or look at now I have it, how do I use it? Bill: This leads into something new we have been doing within the last couple of years. Let's say you inherit a nonprofit. You come in as the new executive director. There has been some staff turnover, and you have three or four huge Excel files with all your donors. You don't really know your donors. You have some record of who gave when, but you don't know why the other people are in there. Are they good prospects? We can actually take that database, those Excel files, do all the usual stuff, combine, de-dupe, update the addresses, make sure they aren't deceased. Then we do something called data append. We send that file—let's say you have 3,000 names but you only know who 50 are—confidentially to some of these national compilers. They can run it versus their data banks and come back with demographic data filled in where you get age, education level, the value of the home, household income, gender, political persuasion, all sorts of things you can add back to that list. That can be a target. You can say, “Listen, these 300 people don't match the profile of our donors. I don't see why we're mailing to them. They haven't given to us in five years. Let's drop them. But these 400 look really good. They match the profile. They are active in the community. Let's keep them on our list.” We call it scoring data or modeling data. There are all kinds of things like that. Russell: There are so many nuances to relating to donors. They come from different backgrounds, education levels, parts of the country. They are in different age groups. When people look at this and say, “I have a lot of different people,” what is the best way for me to organize these groups? What are their touchpoints that are more effective for some groups than others? How do we go about looking at that? Bill: One thing I haven't talked about yet is what channel you use. Is this a demographic that will respond to a Facebook post or a physical newsletter or an e-newsletter? You can ask them. That's a good question. “Would you prefer to receive this?” Make some age and generation assumptions. Millennials actually like direct mail more than you think. Some older folks don't like it as much as you think. The one thing we do advise people to do is do what we call a scattergraph. That's where you sit around the table brainstorming and make a graph of your best donors in terms of age, income level, value of home, education level, geography. As you start graphing this, you will have people all over that graph. You will have young kids who donate to your cause. You have great-grandfathers. You have uneducated and educated. But there will be, the more you plot those dots on your graph, a cluster in the middle. That is your sweet spot. If you want to go after and acquire more donors, acquire more who match those demographics. Add those predictive analytics. It's good to have a profile of who is our sweet spot donor, and how many. Russell: Very helpful. When you start working with an organization, what type of organization are you most effective at helping? What are some of the things that the organization can do that will help you get them results a little faster? Bill: That's a great question, Russell. We find that most nonprofits are pretty good at the first 30%, the message. Nonprofits know most well why they do what they do. It's their passion. It's why they go to work. They usually have that part nailed down. They have that elevator speech. You can't shut them up. They got the message. We find that we can help a lot with the rhythm. We can build these Excel sheets. We can send reminder notifications. “Make sure your blog is written. It's due tomorrow.” “Your e-newsletter should launch next week.” We send reminders that keep them on track, like how a FitBit reminds you to hop up and walk around. These notifications keep you on track. The one that is hardest is the data. It's relationships. We don't know the people in their database, but they do. They know more of them than not. Say the thing in the organization could do is the best results is to go through their database with as many constituents involved as possible: your volunteers, your staff, your key donors. Break it up into small bits, and do a little bit at a time. Try to understand who your donors are. That would probably be the best. Leverage your board. Every board member should have a gun to their head that says, “Who do you know who might donate to your cause? Give us their names.” Leverage conversations. Your whole staff should be encouraged. You have a new administrative assistant who is helping you with this. She bumps into someone at the grocery store who says, “Hey Sally, I haven't seen you in a long time. What are you doing?” “I'm working at Habitat for Humanity now. We are doing this and this.” That person says, “Wow, that sounds interesting. Tell me more.” Sally needs to know to come back and get that information in the database. That person she just bumped into in the grocery store is a better prospect than any of these purchased names we are talking about. Everyone in the organization from the board to the staff to the volunteers should realize it is their personal relationships that lead to the best database. Russell: It's a warm referral that is good. One of the things that I've seen information on and talked to people about in having people on your team, you want to have good tools for them to use to go out and talk about your organization. If you can take a few minutes, talk about some of the tools, printed tools, the toolkits that you make the board members and volunteers and people with information on the organization, how they organize that, and the tools they have to talk about the organization in the best way. Bill: Funny you should ask. We just worked up some handout cards as old-fashioned as that sounds, a little bigger than a business card. The organization calls them the “Get Involved” cards. On one size is the logo and a truncated, poignant abbreviation of the mission. The back features three ways to get involved. You can go to this website and do this. You can become a volunteer and do this. You can call this number and do this. They give these cards to everyone on staff, their volunteers, and encourage them when you are in the grocery store and your old roommate comes up to talk to you, you give them one of the cards. Something as simple as that. Russell: It's important to have those pieces. Is there a way you have people who have these tools, a simple system for them to keep track of how many people are coming? How do you help them document the effectiveness of these tools? Bill: We haven't done a lot of that. The organizations themselves usually keep a database of how many cards did you hand out, and did you talk about it? Ideally you are getting some address/city/state/zip/phone number/email into your database from that encounter. That's the ideal. When you bump into the old roommate in the grocery store, you ask for a business card or a text so I can keep in touch with you. “I'd like to send some information about XYZ charity.” The ones I know do this on a regular basis have weekly staff meetings and go over contacts. It's the most important thing. You're an ambassador for your charity. It's those contacts. People give to people. I know you think they give to your organization because you do all this good. They give because they know and trust you to carry out that mission. It's all about trust. Hugh: Underlying that is relationship building. I can't tell you how many nonprofits out there get a check and wait until next year to ask for another check. I don't know what the average is, but 70% of most nonprofits get the bulk of their money from donors. There is a large percentage. Bill: Yeah, we really do need to take care of our donors better. We recommend the pyramid where you take your database and have your top donors at the top. At some point, you draw that line where everyone above this level of giving gets the personal visit from the executive director or the personal phone call or the three phone calls a year, whatever that appropriate nurturing touch is. The ones at the bottom get a thank-you card. The top people, your key donors, need to be acknowledged, need to be thanked. They need the recognition. You can't do that with all 3,000 names, but you can do it with the top 50. We recommend that pyramid approach. Hugh: It's the old Pareto principle, the 80/20 rule. 80% of your money comes from 20% of your people. The leader is challenged to be able to spend enough time with too many people. My rule of thumb is what you said. You want to spend individual time with your 20%, but you want to stay in touch with the other 80%. Your program is a good way to do that. Bill: We slice and dice it even further. I'll give you an example. They won't mind me talking about them. It's a local arts nonprofit that does theater and plays. They have a huge donor database. The ones at the very top get the personal visit, the handwritten note, the crème de la crème. The next hunk of several thousand records gets variable data printed communication. Variable data has a salutation, “Dear Sam and Jackie.” This communication flips out pictures of the last show they went to. It's highly personalized because they have scrubbed the data that far down that they trust it and know it's accurate. Variable data personalization works as long as it's accurate. The bottom part of the pyramid gets the “Dear friend of XYZ Theater.” The bottom part of it is not personalized because they simply don't have the resources to scrub their data all the way down and make their salutations are correct and other variable data is accurate. Russell: This is important as far as it's managing your budget. You're getting the most bang for the buck and where a lot of people don't think they have money to spend, they may find that after going through and working with someone like you, they may be able to find where they can actually spend the same dollars and get more bang for the buck. When you're working with an organization, sometimes they have board members or volunteers or different people participating in the process. How important is training for all of these key people? What are some of the most important things for you to cover when you're training them? Bill: Let me do a tangent because something you said reminded me of something. This is back in the early 2000s, 2006/2007, right in there. We had not developed our full-blown three-bit marketing system. We were beginning to gather the data and understand that the rhythmic touching is what's important. I ended up being the chair of a small nonprofit. It was a private school trying to get off the ground in the middle of nowhere, southwest Virginia. We didn't have the money to hire my company. We were struggling. We had about 300 names of donors and potential donors. We had 10 board members. 300 names, 10 board members. What a coincidence. Here's what we did. We wrote the letter. We took it to the board meeting and said, “Okay, Sam, you're on the board. You're responsible for these 30 potential people. You make copies of the letter, sneak them into church, and pay the postage. That's why you're on the board.” We assigned each board member 30 records from that database. As an organization, we didn't spend any money. We leveraged our board. They each had to make a few copies and come up with 30 first-class stamps. We did that rhythmically. We did that appeal mail three times a year. By the third year, what do you know? We could afford to have someone else do all this. That was definitely training board members to get in the trenches. Hugh talks about this all the time. The importance of an energized and dedicated board is, I can't say enough about it. That is so critical to have in a thriving nonprofit. Russell: That it is. It's all about the people who you have, who support you, who are in your organization. Your team is your secret sauce. That's where you grow and prosper and create more impact in the lives of others. Knowing how to reach out to them and what really resonates with them is very important. Having that system and having the tools to get them there. The one thing we haven't really touched on is with donors, you have three phases. You're acquiring them. Then at some point, as they're sticking with you, you want them to grow, and you want them to stay. There are three pieces to that. If you would, talk a bit about some of the best ways to move them through that process. How do you acquire them? What are some key tips for that? What are some things that will help you grow them? What are some of the most important things to keep them sticking with you? Bill: The acquisition part we talked about a bit. The best way is those personal relationships, those personal contacts. The second best way would be doing some data acquisition. You can do it yourself; you don't have to go through a company like mine. Google “how to acquire donors,” and plenty of places will crop up that will sell you names. That is the acquisition part. The rhythm means a lot here. The rhythmic touch is how you keep them and how you make them poised to grow. Usually, it's in the second or third year that you get the first donation from a brand new contact. To do that, you need to do those rhythmic touches. This is not an overnight success thing. This is in it for the long haul. It's rare, not unheard of, but rare for someone to move from a $50-per-cycle level to a $5,000-level without something happening. That something could be they come to an event, they hear a speaker, they get a visit from a board member, they get a visit from an executive director. To get that kind of nurturing increase takes something. It's rare that someone would jump from $40 to $500 or $5,000 through repeated passive asks. I think one of the best, it doesn't fit every nonprofit, is to have that annual luncheon where the board members are assigned to fill tables. When they invite people, they let them know, “We will do a presentation. We will ask to give you some money. You don't have to, but there will be an ask. We'd really love to have you.” You get people in the room and have dynamic speakers. You have some of the people you serve. It depends on what kind of nonprofit you have. You do things that give people a real glimpse into how you make the world a better place. that has been known to move people from the $50 level to the $500 level or $5,000 level. Russell: Well-executed non-ask events are critical, too. Just to let people know, “Hey, we're good stewards of your money.” There's some magic about walking them around where they can see where it is people are actually out there in the trenches doing good work. Speaking to some of the things you can acquire and move these services out of the community so they get a working understanding. That growth piece, getting them and growing them, is your lifetime value of a customer for lack of a better way to put it. That takes time. To grow them, you have to keep them. What are the two most important tools? Bill: There are some simple things you can do. You need to thank them for their gifts. The pyramid, the top ones should get a personal visit or phone call. At the bottom, maybe it's a handwritten thank-you note. More and more of our clients are doing the board pizza party, where they get their board together and some phones. Around dinnertime, they serve the board pizza, and they call the top donors. They do it around dinnertime so a lot of people don't answer the phone. But that's fine. You leave a message. The board member says, “Hey, Dr. Smith. I want to thank you and your wife for your $500 gift to our organization. We really appreciate it. It helps us do this, this, and this.” That donor will remember that. That donor will say, “Hey, a board member called me.” That's a nice little thing to do, and to touch the top donors that way. The ones at the really top, the big players, probably need the thank you from the chair of the board and the executive director. You can hit a lot of those mid donors with a call from a board member. Think about the donations you make. How often do you get a phone call of thanks? Not many. Maybe I'm not donating enough. Russell: It's always good. It's just common courtesy. If you're in a supermarket, someone holds the door. Saying thank you to people is a reflex. But somehow, it seems like from some of the statistics I've seen, it's one of the more common mistakes that people make. They don't take that time to say thank you. What are a couple other really common mistakes that people make that are just quick and easy to fix? Bill: Accurate data is really big. If you say “Dear Sam,” and the name isn't Sam, that's not good. You've got to be very careful with variable data and personalization. Personalization gone awry does more damage than it does good. One thing we've been doing more and more, the post office has gotten better with the deceased persons filter. You try to cut out saying, “Dear John and Sally” when John passed away a year ago. That's an easy mistake to fix. Run the data through the filter. Don't mail to dead people if at all possible. Data cleanliness is a common thing. Not thanking is the biggest thing. You mentioned something earlier. Every touch can't be an ask. It really should be more information only touches than there are ask touches. The top donors should get a report at the end of the year, maybe a few months after. Not a fancy annual report, but a sheet of, “Here's what your donation allowed us to do.” You can do these infographic looks. You can really show people what you've done. We have a client now that has this neat system. They do three newsletters a year. They have an elderly donor base. These are physical newsletters. Because newsletters are more expensive, they've gone to a news postcard. They send out these jumbo postcards three times a year. Short bullet point articles that show their impact. Every one of those short articles, it's just bullet points and headlines. People don't read anymore. There is a link to a website you can go to if you want more information. They do this three times a year. In the fourth quarter, they ask. They push out information on a 3:1 ratio with their ask. We recommend something like that. 2:1, 3:1, something like that, so people don't think, “Good grief. XYZ charity is always asking for money.” It has to be, “Here's the good things we're doing.” Your social media should be that. Your social media personally I don't think should ask for money. I think social media should be, “Look what we're doing. Celebrate with us.” Russell: It would certainly be a place to capture your benefactors, the clients online and talk about what's going on. Some of the sites that the work is being done on, it's almost like the news medium. When someone hears their name mentioned on social media, you get a thousand followers. Whoa, they're talking about me. This thing has 1,000 views and 10,000 followers. “Hey, maybe I need to send them another check. They need to get my good side next time.” Hugh: That's part of the story. Telling a story, you have relationships. There are people who want to be in the picture with a big check. I don't think we think about the amount of stories we need to be telling because we are doing a lot of good work. We don't really tell people. In fact, social media is social. We are supposed to engage. I see all too often, “Buy this. Do that.” And there is no attempt at a relationship. That is what I'm hearing you saying. In our program, we are building relationships. We are maintaining relationships. People give to people. That is the biggest sound bite. People give to people, not to organizations. Bill: I agree. It's all about relationships. It's all about telling your story. That's what relationships are. We as humans are people who have relationships with each other, and we tell stories to each other. It's the way you come home to your spouse and say, “Hey honey.” We love to tell stories. I think social media is great for this. You have these snippets and tell this vignette story of something your nonprofit did or something that you did. It's to build relationships. The best donor is the one that knows you. I keep coming back to this. You have a personal relationship with them. But you do it by stories. We recommend the hard ask appeal letter everyone does in the fall that it start off with just a three- to four-sentence story that is in a nutshell what you do. Then you make your ask. You take it to the next level. “There are so many kids like Johnny.” In the first paragraph, you tell Johnny's story. Stories mean a lot. Russell: You have really critical points in the year. A lot happens toward the end of the year around Giving Tuesday in the back end of the year. Are there some time periods during the course of the year that you believe nonprofits are leaving money on the table? Maybe there are times to reach out that might be more effective than people pay attention to. Bill: That's another great question. It's changing. It used to be I would always tell people to do their main appeal early to mid-November because we were told the stats said the most generous week of the year is the week leading up to Thanksgiving. Everybody is starting to feel festive, but they don't have worries about the credit card bills yet. We've also heard that summer is not a great time to ask because so many people are on vacation and will miss the appeal. I tell you though, people are so connected now. With tax law changes, the end of the year may not be as significant of a time as it has been. We are finding more and more of our clients are doing oddly timed appeals. It's just starting, so they haven't built a rhythm yet. We have clients who are doing a February appeal and a July appeal. Stay tuned. I'll have a better answer in three years when we get some data back on that. I really think that if you talk with your key constituents, talk to your board and staff and key donors, you'll know. You'll know when the appropriate time is to do your ask and your information only. Remember the point about you adjust the scale to fit the budget so you can sustain the rhythm. One thing I meant to mention is it's not just the financial budget. It's the budget of your time. Here is another common mistake. We see it probably most often with social media. You get all excited. You say, “I'm going to write a blog every week.” I'm going to post it out on Facebook and Twitter and LinkedIn. I don't know many executive directors who have the time to write a blog every week. If you do, more power to you. Our suggestion will be, Are you really? Let's be realistic about this. Adjust the scale to match the time budget. How much time do you have? Sustain the rhythm. We would counsel you down from once a week to the first Monday every month. If that's too much, if you can't stick with that, then once every month. Hugh: It's the regular rhythm that we heard about earlier, too. Speaking of time, we are almost at the top of the hour. Bill, you get the last word. If you have a thought or tip or challenge to give the audience. This has been a helpful interview. *Sponsor message from SynerVision Leadership Foundation* If you want to talk about how Bill's services look for you, go to Wordsprint.com. The regular mailing to your tribe makes a difference. Bill, Wordsprint.com is one of our main sponsors, so thank you for that. We talk about you often. You're leaving this interview. What is your challenge or parting thought for people? Bill: My parting thought would be it really is all about relationships. The piece of the puzzle that you or a director or a board member or your staff could do to help your organization the most is to work on those relationships and get that relationship into a database so they can get rhythmic touches. If anyone would like to chat with me about this, we do free consultations, no cost, no obligation, at Wordsprint.com. You can send me a message. I can talk in detail about your organization and things that would work for you. Our system of getting the right message to the right people does not mean you have to use us. You can use current partners. You can do it in-house yourself. It's the system that works. The right message to the right people with the right rhythm. Russell: Bill, thanks again for joining us. Thanks for all the support you give us here at SynerVision Leadership. You certainly make us look good. Folks, do yourself a favor, and have a talk with Bill and his team as to how you can grow donors, keep them, and build those relationships using the right tools by getting out there, sending the right message to the right people in the right rhythm. It needs to look good, but that is only 10%. And it will. Make sure you check out our magazine because it's a good-looking magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Spoiler alert: it's flexibility! Why you need it, how to develop it, and how to encourage your congregation toward it - plus an ear toward the Holy Spirit's leading. Click on the player to listen to the conversation, or scroll down to read the transcript. Our Reads of the Week If you purchase through some of the following links, we may earn an affiliate commission. Thank you for supporting Called! Gossip - Rocky Supinger The Color of Life: A Journey Toward Love and Racial Justice - Cara Meredith About Called - At the Intersection of Life and Ministry For 50 years between them, Pastor Bill Smutz and musician Sarah Bereza have survived and thrived in churches big and small, urban and rural, good and not so good. With generous hearts and healthy boundaries, they share practical advice for church staff about working smart, cutting out the bs, and embracing the good in ministry. New episodes on 1st and 3rd Tuesdays. Check out all the Called podcast episodes here, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Transcription of Called Ep. 8: The One Thing You REALLY Need in Ministry (That You Didn't Learn in School) Sarah: Welcome to Called, a podcast where we explore the intersection of ministry and the rest of our lives as church workers. Bill: I'm Bill Smutz. Sarah: And I'm Sarah Bereza. Bill: Join us on the first and third Tuesdays as we talk about cutting out the bs in our lives and embracing all that is good. Sarah: Between the two of us, we have ministered in churches for over 50 years, and we haven't burnt out yet. Bill: It's been close, but we're not there yet. I have pastored primarily Presbyterian congregations, urban, rural, big, small, and and for the last four or five years I have been doing interim transitional work in United Church of Christ congregations. Sarah: And I have been a church musician all over the denominational spectrum - Mainline, Evangelical, Catholic. Basically if they hire organists, I have probably worked for them. That One Thing They Didn't Teach You? Sarah Learned It in Middle School Sarah: Today we are talking about the one thing you need in ministry that they didn't teach in school. You never took a class on this. You probably didn't even hear professors talk about this in seminary or grad school. But you have to have this, or you going to be miserable. So let's see if you can guess what this is. We're going to start out with a story. Sarah: I was 11 years old, almost 12, and the lead pianist at my little Baptist church moved away and at nearly 12, I was the next person in line. And so for the next six years I was the lead pianist in a Baptist congregation where that meant, I was like the main lead musician for the church. Sarah: And I played for three services a week, and the choir, and most of the solos and the prelude and postlude, all that. Not always , cause there were other musical people in the church, but I was the person. And what that means is that I was the person who got hymns that morning right before the service started. And I was the person who a visiting evangelist would call up during the middle of the sermon. "Hey Sarah, come accompany me while I sing this hymn." I was that person as a middle school, high school student. Sarah: And you know what, as I look back on those six years at that little Baptist church, I think that was the best training I could have had. I mean, yeah, I had great music lessons, I had good teachers, all that good stuff. But that insistence on turning on a dime, of suddenly in the midst of a service, "Oh, here's the hymn that the Holy Spirit has led me to sing for our altar call." That kind of stuff. Like, go right now. Do it now. Sarah: What is it that we're talking about? Flexibility. Flexibility is where it's at for church workers. Bill: Anybody in a ministry setting knows that or is suffering because they don't. Why You (and Your Church) Needs to Practice Flexi...

Bill: Where are you joining us from? Kristine: I'm joining us from Orlando. So for those of you who are just tuning in, this is "Snowbirding 101." We're going to come to you with a ... did we say monthly? Monthly series? Bill: Monthly. Yes. Kristine: Just talking about if you've had any thoughts of moving down to Florida, down to the warmth, down to the sunshine, this is a great series to kind of get you started. And just we're going to talk about pretty much everything. We're going to pick a topic each month. This month, we are talking about the differences in construction, what to expect. There's so many differences, like Bill was saying, to anything that is, what'd you say, new construction is after the war? Bill: Post war. Yeah. [crosstalk 00:01:08] Kristine: Which is so funny to me. Bill: [inaudible 00:01:10] foundations, that's the way to go. Kristine: Yeah. So obviously, things are really different. And so, I'll just start with that first difference, is that you're going to find a lot newer homes here, especially in the Orlando area. We were going to have Janet from Tampa on our show today. She's sick, so we'll have her on, probably next month. But I can't speak for every city, but that's why we're bringing on a bunch of different agents. But I can speak for Orlando, and here in Orlando, especially the county that I'm in, which is Seminole County, you're seeing the majority of homes in 1980s, 1990s, and then a ton of new construction. Like my house is built in 2016. So it really helps with your home insurance. Who wouldn't want to insure a brand new home? Bill: It's so refreshing to hear, because we get a lot of buyers looking in the Melrose area here, and sit down, they're like, "We want that open concept floor plan. We want something relatively new, we don't have to put a lot of time in." And it's like, "Have you thought of North Carolina?" Because it just doesn't exist up here. Kristine: But you don't have the charm of those old homes. And here, our new construction is really built on, maybe like 1/4 of an acre, and they are "cookie cutter" homes. So basically, the builder gets a planned unit development in a subdivision, sometimes it's gated, sometimes it's not, and they have anywhere between like three and seven floor plans. And they pretty much just build those over and over and over again. So it is pretty cool. You can go in ... It's called semi customs. You can go in and choose the floor plan, you can choose your lot, and then you can choose all the finishes, but they already have all of the plans for the home done. And then the outside of them looks different. You choose like your elevations. There's usually like two or three different outside aesthetic options that you can do. But it's a good system. It takes them about four months to build the home, and so, that's from scratch, that's from dirt on the ground. Bill: Okay. Yeah, that's a pretty quick turnaround. And I think the good news is, like a lot of people up here have lived in their 1890s Victorian, or turn of the century Colonial, 1920s Colonial, and they've spent 15, 20, 25 years with the upkeep of that property. And I think they're pretty much done with the charm aspect of it, and they're just kind of looking for something easy, so I think that's obviously a great fit. And we'll get a little nerdy here about the architecture and how things are built. So most of the stuff here, Kristine, is wooden frame construction. Tell us what it is down in Florida, usually.

Audience feedback drives the show. We'd love for you to email us and keep the conversation going! Email thefeed@libsyn.com or call 412–573–1934. We'd love to hear from you! Quick Episode Summary: :07 Intro 2:24 Audio Rockin' Libsyn Podcast: Olympic Fever 7:23 How you can be featured by Libsyn! 8:56 PROMO 1: The Sick Mom's Guide 9:26 Elsie and Rob Conversation Have you changed your copyright date? Public Domain Day 14:00 First audio feedback of the year via Paul from Fighting Through Rob's podcast predictions for 2019 Should you add your podcast to Deezer? Flash briefings vs Alexa skills - what are they and what's a good strategy for a show 24:04 Is there any reason to fill in the Facebook social media tab in Libsyn? Audio feedback via Bill It's time to get ready to submit to speak at Podcast Movement! Shout - out to Dr Kiki from This Week is Science for 14+ years and 700 episodes Congrats to TaylorMade Golf for the launch of their podcast Do you need to ask permission to mention big brands on your podcast? 42:34 Great feedback from Oscar and all kinds of good things for his podcast! Attempting to clarify info about LUFS/LKFS and file formats Taylor Swift is closing down her app The Swift Life 56:33 PROMO 2: The Casual Birder Podcast Worst emails of the week Developer thoughts on RAD plus addressing privacy issues plus making sure we're clear who it serves Do stats tend to drop during the end of year holidays? 1:12:57 PROMO 3: Childless Not By Choice Stats, stats, stats! Median and mean numbers on episodes released in November measured through end of December. Featured Podcast Promos + Audio Audio Rockin' Libsyn Podcasts: Olympic Fever Promo 1: The Sick Mom's Guide Promo 2: The Casual Birder Podcast Promo 3: Paul from Fighting Through Bill from Strokecast and Two Minute Talk Tips Oscar from Deep Listening Thank you to Nick from MicMe for our awesome intro! Podcasting Articles and Links mentioned by Rob and Elsie Our SpeakPipe Feedback page! Leave us feedback :) Post about changing your copyright date on Twitter Public Domain Day 2019 Limbo by Aldous Huxley 2018 Predictions: Online Audio in the New Year Podcast Movement: submit to speak! Apple podcast best practices The State of the Business of Podcasting with Libsyn VP, Rob Walch – Why the Future of Podcasting is Bright Social Impact & Podcasting with Elsie Escobar, She Podcasts & Libsyn's The Feed Where is Libsyn Going? (In Real Life) Podcon in Seattle Podfest in Orlando Proclaim 19 NAB in Las Vegas HELP US SPREAD THE WORD! We'd love it if you could please share #TheFeed with your twitter followers. Click here to post a tweet! If you dug this episode head on over to Apple Podcasts and kindly leave us a rating, a review and subscribe! Ways to subscribe to The Feed: The Official Libsyn Podcast Click here to subscribe via Apple Podcasts Click here to subscribe via RSS You can also subscribe via Stitcher FEEDBACK + PROMOTION You can ask your questions, make comments and create a segment about podcasting for podcasters! Let your voice be heard. Download the FREE The Feed App for iOS and Android (you can send feedback straight from within the app) Call 412 573 1934 Email thefeed@libsyn.com Use our SpeakPipe Page!

Audience feedback drives the show. We'd love for you to email us and keep the conversation going! Email thefeed@libsyn.com or call 412–573–1934. We'd love to hear from you! Quick Episode Summary: :07 Intro 2:24 Audio Rockin' Libsyn Podcast: Olympic Fever 7:23 How you can be featured by Libsyn! 8:56 PROMO 1: The Sick Mom's Guide 9:26 Elsie and Rob Conversation Have you changed your copyright date? Public Domain Day 14:00 First audio feedback of the year via Paul from Fighting Through Rob's podcast predictions for 2019 Should you add your podcast to Deezer? Flash briefings vs Alexa skills - what are they and what's a good strategy for a show 24:04 Is there any reason to fill in the Facebook social media tab in Libsyn? Audio feedback via Bill It's time to get ready to submit to speak at Podcast Movement! Shout - out to Dr Kiki from This Week is Science for 14+ years and 700 episodes Congrats to TaylorMade Golf for the launch of their podcast Do you need to ask permission to mention big brands on your podcast? 42:34 Great feedback from Oscar and all kinds of good things for his podcast! Attempting to clarify info about LUFS/LKFS and file formats Taylor Swift is closing down her app The Swift Life 56:33 PROMO 2: The Casual Birder Podcast Worst emails of the week Developer thoughts on RAD plus addressing privacy issues plus making sure we're clear who it serves Do stats tend to drop during the end of year holidays? 1:12:57 PROMO 3: Childless Not By Choice Stats, stats, stats! Median and mean numbers on episodes released in November measured through end of December. Featured Podcast Promos + Audio Audio Rockin' Libsyn Podcasts: Olympic Fever Promo 1: The Sick Mom's Guide Promo 2: The Casual Birder Podcast Promo 3: Paul from Fighting Through Bill from Strokecast and Two Minute Talk Tips Oscar from Deep Listening Thank you to Nick from MicMe for our awesome intro! Podcasting Articles and Links mentioned by Rob and Elsie Our SpeakPipe Feedback page! Leave us feedback :) Post about changing your copyright date on Twitter Public Domain Day 2019 Limbo by Aldous Huxley 2018 Predictions: Online Audio in the New Year Podcast Movement: submit to speak! Apple podcast best practices The State of the Business of Podcasting with Libsyn VP, Rob Walch – Why the Future of Podcasting is Bright Social Impact & Podcasting with Elsie Escobar, She Podcasts & Libsyn's The Feed Where is Libsyn Going? (In Real Life) Podcon in Seattle Podfest in Orlando Proclaim 19 NAB in Las Vegas HELP US SPREAD THE WORD! We'd love it if you could please share #TheFeed with your twitter followers. Click here to post a tweet! If you dug this episode head on over to Apple Podcasts and kindly leave us a rating, a review and subscribe! Ways to subscribe to The Feed: The Official Libsyn Podcast Click here to subscribe via Apple Podcasts Click here to subscribe via RSS You can also subscribe via Stitcher FEEDBACK + PROMOTION You can ask your questions, make comments and create a segment about podcasting for podcasters! Let your voice be heard. Download the FREE The Feed App for iOS and Android (you can send feedback straight from within the app) Call 412 573 1934 Email thefeed@libsyn.com Use our SpeakPipe Page!

Interview Transcript Hugh Ballou: Hey there, it's Hugh Ballou. We're back. This is a bonus session of The Nonprofit Exchange. We are recording a series of interviews about partnerships and collaborations. Recording some thought leaders in the place where SynerVision is located in Lynchburg, Virginia. It's central western Virginia, about halfway up in the commonwealth on the side almost in West Virginia. Bill Varner: Almost. Hugh: Almost. And my guest today is a new friend. I have only been here a year, and we met shortly after. People kept saying, “You need to meet Bill Varner.” Give us a little background, Bill, on who you are. You came from corporate America to run a nonprofit. Bill: I did. The last 30 years, I have spent in health services and hospital administration. The last 17 of those were with Centra as their vice president for strategic planning, marketing, business development, communications, and PR. All of that has been in new business development, evaluating communities and determining what their needs are and putting plans and processes in place to meet those needs. One thing that's interesting about the health system environment is while there is often one single plan for the organization, there are numerous subcomponents to the organization, too. You might have a focus on cardiovascular services, a focus on women's and children's services. There can be strategic plans at each of those levels as well, but they all have to work together toward one single ambition. I have the responsibility for that. I did that for the last 17 years at Centra, headquartered in Lynchburg, and covered all the geographies that organization covers. About a year and a half ago, the opportunity presented itself to run United Way. They were looking for a different skill mix for their incoming executive director, no longer just someone who was comfortable with raising funds, but someone who could say this is an organization that needs to adapt to the future and the current state. What type of skills and experience do we want in the role? Bottom line, they were looking for somebody with more of a strategic planning/vision-setting, tracking incomes type of person. That not only fit very well in my wheelhouse, but I was also very interested in doing something that actually put me a little bit closer to the people that benefited from the work we do. Centra is a great organization, but I am obviously not a physician or nurse or clinician. More and more in my life, I found that I really wanted to be closer to those who were having an impact in the community and to see who we serve. United Way is an ideal fit for me. Hugh: In my world of empowering organizations and leaders, the centrality of it is starting with your vision, mission, and strategy. Being a musical conductor, we have to have the chart in front of us so we know what we have to do. It's a really important foundation for any organization. Coming from corporate America into this philanthropic work for a for-purpose organization—we like to call them that because nonprofit is such a crazy word. When you and I first met, give me an idea. Let's talk about how many other organizations you support. Bill: We support 26 agencies, 38 programs in those agencies. We actually fund those programs. Several of our agencies have more than one program. 26 organizations, 38 programs. Hugh: What makes your work different than Community Foundation? Bill: Community Foundation and we overlap in some respects. Much of what the Greater Lynchburg Community Foundation does focuses on social needs and community needs. They have a broader focus in that they may have benefactors that have funded foundations within their structure who have a very dedicated focus outside social services. We are strictly focused on social services. But we recognize that because we have a shared purpose in the community, we talk. That's a monthly get-together we have. We have included the Centra Foundation. There may be others we want to include in that. We are all to some degree doing the same thing. Let's at least make sure we're coordinated. If we are asking agencies and other nonprofits to collaborate and coordinate, we need to hold ourselves to the same standard. So let's get together and talk. Not sure exactly what is going to come from it. We don't have a hard deadline as to when we will have certain deliverables, but we are starting to see that there will be opportunities for us to communicate and make sure we are all rowing in the same direction around certain needs in the community. I may be getting off your question a little bit, but that's why we recognized early on we needed a single direction. I started to talk about this idea of why don't we do a single community needs assessment? In the past, each nonprofit we support in various times in their planning cycle would do a needs assessment. They each didn't necessarily coordinate with one another. I thought if we could do one needs assessment for the community, not only would we save the time and effort of having everybody do it separately, but we could all participate in that one process, get input into it, and see the same results. We would then ideally be all rowing in the same direction. Here are the three or four biggest issues in the community. Let's make sure we exert most of our time, resources, and effort on those areas. We have the data and feedback to support those are priority areas. We are doing much more than if somebody comes and asks for a grant, we fund them. We're really looking strategically at if this is addressing a community need. Bill at the Community Foundation and I are trying to stay very coordinated in that effort. Hugh: At the heart of collaborations and partnerships, there is defining the need and defining the vision and your philosophy of how you will proceed. How has the work of part of the conversation has been with the city, with the arts center, and with a group called Unity in the Community who are purposefully pulling people together and having projects they can work on together. The theatre is opening up, and there is a whole program centered around the arts. Unity in the Community is centered around religious and service programs. You sit around that table. Thinking about partnerships and/or collaborations, they are slightly different, you can collaborate without being in a partnership, how has your work specifically and your work through United Way created a catalyst or been a facilitator of those things? Bill: Let me answer that by going one step back. I think it's important to understand a place like Lynchburg in central Virginia. One thing I have noticed here, and I have been here 17 years, and I have been in positions myself where we needed help for health issues or other things. This is a community that steps up. This community does not sit around. You just gave an example of your request for people to participate in a choir, and 100 people are there. You don't know if they're all singers, but there is a lot of interest. This is a community when it sees a need, it does not hesitate to rally a group together and try to address that need. Now there is good and bad with that. The good is that you have people who are there who are ready to go, symbolically speaking, they are not thinking all the same. What you also get is multiple efforts that may be duplicated with an existing effort or somehow are running counter to an existing effort. But at the very least, you have multiple organizations who have not yet communicated with one another, who may not even know the other exists. Now you have two different organizational structures. You may have two actual nonprofits who are registered, who have to create a board and have an executive director. They each go into their own direction and suddenly you have fragmentation. I will say a lot of what makes this a unique and wonderful community to live, that good heart that is willing to step up and engage, the unintended consequence of that is there is often too many people who have not yet coordinated. We are replete with organizations who are fragmented and could benefit from coordinating. We have identified that as an issue in our strategic plan. We feel like we have a role in being a catalyst to bring those organizations together. One, because we work with multiple organizations, we may be the first place to see that you are doing the same thing as this organization is doing. Why don't we get you together and talk? Our funding could go a lot further if we could support a consolidated and coordinated effort than it would if we were trying to support two separate organizations. By those way, those two organizations, and in some cases it is six, seven, eight organizations who overlap, are each out in the community asking for funding. My experience with donors is by the third time a person comes and asks for money for the same need, they suddenly realize this isn't coordinated. I won't give my money to this. I think there is a benefit that can come to those who do coordinate in that the ability to “sell themselves” to a donor and to sell their potential impact to a donor is greatly heightened. We are in a unique spot to see maybe for the first time where there are points of fragmentation. It's not always just a duplication or a fragmentation. There are some cases where the work of one organization could feed the work of another organization. Two places should be working together because they are taking care of people at different points in their life. Make sure they are doing a hand-off from one organization to the next. We feel like because we are in that unique spot that sees a lot of this, and we are in the position to be able to fund, and we track outcomes, that is an important role for us. Not just as a fundraiser to give money to those organizations, but to help those organizations operate more efficiently between one another. We are also doing some things to help them operate more efficiently within each organization. Hugh: That's promising. Bill: We are in the very early stages of that. I don't want to oversell accomplishments on that. We are starting to recognize where those overlaps are and are trying to bring groups together and see some of the challenges in that. It's tough for groups, at the end of the day, if you are going to coordinate and collaborate, what you are also going to do is compromise. It means that if I am going to coordinate with another organization, I have to go in with the spirit of compromise, and I have to go in it saying there is a purpose we are coming together for that supersedes my personal self-interest in this. It may in fact require me to give something away for the greater good of the community. I think as long as we are willing to do that and take self-interest and self-preservation out of the equation, I think we will do good things. As long as self-interest, self-preservation, egos, turfism stay in the discussion, it will be hard to move the needle. But I think the purpose of focusing on the community is a much more noble cause than the purpose of focusing on organization and organizational growth. We just need to be all prepared and recognize we will have to compromise. Hugh: I remember reading a story about one of the larger foundations in southern California in the LA area telling their organizations they funded. They pulled them all together and said, “We are not going to fund you anymore unless you work on collaborative efforts. We're leaving the room. You come back to us with a collaboration, and then we will revisit the conversation.” There was a funder stepping up and setting a boundary. We are not duplicating funding anymore. Part of what came to my mind as you were describing that situation was that we create an unintended consequence of leadership: a competitive situation. We have a need, so we will service that need. There is too much of when we didn't adequately do our research about what was available. In business, we look at our competition. What is our unique value proposition? Is it being served? A lot of people come to me when they want to start a nonprofit. I say why don't you work under another one as a project? Do it for a year, and see if there is really a need for this. Then you don't have to go through all that paperwork. Bill: That's music to my ears. That's exactly what we are asking organizations to do. Before you start a nonprofit, pump the brakes. Let's take a look and see if there is somebody else out there not necessarily doing the same thing, but addressing the same need. If there is, talk to them first. It's much more exciting to get your own organization started and create your own logo and website. That stuff is sexy and exciting, and people get caught up in that. You need to let that go. If my real purpose is to serve the community, not just create an organization, let me find out if there is a moving train I can hop onto now, somebody else who is already doing this. In fact, we had an example of that this last year. An organization came to us and wanted to start a new nonprofit. We think you are more appropriately aligned with an existing organization. Long story short, they are now a program under that organization. At least for now, that makes the most sense for them. Now they don't have to go find a separate board. They have not created costly infrastructure. They will share the overheads of the other organization. If anything, that helps spread that organization's overhead out, so that's a win-win. We'll say we have stopped short. We do recognize that as a funder, we have some leverage to say we will withhold some funding until you collaborate. We have stopped short of saying we will not fund you. In our view, that is punishing the wrong person. We're not punishing the organization; we are punishing the people who benefit from that organization. I'm not going to tell for example if there are two backpack programs in the community that provide food to kids on Friday and they are not collaborating, I am not going to say I am cutting your funding until you collaborate because I am not hurting those organizations, I am taking food out of the mouths of the kids on Friday. While it feels like an important knob to turn, to me, it's being a little reckless with money as a motivator. It's not targeted enough to actually motivate the right people. It just hurts the community. But we have said our funding is going to put strong preference on those organizations that collaborate. Hugh: That's true of a lot of private foundations that do fund nonprofit projects. They look favorably at collaborations and partnerships. Going into ways- I want to talk about two things. Going into these joint venture things, what are the deficits? People don't think about writing agreements for certain things. I want to talk about that. And then what are the resources that you and your organization bring to foster those conversations? Bill: It's interesting. I will talk a little bit out of both sides of my mouth. One, I will say I think those organizations who come together to collaborate should not set too high of an expectation early on. I think it's okay to say, “Let's get in a room and talk and see where things go.” If we put a lofty expectation in there meeting one, we may scare each other off, and we may not really know what we're trying to do yet. Don't set super high expectations right out of the gate. Don't be too rigid with saying we have to have an outcome by December. However, at some point, you have to switch the conversation from the stream of consciousness rambling, which some of these can be, which can be ultimately beneficial. At some point, you have to get people on a map. We have talked now for a few meetings; what are some of the things we think we share? Hugh: It's kind of like dating, isn't it? I didn't ask my wife to marry me on the first date. Did some relationship- Bill: That might have been a little presumptuous. Hugh: A little. Bill: It's very much like that. Once you know a little bit more about each other, you can say is there something more here? Is there a common purpose that we share? Is there a common goal that we should work on? If so, let's articulate that as clearly as possible. Maybe that's just one goal. If so, we make part of our work to focus on that goal, and let's keep having this open conversation about other areas you might benefit from or other people you want to bring to the table. But I think ultimately, if work is to get done and accomplishments are to be made and we are going to have positive, sustainable impact on the community, you have to get a plan together. You have to have the basic rudiments that a lot of people think are NBA 101, so people don't do them. They think they have to hold this in their head. You have to have a vision statement that is meaningful, clear, concise, and not have vague language, not be marketing fluff. You need to have a meaningful vision statement. Then you have to talk about the strategy that will get you there. That strategy has to be goals, objectives, tactics, 90-day plans, 30-day plans, who is accountable for it, when is it going to be done, and how do we measure whether or not it was done. If you have that line of sight between that vision and what you need to have done Monday morning, that is a recipe for doing good things. I do think those early collaborative efforts need to be loose on the front end, but gradually get more focused as topics bubble out of those areas. I am in several of those meetings right now. A couple of them, we are in those early stages where we are just talking. We leave the room. The type A in you leaves the room says, “We did a lot of talking, but I don't know what we accomplished.” The more patient side of you should say, “We have done a lot of talking, but we have not talked before. That's good. That's progress. No real hard outcome just yet, but we will get there. Maybe the next meeting or the meeting after that, we will plant a stake in the ground and say that we all want to do this. We all focus on food, clothing, and shelter. Let's pin that up on the wall and say what can we do differently together to do this?” That can be scary to organizations because that does ultimately mean you are going to somebody in the room, probably everybody in the room will have to compromise a bit. You just need to know that going in. If you are going in saying, “I am not doing anything that is going to take something away from me or that causes me to lose influence or control over a certain area of my life,” if you go in there with that attitude, you might as well not be in the room. You have to go in saying, “This is not about me. This is about the community.” If there are points along the road here where I may be doing something that affects something we are measuring at United Way, maybe I need to let it go. If it's better for the community, if what I lose is more than made up for by what the community gains, I should let it go. I will give you a good example. We run a backpack program right now. We fund several backpack programs, but we run a couple different schools out of the United Way. We get revenue for that. That revenue is included in our total pledges that we report at the end of the year. Ultimately, all those backpack programs need to coordinate and consolidate a little bit better. That probably will mean our backpack program could move to a more centralized program somewhere that might be able to do it more efficiently and effectively than us. If I move that backpack program out, that is probably the right thing to do to get it in a more efficient program. But I have also taken X thousands of dollars worth of revenue that had been associated with that program outside of my organization. Somebody looking at our dollars might say you just went from $100 to $75. You're losing ground. Not really. I know where that program went. I know it's doing better where it is now. It made more sense for it to be operated there. If I am collecting $25 less than I used to collect, that's okay. That's not a failure. In fact, that's evidence we collaborated on something. If my only interest is in growing our revenue, I would never do that. That's why you have to let that interest go. There is room for all of us. At some point, organizations may need to consolidate and think about shared purposes. Right now, we are in the earlier coordination and cooperation stage. Hugh: One of the things I am clearly hearing is that you're a catalyst for people to think differently. Bill: We are trying to be, and trying to facilitate conversations like that. and help them see that we are doing this, too. We are not some expert coming in and saying that we want you to do this and it's going to be hard on you and easy for us. We are holding ourselves to that same standard. We can be the voice of experience and say, “Here is what we had to learn about ourselves and our behavior in order to do this effectively.” We want to share our experience with you and see if you could see there is a different way to think about things that might be more advantageous for the community. Hugh: You're the champion of fostering new thinking, but you're also bringing some skills, history, tools, and leadership to this. You re bringing business expertise into tax-exempt business models, which a lot of nonprofits don't think of themselves that way. We have to generate revenue. Otherwise, we will go under. The unintended consequences are people want to go too fast, so you are encouraging people to take a deep breath. Bill: Before starting a new organization out of the ground. Hugh: Or even two organizations- we spoke of one before we went live, which we won't talk about here. We have two coming together who have had some history who had not talked about the philosophies and processes and values moving forward. They got to get to work. There is a self-imposed urgency sometimes. Are we in the long haul compromising our work by going too fast? Bill: Absolutely. Hugh: There is something we could do now. Part of what United Way brings to the table in the community, you are not only working in Lynchburg, Virginia, but you are working in central Virginia. Bill: Amherst, Bedford, Campbell, and Lynchburg. Hugh: That's pretty much the footprint of the greater area. Bill: That is, yep. Hugh: With the impact having more than just funding the programs. You're a funding agency; however, you're fostering this creative thinking about how to work together and how to go to the top a step at a time. Bill: We're doing that not only around collaborative efforts, but we are also trying to establish a program that we are casually referring to now as beyond funding. Many people know us as a organization that does work to improve the community through fundraising that supports nonprofits. In the course of visiting all these nonprofits over the past year and getting familiar with how they operate, it's become clear to me, and I'm sure you feel the same way, that they don't have the marketing department and a finance department and a social media department and an HR department. In many cases, they have an executive director who might be a volunteer, certainly I daresay most are overworked and underpaid. They are in it because their heart is in it and they want to do the right thing. Our money we give them each year is important. They have ample needs beyond that. We survey our membership at the end of last year and asked, “Other than the money, what else could we be helping you with?” About 20 things that we thought they might answer to give them some prompts. We left it open-ended, too. We heard a lot of things. Most said we need help with grant writing, marketing, social media. Many said we need help with board development and board selection or coaching or performance reviews or my building. Our organization can help with some of those things directly. We have someone who writes grants. My background is strategic planning and business development, communications. Aside from our having to fulfill every one of those needs, what we want to do is serve as a broker between those organizations who have their needs and people in the community who can help you address those needs. Right now, one of our agencies who we had a meeting with last week, they need help with their finances. We connected them with somebody from a local employer who says they think they can help them out. We're in the middle. We brokered the relationship. We will stay in touch with it and see if this organization can improve its financial situation. There are several who want grant writing help; we can probably provide that directly for them. We are trying to break the mold of us just being an annual check-writer. You all need help in various areas. Don't be shy asking for help. Tell us, and we will work to get through it. Hugh: That's great. That's a great model. People who are listening and reading the article are looking for ideas. How do we up our game? This will live on in its form as a podcast. As we do a wrap here, parts of this article are some of the other entities in the city, in the arts community and the church community. How do you interface with any of those in your work? Do you? Bill: In some cases, we are taking a sit back and wait and see posture. In many cases, we are directly at the table. Some of these efforts have just gotten started. We have United Way, Centra Foundation, Greater Lynchburg Community Foundation, and that is one group. We have another group that Nat Marshall has pulled together that is us, Salvation Army, Goodwill, Interfaith Outreach, and a couple others. We are in those very early stages of just talking. Poverty to Progress has its combined effort with Bridges out of Poverty. We are in some of the sub-committees of that. We are not sure exactly what our bigger role in that could be, but we probably need to spend some time with the leaders in that effort, Treney and Hugh, to understand what is a better place for us to plug in. Is there some place we can be more effective in that? Given that is one of our big focus areas—we focus on health, education, income, and basic human needs—under income, poverty is one of the biggest issues that we could possibly talk about addressing. We have things that we're doing right now that are not yet looped into the Poverty to Progress initiative. We have more to do to build lines of communication there. Again, that is another one we are sitting back and waiting to see where is the best place for us to plug in. It's broken down into eight or nine groups now. We think we need to try to figure out how to take these lofty conversations and turn those into actionable plans. That is where that effort is now and we may have a role there. Hugh: It's a shame there's only one door. You have covered a lot of turf. Bill: You're the only person who has said that. Hugh: I'm getting tired thinking about it. There are a lot of sub-conversations in there. As we close this out, what thoughts would you share with other leaders who want to move into a partnership or collaborative relationship with their community? What thoughts would you have for them to go forward with? Bill: I'll take a step back on that question, too. One thing I learned early on when I got into this role, and a certain experience in my life from my past made this role very compelling to me, made me be in a position to help people. As I have met executive directors in all the organizations that we support and other organizations, they tend to have a story. They have some reason they are in that type of work. Nobody gets into nonprofit work because of the glory, fame, and riches; you get into it because you care about it. That to me makes this an incredibly exciting sector to work in. The people that you work with are invigorated because they genuinely care. When you get caught up in operating an organization, you can turn down the light on that part of your brain and your heart and get obsessed with what you have to do today. My thought is when you go into a collaborative effort, remember what brought you there. What brought you there is you wanted to help people, not that you wanted to build an organization. If you can keep the light shining on that, the collaboration falls naturally behind. You have to be willing to let some personal interest go so that the benefit accrues to the community, not necessarily to you or your organization. Hugh: Bill Varner, visionary leader for United Way in central Virginia. Thank you for sharing your wisdom today. Bill: Thank you for your time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bill Bodine is a graduate of the soon to be University of Lynchburg with both undergraduate and graduate degrees there.  Much of his career was spent in healthcare, but he is now the President and CEO of the Greater Lynchburg Community Foundation, which was formed in 1972 and last year provided grants to local nonprofits and scholarships totaling just under $1.7 million.   The Interview Transcript   Hugh Ballou: Welcome to The Nonprofit Exchange. This is Hugh Ballou. My guest today is a dear friend of mine who I have known for less than a year because I have been in Lynchburg, Virginia for less than a year. He was one of the first people I met at a rotary breakfast. Bill Bodine. He runs an organization that is now known as the Lynchburg Community Foundation. Bill Bodine, welcome to The Nonprofit Exchange. Bill Bodine: Glad to be here. Appreciate it. Hugh:And there are people who are watching it on video and listening to the podcast. I like to start out these sessions by asking my guest to tell us about themselves, your journey. How did you end up doing this really important work that you do? Bill:Mostly luck, Hugh. I'm originally from New Jersey. I ended up in Lynchburg via Lynchburg College, which in two weeks will be the University of Lynchburg. I didn't necessarily intend to stay, but I got a job working in health care right out of college. The longer I was here, the more I liked it. I have been a resident of Lynchburg now for about 40 years. I know I don't look nearly that old. Hugh:You don't. Bill:It's true. It's true. As far as getting into fundraising, I spent most of my career in health care. I was really looking for something that I could be more excited about and feel like I was making a real difference and helping the community. I have served on several boards. It was important to me to find something that was more service-oriented. I luckily saw that at the time, the Greater Lynchburg Community Trust was looking for a president and CEO because my predecessor was retiring. I went after the job and three years ago, they gave it to me. I have loved that. It's been a little bit of a circuitous journey, but I finally figured out what I want to be when I grow up. Hugh:Oh, I don't think men ever grow up. Bill:I don't know if I ever will, but at least I figured out what I want to be. It's been really enjoyable. Hugh:And you and I both drive convertibles. Bill:We do. We do. I have a little Miata that I try not to get in trouble with. Not driving it today because it's too darn hot with the top down. Hugh:It's 97 in Lynchburg. Bill:I know it's crazy. Next time it cools down, I'll be in it. Hugh:Probably had the remarks about, “Oh, it's a mid-life crisis.” Bill:That would be true if I was in midlife. Hugh:It's too late. Bill:A late-life crisis. More accurately. I have always enjoyed driving cars, and it's a fun car to drive. I know your Mustang is a lot of fun. Hugh:It is fun. It's fun to go slow. Bill:It's fun. I'm not in a hurry. I just enjoy the journey. Hugh:It takes getting some age on. Also, the wisdom of leadership is impacted by our journey and our age. You came into this leadership position, I don't think by dumb luck. I think people looked at you and said, “Oh, this guy can do it.” From what I've heard from people, you have stepped up to that plate. Bill:I feel like things are going well. I think the things that I bring to it are I really enjoy people. I enjoy talking with people. I have a passion for the mission of the organization. If you have that, you are more than halfway toward doing what you really need to do. I have a great story to tell, and I enjoy telling it. People are willing to listen. That's been nice. Hugh:What does leadership mean? You lead an organization that leads and supports leaders of organizations. There is no real membership. Bill:There is no membership. My leadership stems from the fact that we touched 175 nonprofit organizations last year alone in terms of providing grant money. I get to interact with a lot of other leaders. I try to help them fine-tune their grant application process. I also try to pay attention to what the needs of the community are. How can we work together, and how can we best serve others? The leadership part of it comes from being in a chair that touches a lot of other leaders in terms of the grants and trying to make this a better community in any way we can. That's just a byproduct of the job, but I enjoy that, too. Hugh:I picked up something. You just revealed our topic today: grants, and how to do a better job of applying for grants. You slipped in something there, and I'm going to pull it out. You work with people so they do a better job. People just don't know how to apply for grants mostly. Bill:It's all over the board, Hugh. Some people are really good at it and have a lot of experience doing it. Quite honestly, some of the smaller nonprofits that we work with, that's not what people are trained to do or have done or have a lot of time to do. A lot of the smaller nonprofits are making things work with as few staff as they can and as little resources as they can. What I've found is that it's helpful to work with people and speak with them about fine-tuning their grant. What I want to do is give them the best opportunity for success. Our foundation is not there to hold onto money. Our foundation is there to give that money away according to our donors' wishes. The better job I can do helping people access those funds means I do a better job for our donors. That's really what it's about. Hugh:That's amazing. I don't think everybody understands that. This is a good point to make. I posted on the web page some of the questions we're going to address that came from you because you know what you're talking about. Bill:Maybe. Depends on who you ask. Hugh:Part of my career I served megachurches. I was in the interview process in the five biggest megachurches at the same time. Nobody knew what questions to ask. That was amazing. I pretty much had to provide my own questions. Bill:It helps things go smoother if we have an idea of what we're going to talk about. Hugh:Or to get to the bottom line. What is it we need to know about this? Let's start at the top. If I'm going to make a grant request- I run a 501(c)3. It's a foundation. I give away services. I don't give away money. I help people leverage what they have and attract money. Part of my work could conceivably be preparing people to do this process. What I tell my nonprofits is that funders are gonna look at the impact of your work, what results it will create. I want to check my accuracy. If we give you this money, what results will it produce? They will also look at your team. Can they really implement it? Are those the factors that are high? Bill: Those are the big deal. That is the real meat and potatoes of it. You could actually go back to a baseline. One of the first things I would tell people is if you are going to apply for a grant, make sure you review what exactly the grantor is looking for in terms of information. It surprises me occasionally how many applications we get that are incomplete because people have not thoroughly read what it is we are asking for. We get grant applications that come in without a list of the board of directors, which is one of the things we ask for. I would encourage people at the very baseline of it to read very carefully what the requirements are for the grant application, and make sure you include all that information. That seems basic and elementary, but it surprises me how many of them we get that are not fully completed. First and foremost, make sure you understand what that grantor is looking for and what their requirements are in applying for them. Make sure it's complete because it's a little bit like when you write your resume, make sure you spell things correctly. First impressions are important. That is maybe the first step. But you're absolutely right. We like to know first of all what do you want the money for, and how is that going to help my community be a better place? How is that going to satisfy the wishes of the donors who have given us the money in the first place? First and foremost, I am bound by their wishes and their desires. My responsibility is to use the money that our donors have provided as wisely as possible and as closely to their various intents as possible. Hugh: I want to introduce you to somebody who got stuck on the viewer side of this, who is my co-host. He has been AWOL here. Russell David Dennis is joining us in this podcast from Denver, Colorado. I thought you were maybe having technical difficulty today. Russell showed up a year and a half ago and was very consistent with this. Russell is one of our WayFinders. It is our antidote to a consultant. It's a WayFinder. We guide you; we don't tell you what to do. We help you define what you're going to do. Russell has been through the whole methodology of SynerVision, and he is now one of our bonafide WayFinders. I made him co-host. He outshines me many times. I like to say I pale in comparison. I've used that line. Russell, welcome. You're muted. Russell Dennis: Greetings. I had to turn to my tablet. My computer has been loading updates all morning, and it doesn't seem to want to finish. Hugh: Welcome to the party. I already warned him that my co-host has the zingers of the questions. He is braced for ya. I'm getting chats from across the screen. Russell, we're talking about grants today and what makes a good grant request. So far, Bill has validated our premise that we need to have worthy goals in terms of what difference we are going to make, and people on board to do that. Bill, people maybe do read the requirements. You think they just forget? Or they weren't careful? I guess you go back to people and resubmit. Bill: We do. We review all the applications. Before we put them in front of our distribution committee, we review them for completeness and accuracy. We try to track down questions we know they might ask. But yeah, it's hard to know the reasons, Hugh, why people don't always include everything. Sometimes they don't have the information, and sometimes they forget, and sometimes they are just flustered by the process and don't think it through well enough. Whatever the reasons, again, what we want to do is help people be as successful as possible. I just throw that out there as step one. Make sure you read the requirements and do your best to fulfill them. If you have a question or problem, call us, or call whomever you are applying to and ask for their help. Hugh: Are there community foundations in every area in the country? Bill: Just about. When the Greater Lynchburg Community Foundation was formed in 1972, there were probably about 30 community foundations nationally. We know from the Council of Foundations in Washington that in 1975, there were only 50. So we were formed in ‘72. There are now over 850. So they are all over the place now. A community foundation is a little different from family foundations or corporate foundations. Often family foundations and corporate foundations have more specific purposes. Ours is probably more general. We have more general purposes than a lot of other foundations. We cover the waterfront. As I mentioned before, we gave grants to 175 nonprofits in Lynchburg and the four surrounding counties last year alone. We will support basic human needs, the arts, historic preservation, the environment, all kinds of things. Most foundations you'll find have a little bit narrower focus. That's true for hospital foundations, the United Way for example. All of them do fantastic work. But our reach is a little broader. For some people, that fills in. Hugh: It fills in some gaps I would imagine. Bill: Yeah, it does. We have a flexibility that appeals to people. The other thing is community foundations are intended to be forever. We are perpetual. The appeal we have for people is that you can set up a fund, name it after your grandmother or whomever you want, and it will be here long after you're gone and probably after your children are gone. It leaves a legacy. That is one of the appeals to community foundations. Hugh: I found more and more people who are interested in the legacy component. They are the instigator. They start this thing. But they are not going to be around forever. We want to have impact that goes on after our lifetime. There is a value. When they get money and enough money that they put it under management, you assist with that. Bill: Our purpose is to grow the fund and to distribute monies annually or more often than that sometimes from that fund, but continue to grow it so it continues to expand and lasts as long as the world lasts is the idea. People like that. Hugh: I'm hearing some fundamental principles. One, which we talked around, is pick up the phone and call. I don't think people do that who are applying for grants. Maybe not all foundations are equally as successful as yours. Bill:Well, I don't know about that. I haven't worked at other foundations. I've talked to some colleagues. I think we are all generally here for the same purpose, which is to help people out and help the community be as seamless as possible. I really love it when someone calls me and says, “Hey, can I talk to you about this grant? I've been thinking about this proposal. Can you help me fine-tune it a little bit?” I do a lot of that. Hugh:Part of our due diligence, and Russell worked 11 years on an Indian reservation and he did grants, he comes up with another experience. Part of our job is to do our due diligence to learn about the grantor. What is the purpose of the grant? What requirements are there? Will what we want funded match up with what you want to fund? And spell the name right. Bill:Sure. We get applications that are for things we can't do. If an organization is renting a building, and they come to us and ask for renovations to that building, that is something we really won't do because we don't pay for renovations to a building that is not owned by the organization. We only provide money to nonprofits, and we don't want to improve a building for a landlord. We want to help that organization. I try to guide people not to do those kinds of things. We typically don't like to pay operating costs such as salaries. We need to hire a new person and we need this for a salary. We'd rather not do that. We'd rather put our donors' money toward programs, resources that go directly to help people, and that sort of thing. That is part of the guidance I try to provide. I don't want people to waste their time or our time with an application that I know is just not going to perform. Hugh:One of the deficits we see often is that there is an organization trying to fly by tradition and history by the seat of their pants without a strategy. By the way, Russell, he is a fellow musician. He is an actor/musician. He has been a professional production for the past couple of weeks, so he far exceeds my capabilities. We need a map. What do you sing when? When do you go off stage? When do you go on stage? When do the trumpets play? The way we think is there is a core map for where we're going and how we're going to get there and what kind of impact we're going to have. That gives us substance for our thinking. When people are looking at funding, if there is a deficit in leadership or lack of strategy, are those pieces what we might call capacity-building? Are there capacity-building grants for them to up their game so to speak? Bill:There are. There certainly are. For example, let's say somebody needs new computer equipment. We have helped people with that before, but only if we understand what they are going to use that computer equipment for. If you apply for a grant saying, “I need new computers,” that's great, and we can assume a certain number of things. What I'd really like to see is “We need these computers because we are putting them in front of school-age children to make them more familiar with technology. It will impact 80 kids.” That kind of detail is very helpful. If it's capacity-building, that's great, but what are you building that capacity for? What's your plan? Anything like that is more helpful than not having that information. Hugh:Russell, you're here and smiling. I'm sure you have some reflections or additional questions for Bill Bodine. You sat on the other side approaching grantors. This stuff, I'm sure, rings true for you, does it not? Russell:Yes, it does. One of the biggest mistakes people make is to contort what they're doing into the requirements of a funding source they are not familiar with. To back up further than that, the number one reason grant proposals are turned down is because they don't follow instructions. If you do that with a government grant, I have sat on grant panels for three years, if they don't follow the instructions, we don't even read it. It goes on the pile. I have seen some bad proposals. It may be a really good one, but because they didn't follow the instructions… There is a strategy to this. The first piece of that is making sure you're talking to the right source. You get these applications that don't fit what you're doing because people will sit and do a shotgun/M50 machine gun approach where they apply to 150 foundations and see what sticks. Bill:Like a one-size-fits-all kind of thing. That's not good. Russell:And it doesn't work. There is a strategy and a process. I have mind-mapped that a bit. I need to build a course on that. I have a couple of courses, but that's one I need to build. I'm working on one for donors, too, at the moment. There is a strategy and there is a process. Everybody that sends you a grant proposal should be calling you on the phone and talking to you just to get clear because the guidelines are out there, the instructions are out there, the requirements are out there, but when you take a few minutes to call, ask about some things. Please do your homework, folks. You don't want to ask people information that is already on the website. What you really want to do is get a feel of what is going on between the lines. Are there some things within this broad category that are really important to the foundation right now? What sort of things have they funded recently? Talk a little bit about your project. I'm thinking about does this fit in what is important to you? If not, what would be more of a fit? Would it be all right if I send you a proposal based on what you're thinking? Hugh:Can I slate that data point for just a second? What he outlined was an exploratory conversation. What does that look like from what you sit? Sorry to interrupt you, Russell. I just wanted to capture that. To me, that was a notable sound bite. Bill:Russell and I are definitely on the same page here in terms of making sure you follow the instructions. But also what he said is really important about knowing what the grantor is and what resonates with them. The other piece is: What is a reasonable amount to ask for? All these foundations have different amounts they are comfortable providing. With our foundation, we gave away $1.7 million last year alone, but it went to 175 different nonprofits. That includes scholarship money for high school students going to college. The amount of money that we have is not as huge as many community foundations might be, and it gets spread out over a large number of agencies. If someone asks us for $100,000 today, that is not something we can really do without taking away from our other responsibilities. I like to sort of give people an idea of what is a reasonable amount to ask for and what we can do. That tends to be helpful, I think. That is another piece. Russell:That is knowing what your source is all about. Community foundations, which is a donor-advised fund because people have purposes, is it always is in the guidelines. You will see a range of funding that is awarded. That breaks things down into pieces, put them in sequence. What can you accomplish with that? It's understanding how much you have and how much you need. Here is the thing that I want to stress to any nonprofits out there who are listening. It's every bit as difficult, if not more, to get this money into the hands of people who will make good use of it than it is to apply for it and get it. Community foundations, a lot of family foundations are running lean. They don't have all the people and tools that they have to try to give technical support to these nonprofits. What a community foundation does is work with smaller organizations. Finding good projects is really difficult. You have to put yourself in their shoes and understand that it's not just difficult for you to get the money, it's difficult for them to find projects to invest in and make sure that money is making the impact it's intended. Bill:That's right, Russell. The biggest sense of responsibility I have is to remember that it's not my money. This was money provided to us by donors, individuals, corporations, and families who have a dream. They really have a desire to do something important with that money. I always have to remember that I need to find things that are worthy of those desires and that I am fulfilling that responsibility. If I don't, I am not only letting those people down, but I am also possibly ruining potential contributions to the foundation to continue that purpose. That is a real responsibility that I feel strongly about. Hugh:While Russell is formulating his difficult question… As you're looking at projects, is there any value for looking at collaboration coming to you, like two, three, or four different entities coming to you and saying they are going to do something together? Bill:Very highly. Again, getting back to that core value of trying to do the most good for the community we possibly can with our ultimately limited resources, any time we can encourage collaboration- One of the things we are in a good position to do in my spot is look for gaps in services and look for overlap. There is a lot of both quite frankly. So trying to get some of the smaller nonprofits to talk to each other, it might be the people providing food or shelter or furniture, or even arts organizations. How can we encourage collaboration with the ultimate purpose being how we can get our dollars to work as efficiently as possible and to do the most good they can do. Yeah, Hugh, that's a vital point. You hit on something really important. We have to try to encourage collaboration. We just started to scratch that surface. Hugh:Maybe there is a place SynerVision could play in facilitating some conversation. Bill:I think so. Hugh:We have to get Russell over here from Denver. Bill:If I lived in Denver, I'm not sure I'd ever leave. Maybe we can get Russell to come because Lynchburg is great, too. Russell:I'm happy to come out there and see what's happening now. I have some friends out in Virginia Beach. I have excuses to come over and poke around and have some fun. The challenge that you talked about of getting people to collaborate, this scarcity thinking that I'm not going to share my resources with anyone, is trying to get people to break out of that way of thinking. I think even something as simple as saying we encourage collaboration on projects that involve collaboration between a number of entities that are different from what is out there will be given extra special consideration so that maybe triggers something in people's minds to say let's talk to other people. There seems to be a lot of resistance to that. I don't know why. More hands makes the work lighter. Bill:I think you're right. I think we need to get at the sources of those feelings. Some people may have a control issue. I need to control this so I can make sure it goes in the direction I want it to go in. Or some of it is just not knowing who the other leaders out there are. If we can identify those reasons, then we can appeal to those people based on whatever their sensitivity is. Maybe we can provide assurances and say, “If we combine with this other group and they provide a service, you can still run that. You can still be in charge of that. Let's say if we can't strengthen your organization by getting some help from over here,” or whatever your trigger is. If we can identify those, then we may have a chance to approach it properly with a chance for success. Hugh:You could apply for one of the grants at SynerVision. You could say, “Hey, we want to fund this project. We are going to ask for SynerVision to group you together and come up with a plan to present this to us.” It would be the work that we do, facilitating people collaborating.  Bill:And the carat for them is these funds are available in terms of the grant. You have to figure out- Just like with donors. What is their hot button? What appeals to them? When you hit resistance from people who maybe are not willing to collaborate, maybe they are in that overused term of being in their own silos—that is the buzz phrase for the year—but whatever it is, and we can figure out what that is and address that, then we maybe have a chance to hook up some of these collaborations. Hugh:It's an exploratory conversation first. Get some knowledge. Part of what I see, and I think you have, too, is people don't understand how to collaborate or how to get it started. We think consensus and collaboration are the same as- What's the other side? Compromise. A lose-lose. A consensus is a win-win. A collaboration is how we do consensus. We come together with a common purpose and a common mind. Actually, we can make the dollars go further because we are making lighter work for everybody. Bill:Sometimes it's just that people are paddling as hard as they can and they don't feel they have time. Who wants to go to another meeting unless you're sure it will be extremely beneficial? Some of it is just battling that. Whatever it is, we ought to be able to figure it out and address it. Hugh:I think it's a new way of effectiveness here. Our initials, people in business invest money for ROI. In nonprofits, people invest money for ROL, return on life. How we get there is ROR, return on relationship. What you're talking about is let's develop a relationship with the funder to know that we're in sync. We were both smiling when you were talking about the intent of the donor. We ask people why they want to serve on the board and what they want done with their money. We don't really go there because we don't think about it. So really, how do we understand the intent of the donor? Russell, you had some time. Come back to Bill here with a goodly framed question. Couldn't get that out. Russell:That is why I left the IRS. People started thinking I was this horrible, scary guy, and that's just not true. Hugh is trying to turn me into this evil quizmaster that will send the guest running for the exit. That's not the truth. You talked about getting the money into programs. I think that a lot of this scarcity thinking is really centered around the fact that for some nonprofits, because they don't have diverse funding, they're worried about how to keep the lights on and pay the bills that eats up a lot of our resources. How much of that do you think is a factor in people not collaborating? Bill:It's hard to quantify it. That's a good question. It is a factor. I think we can safely say it's a big factor. What percentage? I would have a hard time putting my fingers on that. That's part of the job is trying to make sure you're helping people take care of those basic needs so that they feel more available or open to diving deeper into this stuff. I don't really know if that answers your question, but I think you have identified a big factor. How to quantify that, I'm not sure. In different organizations, it varies widely, I would guess. Russell:That falls in line with the airline safety theory of putting your own mask on first. People really feel they would actually be taking something away from themselves to collaborate when in fact they might find some extra resources for their programs. This is the motivation for trying to find other ways. We live and die by the grant. We did have some private donors and other sources. When I was working for the tribe, we spent a whole lot of time focusing on grants as opposed to any other sources of revenue. We did try to start some businesses. There is a lot of snake oil out there. You have to keep your eyes open. That diversity of funding is important, and building relationships with donors is critical. That funding usually has more flexibility on the bottom end. When we start getting into the top end of the donors, they are usually a little bit more focused with what they want to see happen with that money. It's trying to get other sources of revenue in the door. Grants are not intended to keep you operating. They are for special purposes: to build them, test them until you can make them sustainable. That's another mistake folks make with grants. Bill:The other comment I would make on that is you are exactly right. The other thing is grants, we tell people that you can't put us in your budget for next year and assume you will get a grant every year. We have two grant cycles a year. We evaluate those separately every cycle. You can't count on that grant income. If you're good at it, you may have a good track record. You really have to develop other resources for funds that are steadier than that. I guess you found that with your Native American work. Hugh:When you review people, they have to submit financials or something. Do you look for alternate sources of funding? Bill:Yes, we do. It's one way you judge the strength of the organization. Do they have other sources of funds? I don't really want people who depend solely on us for their annual budget. There are some smaller agencies that probably truth be known they are very dependent on us. It's a stronger application if they can show us other sources of funds or have programs that generate funds. That helps the application. Hugh:There is a lot of data here that I think is helpful to any grant application. Understand what the grantor wants to achieve. Know about them. Follow the directions. Be very clear on the impact of what the money is going to provide. Here is another topic. We don't think about the administrative. I imagine a $5,000 grant would have fewer administrative requirements than a $500,000 grant or a $5 million grant. So there is some reporting back of how the money was utilized. How important is that? Bill:It's really important. Quite honestly, there is not really much difference for us because our grants generally run from a couple thousand to $25,000. We don't do half-a-million dollar grants. The administrative requirements are essentially the same for all the grants we provide. We feel it's our responsibility to our donors that first of all, the money was used for the purpose that was stated, and also that the impact that was expected was achieved or nearly achieved as well as could be done. We require written documentation of all that within a year from receiving the grant so that we can have a record of that and show the money was used for what our donors and we intended it to be used for and what the agency said it was going to be used for. That's a big deal to us. I know there are foundations that struggle with that sort of validation. They will go back later and find out there have been some discrepancies, or that the money wasn't used for what it said it was going to be used for. Whether you get $1,000 from us or $25,000 from us, you have to jump through the same hoops. Russell:If you are going to have a high-performance organization, you should track everything you do. This is strategy as we lay it out. You're tracking everything you're doing. This should not really be a stretch to reach out to your funding sources and say this is what you did. You built the framework, you built the strategy, you're tracking what you're doing, and you're getting it out there. Sometimes, things don't go well. People don't want to be transparent. I went to my mastermind network that I have out here. I put some stuff on the table. I got a lot of suggestions that were helpful. Some of the stuff was very basic, but it's the transparency. Now these folks can help me more than they were ever able to if I hadn't done this. The transparency supported me. Sometimes things don't go as well as they're planned, but we need to be in constant contact and transparent so that we can right the ship and get it back on track. A lot of foundations don't have the resources to track because you guys have to review everything you get back to make sure that project is on track. If you're effective, you're doing that. In structuring these programs, getting back the strategy piece and building things out, you will want to create systems that capture all the information you need, but they're easy to understand, access, and use by the people who are running the programs. If the evaluation tools are too hard, people will not use anything that is hard to implement. It has to be simple. It has to flow in line with their work. As these programs run, they are easy to track. It doesn't become a stretch at the end of the quarter, at the end of year to scramble and finish these reports. Been there, done that. That's how I know. If you got these things as part of your process, you can just roll this stuff out because you are tracking it all the time. Hugh:Part of what he referred to is we teach people when you have a strategy, you have milestones. This is your success. You've reached this. Then a milestone, you have a budget over here. When you pay a dollar, you achieve a milestone, so there is a redundancy in the budget. We find a lot of organizations don't really have any way to track things because they don't have a system in place. It's the Covey principle, as you were talking, Russell, of begin with the end in mind. You're going to have to do a report, so let's think backwards. What do we need to create now so it's not a big deal? The question to you is: Do you have pamphlets or educational materials or trainings for people to master these skills they may not have? Bill:The answer to that is no, we really don't. That is not something we have seen in our role up to now. What we have tried to do is as Russell was saying make it as easy for people as possible. Three years ago, we required paper copies of all applications, ten copies, so you'd get a stack of paper a foot tall from this little agency. Not only that, but all the trees we were killing. We have brought the process online on our website. While you're there, you can look at all the grants we made last year, who we granted to, how much, and for what purpose. We tried to make that as simple as possible and with as few clicks as possible. To your point, Hugh, I think maybe that's one of the next steps. I really see organizations like yours being at the forefront of helping people gain the tools they need to be successful. I don't know that with the staff I have, which is me, another full-time person, and a two-day-a-week accountant, that we could provide a lot of these resources. But there are good people out here like yourself who can do that. We'd certainly be interested in helping out. Hugh:Sure. We might have something we could provide for you. Russell, that was a good point you opened up there. What else are you stirring up in that no-hair head of yours? Bill:It's a good one. I'm not going to make any comments about hair. I'm right behind ya. Hugh:Oh, he has hair! Russell:I'm going to have to take a razor to it because when it comes in, it's pretty gray. I promised myself after I recovered from chemotherapy six years ago, no formula. I'm going to remind myself that I'm on blessed time, I got a few extra days, and I'm going to wear it proudly. That is part of the piece. A lot of nonprofits don't have the budget and development. That's something community foundations- Denver Foundation will provide technical support to grantees who they have granted funds to before. You spread too thin in terms of resources to do that. Partnerships between entities like SynerVision and my company and community foundations makes sense to go in and talk to people and help them get the training they need. Doing that for a community foundation, you touch a lot of entities because I don't know how many organizations you have, but the Denver Foundation probably has somewhere between 200-300 organizations who are grantees and members. That is a common size. To be able to talk to people about these things and to help them and to provide that sort of technical assistance that you haven't been able to provide is still good stewardship. It's about good stewardship and protecting those investments. That is something that benefits grantees and the foundation. It's really about going out and making that impact and supporting one another. Maybe something like a mastermind group from time to time. Some of our community foundations have put on a training event. But a mastermind, I just left a mastermind for my business. Is that something you have thought about with some of the folks you work with? Creating a mastermind group. Bill:That's something that Hugh and I have had conversations about. That's not something I have really envisioned our foundation doing. But I think in collaboration with people like you guys and maybe others, that's something we could work toward. I think it's a great idea. Hugh:Having a conversation with people about the gaps – they will discover something. We will discover what they think they need versus what they really need. The problem with blind spots is you can't see them. It's like your hair, Russell. I am glad it's coming in gray because you have earned every one of them. Are there any pitfalls that we have not identified in this conversation for people who are applying? Bill:I think we have touched on the ones that I can really think of. Make sure you ask for the right kind of things. Make sure you ask for the right amount of money based on what you have been able to find out about the foundation or whomever you are applying to. Make sure your application is complete and according to the requirements specified by the grantor. We have touched on all those things. Those are the key things, Hugh. The other thing I would mention is follow-up. The grant process doesn't end when you get that phone call or that letter that says, “Congratulations, you have been granted such-and-such money,” or the phone call that you might get- It's a good idea to make sure that you thank the organization, that you show a level of gratitude. We all like to feel like it's appreciated. That can only help. Particularly, in a community like ours, where most of these organizations will apply regularly, what you want is to be looked upon favorably as someone who has been A) a good steward of that money and B) appreciated getting it in the first place, and that we develop a relationship where we know who you are, what you're doing, and why you're a good outfit and good people doing good work. Hugh:That's a fundamental principle. I'm so surprised people don't honor it. Bill:Some people are really good at it, but not everybody. The ones who are good at it might be in the minority. But that's an important piece. We all like to be thanked and to have it known that what was done is appreciated and that you take it seriously. I would just encourage the grantees to make sure they do that. Hugh:Attitude or gratitude. I'm thinking back over the in-kind grants I've done. In my symposium, you had a board meeting… Bill:I know. How lame can you get? Hugh:People applied for a grant for that even though it was $40, and they got it. They were very grateful. But there were some small community leaders who didn't have any money who I granted. And only one of them said thank you. One. One. Bill:It is a bit of a lost art. Hugh:It is. Like conversation. We are going to give you the last word here. We try to keep it under an hour. This has been very helpful information.  Bill, this is great. He came over to my house so we could hang out and do this. One day, he'll have a camera on his computer. Bill:I just wanted to come over and check out your house. Hugh:Do you like it so far? Bill:It's great. Hugh:So Bill, what do you want to leave people with? What's a challenge or a tip or a thought you want to leave people with as we are ending this really good interview? Bill:Always remember the work you're doing is critically important. On the days when it feels like things are piling up and you feel varied, you are making a difference. I get to jump out of bed every morning and think, Wow, what can happen that will help the community be a better place to live? That's incredibly motivating. Don't lose sight of it. That's what we're here for. Yeah, it's about fundraising, it's about giving grants, but it's really not. What we're here for is to improve our communities and give people a sense that their money is going to help their fellow man and help their community. The vast majority don't give money to foundations for tax purposes and things like that. It's about philanthropy. We're helping people feel good, and we should feel good about that. Hugh:Most people don't give money because of donations. It's because they want to make a difference. Bill:It's not for taxes. It's because it makes them feel good. They do it with their heart. Hugh:I see you smiling, Russell. Thank you again for being here, my friend. Russell:Always a pleasure. If you don't tell people what difference their dollars are making, they will put them somewhere else. You stay in touch no matter what the results is. Bill, thanks a million. Hugh, thanks for making it through a broadcast without the magic phrase. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, we form the Ocean’s 11 of food crimes. Mike slaps a sports horse on the butt, Michael sends a bill to the moon. We take a moment to think about old people smashing it. Highlights Include: Food crimes never pay. [13:00] Bill It to the Moon [20:05] The Queen Mary 2 [29:00] The Flea’s Bees [37:30] A shower of shower thoughts. [43:00]

Is your partner emotionally explosive, regularly picking fights, and blaming others for all their troubles? Bill Eddy sheds light on how to manage conflict and communication with a high conflict person. Bill Eddy is a lawyer, therapist, and mediator in San Diego, California. He is the President of the High Conflict Institute. He is on the part-time faculty at the Pepperdine University School of Law and on the part-time faculty of the National Judicial College and is the senior family mediator at the National Conflict Resolution Center. He is the developer of the New Ways for Families, a skill-based method for managing high-conflict families in separation and divorce, which is being implemented in court systems in the United States and Canada. Bill provides training to professionals worldwide on the subject of managing high-conflict personalities and high-conflict disputes. He provides seminars to attorneys, mediators, judges, mental health professionals, human resource professionals, employee assistance professionals, ombuds, hospital and college administrators, government agencies, law enforcement, homeowners’ association managers and many others. He has presented in over 30 states, several provinces in Canada, and England, France, Sweden, Austria, Australia, Israel, Netherlands and New Zealand. Mr. Eddy is also the author of several books, including: 5 Types of People Who can Ruin Your Life (coming soon) Dating Radar: why your Brain Says Yes to the One Who Will Make your Life Hell (with Megan Hunter, MBA) High Conflict People in Legal Disputes It’s All Your Fault: 12 Tips for Managing People Who Blame Others for Everything BIFF: Quick Responses to High-Conflict People So, What’s Your Proposal: Shifting High-Conflict People from Blaming to Problem-Solving in 30 Seconds Your host, Christina Vinters, is a nationally designated Chartered Mediator on a mission to inspire and facilitate healthy family transitions. She is an “ex” Divorce Lawyer (Non-Practicing Member of the Bar), Author of Pathways to Amicable Divorce, and the  DIY Divorce Manual, and Peacemaking Business Consultant. Guest Links: Websites http://www.highconflictinstitute.com/ https://www.newways4families.com/ Visit www.unhookedmedia.com for Bill Eddy books and products. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/highconflictinstitute/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/HighConflict Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bill-eddy-bba98a1b/ Modern Separations Links: Website: https://www.modernseparations.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/modernseparations Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/divorcewell Twitter: https://twitter.com/cvinters LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cvinters/ Episode Transcript Christina: Hi everybody. Today I'm very lucky to be talking to Bill Eddy, an international leader in the field of conflict resolution with high-conflict people. Bill is a lawyer, therapist, and mediator in San Diego, California. He's also the founder and president of the High Conflict Institute. He teaches part-time at Pepperdine University School of Law, the National Judicial College, as well as private training sessions for professionals worldwide on the subject of managing high-conflict personalities and high-conflict disputes. And there's still more! He has developed a program called New Ways for Families, a skill-based method for managing high-conflict families. And his program has been implemented in several court systems in the United States and Canada. Bill is also the author of several books, really too many in the list here but in our discussion, we talk in some detail about BIFF: Quick Responses to High-Conflict People and BIFF stands for brief, informative, friendly, and firm. We talked about his book So What's Your Proposal? Shifting High-Conflict People from Blaming to Problem Solving in Thirty Seconds!, and his newest book Dating Radar. Bill says there are four characteristics of high-conflict people. These are all-or-nothing, black and white type thinking, unmanaged emotions, extreme behaviors, and preoccupation with blaming others. So if these characteristics sound familiar, whether you're separating from a high-conflict person or you have a high-conflict person in another area of your life, this episode is for you. Here we go.  Christina: Welcome, Bill! It's such an honor to speak to you today.  Bill: Well Christina, I'm really glad to be speaking with you about this.  Christina: Your contributions to the area of resolving really difficult conflict has been prolific over your career. For anyone not yet familiar with Bill's work, I highly recommend that you check out his books and programs. To get started, why don't you tell us about your journey and what brought you to focus on high-conflict people?  Bill: Well, it's interesting. I, for many years, have been a social worker since actually over thirty years since about 1981. I really like working with children and families and I was kind of trying to find the best place for myself. And while I started out practicing as a child and family counselor, I also volunteered at our local mediation center and found that I really like helping resolve disputes between people. And that I liked mediation and decided I would go to law school to primarily do divorce mediation. But in law school, I realized I should probably practice law for a couple of years and so I started dealing with practicing family law after I got my law degree and found that much of it was like, social work. And so I noticed that I was doing divorce mediation with out-of-court couples who were basically able to get along and just needed some guidance and help. And then I go to court in the mornings and one or both people would be very difficult and we would spend months, sometimes years. And what I realized is the high-conflict problems have a lot to do with people's own nature with their own personalities. And so I started writing a lot about high-conflict personalities but also how to deal with people like that, especially if you're going through a divorce or separation. So that's kind of how I ended up here.  Christina: OK, great! And so to clarify for the listeners, how do you define a high-conflict person? And how would somebody be able to tell if they're dealing with a high-conflict person?  Bill: Well in a sense, a lot of feedback I get from working with law clients and social work clients and mediation clients, is that people suddenly go “Oh my goodness, I know I'm dealing with a high-conflict person!” But I'd say there's four characteristics. And sometimes you can get a hint of this even before you separate. That is a lot of all-or-nothing thinking, unmanaged emotions where the person's emotions just kinda lead them down a lot of different paths where they start yelling and things that doesn't help; extreme behaviors like yelling, throwing things, lyings, taking family money, spreading rumors – all of these kinds of things. But the fourth is the biggest in many ways, and that's the preoccupation with blaming others. And if you're getting divorced from someone like this, you may be and have been and will become their target of blame. And they put all these intense thinking, emotions, behavior on the other person who's their target of blame. And so when people are getting ready to divorce or separate from someone who is like this or may show those behaviors, I encourage caution and planning so that you don't go through too much extreme difficulty becoming that person's target of blame.  Christina: So is it fair to say that most people probably would have noticed some or all of these types of characteristics during the relationship, or does it ever happen that a separation could all of a sudden sort of bring this type of behavior into the fore?  Bill: We see both. I'd say that most people that have a high-conflict divorce have realized during the relationship whether they are married or just living together that the person they're dealing with has extremes from time to time. But I've had people tell me that they really were surprised at how extreme the person became when they did go through divorce. So usually you know you're dealing with some difficulties but sometimes the difficulties during the divorce even gets the person by surprise. So that's why it's good to kind of think about patterns of behavior and there's high-conflict pattern of behavior in advance and to prepare for that possibility.  Christina: What type of preparation do you recommend?  Bill: Well, a few things. First of all, get support. Build a support system. I think it helps to meet with a counselor occasionally and just kind of prepare for what you may go through, 'cause you'll maybe personally attacked, publicly criticized, harassed, etc. Also, get consultation with a family lawyer, whether you'll hire one or not, a lot of family lawyers today will let you consult for half an hour or an hour. And kind of talk about your situation and what some of the problems could be. Another is to kinda collect information. What a lot of people we encourage to do is make sure you find out what all your bank account numbers are. Some people take pictures of all their household furniture, the big items, in case things start disappearing during a divorce. And also keep a journal of extreme events. So let's say there was a pushing and shoving incident happened while you're still living together. You wanna write down exactly what happened ideally on the day it happened. So if six months or a year later, you get blamed for that event, you got some kind of record to say “Wait a minute, this is what happened. I didn't start pushing. The other person started pushing.” You know, whatever it is that happened. So in a sense, it's preparing for the worst, but hoping for the best. And not assuming that the worst will happen, but kinda having your eyes open, having support, having information and keeping some records.  Christina: OK and so part of what I'm hoping to do is to provide people with a range of dispute resolution options and some hope that you don't necessarily have to end up in court. Now a lot of court files are comprised of at least one high-conflict person. But I know that you recommend that mediation can be possible and so that might be surprising for some people. Can you share your view of why mediation is a viable option in such a circumstance?  Bill: Well the reality is that over 90 percent of divorces are resolved by agreement. Even the ones that go to court, some end up finishing by agreement. So there's a really good chance even in a high-conflict case that it's gonna get resolved by agreement. And so I think mediation is really good because it keeps things calm. While two attorneys can negotiate with each other, it may be just the attorneys on their own and slip into being more adversarial. So mediation kinda keeps things calm. And collaborative divorce, if people have two collaborative lawyers, the lawyers can't go to court so they try hard to settle the case. So, something that kind of manages the case, and that's where I see mediation really be effective and that's most of what I do now. I've been a family lawyer for 25 years, but the last ten years I just do mediation. And about a third of my cases are high-conflict cases and people mostly reach an agreement. So what I encourage people do is kind of think a two-track system. One is try hard to negotiate and settle issues and mediation or some other form of negotiation, but keep your records, keep your notes your journal just in case you have to go to court. And the more prepared you are, the less likely the other person is to try to drag you into court. So I very much believe that mediation and I see high-conflict cases work things out. Sometimes it takes longer than it would with a case that wasn't high-conflict but still high-conflict people can settle in mediation so it's definitely worth a try. And it doesn't really hurt to try mediation. So that's why I just encourage people to start with mediation or some negotiation methods first.  Christina: Yeah, for sure. I agree that one of the benefits of mediation is the focus on trying to de-escalate, but I like your point of keeping the records and making sure that you are prepared just in case. But try to keep with the mindset that resolution is going to be the best for the family. And not using those records as a threat to the other.  Bill: Exactly! And there's a saying among lawyers, is used as something as a shield, not as a sword. And I really agree with that. Just protect yourself. And I might mention I have a book called Splitting, which is protecting yourself while divorcing someone with borderline or narcissistic personality disorder. And it's really geared to potentially high-conflict situations and we really emphasize, my co-author and I, Randi Kreger, to be prepared to take notes but also to communicate well. We talk about using the BIFF method – brief, informative, friendly and firm. So that you're really trying to put a positive on things even if it feels like a potentially negative situation.  Christina: I think that BIFF strategy is really helpful. And it can feel overwhelming for people when they're dealing with somebody who wants to engage in conflict all the time, that's exhausting. Are there any other go-to tactics or strategies that people can keep in mind when they are trying to negotiate with a high-conflict spouse? And I'm thinking particularly of co-parenting is part of their arrangement and regular communication is necessary.  Bill: Yeah, there's... it really helps to focus on what you want for the future and not talking and emphasizing what you don't want to happen in the past and people make that mistake all the time is with a potentially high-conflict person. Just say what you want. So rather than say “You never took the kids to their karate class,” is to say “I'd like you to take the kids to their karate class.” And, because what happens is you trigger so much defensiveness that people are busy defending themselves rather than saying “Yes, I can agree to that.” And so think the future. Think proposals. And just so the people know there's other information out there, I also have a little book called So What's Your Proposal? And it talks about a lot, like twenty examples in there of focusing on the future by making a proposal and focusing on it like the other person has a choice that you're willing to discuss with them. Other options so it's a proposal, not a demand. And that's so important in dealing with a high-conflict partner or co-parent because it's easy to just try to tell them what to do or to point out all the mistakes that they've made. And that definitely doesn't help. You just wanna say what you're aiming for. Say, “I would like you to pick up the kids after school for karate twice a week.” rather than “You've been doing it wrong for years.”  Christina: And I find that sometimes it's necessary to repeat those types of questions. For example, “So what's your proposal?” If you take the karate example that you used, “I'd like you to pick up the kids from karate.” Because sometimes, the really high-conflict people will grab on to even a positive statement like that and be defensive. “Well, I always pick up the kids from karate.” And so bringing the conversation back again to that focusing on the positive and the future and that is great. So that's what I'd like you to do.  Bill: Right. Right, right. Just really try to emphasize the positive and that's good to point out things that are working. A lot of times when people dealing with a high-conflict person, they don't give them any positive feedback. They just look at everything that's wrong. And it really helps to say “I appreciate that thing you did last week. That was helpful.” Or “The kids said that they enjoyed doing that activity with you last week. That's great!” Because the more you can do that, you're being kind of a role model for the other parent to do that back. And to say “Well you did something I appreciate. Thank you for that.”  Christina: And then that type of appreciation and role modeling will hopefully inspire similar responses in return.  Bill: Exactly. And what's interesting is, we're talking briefly before about the BIFF response method of emails that are brief, informative, friendly, and firm. And the feedback we're getting is people really like writing their emails that way. 'Cause even if someone's hostile towards them, you're responding in a clean way. You're not being hostile or rude back. And what we're hearing is that the other person starts to respond with a BIFF response as well even though they don't know what a BIFF is. They just try to be brief or more straight in information, friendly, and firm. And so it's contagious, and that's important as people to realize everything you do is contagious, especially in a highly emotional situation like separation or divorce. So what you want the other person to catch from you is calmness, positive feedback. Not anger and resentment and focusing on what went wrong. So you can influence the other person a little bit, not a lot, but somewhat by being positive and not being negative.  Christina: I think it might be really helpful to give the listeners an example of a BIFF response. So let's say that somebody receives an email demanding that the parenting schedule change the following week. What might a BIFF response look like?  Bill: Well actually, let me read one to you from the Splitting book...  Christina: OK.  Bill: Because it really, it's a classic example. And so let's say this is Joe and Jane and they've been separated for a couple of years – maybe divorced or maybe never married but with a couple of kids. And so Jane actually wants to take the kids Friday afternoon to her boss' birthday party at the office. And so she made that request, simple request. Jane and Joe response:  “Jane, I can't believe you're so stupid as to think I'm going to let you take the children to your boss' birthday party during my parenting time. Have you no memory of the last six conflicts we've had about my parenting time? Or are you having an affair with him? I always knew you would do anything to get ahead. In fact, I remember coming to your office party and witnessing you making a total fool of yourself. Including flirting with everyone from the CEO down to the mail room clerk. Are you high on something? Haven't you got your finances together enough to support yourself yet? Without flinging yourself at every time they can have it, and on and on and on...”  Christina: Oh my gosh that's traumatic just to listen to!  Bill: I know! I know! It's funny I read this to family lawyers and they say “I get these everyday.” So that's not a BIFF response. That's not the way we want people to talk. But if you think of a BIFF response as brief, informative, just straight information, no opinions, criticisms, emotions. Friendly, just a friendly greeting. And firm in that it ends the conversation or it asks for a simple yes or no response.  So let me read Jane's response and see if this is a BIFF response.  “Thank you for responding to my request to take the children to my office party. Just to clarify, the party would be from 3 to 5 on Friday at the office and there would be approximately thirty people there, including several other parents and their school-aged children. There'll be no alcohol because that's a family-oriented firm and there'll be family-oriented activities. I think it would be a good experience for the kids to see me at my workplace. Since you've not agreed, and of course I will respect that and withdraw my request because I recognize it is your parenting time.”  Bill: So, that's brief, that's straight information, it's friendly, she says “Thank you for responding...”, and she says “I respect your parenting time...”, and it's firm that it ends the conversation. Now she could have, depending on what she knows about Joe, have ended by saying, “With these information, I hope you'll reconsider. Please let me know by Thursday at 5:00. Yes or No.” So either of those would be a BIFF response. But do you feel the difference in the tone?  Christina: Yeah, I mean it would take a huge amount of mindfulness and maturity to be able to respond that way. Probably if some deep breathing and some time in between reading the first email and sending the BIFF response.  Bill: Right. One thing we encourage is that people have someone else look at it before they send it. So that they can kinda catch if you let anything kinda weak through that is really angry back. But you're right. It's not easy and in many ways, what we teach people is self-management. It's managing their own emotions. It's keeping their thinking flexible. Managing moderate behavior and checking themselves rather than blaming other people. And I might mention we have a method we call New Ways for Families that teaches a lot of skills, like making proposals and BIFF responses. So that people can get more and more comfortable doing these things with practice. And I'll tell you, we just get a lot of good feedback about this method because people feel more in control of themselves. And then the other person has less and less influence on them with their negativity.    Christina: Sure. Because the only person we really can control is ourselves. So when you're dealing with somebody high-conflict, the odds of being able to change their behavior is probably relatively slim. Hopefully, over time, they might take on this BIFF strategy themselves. But it in the meantime, people can affect how they are looking at the situation and choosing to respond.  Bill: Right. It's a learning process, it's a process of patience. I think it's kinda giving yourself encouraging statements, that's something else we teach with our New Ways for Families method. Because you know you're dealing with a hard time. And you can give yourself encouraging statements. You really can focus on what makes you feel good and get less stressed by it all. By getting support as I've said at the very beginning is a big part of that – from friends, family, even a counselor from, if you find it helpful.  Christina: Is the New Ways program, is that online and something anybody can sign up for?  Bill: It's both. It's online, where anyone can go. And actually, I'll give you our website for New Ways. It's newways4families.com. And we use the number 4 as we say new ways, and then the number 4, families.com. And the online version is called Parenting Without Conflict. Now that's kind of an aspiration because there's always gonna be some conflict. We just want it to be low-conflict, not high-conflict.  Christina: Or respectful conflict.  Bill: Exactly. But it's a twelve, basically twelve sessions, twelve hours, and it's approved by various court systems for people required to take a parenting class. But a lot of people just find it really helpful because of the skills that it teaches. We also have some cities where this is available as a counseling program and the judges actually order both parents to get the counseling program method which is six individual sessions for each parent with a separate counselor and a workbook. And then they each have three parent-child sessions to teach the kids the same skills – flexible thinking, managed emotions, moderate behavior, and checking themselves. The online course anybody can take. It's very easy to access that. But what we find is skills really help a lot and the people want skills. They want to know “How do I deal with my own emotions?” and “How do I respond to the other person's emotions?” and how you go through a divorce will really teach your kids how they should solve relationship problems in the future. And so we were really encouraging people kinda practice self-management skills during this time.  Christina: That's a fantastic resource and we will provide the link in the show notes so people can access that.  Bill: Let me mention one other thing is our other website, highconflictinstitute.com can be used to look at a lot of articles. We have a lot of free articles as well as books to pay for and videos. So I'll make sure you know about both of those websites.  Christina: Thank you, we'll post both of those. So taking just a bit of a left turn here, I see that your newest book, Dating Radar is helping people understand why they make the relationship choices that they do. I think the subtitle says it all: 'Why your brain says Yes to the one who'll make your life hell'. Now, I haven't had the chance to read it yet but I'd love to hear a bit of an overview because that sounds like that's really gonna help people hear out why they've made the decisions they have in the past and hopefully help make better decisions in the future.  Bill: I'm so glad you're asking about that 'cause we're really... Megan Hunter and I co-authored it. And we really feel enthusiastic about what we put in there. We did an online survey which helped give us feedback from a lot of people who said they've been through high-conflict relationships and warning signs that they missed. So in this book, we focused on three key things for Dating Radar. First, is know what you're looking for. Learn what the patterns of five high-conflict personality styles are. Then look at how they jam your radar that people get misled or overwhelmed with the goodness. You know, the knight-in-shining-armor image, the super charming man or woman who just sweeps you off your feet – that this isn't real. And that people realize this person is too good to be true. That they act like their favorite most important interests are the same as what they realize yours are. And we call that a fake compatibility that people are misled by. But the third category is your own blind spots, and that's where we look at kind of cultural beliefs about relationships that don't help. And a lot of songs feed this. You know, that you can change your partner “I will be able to fix this person and make them into a more responsible, honest partner. And that's just not true. We have to learn what you see is what you're going to get. And so a lot of people, you know like the day before they get married they go, “You know I'm not so sure but you know, I think time and love will change someone's soul. I'll make him settle down.” Of course, there's the old saying that women marry somebody based on the idea that they can change him and that men marry someone based on the idea that she'll never change.  Christina: Right.  Bill: So we have a lot of beliefs that trick us up so, that's what it helps with what we really think that so many people, both Megan and I worked in the divorce field for so many years and we see so many people they go, “Why did I do this? And I missed the warning signs.” We wanna help people know the warning signs and not miss them. So that you know, you don't have to go through a high-conflict divorce or separation later on.  Christina: Well that's fantastic. I'm looking forward to reading that. Before we end, do you have any other recommendations for people who find themselves in the situation of separating from a high-conflict person?  Bill: Just basically you know, getting support, getting information... We've got a lot of books. I mentioned BIFF, but I didn't mention that we have a BIFF book that teaches people how to write BIFF response emails and Facebook posts, etc. We have So What's Your Proposal, we have Dating Radar. So another book called Don't Alienate the Kids!, which talks about how we try to help the kids this time. And that's such an important part. People wonder “What do I say? Should I say something? Shouldn't I say something?” And so we recommend a lot of specific things to explain what's going on without badmouthing the other parent. Warning family members and friends, “You may hear terrible things about me. Please check them out with me. Don't hesitate to ask me if something true that you've heard.” Those kinds of things. So overall, it's being prepared, but I would say if someone's facing a high-conflict divorce, just plan ahead before you start the divorce process. Before you even say “I wanna get divorce” or “I'm moving out” is get your dots in a row. And the book Splitting really gives you a whole kinda map for what to expect and what to do.  Christina: This has been a wealth of information for our listeners, Bill. Thank you so much for being here with me today. And thank you for all of your contributions to the field of family law.  Bill: Thank you so much, Christina! And best wishes with your work.  Christina: Thank you. 

Adam Zickerman and Mike Rogers interview author, weight lifter, and personal trainer Bill DeSimone.  Bill penned the book Congruent Exercise: How To Make Weight Training Easier On Your Joints  Bill is well known for his approach to weight lifting which, focuses on correct biomechanics to build strength without undue collateral damage to connective tissue and the rest of the body.So, whether you are an aspiring trainer, serious weight lifter, or even an Inform Fitness client who invests just 20-30 minutes a week at one of their seven locations this episode is chock full of valuable information regarding safety in your high-intensity strength training.  A paramount platform of which the Power of Ten resides at all InForm Fitness locations across the country.To find an Inform Fitness location nearest you visit www.InformFitness.comIf you'd like to ask Adam, Mike or Sheila a question or have a comment regarding the Power of 10. Send us an email or record a voice memo on your phone and send it to podcast@informfitness.com. Join Inform Nation and call the show with a comment or question.  The number is 888-983-5020, Ext. 3. To purchase Adam Zickerman's book, Power of 10: The Once-a-Week Slow Motion Fitness Revolution click this link to visit Amazon:http://bit.ly/ThePowerofTenTo purchase Bill DeSimone's book Congruent Exercise: How To Make Weight Training Easier On Your Joints click this link to visit Amazon:http://bit.ly/CongruentExerciseIf you would like to produce a podcast of your own just like The Inform Fitness Podcast, please email Tim Edwards at tim@InBoundPodcasting.comBelow is the transcription for Episode 20 - Author Bill DeSimone - Congruent Exercise20 Author Bill DeSimone - Congruent ExerciseAdam: So there's not a day that goes by that I don't think by the way that I don't think of something Bill has said to me when I'm training people. Bill is basically my reference guide, he's my Grey's Anatomy. When I try an exercise with somebody, I often find myself asking myself, what would Bill do and I take it from there. Without further ado, this is Bill, and we're going to talk about all good stuff. Joint friendly exercises, what Bill calls it now, you started out with congruent exercises, technical manual for joint friendly exercise, and now you're rephrasing it.Bill: Well actually the first thing I did was [Inaudible: 00:00:43] exercise, but the thing is I didn't write [Inaudible: 00:00:45] exercise with the idea that anybody other than me was going to read it. I was just getting my own ideas down, taking my own notes, and just to flesh it out and tie it up in a nice package, I actually wrote it and had it bound it up and sent it off to Greg Anderson and McGuff and a couple others, and it hit a wave of interest.Adam: A wave, they were probably blown away.Bill: Yeah well, a lot of those guys went out of their way to call me to say boy, a lot of what I suspected, you explained here. But when I read it now, it's pretty technical, it's a challenge.Mike: There's a lot of, I think, common sense with an experienced trainer when you think about levers in general, and I think what you did in that manual was make it very succinct and very clear. I think it's something that maybe we didn't have the full story on, but I think we had some — if you have some experience and you care about safety as a trainer, I think you are kind of looking at it and you saw it observationally, and then I think when we read this we were like ah, finally, this has crystalized what I think some of us were thinking.Adam: Exactly. You know what I just realized, let's explain, first and foremost. You wrote something called Moment Arm Exercise, so the name itself shows you have technical — that it probably is inside, right? So moment arm is a very technical term, a very specific term in physics, but now you're calling it joint friendly exercise, and you called it also congruent exercise at one point. All synonymous with each other, so please explain, what is joint friendly exercise or fitness?Bill: It's based more on anatomy and biomechanics than sports performance. So unlike a lot of the fitness fads that the attitude and the verbiage comes out of say football practice or a competitive sport, what I'm doing is I'm filtering all my exercise instruction through the anatomy and biomechanics books, to try to avoid the vulnerable — putting your joints in vulnerable positions, and that's so complicated which is why I struggled with so much to make it clearer. So I started with moment arm exercise, and then I wrote Congruent Exercise, which is a little broader but obviously the title still requires some explanation. And then — how it happened, as for my personal training in the studio, I would use all this stuff but I wouldn't explain it because I was only dealing with clients, I wasn't dealing with peers. Since it's a private studio and not a big gym, I don't have to explain the difference between what I'm doing and what somebody else is doing, but in effect, I've been doing this every day for fifteen years.Adam: I have to say, when you say that, that you didn't explain it to clients, I actually use this information as a selling point. I actually explain to my clients why we're doing it this way, as opposed to the conventional way, because this is joint friendly. I don't get too technical necessarily, but I let them know that there is a difference of why we're doing it this way, versus the conventional way. So they understand that we are actually a cut above everybody else in how we apply exercise, so they feel very secure in the fact that they're doing what they're supposed to be doing, but I digress.Bill: Generally what I do is any signage I have, a business card, website, Facebook presence, all lays out joint friendly and defines it and kind of explains itself. I would say most of the clients I have aren't coming from being heavily engaged in another form of fitness. They're people who start and drop out programs or they join a health club in January and drop out. It's not like I'm getting somebody who is really intensely into Crossfit, or intensely into Zumba or bodybuilding, and now they're banged up and need to do something different. The joint friendly phrasing is what connects me with people that need that, I just find that they don't need the technical explanation as to why we're not over stretching the joint capsule in the shoulder. Why we're not getting that extra range of motion on the bench press, because again, they haven't seen anybody doing otherwise, so I don't have to explain why I'm doing it this way.Adam: Yeah but they might have had experience doing it themselves. Let's take an overhead press for example, having your arms externally rotating and abducted, versus having them in front of you. There's an easy explanation to a client why we won't do one versus the other.Bill: But I have to say I do not get people who do not even know what a behind the neck press is. Now in Manhattan is a little bit different, more denser.Adam: So for this conversation, let's assume some people know, or understand in a way what the conventional is, but we can kind of get into it. What is conventional and what's not conventional. So it's joint friendly, how is it joint friendly, what are you actually doing to make it joint friendly?Bill: Well the short answer is that I use a lot less range of motion than we've got accustomed to, when we used to use an extreme range of motion. If bodybuilders in the 60s were doing pumping motions, and then you wanted to expand that range of motion, for good reason, and then that gets bastardized and we take more of a range of motion and turn it into an extreme range of motion — just because going from partial motions to a normal range of motion was good, doesn't make a normal range of motion to an extreme range of motion better. And in fact —Adam: What's wrong with extreme range of motion?Bill: Well because —Adam: Don't say that you want to improve flexibility.Bill: Well the HIIT guys who would say that you're going to improve flexibility by using —Adam: HIIT guys means the high intensity training sect of our business.Bill: So the line about, you're going to use the extreme range of motion with a weight training exercise to increase flexibility. First of all, either flexibility is important or it's not, and that's one of those things where HIIT has a little bit of an inconsistency, and they'll argue that it's not important, but then they'll say that you can get it with the weights. That's number one. Number two, a lot of the joint positions that machines and free weight exercises put us in, or can put us in, are very vulnerable to the joints, and if you go to an anatomy and biomechanics textbook, that is painfully obvious what those vulnerable positions are. Just because we walk into a gym or a studio and call it exercise instead of manual labor or instead of — instead of calling it submission wrestling and putting our joints or opponents' joints in an externally rotated abduct and extended position, we call it a pec fly, it's still the same shoulder. It's still a vulnerable position whether it's a pec fly stretching you back there, or a jiujitsu guy putting you in a paintbrush, but I don't know, for most of the pop fitness books though, if anybody else is really looking at this. Maybe not in pop fitness, maybe Tom Pervis —Adam: What's pop fitness?Bill: If you walk into a bookstore and look in the fitness section for instance, any of those types. No offense, but celebrity books, glossy celebrity fitness books, but I don't know that anybody — and the feedback that I've gotten from experienced guys like [Inaudible: 00:08:26] or the guys we know personally, is — even McGuff said yeah, I never associated the joint stuff with the exercise stuff.Adam: Let's talk about these vulnerabilities that you're talking about and extreme ranges of motion. So we have to understand a little bit about muscle anatomy to understand what we mean by the dangers of these extreme ranges of motion. So muscles are weaker in certain positions and they're stronger in other positions. Maybe talk about that, because that's where you start getting into why we do what we do, like understanding that muscles don't generate the same amount of force through a range of motion. They have different torque potentials.Mike: And is there a very clear and concise way of communicating that to a lay person too, like we have practice at it, but in here, we're over the radio or over the podcast, so it's like describing pictures with words.Bill: The easiest way to show it to a client who may not understand what muscle torque is, is to have them lock out in an exercise. Take a safe exercise, the barbell curl, where clearly if you allow your elbows to come forward and be vertically under the weight, at the top of the repetition, clearly all of a sudden the effort's gone. There's no resistance, but if you let your elbows drop back to rib height, if you pin your elbows to the sides through the whole curl, now all of a sudden your effort feels even. Instead of feeling like — instead of having effort and then a lockout, or having a sticky point and then a lockout, now it just feels like effort.Adam: Or a chest press where your elbows are straight and the weights are sitting on those elbows, you're not really working too hard there either.Bill: Same thing. If you have a lockout — what's easy to demonstrate is when the resistance torque that the machine or exercise provides doesn't match your muscle torque. So if your muscle torque pattern changes in the course of a movement, if you feel a lockout or a sticking point, then it's not a line. If all you feel is effort, now it matches pretty evenly. Now here's the thing, all that really means, and part of what I got away for a moment on — all that really means is that that set is going to be very efficient. Like for instance, the whole length of the reputation you're working. It's not like you work and lockout and rest, all that means is that it's going to be a very efficient set. You can't change a muscle torque curve, so if you were just to do some kind of weird angled exercise, you wouldn't get stronger in that angle. All you would do is use a relatively lower weight. Nobody does like a scott bench curl, nobody curls more than a standing curl. You can't change the muscle torque curve, you might change the angle, which means the amount of weight that your hand has change, to accommodate the different torque at that joint angle, but you're not changing where you're strongest. If you could, you would never know you had a bad [Inaudible: 00:11:36], because if the pattern — if the muscle torque pattern could change with a good [Inaudible: 00:11:44], it would also change with a bad [Inaudible: 00:11:47], and then you would never know. Take a dumbbell side raise, everybody on the planet knows it's hardest when your arms are horizontal. Your muscle torque curve can never change to accommodate what the resistance is asking. Now if you go from a machine side raise, which has more even — like where those two curves match, that set feels harder because you don't have to break. You do a set of side raises with dumbbells to failure, if it feels — if it's a difficulty level of ten, of force out of ten, and then you go to a machine side raise and go to failure, it's like a ten, because you didn't have that break built into the actual rep. So the moment arms, knowing how to match the resistance required by the exercise and the muscle torque expressed by your limbs, that makes for a more efficient exercise. In terms of safety, it's all about knowing what the vulnerable positions of the joints are and cutting the exercise short, so that you're not loading the joint into an impingement, or into like an overstretched position.Mike: How different are these…. like thinking about limitation and range of motion on them, we mentioned that before and I think it's kind of adjacent to what you're talking about is — we also want to help people understand that if they're on their own exercising or there are other trainers who want to help their clients, and for our trainers to help our clients… troubleshooting, we know generally how the joints work, where the strength curves exist, but how to discern where those limitations are. Like you said before, that one of the things you do is you limit range of motion and get much more stimulus and muscle.Bill: I'm saying limit range of motion because that might be the verbiage that we understand and maybe listeners would understand, but it's really a lot more complicated than just saying, use this range of motion. So for instance, in a lower back exercise, say a stiff leg or dead lift, which, when I used to misinterpret that by using a full range of motion, I'd be standing on a bench with a barbell, and the barbell would be at shoe level. My knees would be locked, my lower back would be rounded, my shoulders would be up my ears as I'm trying to get the bar off the ground, and so yes, I was using a full range of motion.Adam: That's for sure.Mike: That can be painted for that description.Bill: It's also pretty much a disaster on your lower back waiting to happen, at least on your lower back.Adam: I've got to go to a chiropractor just listening to that.Bill: Exactly, but you still see it all the time. You see it all the time on people using kettle bells, you see that exact posture. The kettle bell is between their legs, their knees are locked, their lower back is rounded, and now they're doing a speed lift. At least I was doing them slow, they're doing speed dead lifts, so if I was going to do an exercise like that, it wouldn't be an extreme range of motion, I'd be looking to use a correct range of motion. So for instance, I wouldn't lock the knees, and I would only lower the person's torso so that they could keep the curve in the lower back. Which might require a rep or two to see where that is, but once you see where that is, that's what I would limit them to.Mike: Do you do it at first with no weight with the client?Bill: That'd be one way of lining it up.Mike: Just sort of seeing what they can just do, make sure they understand the position and stuff.Bill: So for instance, the chest press machine I have in the studio is a Nitro —Adam: [Inaudible: 00:15:37] Nitro.Bill: And it doesn't — the seat doesn't adjust enough for my preference, so the person's elbows come too far back. So for instance, to get the first rep off the ground, the person's elbows have to come way behind the plane of their back, which —Adam: So you've come to weigh stack themBill: Weigh stack, right.Mike: It's like our pull over, you know how we had to pull it over at one point?Bill: So what I'll do is I'll help the person out of the first repetition, help them out of the bottom, and then I'll have my hand to the clipboard where I want their elbow to stop. So as soon as they touch my hand with their elbow, they start to go the other way.Adam: So they're not stretching their pecs too far.Bill: Well more specifically, they're not rotating their shoulder capsule. So that's another thing we tend to do, we tend to think of everything in terms of the big, superficial muscles — right, those are the ones that don't get hurt, it's the joints that [do]. That was one thing of all the stuff I read, whether it was CSCS or Darton's stuff or Jones' stuff, there was always a little murkiness between what was the joint and what was the muscle. That stuff was always written from the point of view of the muscle.Adam: What's a joint capsule, for those that don't know what a joint capsule is. A shoulder capsule.Bill: It's part of the structure of what holds your shoulder together, and so if the old [Inaudible: 00:17:06] machines, 1980 vintage, that bragged about getting such an extreme range of motion, some of them… it really took your shoulder to the limit of where it could go to start the exercise, and we were encouraged to go that far.Adam: And what would happen?Bill: Eventually it just adds to the wear and tear that you were going to have in your shoulder anyway. And that's if people stayed with it, I think a lot of people ended up dropping out.Mike: Often times exacerbating what was going on.Bill: You rarely see, it's occasional that we have that sort of catastrophic event in the gym, it's occasional —Mike: Almost never happens.Bill: A lot of the grief that I take for my material is well, that never happens, people do this exercise all the time, people never explode their spine. Well a) that's not true, they do, just not in that persons' awareness, and b) but the real problem is unnecessarily adding to life's wear and tear on your joints. So it's not just what we do in the gym that counts, if somebody plays tennis or somebody has a desk job or manual labor job — let's say a plumber or some other manual labor guy has to go over his head with his arms a lot, that wear and tear on his shoulder counts, and just because they walk into your gym, and you ask them about their health history, do you have any orthopedic problems and they say no, yes. I'm on the verge of an orthopedic problem that I don't know about, and I've worn this joint out because of work, but no I have no orthopedic problems at the moment. So my thing is, the exercise I'm prescribing isn't going to make that worse.Adam: Well you don't want to make it worse, and that's why you're limiting range of motion, that's why you're matching the strength curve of the muscle with the resistance curve of the tool you're using, whether it's free weight or machine or the cam.Bill: Yeah, we're supposed to be doing this for the benefits of exercise. I do not — I truly do not understand crippling yourself over the magical benefit of exercise. I mean there's no — in 2014, there was a lot of negative publicity with Crossfit, with some of the really catastrophic injuries coming about. There's no magic benefits just because you risk your life, you either benefit from exercise or you don't, but you don't get extra magic benefit because you pushed something to the brink of cracking your spine or tearing your shoulder apart.Adam: Well they talk about them being functional or natural movements, that they do encourage these full ranges of motion because that's what you do in life.Bill: Where? Mike: Well I mean like in sports for example, you're extending your body into a range of motion — and also there are things in life, like for example, like I was saying to Adam, for example, sometimes you have to lift something that's heavy and you have to reach over a boundary in front of you to do so.Bill: Like… putting in the trunk of a car, for example.Mike: Things like that, or even —Adam: So shouldn't you exercise that way if that's what you're doing in every day life?Mike: If your daily life does involve occasional extreme ranges of motion, which that's the reason why your joints of kind of wearing and tearing anyway, is there something you can do to assist in training that without hurting it? Or exacerbating it?Bill: You know it's interesting, 25 years ago, there was a movement in physical therapy and they would have back schools, and they would — it was sort of like an occupational oriented thing, where they would teach you how to lift, and at the time, I thought that was so frivolous. I just thought, get stronger, but lifting it right in the first place is really the first step to not getting injured. Mike: Don't life that into the trunk unless —Bill: Well unless you have to, right? For instance, practicing bad movements doesn't make you invulnerable to the bad movements, you're just wearing out your free passes. Now sport is a different animal, yes you're going to be — again, I don't think anyone is doing this, but there's enough wear and tear just in your sport, whether it's football, martial arts, running, why add more wear and tear from your workout that's there to support the sport. The original [Inaudible: 00:21:52] marketing pitch was look how efficient we made weight training, you can spend more time practicing. You don't have to spend four hours a day in the gym, you can spend a half hour twice a week or three times a week in the gym, and get back to practicing.Adam: I remember Greg [Inaudible: 22:06] said to a basketball coach that if his team is in his gym more than 20 minutes or so a week, that he's turning them into weight lifters and not basketball players.Bill: Well there you go. Now —Mike: The thing is the training and the performance goals in getting people stronger, faster, all that kind of stuff, is like unbelievable now a days, but I've never seen more injuries in sports in my entire life than right now.Bill: It's unbelievably bogus though is what it is. You see a lot of pec tears in NFL training rooms. Adam: So why aren't they learning? Why is it so hard to get across then?Bill: Well for starters, you're going to churn out — first of all you're dealing with twenty year olds. Adam: So what, what are you saying about twenty year olds?Bill: I was a lot more invincible at twenty than I am at sixty.Mike: Physically and psychologically.Bill: The other thing for instance. Let's say you've got a college level, this is not my experience, I'm repeating this, but if you have a weight room that's empty, or, and you're the strength and conditioning coach, because you're intensely working people out, briefly, every day. Versus the time they're idle, they're off doing their own thing. Or, every day the administrators and the coaches see people running hoops and doing drills, running parachutes and every day there is an activity going. What looks better? What is more job security for that strength and conditioning coach? Adam: Wait a second. What is Jim the strength training coach doing? He's working one day a week and what's he doing the rest of the week?Mike: And what's the team doing the rest of the week?Bill: But again, don't forget, if you're talking about twenty something year old athletes, who knows what that's going to bring on later.Adam: You are seeing more injuries though.Bill: Right. A couple of years ago, ESPN had a story on a guy. He had gotten injured doing a barbell step up, so a barbell step up, you put a barbell on your back, you step onto a bench, bring the other foot up. Step back off the bench, four repetitions. Classic sports conditioning exercise, in this guys case either he stepped back and twisted his ankle and fell with the bar on his back, or when he went to turn to put the bar back on the rack, when he turned, it spun on him and he damaged his back that way. Either way, he put his ability to walk at risk, so the ESPN story was, oh look how great that is he's back to playing. Yes, but he put his ability to walk at risk, to do an exercise that is really not significantly — it's more dangerous than other ways of working your legs, but it's not better.Adam: The coaches here, the physical trainers, they don't have evidence that doing step ups is any more effective in the performance of their sport, or even just pure strength gains. Then lets say doing a safe version of a leg press or even squats for that matter.Bill: And even if you wanted to go for a more endurance thing, running stadium steps was a classic exercise, but stadium steps are what, three or four inches, they made them very flat. Even that's safer because there's no bar on your back. So on the barbell step up, which I think is still currently in the NSCA textbooks, the bar is on your back. If the bench is too high, you have to bend over in order to get your center of gravity over the bench, otherwise you can't get off the floor. So now you're bent over with one foot in front of you, so now you don't even have two feet under you like in a barbell squat to be more stable. You have your feet in line, with the weight extending sideways, and now you do your twenty repetitions or whatever and you're on top of the bench, and your legs are burning and you're breathing heavy, and now you've got to get off. How do you get off that bench when your legs are gassed, you're going to break and lock your knee, and the floor is going to come up — nobody steps forward, they all step backwards where you can't see. Mike: Even after doing an exercise, let's say you did it okay or whatever and whether it was congruent or not congruent, sometimes, if it's a free weight type of thing, just getting the weight back on the floor or on the rack. After you've gone to muscle failure or close to muscle failure —Adam: So are these things common now, like still in the NFL they're doing these types of training techniques? Bill: I don't really know what's happening in the NFL or the college level, because frankly I stopped my NSCA membership because I couldn't use any material with my population anyway. So I don't really know what they are — I do know that that was a classic one, and as recently as 2014 — in fact one other athlete actually did lose his ability to walk getting injured in that exercise. Adam: It's cost benefit, like how much more benefit are you getting —Bill: It's cost. My point is that the benefit is — it's either or.Mike: That's the thing, people don't know it though, they think the benefit is there. That's the problem.Bill: They think that for double the risk, you're going to get quadruple the benefit. What, what benefit? What magic benefit comes out of putting your ability to walk at risk?Mike: One of my clients has a daughter who was recruited to row at Lehigh which is a really good school for that, and she, in the training program, she was recruited to go. She was a great student but she was recruited to row, and in the training program, she hurt her back in the weight room in the fall, and never, ever was with the team. This was a very, very good program — Bill: Very good program, so it's rowing, so a) it's rough on your lower back period, and b) I'm completely guessing here, but at one time they used to have their athletes doing [Inaudible: 00:28:22] and other things —Adam: Explain what a clean is —Bill: Barbells on the floor and you either pull it straight up and squat under the bar, which would be like an olympic clean, or you're a little more upright and you just sort of drag the bar up to your collarbones, and get your elbows underneath it. Either way it's hard on the back, but at one time, rowing conditioning featured a lot of exercises like that to get their back stronger, that they're already wearing out in the boat. They didn't ask me, but if I was coaching them, I would not train their lower backs in the off season. I would let the rowing take care of that, I would train everything around their back, and give their back a break, but they didn't ask.Adam: I don't know why they didn't ask you, didn't they know that you're a congruent exerciser?Bill: You've got to go to a receptive audience.Mike: I think because there are things we do in our lives that are outside, occasionally outside our range of motion or outside — that are just incongruent or not joint friendly, whether it's in sports or not. The thing is, I'm wondering are there exercises that go like — say for example you have to go — your sport asks for range of motion from one to ten, and you need to be prepared to do that, if you want to do that, the person desires to do that. Are there exercises where you go — can you be more prepared for that movement if you are doing it with a load or just a body weight load, whatever, up to say level four. Are there situations where it's okay to do that, where you're going a slight increase into that range where it's not comprising joint safety, and it's getting you a little bit more prepared to handle something that is going on.Adam: So for example, for a golf swing, when you do a golf swing, you're targeting the back probably more than you should in a safe range of motion in an exercise. I would never [Inaudible: 00:30:32] somebody's back in the exercise room to the level that you have to [Inaudible: 00:30:34] your back to play golf. So I guess what Mike is asking is is there an exercise that would be safe to [Inaudible: 00:30:41] the back, almost as much as you would have to in golf.Bill: I would say no. I would say, and golf is a good example. Now if you notice, nobody has their feet planted and tries to swing with their upper body.Mike: A lot of people do, that's how you hurt yourself.Bill: But any sport, tennis, throwing a baseball, throwing a punch. Get your hips into it, it's like standard coaching cliche, get your hips into it. What that does is it keeps you from twisting your back too much. In golf, even Tiger who was in shape for quite a while couldn't help but over twist and then he's out for quite a while with back problems.Mike: Yeah, his story is really interesting and complicated. He did get into kind of navy seal training and also you should see the ESPN article on that which really — after I read that I thought that was the big thing with his problems. Going with what you just said about putting your hips into it, I'm a golfer, I try to play golf, and I did the TPI certification. Are you familiar with that? I thought it was really wonderful, I thought I learned a lot. I wasn't like the gospel according to the world of biomechanics, but I felt like it was a big step in the right direction with helping with sports performance and understanding strength and mobility. One of the bases of, the foundation of it, they — the computer analysis over the body and the best golfers, the ones that do it very very efficiently, powerfully and consistently, and they showed what they called a [Inaudible: 00:32:38] sequence, and it's actually very similar, as you said, in all sports. Tennis, golf, throwing a punch, there's a sequence where they see that the people who do it really, really well, and in a panfry way, it goes hip first, then torso, then arm, then club. In a very measured sequence, despite a lot of people who have different looking golf swings, like Jim [Inaudible: 00:32:52], Tiger Woods, John Daley, completely different body types, completely different golf swings, but they all have the — if you look at them on the screen in slow motion with all the sensors all over their body, their [Inaudible: 00:33:04] sequence is identical. It leads to a very powerful and consistent and efficient swing, but if you say like if you have limitations in you mobility between your hips and your lumbar spine, or your lumbar spine and your torso, and it's all kind of going together. It throws timing off, and if you don't have those types of things, very slowly, or quickly, you're going to get to an injury, quicker than another person would get to an injury. The thing is, at the same time, you don't want to stop someone who really wants to be a good golfer. We have to give the information and this is a — people have to learn the biomechanics and the basic swing mechanics of a golf swing, and then there's a fitness element to it all. Are you strong enough, do you have the range of motion, is there a proper mobility between the segments of your body in order to do this without hurting yourself over time, and if there isn't, golf professionals and fitness professionals are struggling. How do I teach you how to do this, even though it's probably going to lead you to an injury down the line anyway. It's a puzzle but the final question is, what — I'm trying to safely help people who have goals with sports performance and without hurting them.Bill: First of all, any time you go from exercise in air quotes to sports, with sports, there's almost an assumption of risk. The person playing golf assumes they're going to hurt a rotator cuff or a back, or they at least know it's a possibility. It's just part of the game. Football player knows they could have a knee injury, maybe now they know they could have a concussion, but they just accept it by accepting it on the court or the turf. They walk into our studio, I don't think that expectation — they may expect it also, but I don't think it really belongs there. I don't think you're doing something to prepare for the risky thing. The thing you're doing to prepare for the risky thing shouldn't also be risky, and besides, let them get hurt on that guy's time, not on your time. I'm being a little facetious there, I don't buy the macho bullshit attitude that in order to challenge myself physically, I have to do something so reckless I could get hurt. That's just simply not necessary. If somebody says I want to be an Olympic weightlifter, I want to be a power lifter, just like if they want to be a mixed martial artist, well then you're accepting the fact that that activity is your priority. Not your joint health, not your safety. That activity is your priority, and again, nobody in professional sports is asking me, but I would so make the exercise as safe as possible. As safe as possible at first, then as vigorous as possible, and then let them take that conditioning and apply it to their sport.Adam: If a sport requires that scapulary traction at a certain time in a swing or whatever they're asking for, I don't really think that there's a way in the exercise room of working on just that. Scapular traction, and even if you can, it doesn't mean it's going to translate to the biomechanics and the neuro conditioning and the motor skill conditioning to put it all together. Bill: You can't think that much —Adam: I'm just thinking once and for all, if strong hips are what's important for this sport, a strong neck is what's important for this. If being able to rotate the spine is important and you need your rotation muscles for the spine, work your spine rotationally but in a very safe range of motion. Tax those muscles, let them recover and get strong so when you do go play your sport, lets say a golf swing, it's watching the videos and perfecting your biomechanics, but there's nothing I think you can do in the gym that is going to help you really coordinate all those skills, because you're trying to isolate the hip abductor or a shoulder retractor. Mike: Well I was going to say, I think isolating the muscles in the gym is fine, because it allows you to control what happens, you don't have too many moving parts, and this is kind of leading up to the conversational on functional training.Adam: Which is good even if you can do that. You might notice there's a weakness —Mike: Yeah but if you're going to punch, you don't think okay flex the shoulder, extend at the — Adam: There are a lot of boxers that didn't make it because they were called arm punchers. Bill: So at some point you can't train it. You need to realize gee that guy has good hip movement, let me direct him to this sport.Adam: So I think what Mike's asking is is there some kind of exercise you can do to turn an arm puncher, let's use this as an example, turn an arm puncher into a hip puncher? If you can maybe do something —Bill: I think it's practice though. Mike: I think there's a practice part of it. Going back to the golf swing, one of the things that they were making a big deal out of is, and it goes back to what we mentioned before, sitting at a desk and what's going on with our bodies. Our backs, our hips, our hamstrings. As a result of the amount of time that most of us in our lives have, and we're trainers, we're up on our feet all day, but a lot of people are in a seated position all the time. Adam: Hunched over, going forward.Mike: Their lower back is —Bill: Hamstrings are shortened, yeah.Mike: What is going on in the body if your body is — if you're under those conditions, eight to ten hours a day, five days a week. Not to mention every time you sit down in your car, on the train, have a meal, if you're in a fetal position. My point is, they made a big thing at TPI about how we spend 18-20 hours a day in hip flexion, and what's going on. How does that affect your gluten if you're in hip flexion 20 hours a day. They were discussing the term called reciprocal inhibition, which is — you know what I mean by that?Bill: The muscle that's contracting, the opposite muscle has to relax.Mike: Exactly, so if the hip is flexed, so as the antagonist muscle of the glue which is being shut off, and therefore —Bill: Then when you go to hip henge, your glutes aren't strong enough to do the hip henge so you're going to get into a bad thing.Mike: Exactly, and the thing as I said before —Adam: What are they recommending you do though?Mike: Well the thing is they're saying do several different exercises to activate the gluten specifically and —Adam: How is that different than just doing a leg press that will activate them?Mike: Adam, that's a good question and the thing is it comes back to some of the testimonials. When you deal with clients, often times if you put them on a leg press, they'll say I'm not feeling it in my glutes, I'm only feeling it in my quads, and other people will say, I'm feeling it a lot in my glutes and my hamstrings, and a little bit in my quads.Adam: But if they don't feel it in their glutes, it doesn't mean that their glutes aren't activated, for sure.Mike: Bill, what do you think about that?Bill: I think feel is very overrated in our line of work. I can get you to feel something but it's not — you can do a concentration curl, tricep kickback, or donkey kicks with a cuff, and you'll feel something because you're not — you're making the muscle about to cramp, but that's not necessarily a positive. As far as activating the glutes go, if they don't feel it on the leg press, I would go to the abductor machine. Mike: I mean okay, whether it's feel it's overrated, that's the thing that as a trainer, I really want the client to actually really make the connection with the muscle part.Bill: Well yeah, you have to steer it though. For instance, if you put somebody on the abductor machine and they feel the sides of their glutes burn, in that case, the feel matches what you're trying to do. If you have somebody doing these glute bridging exercises where their shoulders are on a chair and their hips are on the ground, knees are bent, and they're kind of just driving their hips up. You feel that but it's irrelevant, you're feeling it because you're trying to get the glutes to contract at the end of where — away from their strongest point. You're not taxing the glutes, you're getting a feeling, but it's not really challenging the strength of the glutes. So I think what happens with a lot of the approaches like you're describing, where they have half a dozen exercises to wake up the glutes, or engage them or whatever the phrase is.Mike: Activate, yeah.Bill:  There's kind of a continuity there, so it should be more of a progression rather than all of these exercises are valid. If you've got a hip abductor machine, the progression is there already.Mike: The thing is, it's also a big emphasis, it's going back to TPI and golf and stuff, is the mobility factor. So I think that's the — the strength is there often times, but there's a mobility issue every once in a while, and I think that is — if something is, like for example if you're very, very tight and if your glutes are supposed to go first, so says TPI through their [Inaudible: 00:42:57] sequence, but because you're so tight that it's going together, and therefore it's causing a whole mess of other things which might make your club hit the ground first, and then tension in the arms, tension in the back, and all sorts of things. I'm thinking maybe there are other points, maybe the mobility thing has to be addressed in relation to a golf swing, more so than are the glutes actually working or not.Bill: Well the answer is it all could be. So getting back to a broader point, the way we train people takes half an hour, twice a week maybe. That leaves plenty of time for this person to do mobility work or flexibility work, if they have a specific activity that they think they need the work in.Mike: Or golf practice.Bill:  Well that's what I'm saying, even if it's golf and even if — if you're training for strength once or twice a week, that leaves a lot of time that you can do some of these mobility things, if the person needs them. That type of program, NASM has a very elaborate personal trainer program, but they tend to equally weight every possible — some people work at a desk and they're not — their posture is fine. Maybe they just intuitively stretch during the day, so I think a lot of those programs try to give you a recipe for every possible eventuality, and then there's a continuum within that recipe. First we're going to do one leg bridges, then we're going to do two leg bridges, now we're going to do two leg bridges on a ball, now we're going to do leg bridges with an extra weight, now we're going to do two leg bridges with an elastic band. Some of those things are just progressions, there's no magic to any one of those exercises, but I think that's on a case by case basis. If the person says I'm having trouble doing the swing the way the instructor is teaching me, then you can pick it apart, but the answer is not necessarily weight training.Mike: The limitation could be weakness but it could be a mobility thing, it could be a whole bunch of things, it could be just that their mechanics are off.Bill: And it could just be that it's a bad sport for them. The other thing with postural issues, is if you get them when a person's young, you might be able to correct them. You get a person 60, 70, it may have settled into the actual joints. The joints have may have changed shape.Adam: We've got people with kyphosis all the time. We're going to not reverse that kyphosis. You have these women, I find it a lot with tall women. They grow up taller than everyone else in their class and they're shy so they end up being kyphotic because they're shy to stand up tall. You can prevent further degeneration and further kyphosis.Bill: Maybe at 20 or 25, if you catch that, maybe they can train out of it, but if you get it when it's already locked in, all you can do is not do more damage.Adam: So a lot of people feel and argue that machines are great if you want to just do really high intensity, get really deep and go to failure, but if you want to really learn how to use your body in  space, then free weights and body weight movements need to be incorporated, and both are important. Going to failure with machines in a safe manner, that might be cammed properly, but that in and of itself is not enough. That a lot of people for full fitness or conditioning if you will, you need to use free weights or body weight movements —Mike: Some people even think that machines are bad and only body weights should be done.Adam: Do you have an opinion about if one is better than the other, or they both serve different purposes and they're both important, or if you just use either one of them correctly, you're good.Bill: Let's talk about the idea that free weights are more functional than machines. I personally think it's what you do with your body that makes it functional or not, and by functional, that's —Adam: Let's talk about that, let's talk about functional training.Bill:  I'm half mocking that phrase.Adam: So before you even go into the question I just asked, maybe we can talk about this idea, because people are throwing around the expression functional training nowadays. So Crossfit is apparently functional training, so what exactly was functional training and what has it become?Bill: I don't know what they're talking about, because frankly if I've got to move a tire from point A to point B, I'm rolling it, I'm not flipping it. Adam: That would be more functional, wouldn't it.Bill: If I have to lift something, if I have a child or a bag of groceries that I have to lift, I'm not going to lift a kettle bell or dumbbell awkwardly to prepare for that awkward lift. In other words, I would rather train my muscles safely and then if I have to do something awkward, hopefully I'm strong enough to get through it, to withstand it. My thought was, when I started in 1982 or so, 84, 83, somewhere in the early 80s I started to train, most of us at the time were very influenced by the muscle magazines. So it was either muscle magazines, or the [Inaudible: 00:48:24] one set to failure type training, but the people that we were training in the early 80s, especially in Manhattan, they weren't body builders and they weren't necessarily athletes. So to train business people and celebrities and actors etc, like you would train an athlete seemed like a bad idea. Plus how many times did I hear, oh I don't want to get big, or I'm not going out for the Olympics. Okay fine, but then getting to what Mike said before, if someone has a hunched over shoulder or whatever, now you're tailoring the training to what the person is in front of you, to what is relevant to their life. 20 inch arms didn't fascinate them, why are you training them to get 20 inch arms? Maybe a trimmer waist was more their priority, so to my eye, functional training and personal training, back in the 80s, was synonymous. Somewhere since the 80s, functional training turned into this anti machine approach and functional training for sport was [Inaudible: 00:49:32] by a guy named Mike Boyle. His main point in there is, and I'm paraphrasing so if I get it wrong, don't blame him, but his point was as an athlete, you don't necessarily need to bench heavy or squat heavy or deadlift heavy, although it might be helpful, but you do need the muscles that hold your joints together to be in better shape. So all of his exercises were designed around rotator cuff, around the muscles around the spine, the muscles around the hips, the muscles around the ankles. So in his eye it was functional for sport, he was training people, doing exercises, so they would hold their posture together so that that wouldn't cause a problem on the field. That material was pretty good, went a little overboard I think in some ways, but generally it was pretty good, but then it kind of got bastardized as it got caught into the commercial fitness industry, and it just became an excuse for sequencing like a lunge with a curl with a row with a pushup, to another lunge, to a squat. It just became sort of a random collection of movements, justified as being functional, functional for what? At least Boyle was functional for sport, his point was to cut injuries down in sport. Where is the function in stringing together, again, a curl, to a press, to a pushup, to a squat, back to the curl, like one rep of each, those are more like stunts or feats of strength than they are, to me, exercise, Adam: So when you're talking about the muscles around the spine or the rotator cuffs, they're commonly known as stabilizer muscles, and when we talk about free weights versus machines, a lot of times we'll say something like, well if you want to work your stabilizer muscles, you need to use free weights, because that's how you work the stabilizer muscles. What would you say to that?Bill: I would say that if they're stabilizing while they're using the free weights, then they're using the stabilizer muscles, right?Adam: And if they're stabilizing while using a machine?Bill:  They're using their stabilizer muscles.Adam: Could you work out those stabilizer muscles of the shoulder on a machine chest press, the same way you can use strength in stabilizer muscles of the shoulder on a free weight bench press?Bill:  Yes, it's what your body is doing that counts, not the tool. So if someone is on a free weight…Mike: Is it the same though, is it doing it the same way? So you can do it both ways, but is it the same?Bill: If you want to — skill is very specific, so if you want to barbell bench press, you have to barbell bench press.Adam: Is there an advantage to your stabilizer muscles to do it with a free weight bench press, as opposed to a machine?Bill: I don't see it, other than to help the ability to free weight bench press, but if that's not why the person is training, if the person is just training for the health benefits of exercise to use it broadly, I don't think it matters — if you're on a machine chest press and you're keeping your shoulder blades down and back, and you're not buckling your elbows, you're voluntarily controlling the range of the motion. I don't see how that stabilization is different than if you're on a barbell bench press, and you have to do it the same way. Adam: You're balancing, because both arms have to work independently in a way.Bill:  To me that just makes it risky, that doesn't add a benefit.Mike: What about in contrast to lets say, a pushup. A bodyweight pushup, obviously there's a lot more going on because you're holding into a plank position which incorporates so many more muscles of your entire body, but like Adam and I were talking the other day about the feeling — if you're not used to doing pushups regularly, which Adam is all about machines and stuff like that, I do a little bit of everything, but slow protocol. It's different, one of our clients is unbelievably strong on all of the machines, we're talking like top 10% in weight on everything. Hip abduction, leg press, chest press, pull downs, everything, and this guy could barely do 8 limited range of motion squats with his body weight, and he struggles with slow pushups, like doing 5 or 6 pushups. 5 seconds down, 5 seconds up, to 90 degrees at the elbow, he's not even going past — my point is that he's working exponentially harder despite that he's only dealing with his body weight, then he is on the machines, in all categories.Bill:  So here's the thing though. Unless that's a thing with them, that I have to be able to do 100 pushups or whatever, what's the difference?Mike: The difference is —Adam: The question is why though. Why could he lift 400, 500 pounds on Medex chest press, he could hardly do a few pushups, and should he be doing pushups now because have we discovered some kind of weakness? That he needs to work on pushups?Bill: Yes, but it's not in his pecs and his shoulders.Mike: I'm going to agree, exactly.Bill:  The weakness is probably in his trunk, I don't know what the guy is built like. The weakness is in his trunk because in a pushup, you're suspending yourself between your toes and your arms.Adam: So somebody should probably be doing ab work and lower back extensions?Bill: No he should be doing pushups. He should be practicing pushups, but practicing them in a way that's right. Not doing the pushup and hyper extending his back, doing a pushup with his butt in the air. Do a perfect pushup and then if your form breaks, stop, recover. Do another perfect pushup, because we're getting back into things that are very, very specific. So for instance, if you tell me that he was strong on every machine, and he comes back every week and he's constantly pulling things in his back, then I would say yes, you have to address it.Mike: This is my observations that are more or less about — I think it's something to do with his coordination, and he's not comfortable in his own body. For example, his hips turn out significantly, like he can't put his feet parallel on the leg press for example. So if I ever have him do a limited range of motion lunge, his feet go into very awkward positions. I can tell he struggles with balance, he's an aspiring golfer as well. His coordination is — his swing is really, I hope he never listens to this, it's horrible. Adam: We're not giving his name out.Bill: Here's the thing now. You as a trainer have to decide, am I going to reconfigure what he's doing, at the risk of making him feel very incompetent and get him very discouraged, or do I just want to, instead of doing a machine chest press, say we'll work on pushups. Do you just want to introduce some of these new things that he's not good at, dribble it out to him a little bit at a time so it gives him like a new challenge for him, or is that going to demoralize him?Mike: He's not demoralized at all, that is not even on the table. I understand what you're saying, I think there are other people who would look at it that way. I think he looks at it as a new challenge, I think he knows — like we've discussed this very, very openly. He definitely — it feels like he doesn't have control over his body in a way. Despite his strength, I feel that — my instincts as a trainer, I want to see this guy be able to feel like he's strong doing something that is a little bit more — incorporates his body more in space than just being on a machine. If I'm measuring his strength based on what he can do by pressing forward or pulling back or squatting down, he's passed the test with As and great form. He does all the other exercises with pretty good form, but he's struggling with them. He has to work a lot harder in order to do it, and to be it's an interesting thing to see someone who lifts very heavy weights on the chest press and can barely do 4 slow pushups.Bill: Let's look at the pushups from a different angle. Take someone who could do pushups, who can do pushups adequately, strictly and all. Have another adult sit on their butt, all of a sudden those perfect pushups, even though probably raw strength could bench press an extra person, say, you can't do it, because someone who is thicker in the hips, has more weight around the hips, represented by the person sitting on their back, their dimensions are such that their hips are always going to be weighing them down. So that person's core — like a person with broader hips, in order to do a pushup, their core has to be much stronger than somebody with very narrow hips, because they have less weight in the middle of their body. So some of these things are a function of proportion.Adam: You can't train for it, in other words you can't improve it.Mike: Women in general have their center of gravity in their hips, and that's why pushups are very, very hard.Adam: I have an extremely strong individual, a perfect example of what you're talking about right now. I know people that are extremely, extremely strong, but some of these very, very strong individuals can do a lot of weight on a pullover machine, they can do a lot of weight on a pulldown machine, but as soon as you put them on the chin-up bar, they can't do it. Does that mean they're not strong, does that mean that they can't do chin-ups, that they should be working on chin-ups because we discovered a weakness? No, there's people for example who might have shitty tendon insertions, like you said about body weight and center of gravity, if they have really thick lower body. I notice that people who have really big, thick lower bodies, really strong people — or if they have really long arms, the leverage is different. So it begs the question, lets start doing chin-ups, yeah but you'll never proportionally get better at chin-ups, given your proportions, given your tendon insertions, given your length of your arms. So maybe Mike, this person is just not built to do push-ups and you're essentially just giving him another chest and body exercise that is not necessarily going to improve or help anything, because it's a proportional thing, it's a leverage thing. It's not a strength thing, especially if you're telling me he's so strong and everything else.Bill: The only way you'll know is to try.Mike: Well that's the thing, and that's what I've been doing. We just started it, maybe in the last month, and frankly both of us are excited by it. He's been here for a few years, and he is also I think starving to do something a little new. I think that's a piece of the puzzle as well, because even if you're coming once a week and you get results, it gets a little stale, and that's why I've tried to make an effort of making all the exercises we're doing congruent. Joint friendly, very limited range of motion, and the thing is, he's embracing the challenge, and he's feeling it too. I know the deal with soreness and stuff like that, new stimulus.Bill: In that case, the feeling counts, right? It doesn't always mean something good, it doesn't always mean something bad.Mike: Right, it is a little bit of a marketing thing. Adam: It's a motivator. It's nothing to be ashamed of for motivation. If pushups is motivating this guy, then do pushups, they're a great exercise regardless.Bill: Getting back to your general question about whether free weights lends itself to stabilizing the core better or not, if that's what the person is doing on the exercise, then it is. If the person is doing the pushup and is very tight, yes, he's exercising his core. If the person is doing the pushup and it's sloppy, one shoulder is rising up, one elbow to the side, it doesn't matter that it's a pushup —Adam: He's still not doing it right and he's still not working his core.Bill: Right, so it's really how the person is using their body that determines whether they're training their core appropriately, not the source of the resistance.Adam: I'm sorry, I've done compound rows with free weights in all kinds of ways over the years, and now I'm doing compound row with a retrofitted Medex machine, with a CAM that really represents pretty good CAM design and I challenge anyone to think that they're not working everything they need to work on that machine, because you've still got to keep your shoulders down. You've still got to keep your chest up, you still have to not hunch over your shoulders when you're lowering a weight. I mean there's a lot of things you've got to do right on a compound machine, just like if you're using free weights. I don't personally, I've never noticed that much of a benefit, and how do you measure that benefit anyway? How would you be able to prove that free weights is helping in one way that a machine is not, how do you actually prove something like that? I hear it all the time, you need to do it because you need to be able to —Mike: There's one measuring thing actually, but Bill —Bill: I was going to say, a lot of claims of exercise, a lot of the chain of thought goes like this. You make the claim, the result, and there's this big black box in the middle that — there's no  explanation of why doing this leads to this. Mike: If you made the claim and the result turns out, then yes it's correlated and therefore —Bill: I was going to say getting to Crossfit and bootcamp type things, and even following along with a DVD program, whatever brand name you choose. The problem I have with that from a joint friendly perspective is you have too many moving parts for you to be managing your posture and taking care of your joints. Especially if you're trying to keep up with the kettle bell class. I imagine it's possible that you can do certain kettle bell exercises to protect your lower back and protect your shoulders. It's possible, but what the user has to decide is how likely is it? So I know for me personally, I can be as meticulous as I want with a kettle bell or with a barbell deadlift, and at some point, I'm going to hurt myself. Not from being over ambitious, not from sloppy form, something is going to go wrong. Somebody else might look at those two exercises and say no, I'm very confident I can get this. You pay your money, you take your chance.Mike: As a measuring tool, sometimes you never know if one is better or worse but sometimes — every once in a while, even when we have clients come into our gym and you have been doing everything very carefully with them, very, very modest weight, and sometimes people say, you know Mike, I've never had any knee problems and my knees are bothering me a little bit. I think it's the leg press that's been doing it, ever since we started doing that, I'm feeling like a little bit of a tweak in my knee, I'm feeling it when I go up stairs. Something like that, and then one of the first things I'll do is like when did it start, interview them, try to draw some lines or some hypotheses as to what's going on. Obviously there might be some wear and tear in their life, almost definitely was, and maybe something about their alignment on the leg press is not right. Maybe they're right, maybe they're completely wrong, but one of the things I'll do first is say okay, we still want to work your legs. We still want to work your quads, your hamstrings, your glutes, let's try doing some limited range of motions squats against the wall or with the TRX or something like that, and then like hey, how are your knees feeling over the past couple weeks? Actually you know, much much better, ever since we stopped doing the leg press.Bill: Sometimes some movements just don't agree with some joints.Adam: There's a [Inaudible: 01:05:32] tricep machine that I used to use, and it was like kind of like —Bill: The one up here? Yeah.Adam: You karate chop right, and your elbows are stabilized on the pad, you karate chop down. It was an old, [Inaudible: 01:05:45] machine, and I got these sharp pains on my elbows. Nobody else that I trained on that machine ever had that sharp pain in their elbows, but it bothered the hell out of my elbows. So I would do other tricep extensions and they weren't ever a problem, so does that make that a bad exercise? For me it did.Bill: For you it did, but if you notice, certain machine designs have disappeared. There's a reason why those machine designs disappeared, so there's a reason why, I think in the Nitro line, I know what machine you're talking about. They used to call it multi tricep, right, okay, and your upper arms were held basically parallel, and you had to kind of karate chop down.Adam: It wasn't accounting for the carrying angle.Bill: I'll get to that. So your elbows were slightly above your shoulders, and you had to move your elbows into a parallel. Later designs, they moved it out here. They gave them independent axises, that's not an accident. A certain amount of ligament binding happens, and then —Adam: So my ligaments just were not coping with that very well.Bill: That's right. So for instance, exactly what joint angle your ligaments bind at is individual, but if you're going in this direction, there is a point where the shoulder ligaments bind and you have to do this. Well that machine forced us in the bound position, so when movement has to happen, it can't happen at the shoulder because you're pinned in the seat. It was happening in your elbow. It might not be the same with everybody, but that is how the model works.Adam: So getting back to your client on the leg press, like for instance — you can play with different positions too.Mike: Well the thing is, I'm trying to decipher some of — trying to find where the issues may be. A lot of times I think that the client probably just — maybe there's some alignment issues, IT bands are tight or something like that, or maybe there's a weak — there can be a lot of different little things, but the machines are perfect and symmetrical, but you aren't. You're trying to put your body that's not through a pattern, a movement pattern that has to be fixed in this plane, when your body kind of wants to go a little to the right, a little to the left, or something like that. It just wants to do that even though you're still extending and flexing. In my mind and

New post from The eCommerceFuel Blog: If you can't beat them, join them. Amazon FBA is a natural next step to help you grow your business. But sending out your first shipment can be ripe with potential problems. On today's episode, we've got a novice and a pro weighing in on the intricacies behind FBA, including the differences between a UPC, FNSKU, and an ASIN, along with expert tips for optimizing your FBA experience and nailing it right from the get go. Subscribe:  iTunes | Stitcher (With your host Andrew Youderian of eCommerceFuel.com and Bill D'Alessandro of RebelCEO.com) Andrew: Welcome to the eCommerceFuel podcast, the show dedicated to helping high six and seven-figure entrepreneurs build amazing online companies and incredible lives. I'm your host and fellow eCommerce entrepreneur, Andrew Youderian. Hey, hey, guys, Andrew here and welcome to the eCommerceFuel podcast. Thanks so much for tuning in today. And today on the show, talking about how to not screw up your first inbound shipment to FBA, something I don't have any experience with. I've got a shipment of goods coming in that I'm going to be sending to FBA for the first time and figured who better else to grow with questions about this, for my own benefit and hopefully yours as well, other than Mr. Bill Dalessandro, the man behind Rebelceo.com and Elements Brands. Bill, how's it going? Bill: It's going well, man. It's great to be back on the show, as always. Andrew: Yeah. I feel like it's been...I don't know if it was just the holidays or the New Year, but I feel like it's been a while. Bill: Yeah, the ECF Live and holiday hangover. It kind of all ran together. Big Goals for 2016 Andrew: Quickly before we jump into this one, any big plans for 2016? Or did you like sit down and have a big kind of pow wow with yourself to really plan out the year? Are you big on the New Year's resolutions things? I know we're talking about this much after the New Year, but... Bill: So I'm not big on the New Year's resolution thing, but I am big on planning for the year and setting goals. So I sat down with all my employees. We're trying something new this year, and we're doing bonus programs. So we sat down with all the employees, and I set six goals for each of them for the year. I set up a bonus pool of 12% of each of their salaries, and each goal was worth 2% of their salary as a bonus. So everybody has sort of six goals for the year for 2016 hanging above their desk, and if they hit all six goals they get a 12% bonus at the end of the year. So as a way, something new I'm trying this year to...and I made some of the goals were monetary. They were hit a certain number. For my salesperson like a certain number in wholesale sales, or for my eCommerce marketing manager a certain amount of website sales or a certain number of new accounts, new products in stores, or getting a new website launched. So some were monetary, some were more kind of projects that needed to be done. Like we're implementing a new shipping and inventory system. Things like that. So like getting that launched was a goal for my warehouse manager. I basically looked at this list of all these things and said, "Man, if all like 20-something of these things are done by the end of the year, I'll feel really good, and it'll be easily worth me paying everybody a 12% bonus." Andrew: Nice, very cool. One thing we did this year, at least on the eCommerceFuel site was tried to focus more. I mean, we've got kind of this dashboard across all of our businesses with a myriad of different metrics. You could come up with 100 probably metrics you could track for a business, if not more. We tried to focus in on three metrics this year. One that was like the overall king metric, and two other kind of secondary ones, but be able to... Bill: What are they? Andrew: For eCommerceFuel, they are the biggest one that we're focusing on is new mem...

BHL: Justice Is Served - In this episode Black Hollywood Live hosts Rahwa Ghebre-Ab and Loni Coombs discuss legal cases for the week of July 25th, 2014. Also joining the conversation is special guest Michael B. Wilson. Rahwa opens up with this weeks 'Case Of The Week' by talking about Investigations, Outrage Follow Police Chokehold and Eric Garner's Death. They then switch to talk about this weeks 'On The Docket' cases by discussing Woman Who Shot Man Over Poor Performance In Bed Granted Bond, Singer Ray J Norwood Charged with Sexual Battery, Vandalism, Resisting Arrest, and Octavia Spencer Headed to Trial Over Weight Loss Endorsement. They wrap things up with the "Tipping Scales" question Renisha McBride Shooting Trial Begins: Fair to Bill It as Sequel to the Trayvon Martin Shooting Trial? [print_gllr id=6501]

Conversation: Bill: I got a new computer yesterday. Robert: You got a new computer? Bill: Yes, a new notebook computer. Robert: Why didn't you get a desktop computer? Bill: The notebook is light, and has a battery, so I can use it anywhere. I can use it on the train or the bus. Robert: Isn't the keyboard too small to use? Bill: It's compact, but I'll get used to it. Robert: I think large keyboards are easier to use than small ones. Also, desktop computers are more powerful than notebooks. Bill: That's true, but my notebook computer is powerful enough for me. Robert: Aren't notebooks more expensive than desktop computers? Bill: Yes, desktop computers are less expensive, usually, but notebook computers are portable. I can use my notebook in any room, and when I'm finished, I can put it away. You can't put a desktop computer away. Robert: That's true, but my desktop computer doesn't take too much space. It's an iMac. Bill: That's a cool computer. I bet my Windows notebook was cheaper than your iMac. Robert: You get what you pay for. Bill: Funny. Let's practice: A: I got a new pet yesterday. B: You got a new pet? A: Yes, a cat. B: Why didn't you get a dog? A: I got a new car yesterday. B: You got a new car? A: Yes, a compact car. B: Why didn't you get a sports car? A: I got a new iPod yesterday. B: You got a new iPod? A: Yes, I got an iPod Shuffle. B: Why didn't you get an iPod Nano? A: I went on a homestay last year. B: You went on a homestay? A: Yes, I went to Ireland. B: Why didn't you go to Australia? www.eltcalendar.com