Podcast appearances and mentions of chris yes

  • 39PODCASTS
  • 89EPISODES
  • 33mAVG DURATION
  • ?INFREQUENT EPISODES
  • Apr 9, 2025LATEST

POPULARITY

20172018201920202021202220232024


Best podcasts about chris yes

Latest podcast episodes about chris yes

Building Texas Business
Ep089: Dig World's Rise with Jacob Robinson

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 9, 2025 31:34


In this episode of the Building Texas Business Podcast, I sit down with Jacob Robinson, the founder of Dig World, a construction-themed amusement park. Jacob's journey from owning a commercial cleaning business to launching a theme park was inspired by his son Pierce's courage in overcoming a severe illness. Jacob shares how this personal experience drove him to create a space where families can make lasting memories by operating real construction equipment. We also explore Jacob's unexpected invitation to appear on Shark Tank, which initially seemed too good to be true. Jacob describes the rigorous preparation process for the show and how securing a deal with Robert Herjavec provided significant exposure and credibility for Dig World. This experience sparked interest in franchise opportunities nationwide, propelling the business forward. However, Jacob's path has not been without challenges. He reflects on the operational setbacks faced during Dig World's grand opening and the importance of resilience in entrepreneurship. Jacob emphasizes learning from these failures and the need to be patient and ready for success. Throughout the episode, Jacob discusses his leadership evolution, focusing on servant leadership and building a passionate, customer-focused team. He highlights the importance of creating a culture of trust and creativity to ensure a safe and memorable experience for all visitors. Jacob remains committed to expanding DigWorld while offering an affordable alternative to traditional family outings. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS I discussed Jacob Robinson's inspiring journey from running a commercial cleaning company to founding Dig World, a construction-themed amusement park inspired by his son Pierce's battle with a severe illness. Jacob shared the story of how an unexpected email invitation led to his appearance on Shark Tank, which resulted in a significant deal with Robert Herjavec and propelled Dig World into the national spotlight. We explored the challenges faced during Dig World's opening day, highlighting the operational setbacks that resulted in temporary closure and how these experiences taught valuable lessons about patience and readiness. Jacob explained the development of custom technology to enhance safety and functionality in the park's machinery, ensuring a secure and manageable experience for visitors operating real construction equipment. We discussed the importance of building a passionate and customer-focused team, emphasizing a culture of creativity and care that enhances the visitor experience and supports the company's mission. Jacob described his evolution from a fear-driven leadership style to one centered on servant leadership, focusing on resilience and motivating his team positively through setbacks. As Dig World plans for expansion, Jacob remains committed to offering an affordable, enriching alternative to traditional family outings, while also contemplating new mascots and improvements to machinery safety. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Dig World GUESTS Jacob RobinsonAbout Jacob TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: Jacob, I want to welcome you to Building Texas Business. Thanks for taking time to come on the podcast. Jacob: No, thank you. I'm so honored to be here. Chris: So we can see from behind you. You know Dig World's your company. Take a minute to tell the listeners what Dig World is. What do you do? What are you known for? Jacob: Yeah, great question. So we are a construction theme park where we allow kids and adults to operate real construction equipment. So we let them drive real skid steers, real excavators, real UTVs would take you up and boom lifts, the whole deal. And the only thing is you need to be three years old or older. And so we truly are a fun family theme park, but we allow you to operate real construction equipment. Chris: Wow, I mean, that's amazing Real construction equipment. I can't wait to get into more of the details behind that, but first I have to ask you what was the inspiration to start a company like this? Jacob: Yeah, it's crazy. You don't wake up with a dream every day to start a construction theme park. Chris: Yeah, maybe a construction theme park, but not one where a three-year-old can operate. That's right. Jacob: That's fair? That's fair? Well, no. So we, my wife and I, were blessed. We have three amazing kids. We have nine-year-old, a five-year-old and almost a two-year-old, and so life is good and hectic right now. But my nine-year-old son, pierce, was born in 2015, a happy, healthy baby boy, and life progressed just normally and just fine. And then, in 2017, one morning on a Saturday morning, my wife found him in his crib unconscious and after rushing him to the hospital, we learned that he had contracted bacterial meningitis. We weren't sure if he was going to make it through the weekend, but the Lord had different plans. He was in a coma 12 days and we were in the hospital 75 days. And when we left the hospital, pierce left with a whole host of issues he's nonverbal, he's epileptic, he's deaf in both ears, you know, wheelchair and mental capacity of call it maybe a one-year-old, but but he is a happy little boy and, as I was telling somebody else, you know Pierce sees the world the way that we should all see the world. He doesn't see your skin color. He doesn't see your income. He doesn't see what car you drive. As long as you hang out with them, you've, we could bring people together. You know, you conceptually always understand that life is short, but when you're faced with something like that, you really understand that life is short and precious and so you want to bring people together and create memories and have good times and not just look up and say, man, all I did was work for 40, 50 years. And here I am, and so we had this idea. You know, as I told somebody, we're pretty good arrogant Texans. We thought we could build a theme park. It couldn't be that hard, right. And man, we were wrong and we'll get into that, I'm sure, at some point in the show. But Pierce's always loved construction equipment garbage trucks, dump trucks, really thinking that whole, everything in that category. And so we said, hey, we really think we could build a theme park where kids could actually come and operate real construction equipment. And for the listeners out there, some of you may be thinking, oh, this must be some toned down version. No, these are real. These are 3027s, these are 305s, these are 243 skid steers, and so these are the real deal that we have re-engineered to where it's safe, but these are the real deal that you get to operate the park. So that's how we got started. Pierce is the inspiration behind the park, the inspiration behind really a lot of things that I do in life, and bringing people together to create memories that last a lifetime. Chris: My gosh, I mean what? I mean? That's a mic drop story, jacob. I mean, you know, blessings to you and Pierce and your whole family. I hope to get the chance to meet him one day. Yes, he's the coolest member of our family. So, yes, that is amazing. So, wow. I love the inspiration and the story and this whole idea of bringing people and families together for those memories. So were you in the construction business when you started this, or what? Jacob: were you doing? I would say yes and no. I had a commercial cleaning company. I started in 2015. That was my job. We just recently sold that business and where we started that business was in the construction cleaning space. So anytime a general contractor would go and build a big building or a hotel or an office building, we would come in, we would work for the general contractor and we would do the final clean on that building. So I was kind of in the construction space. We, you know we answered to GCs all day, but I am not a construction guy by trade. I was an ag major at Texas A&M, so I was a janitor turned theme park guy. So it's been a very interesting career, as you can ask my CPA wife from all the meandering roads that we've taken. Chris: Yeah, so you know we're on inspiration. So then let's yeah, let's kind of dig into what a lot of entrepreneurs and business owners you know face is that first step right Of actually getting the courage to, to chase that dream. So let's take us back to that. What was that like? You know what were, you know what were the first steps like, what were the feelings? Like? How'd you convince that CPA wife that you know CPA wife that this wasn't quite as crazy as it sounded? Jacob: Yes, I'm not sure, when we crossed that line that the craziness went out the window. We may have been there for a couple of years, but I would say to those entrepreneurs out there it's easy to say and it's cliche to say, but everybody sees the end of the story, everybody sees Dig World. Now We've been open, we're on Shark Tank, we're franchising. You know everybody's going ah, great idea. Listen, that was not the case when we first started. We went back and counted. I had roughly 248 pitch meetings where they told me no, that I was crazy, it was never going to work. Nobody's ever going to come to this, nobody's. You know, it's not safe All these kinds of things. And so 248, it's a lot of meetings. It's a lot of meetings. It's a lot of no's. It's a lot of no's. To keep coming home and go, no, it was a good meeting. It was a good meeting. What did they give you? Money? Not at all, quite the opposite, but it was a good meeting, right? And so to those entrepreneurs out there that you, you, if you're pounding your head against the pavement and going, man, if one more person tells me no, hey, I've been there with you, I know what that's like. Keep pressing on, keep going. If you have the vision and you have the conviction behind it, I promise you, at some point you are going to find somebody that believes in your vision for no other reason than you've just been at it for so long and you've got conviction behind it that somebody will take a flyer on you. But it was difficult. It was difficult. We started in 2019, and then COVID hit right, and so we told people not only were we the crazy theme park people running around asking people to invest, but then we were the crazy people saying hey, listen, not only are we going to build it, we're going to get a whole bunch of people together. And that messaging wasn't going over very well during COVID, and so you know, we had all of these factors that were not going in our favor. And then, finally, in 21, in 2021, we had a first couple of people start to say yes, and then Domino's started to fall, and then we opened in March of 2022. And, frankly, that was an epic failure, too, that we can talk about as well, but it was a long journey. It was a long journey, and so my encouragement to those that are out there, either on that journey or those that are at the beginning of that journey is take a step, just take a step. Right, do something. Just call somebody and say your dream out loud, right? Call somebody and say hey, listen, I'm going to let a three-year-old drive a skid steer. Right, and the more you start to say it out loud, the better that muscle is going to become being flexed. And then, all of a sudden, you're going to be the confident person that walks in the room and goes no, yeah, of course we're going to put a three-year-old on skid steer. We're going to let them drive an excavator. We're going to have birthday parties here, and then, hey, guess what they? But that theme of just take the step, just do it just go for it. Chris: No one's ever going to believe it as much as you do, so you got to have that passion and belief and eventually you will find someone to get behind you, and then it's on you to deliver. Right, that's right, that's right, that's exactly right. So I do want to get to the story on the opening, but I have to ask you mentioned it earlier, so how did the Shark Tank thing come about? How did you, how'd you wind up on Shark Tank? Let's talk a little bit about that experience and what that was like. Jacob: Yeah, an amazing experience, you know, it just was fantastic all around. An exhausting experience nonetheless, but it was a fantastic experience. You know, we were very blessed. One day I was sitting at my computer and we got an email to our info account and said hey, would you consider being on season 16 of Shark Tank? And clearly we thought it was a joke, right, and clearly thought something was going to be hacked if I responded to it. Chris: Don't click the attachment right, that's right, that's right. Jacob: All of a sudden our bank account gets hacked. But it was actually one of the producers. She had seen us on Instagram and said, hey, listen, would you be interested? Let's learn more about your business, see if it checks a lot of these boxes. And then that started the whole process. And the process is rigorous and it's long, and your fate hangs in the hands of people that you never get to see or talk to. And you know it goes from one lawyer to another lawyer. None of those lawyers have talked to each other, and so the whole process is very interesting. And then you know the show is true. It's true to form. The only thing scripted about the show is the very beginning pitch that you give, and other than that, it's a free for all. The Sharks don't know about your business, they don't have a flyer on your business, they haven't been given any information. It's truly a live pitch pitching again when I'm like, hey, no, hold on, we got the park open, I don't need to pitch anybody again. Plenty of people have told me no, I don't need, you know, five people on national television to blast me and tell me no. But so when we got there, we did the pitch and we were very blessed it went well. We secured a deal from Robert Herjavec, the tech entrepreneur on the show. He's one of the staple sharks and it's just been a great experience and once there's one of those things that you look up and you really have to sit in the fact that it's one of those once in a lifetime crazy things. And even yesterday I was driving to the grocery store and I sat there and I was like man, this really happened. That's crazy and just trying to enjoy those moments. Chris: Well, and it has to be. I mean, it's great that it worked out and you got, you know, some additional investment from a very seasoned person, but just the notoriety of being on right Open, you know, a lot of eyes to you and had to, you know, you know, increase traction and interest in what you were doing. Jacob: Totally. I think, from even, just you know, foot traffic to the park here in Katy. That that's been tremendous. But then even, obviously, you know we went on the show to sell franchises. That that's our next big hurdle is selling franchises across the country and we have been flooded with requests of franchises to bring people, you know, bring a park to their location, their city. Talking to potential franchisees, it really just just totally gasoline on the fire. Chris: Yeah. So let's go back to the opening. You said March 2022. One of the things I like to talk to people about is let's talk about a failure that you've encountered and most people will tell you can do a whole show on them, right. Literally, I was going to say you don't have enough time on this, but you know you shared that. I guess the opening didn't go so well or something around that. So let's talk about what were some of the failures around that. What did you learn that made you better going forward? Jacob: That's right. You know, I tell people one day when I'm, when I give it, when I give a speech one day at a theme park conference, I'm going to be able to tell people I'm one of the very few theme park operators in the world that has opened a theme park and closed it the same day because it went so poorly. And so you know, I do have that badge of honor with me. So we opened the park too soon and that was a hundred percent my fault, right you too soon, and that was 100% my fault, right? You're trying to you build in these parameters in your head. We got to open this date. We got to do this. You know people are waiting and I really wanted it to be open that Thursday of spring break back in 2022. Could I have waited 48 hours more and would that have fixed our problems? Yes, did I? No, and I think a lot of it was. You know, we had been at this for four years. At this point, we were exhausted and here was the finish line. The finish line was on Thursday and we could do this and everybody's gonna love it. Tickets were sold out there. There was plenty of buzz. You know we were being interviewed from broadcaster. You know I was on NPR and we're doing this interview in this country and all over the US, and there was so much media attention. We had helicopters circling over the park doing filming, getting ready for the opening, and when we opened, man, it was an epic disaster, and the reason it was is I pushed the grand opening. All of our machines were not ready. We had not put on our technology of all the machines, not that we were letting people operate those machines, but we did not have enough time built in to put a computer on this machine, and then this machine, and then this machine. And so what happened is we opened the park to hundreds and hundreds of people and we didn't have that many machines going, and so those hundreds and hundreds of people waited in line for hours and it was just disastrous. And people were angry at me, rightfully so. People wanted to tell me what they thought about me, and rightfully so. The amount of refunds that we issued that day were it was probably dollar for dollar, we probably made $0 that day or just lost money, and so we had to shut the park down. So so I go on, and we, you know we were open. We were going to be open that Thursday, friday, saturday, sunday, and I just canceled everything and said hey, I'm so sorry, we're not going to be open, we'll refund you your tickets or you can come back whenever you want. And, man, people were so mad at us. They were so mad at us. The news was doing coverage about how Dig World closed in less than 24 hours and it was a disaster, an epic failure. And so you know you go home that night and something you had been working for four years, there was no, nothing good about it. There wasn't even. There was no silver lining, like you could be, like well, but no, it was terrible and kids left crying. I mean, just like I said, just terrible. And my wife will tell you that, looking back on that night, she goes hey, I thought I lost you mentally that night, like I thought you were so down in the dumps that night that I didn't know where we were going to go from here. And yeah, I remember the next day waking up, I was trying to, I was going to take my son on a walk and I remember getting halfway out of the neighborhood and having to turn around, got to go back into the office. We've got to go on the offensive here and really try to say hey, listen, we're sorry, let's own the mistake right. Hey, we opened too soon, please come back. And so I think you look at it right and it just was one of those epic failures, and we've had many more along the way, right? Advert Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom, and thanks for listening to the show. Jacob: I was thinking of just trying to figure out how to run a theme park, and we've never run a theme park, but that was one. That's an easy recall when somebody asked me to talk about failure. Chris: Right, like you almost were there right Reliving it that day. Jacob: Oh man yes. Chris: Well, the lesson, though, in that you found the positive and I think it's true in so many different circumstances. We're all going to make mistakes, right, we've made them in the past. One thing certain we're going to make them again in the future, it's owning it right, be this, taking ownership of it, and then kind of committing to do better. I think when you do that, you know what, more times than not, what comes from that is grace. You know people grace to you, and I think that's what it seems like what you've experienced. Right, you owned it, so we're going to do better. The community gave you grace, and when you open back up, they came. Jacob: I think don't pass the blame, Even honestly, even if it's not really your blame, right? People want somebody to stand up and say, hey, it's on me, and I think we don't see that a lot of times in leadership throughout you know, whatever. But people willing to say, hey, that was on me, I'm gonna raise my hand, that was on me. And then the key is forgetting quickly and moving on right and not dwelling which, whatever you do, operate out of imagination, not memory. Right, Don't go back there, sit in those failures operate out of imagination, not memory. Chris: That's a good one. I haven't heard that one before I'm writing it down. Jacob: I would like to take credit for it, but somebody much smarter than me said it, so yeah, right. Chris: So I want to talk a little bit about technology and innovation because, I mean, I know these are, you know, big machinery used out in the construction. There's nothing really innovative about them, but it seems to me that using them in your theme park has to have some innovation and technology to make them safe, as you've described them. So you know, tell us about that. How did you come up with it or did you, or where did you find it? Jacob: it? Yeah, great question. So, yes, yes, all of the above. I know I did not come up with it, I'm not smart enough to write code, but we partnered with an engineer and we said hey, listen, this is what we want to do. We believe this can happen. And what we did, in simplistic terms, we built our own computer to put onto the back of the machine. That goes into its wiring to override a lot of the functionality of it. And so when we call it dig world mode, when the computer's in dig world mode, it is safe. The excavators are stationary, they can't go forward and backwards, they only go certain degrees to the right and left and up and down. Our skid steers are heavily governed, the hydraulics and a lot of functionalities are disengaged. We have kill switches and then we can flip the computer back to normal mode and it's a normal functioning machine. And so really, coming alongside a bright engineering team and building this technology that's our technology and putting it on these machines is really outside the box kind of stuff. And finding somebody that wanted to dream alongside with us was the key to success there. And he's still dreaming alongside with us. I mean he had made a technology upgrade this past week. That's one of those things you look at and you go why didn't we do that three years ago? That makes things a lot, you know not safer, they were very safe it makes it simpler for our team to utilize, and so we're always improving. I think that's the other thing. You know you hear it all the time as an entrepreneur, but as a business owner, one of the things that's very easy to do is get stuck in a rut and go well, we've always done it that way, right? I had a call with my business partner this morning and he's newer to the team and he said well, why are we doing that? And I was like well, honestly, I don't know if we've ever asked that question. I think we've just done it and let's try something new here. And knowing that you don't always have the right answers, and your teammate you may have a high school kid that works for you, like I do that comes to you and goes hey, why, why aren't we doing it like this? Could we do it like this? And you go it's a genius idea, let's do it that way. Yeah, and being okay and putting your pride aside and saying let's change and adapt. Chris: Right. So you're clearly kind of in the entertainment business. Let's talk about building a team right, because I think I mean clearly you've got an internal team there, I guess in the office that's got to run the company, some creativity around it, but then you have another team, that's, you know, customer facing. How have you gone about building kind of each of those teams to try to maximize the company's success? Jacob: Yeah, it's a great question, Thank you. I would say, yeah, our two teams I'd almost kind of say like our corporate team. Right, our corporate team is the X's and O's business focus. How do we grow the franchises? How do we optimize the P&L? And really the key to success there is not to overstate cliches, but like go hire somebody smarter than you and go hire somebody that is great at your weaknesses and then give them the reins to run it. I don't go in your lane, you know how to run it. I trust you explicitly. I've given you the keys of the kingdom because if not, if I'm just going to micromanage you, then why would I even have you on my team? That's demeaning to you. I'm going to end up doing the work anyways because I'm a control freak. So I'm going to go hire somebody that really knows what they're doing and say go, do it right. Or my business partner he oversees a lot of different things, but one of them is the marketing, and today he said hey, listen, do we want to spend here? Do you want to spend here? I think the answer is here. Yep, let's go there right, if you think that's interview going. Hey, this is what we sleep and breathe here. We love the customer, we love that people are here. We're going to love on them and we're going to make memories. Can you do that? And that's what I'm going to hire and fire against. If I see you out there and you're not loving on customers and you're not creating memories that last a lifetime, we're going to ask you to leave. But that's what you know from the beginning. We're going to hire and fire against. Do we love people and are we serving them well? And if we do those things, we're going to build a culture that people start to talk about. And every team meeting that we have, I kick off of hey, today we're going to love people and today we're going to think outside the box, and I know you had, you know, a long week at school. I'm asking you from nine to five today to dig deep and love on people because and when you really frame it up, we get to be a part of something so special and so unique. We get to really be a part of this kid or this family's memory bank, and hopefully in a good way. Right, there are going to be hundreds and hundreds of kids for the rest of their lives that are able to say man, when I was five I had my birthday party at this place called Dig World and I got to drive a real excavator. They're gonna tell that story for their whole life. We get to be a part of that. How humbling is that. And so when you really can set the picture for these kids, what we're doing here is not just a job. We're not here today to collect tickets and put you on a machine and say thank you for coming. We are ingraining ourselves into your memory bank, and when we can take that on in the privilege of that, then, man, we can really sky's the limit. Chris: Yeah, well, I could see if you get that light bulb to go off and kind of in any employee, right, it changes the whole dynamic, the mindset and luckily those high school kids I got to believe they're learning great life skills to have to deal with people on the fly. And that's what we do every day. Right, we're dealing with people as we as they come to us, and so that's exactly right. Jacob: And get to teaching that, hey, the customer's not always right Sometimes. You know we can stand our ground every now and then too, and so really, yeah, how do we handle conflict with each other? How do we handle conflict with a customer? You know those are skills that are in an online day and age are becoming less and less, so how do we actually stand in front of another human being and say, hey, listen, I know you're frustrated, let's figure out how we can work through this kind of deal. So hopefully we're teaching them things that can go far beyond Dig World. Chris: Yes, for sure. So we're here in Texas. You started this business here. Tell me some of the things that you found, or have found, to be advantageous about being a Texas-based business. Jacob: Oh man, so many, one. Obviously. Just the people right, the people buy in and they love it. They love supporting the business, they love supporting what we're trying to do here. And so, culturally, it's amazing to be here in Texas. We were fortunate when we started we had a partnership with Texas A&M, my alma mater and so I'm a little biased there but really getting their buy-in, and a university that saw what we were trying to do and said, hey, listen, let's go capture the next generation of construction workers and teach them about Texas A&M. Yes, but let's also teach them about this great industry of construction. And then really, just the flexibility of Texas. You know there's not many states you can just go out and, for the first and foremost, be like, hey, listen, we're going to start a theme park and it's going to let kids operate construction equipment, right, the flexibility and you know we went through the whole rigmarole and everything with insurance and the filings, but really the adaptability of the state and going, yeah, that sounds great, let's do that. And then everybody behind it. It's just, it's been amazing. Chris: That's great. So I'd like to talk about leadership, and you know you're clearly, as a founder and CEO, leader, but how do you think those leadership qualities have developed over time and how would you describe your leadership style? Jacob: Yeah, I tell people a lot of times I think there's two versions of Jacob as the leader. There is pre-Pierce getting sick and then there's post-Pierce getting sick. Not that the goals have changed. The goals are still. Listen, you're running a business. You got to make money and you got to keep the doors open right At the end of the day. That's the name of the game. But mindset around those have changed. The intensity around that has changed and the bigger picture around that has changed. So, for example, pre Pierce getting sick and our cleaning business, we lose a contract. I'm pretty frustrated. I'm probably a little panicky. We're getting a little desperate on how do we replace that contract. I'm driving the team harder. What are we selling? I'm micromanaging more because I'm feeling nervous and anxious. Right, post Pierce getting sick, the intensity is not gone, but the priorities are going hey, we lost the contract, okay, let's go home, let's reset. Tomorrow, we'll find another one. There's another one out there, let's go find another one. Right, and motivating the team that way, instead of fear-based whether it be my fear or the fear I'm instilling rather than going hey, we'll be fine, we're gonna keep doing what we're doing. We're gonna keep doing the X's and O's of the business and it will be there. And so I think, when failure of a grand opening and a grand closing comes, you go. Okay, listen, today was not a good day, today was a terrible day. However, I'm still here, my family's still here, and tomorrow we're going to figure out how we survive this and we're going to pick up and we're going to go to work tomorrow and we're going to figure it out, and then I think, at the end of the day, I'm a servant leader. I hope our high school kids see me doing things that I asked them to do. I hope they see me cleaning the bathrooms. I hope they see me doing this, not to manipulate them to saying, hey, you know, oh, jacob's doing it, I should go do it. No, I want you to see that we're all in this together, right, and I believe in it this much that I'm going to get in here with you and I'm not going do at that point is they go? Yeah, I'll go clean the bathrooms, right, and hey, jacob asked me to do it, I'll go do it because I know he would do it right, rather than the dictator style leadership or the authoritarian style leadership. So I think for me it's coming alongside them, servant leadership, getting in the trenches, dealing with the disgruntled customers and not just making them deal with it, all of those kinds of things, I think. Build in the goodwill with the team and they see somebody that wants to link arms with you, and then what it allows me to do is come alongside them on those times where I either have to discipline or I have to recorrect or reposition, and they go. Ok, I know. But I know at the end of the day, he loves me. I know at the end of the day, it's the best, even if he's firing me. You know at the end that you, moving on, I'm still going to be in your corner, and so I think I view my leadership in those two ways. Chris: I like that. I can identify with it as well, feel the same way. To me the servant leadership is so valuable, right? Your employees have to believe not only they've seen you do it, not that you will do it, they've seen you do it right, and that when you ask them to do it it's important and so that's great. You know, just thinking about the obviously a lot of stuff going on in our world and in any kind of different ways. But you know economically, you know legislatively, what are some of the headwinds, given all that that you kind of see facing dig world as you're kind of looking out over the next 30, 60, 90, 120 days, year, kind of yeah, yeah. Jacob: It's a great question. I would answer it two ways. One you know, as we look at the economics of our park and people coming to our park, you know what we feel like is we sit in that middle or probably lower to middle ground of your discretionary spending as a family, meaning. Meaning, as I compare it to a Disney right, and when the economy goes down a little bit or people are a little worried or nervous, the Disney vacation may go on the back burner. Right, because that's a significant financial investment into that. It's a great experience, but it's significant. Where we fall is on the lower end of that category, hopefully delivering the same memories and experiences and fun and joy, but the price point is significantly cheaper than that. So we feel in good times and in rougher times we hope to be a resource that allows those families to still create memories in that regard. Externally, as we look to grow franchises, the ups and downs of the economy can sway different investors. They can sway how they want to hold their money, what they want to do with their money, what they don't want to do with their money. Now my sales pitch to those individuals are hey, you could take your money and put it over here, or you could take your money and put it over here and you could kind of be in control of it, but you also can create something that's bigger than you for your community, for your family, things like that. So it it will be interesting to see what the next probably call it 120 days have in store for us as far as how we're received on the investment side. But right now, our focus on this phase one is how do we get five franchises across the finish line, and right now, praise the Lord, we're very close to hitting that number. And then we got to get them open and we have to produce right. Chris: At the end of the day, you have to produce and I understand you have two open now or the second one's about to open. Dallas will be open by the end of this year. That's correct. Okay, that's great. So I gotta ask. I mean, you're talking about disney, made me think. Do you have some kind of mascot or anybody like in a big suit when you show up at dig world? You know? Jacob: so. But he said I literally got off a phone call earlier we are, we've honed it into kind of two mascots that we want, and so that will be released soon once the debate can be decided within our team of which way we're going. Chris: Okay very good. So let's just kind of turn to a little more casual side. Yeah, you said you and Katie went to A&M. I'm taking those two data points and making an assumption you're a born and raised Texan, it's a great question. Jacob: It's a great assumption, but no, I am a son of a healthcare executive, and so I was born in Alabama, raised all over Texas, graduated high school in South Carolina, then came to A&M, met my wife, who is a Houstonian, who's a Katie girl and much smarter than I am, and so she had a real job after college, and so I followed her here and I've been here ever since. Chris: Okay, Great story. So just talking about Texas, you know you all have a favorite spot. You like to go within the state to get away, maybe vacation time. Jacob: Yeah, you know it's funny whenever, within the state, melissa and I we love to head over to San Antonio. We love the Hill Country side. We like a couple of the resorts there. That's our, our getaway. And then I think you know when we're getting away. Now we've got young kids. Grandparents and cousins and nephews live in waco and so we head over to waco. We spend a lot of time there. But if melissa and I are just getting away and staying in the state, we're gonna head probably over to san antonio very good. Chris: That leads me to the next question then do you prefer tex-mex or barbecue? Jacob: oh man, that's. Oh man, see that one. That's a tricky question because we'd have to be like specific in the subcategory right. Like'd have, we'd have to like pit two against each other. Chris: I hear you. Everyone says that that's the hardest question saved for last. Jacob: Oh, my goodness, I'm going to have to go barbecue. I'm going to have to go barbecue. Chris: All right, all right. I love how you're going to break it down, though, cause I'm the same way. You know. It's like. Well, I don't know, it depends, I mean it depends it just. Jacob: You know, on Friday night this weekend I had Tex-Mex. On Saturday I had barbecue. So you know like it literally is, but I'd have to go barbecue. Chris: All right, very good. Well, jacob, thank you again for taking time to come on the podcast. I mean your story, obviously from the start of it with Pierce, was amazing, but just such a creative, unique thing that you've created. And you know, just wish you the best of success, thank you. Thank you, honored to be here today. Thank you for taking time Special Guest: Jacob Robinson.

Building Texas Business
Ep086: Exploring Houston's Economic Horizons with Brian Freedman

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 12, 2025 35:58


In this episode of The Building Texas Business Podcast, I spoke with Brian Freedman, president of the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership, about the region's economic development. We explored the five major industry clusters shaping the area: maritime logistics, aerospace, tourism, healthcare, and petrochemicals. Brian shared updates on aerospace innovations at Ellington Field, including projects by Intuitive Machines and Axiom, while highlighting new opportunities in defence manufacturing. I learned about Project 11, an initiative to expand the Houston port's capacity for larger vessels. Brian explained how this infrastructure project connects to the broader transportation network, particularly the role of trucking in regional commerce. We discussed how the partnership works with legislators and industry leaders to address challenges like insurance costs and maintain economic momentum. The conversation shifted to leadership approaches and team dynamics in Texas business. Brian described how maintaining diverse projects keeps his team engaged and motivated. We explored how the Houston area supports entrepreneurs through community partnerships and mentorship programs while adapting to technological changes like AI integration. Our discussion wrapped up with a look at workforce development in the region. Brian explained how educational partnerships are building talent pipelines across industries. We covered the importance of aligning training programs with business needs while fostering collaboration between municipalities, educational institutions, and industry partners. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS In this episode, I spoke with Brian Freedman, president of the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership, about the economic development in the Houston Bay Area, focusing on the recruitment, retention, and expansion of primary employers. We discussed the significant industry clusters in the region, including maritime logistics, aerospace, tourism, healthcare, and petrochemicals, and their impact on the area's economic growth. Brian highlighted developments at Ellington Field, including contributions from companies like Intuitive Machines and Axiom, as well as the emerging opportunities in defense manufacturing and procurement. The episode explored the scale and impact of the Houston port, emphasizing Project 11's role in expanding the port's capacity and the importance of logistics and innovation for regional prosperity. We delved into the leadership style necessary for motivating teams and managing diverse projects, underscoring the Texan entrepreneurial spirit characterized by ambition and a collaborative approach. Brian shared insights on the vibrant business ecosystem in Texas, driven by a skilled workforce, affordability, and a supportive community fostering partnerships and mentorship opportunities. Finally, we addressed challenges like insurance costs and the importance of regional solidarity, as well as efforts to mitigate natural disaster risks and promote responsible development in the area. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About BAHEP GUESTS Brian FreedmanAbout Brian TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In this episode you will meet Brian Freedman, president of the Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership. Brian shares how his organization works to recruit, retain and expand primary employers in the greater Houston Bay Area region. Brian, I want to welcome you to Building Texas Business. Thanks for joining us today. Brian: Hey, thank you, Chris. Honored to be here and great to catch up. Chris: Yes, likewise. So let's start with you. You're the president and the organizational name's kind of long it's Bay Area, houston Economic Partnership. Tell the listeners a little bit about what that organization is and what it does, to kind of put the rest of our conversation into context. Brian: Sure, so BayHEP is the short version of it. So we're the Regional Economic Development Group and kind of the, as I like to say, in the Houston-Galveston region. We're three o'clock to six o'clock on the watch, face right. So we kind of go out 225, all the municipalities and cities going out east and then going down south 45. We go a little west of 45, but really that 3 o'clock to 6 o'clock and we're really focused on how do you recruit, retain and expand primary employers in the region with the idea that if you can get great companies located here and have a group of industry clusters that are cranking away every day, that we can have a great place to live. We have great involved residents that are in this area and opportunities for the folks who live here and kind of build what the future will look like for this region. So a lot of good stuff going on and, happy to get into that a little further, we do economic development, recruitment, retention projects. So how do we get companies here? We do some grants and then we're a membership organization is how we're funded. So we have about 300 members, 19 municipal members, Harrison-Galveston County, the port, the airport system. It's really how do you get the leaders of a region to work together to advance what we're doing here. Chris: Wow, I mean that's it sounds like it's easier to say and harder to do coordinating that many organizations and trying to get everybody pulling the same direction. Brian: Yeah, it's a lot of fun and we get to work with a lot of great folks. That's how we met Chris, is that, you know, through some of our mutual connections. But yeah, you know, it's really when you can get generally like-minded folks thinking about what the future of a region will look like and pretty aligned and working towards that effort, it's more of a well, it's just fun and you can create a lot of impact and we're seeing that and I'll be happy to dive into some of the specific projects we're working down here. But I mean, you guys do it too at Boyer Miller. Y'all are working with clients all over the spectrum of types of industry and you have to adapt to what's coming up, what's at you, and be ready for that kind of stuff. Chris: Yeah, no doubt. So yeah let's jump into some stuff. Let's talk first, because when I think of your area, obviously the first thing that comes to mind is NASA and all that's going on around that, and that leads me to technology and innovation. So what are some of the emerging technologies or trends that you're seeing that are kind of helping shape the future of Texas and kind of the business opportunities, at least in your region and for Texas? Brian: Yeah, so I call it kind of the big five on the industry cluster. So everybody thinks about this area for NASA, which we love right, because it really is a crown jewel out here, but I call it the big five right Maritime and all the associated logistics with the port aerospace and aviation, so nasa, but also the great work that the airport system is doing with ellington and hobby, tourism and recreation, health care and all the hospitals that have campuses down here, and then specialty and petrochemical and the energy industry partners and every one of those ecosystem has a ton of stuff going on. So I'm happy to talk about some of those more granular. But a couple of observations. One is that often overlooked in this community and really an asset to the greater Houston region is Ellington Field, ellington Airport, the Spaceport and, if you haven't seen or heard about it, the work that's going on at the Spaceport. They have three new beautiful buildings. One is occupied by Intuitive Machines who just put the first commercial lander payload on the surface of the moon. One is occupied by a company called Axiom that's building the next generation of commercial spacesuits and the next generation space station, and Collins who do spacesuit design in our building and maintaining the current spacesuits. They've set up huge facilities down there and so new stuff coming on. But I'm equally excited about just across the runway is the 147th Reserve Group. So there's a reserve unit out there, a reserve base, and the defense opportunities are pretty exciting. So that's highlighted by the 147th. But almost every branch has a reserve unit out there, save the Space Force, and we're working on that. And so the opportunities with defense manufacturing to come out to do more work in Houston and some of their innovation units and, as mundane as it sounds, some of the procurement opportunities, because when it comes to contracting, having a group of folks here would be a great opportunity for Houston businesses to then pipeline the work that they're doing into the broader defense industry, which can be really exciting. One other thing I'll mention, chris, is if you just look at the path of predictable growth for Houston, right, it keeps going out and we see that on our freeways every day. So there are growing pains that come with that, but for our region it's that steady march down Interstate 45. And so while Clear Lake Lake City are starting to get to fully built out and we're looking at what is the next generation of building look like, what's redevelopment look like For communities Dickinson, hitchcock, santa Fe, to some extent Texas City. Although they've got quite an industrial complex too, there's still space, and so it really brings up the opportunity of we can handle big projects, and whether they're industrial or tourism, there's a lot of opportunity that comes with that. And so, as folks you know, as we get built out further and further, those cities that were, they've always been important cities for the regional ecosystem, but they become major players, and so it's exciting to be able to work with them on that stuff. Chris: Sounds like a lot of opportunity for real estate development. Both residential, retail, commercial, industrial kind of all sectors are going to be playing a big part in that ongoing development in your region. Brian: Exactly right, and part of the the fun part is, you know, every municipality has different targets of what they view their economic development to look like, and so we get to work with all those cities where some may be really focused on industrial, some may want to be bedroom communities and be focused on residential. Our task is to support those municipalities in this region and identifying good players to bring to the table. So who are people that we do want to partner with that can follow through on the projects that can complete them and make them successful? Chris: That's great. I think I saw recently in the news the state of Texas, I think it's had something along these lines, but it's like a fund for the space-related projects and I know I don't know the name and you'll help me with that, but I seem to recall the governor being in town and making some big announcement right after the first of the year. Tell us a little more about that. Brian: Recall the governor being in town and making some big announcement right after the first of the year. Tell us a little more about that, exactly, right? So last legislative session, primarily spearheaded by State Representative Greg Bonin, who's also a Princewood resident he's a neurosurgeon by day and State Representative Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee during the legislative session he had this kind of vision of how does the state become a major player in the aerospace community. That's been primarily a federal and private industry ecosystem and so under his vision and with support of the state legislature and certainly the governor, they put a bill that kind of outlined a direction for the state to engage and the resources behind it. It does a couple of things. One was it allocated about $200 million that would go to Texas A&M to build this A&M Space Institute, and they've actually located that property. It will be built on the edge of the campus of Johnson Space Center, so for those familiar with this area, right on Saturn Lane. $200 million building and, as A&M's laid it out, it will have a giant lunar rock yard and a giant Mars rock yard, with the idea that everybody who's going to be doing hardware testing to send vehicles to the moon or Mars is trying to figure out where they're going to do that testing. And it's very expensive to build, obviously. And so companies are making the decision whether they're going to build that themselves and own it or go lease it somewhere. And if they're going to lease it, where do you go to find a giant brockyard to simulate the surface of the moon? And well, the state of Texas answered that question. So what was so unique about that vision was that everybody who's in that ecosystem now wants to come through Houston Texas to do that work. And so with that comes the. You know they'll be have their lab space there, but they may need offices, they're going to be hiring people, and so you know it really is an exciting project. They had their groundbreaking right at the end of last year. I've seen surveyors out there and they think they're going to have it open in 2026. So an aggressive timeline to get that bill. The other part to that bill was they appropriated $150 million for a grant program to incentivize sort of space leadership projects in the state of Texas, and so they have to set up a whole, basically administration portion of this. So they selected nine individuals to serve on the Texas Space Commission who will review those proposals and evaluate them and make awards. Who will review those proposals and evaluate them and make awards, and then they'll also help advise the state on how they can keep their leadership position in the space industry. The first of those awards about 20 million were released a little over a week ago. A couple of them were studies for best use for really cool stuff hypersonic corridors where to be landing sites. And then another one that is to build assets and capabilities for the Space Force in El Paso to have more of a Space Force presence in the state of Texas, which is pretty exciting. So I'm optimistic about what's to come for them. Chris: Yeah, that sounds very exciting, especially the concept of the $200 million grant to A&M and what that will do to attract other businesses that might relocate somewhere else and bring them here, and then all the ancillary things around hiring and jobs et cetera. So that's very exciting news and I think it'll be just around the corner. Let's maybe talk a little bit about. You mentioned Maritime and the port, and most Houstonians People know the Houston port is a significant asset for our area. Anything going on there that's new and exciting, any kind of innovation that you see when you're working with those entities and, I guess, the port authority itself. Brian: Yeah, well, maybe the first thing when you talk about the port is you're absolutely right just how important they are to this well, to all of Houston, but to the country I mean. The scale of the port is hard to appreciate when you just look at the numbers. But the numbers are just staggering. The amount of capability that comes through there and the innovation really is on the logistics and management for how they move, whether it's container, you know, container containers, the container terminal organization and how that whole orchestra is operated, and the capabilities from there is that the crane's getting stuff unloaded, then onto the trucks or rail or whatever. The mechanism to get it out and then get it distributed to wherever it's going is pretty incredible, and so we're fortunate to have them. We just hosted the new port CEO, charlie Jenkins, who's a phenomenal leader, has a career in service of the port, is the right guy to lead that organization into their next chapter. But he made this comment kind of in passing that the port's operations are about a $3 billion a day operation, you know, and you just go like a day of economic impact that go into that. The scale is really something impressive and that's all the trickle out and secondary effects. But it's amazing, the big thing that's going on with them right now is Project 11. That's the deepening and widening of the channel that'll allow additional capacity to go in there, and it's really writing the story for what the next chapter of the port's future is and Houston as a trading hub is, and so it'll allow for larger ships to come through. The additional investments they're making will allow faster turn and movement of all the goods that are on there. So a lot of good stuff going on. I guess the last thing I'll say is anybody who's driven 225 sees all those trucks and I drive it pretty regularly and see that too and as much as nobody likes driving next to a giant 18 wheeler, every one of those trucks is jobs and prosperity for our region, and so the next time you're driving there and you see a hundred trucks going down 225, that's our economic prosperity moving around our region and, candidly, around the country. It's good stuff. Chris: It's a good point. Yeah, I mean it's. You wouldn't want the roads to be empty and no trucks moving. I mean that's not a good sign. So feel blessed that we have all that you know in our area and driving all kinds of different prospects and opportunities for people. So when you are working with, let's talk a little bit about these member organizations and all the different moving parts you know what are you doing? How do you, I guess, keep things organized and people kind of moving in the same direction? Just, I would think that in itself is a full-time job. Brian: Yeah, it's a lot, but you know it's good stuff. I guess I'll start with a phrase that I kind of live by, which is we have a lot of stuff going on and so we'll find something to get on about. Right, we can always find something to work together on, and so, if you kind of start with that attitude, there's a lot of common issues that really require a lot of work but you can get maybe not perfect alignment, but general directional alignment. And so you know, one of the big issues we're working with right now is insurance. Right, we're all dealing with it. I'm sure you've gotten your insurance bill, but whether it's home or your business insurance, all those things, and so you can find a lot of commonality and ideas about hey, how can we work with our state leaders, potentially our federal leaders, with the insurance companies themselves, to try to manage the cost of doing that and find ways could it be grouping, doing kind of what they do in medical where you can have these larger groups or other mechanisms to try and help mitigate some of the costs? For that I'm getting a little granular, but you can find these little pockets where you can go move the ball down the field and get general alignment and so we spend a lot of time doing that. But we are very fortunate that our membership and generally this is kind of a Texan spirit type thing is hey, how do we go get some stuff done? Right, we want to go work on some stuff we want to go work on together. Generally it's a rising tide mentality and I spent a good portion of my career in industry and there are times where we compete like crazy and that's fun and, you know, makes great products and great opportunities for our customers. There are a lot of times where we need the tide to rise and finding alignment about that we try to be an outlet for that and keep things running. Right Is that we have not a big staff but a staff that can help make sure that. You know, our members are doing a lot of this stuff as volunteers, right, but they're bringing ideas to the table. So how can we make sure that they're staying engaged, that we're checking in on them, that we're helping carry these things and that we're creating a forum to have the right discussions and bring leaders together so we can invite in elected officials over relevant stuff, the right industry players, and bring them to the table and figure out what we can do, and then I guess the last thing I'll say is that manifests itself. We have a very active state legislative agenda. That we're going to be spending a fair amount of time in Austin, federal priorities. That we work with our congressional delegation and then very on the ground working with our municipalities and all the companies that are out down here to make movement. Probably talk all day about little one-offs. Advert Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom. And thanks for listening to the show at boyermillercom. And thanks for listening to the show. Chris: Well it is. You know legislature is in session, so I know that creates a busy time for you. You talked a lot about some of the opportunities and I hope we can talk some more about that, but I do want to ask you at this point what are some of the headwinds that you see you know this region and specifically kind of where you are. You know that could be out there. That you see you know this region and specifically kind of where you are. You know that could be out there that you've got to try to deal with, to get ahead of or navigate through. Brian: I'll start with. It's a great time down here. Just the way that each one of those big five industry clusters is going about is that it's a. You know they're all doing well and have a lot of opportunity that's on the horizon or that they're in the midst of right now, but certainly you know, a few headwinds. One of the things that we're always worried about and we work actively is just natural disaster flood mitigation and storm surge and making sure that we're resilient and prepared for the future, and so the risk from some incident happening. I'm more excited to talk about, when it comes to that, all the things that we're doing to mitigate that. In terms of flood mitigation, the coastal barrier protection work that we've been spending a lot of time on. That's the Ike Dike. It has a lot of names, but most commonly known is that but a system to protect us from storm surge. So one is the risk of natural disaster I don't like it, but it's a real thing, right? The second is that we're in the you know how do we have responsible development? And so when you have a project that comes online, there are, you know, reasonable concerns from citizens saying, hey, is this the best thing to be doing with this piece of land, and so anytime you're talking about a development that's going to take a field and turn it into a thing, people get concerned about that and that's perfectly reasonable for them to be concerned and want to do that. And so part of what I spend time doing is addressing like, hey, here's why this is worthwhile, here's why this funds your local municipality and build more parks so we can have the resources and the tax base that justify expenditures that come elsewhere and make through that. But just the ability for the public's ability to impact development, as it happens, is important. But for them to do that knowing all the ground truth, knowing what the trades are and understanding that, so that if they are concerned about something that they come with that from an educated knowledge base and so that's out there. And then I certainly don't want to get political, but anytime there's an administration change, there's just priorities that get changed. And so we're still waiting to understand all of those. We're kind of watching how things are shaken out in Washington DC and we'll adapt and make sure that we're doing everything we can to put our region in a great posture with whatever those priorities are at the end of the day. Chris: So yeah, to that last point where you're kind of right in throws that change. Right now that's happening pretty fast, so you got to stay on your toes. Let me take you back to the Ike Dike, because that you know something to get after Harvey. Hurricane Harvey got talked about a lot. You don't hear much about it anymore. Any kind of updates for the listeners. That might be curious. Is it really going to happen and, if so, what's really going on down there to make sure it doesn't happen? Brian: And if so, what's really going on down there to make sure it doesn't happen? Yeah, so it's still moving along, you know, and with some enthusiasm. So a couple of big milestones. One is that in December of 22, it became a formal project of the US Army Corps of Engineers. It was authorized by Congress as a project, so that says, you know, they can now go focus on that. And so the next big question becomes how do we pay for it? To answer that, the state stepped up in a big way in the last legislative session and they had previously formed what's called the Gulf Coast Protection District. That is the local entity for that project. That will work with the US Army Corps of Engineers. So that group exists and has monthly meetings. They actually have an office in our suite. We lease an office to them them and they have their meeting in our conference room two out of every three months and then they do a rotation on that. Third, and they've been funded to the tune of about a half a billion dollars from the state of Texas. So they're ready to take significant action. We've been working with our federal partners about identifying where the big dollars come from for that project. It's going to be expensive and it's going to take a long time, but it will be likely done in phases and so that allows it. Where you don't need this one giant tranche of money all at once, you can do it sort of in a series and address the most important aspects of that, like the gates, some of the initial most highly populated areas, in phases. But we got to get federal appropriations for it. So in addition to the state entity being in our office, actually the US Army Corps of Engineers is on the fourth floor of this building and so all of the players for that project are in one building in our area right here, so that when what I'm hopeful for is if Corps moved in about six months ago, anytime an elected leader wants to come down and meet, they'll get every leader for that project in the same building and often meeting in our conference room or one of the core conference rooms. But a lot more can get done. There's sort of the opportunity for water cooler conversations between the state and the fed folks, and so I'm optimistic that the cadence just from that proximity will be helpful to that effort. Chris: Very good, that's good to hear. Let's change conversation a little bit. So, as I said, you're the president of BHEP. You mentioned your staff. Let's talk a little about leadership. How would you describe your leadership style and how do you think that's evolved kind of as you've been in this role? Brian: Yeah, well, I don't know that I can quantify terribly well, but I'm a kind of hey, all hands on deck and let's all just lean into wherever we're going. Right, and I kind of have that expectation of our team that we're have a clear set of priorities generally around the growth of this region and the projects that we're undertaking and that we're just leaning into them all the time and focusing. That I've been. You know I love getting down and into projects and so that's as I've been on this journey. That's been one of the big focus points to me is that you know you need a team to get this amount of stuff done and the size of these projects and the scope and so the ability to trust in the team and lean on them and let them go run with the ball is really important. I've been extremely fortunate that we have a great staff and we have a great membership base that we can lean on to help go bring those things to fruition. But it's a lot of fun coming to work. I think the team has a great time and enjoy the work that we do and you can see the difference that we make because there are buildings. We can point to that, wouldn't, you know, if not for the work of us and the leaders in this community wouldn't be there, and I'm looking forward to seeing that one on Saturn Lane with giant Texas A&M buildings sticking out of it coming through. Chris: It sounds like it's going to be impressive with the rockyards and all. But, you know, it made me think, though your team has a lot on its plate, I would think at times it may feel overwhelming. So, you know, what do you do to kind of help keep the motivation and keep the energy level up for a team that probably, at some points is, you know, starting to get to the end of the rope or run out of gas? Brian: Yeah, diversity of projects and lots of different stuff to work on. I'm guessing and actually I'd kind of turn that question on you, chris, because I can only imagine the type of stress that you guys live under, especially working big cases and big projects. There's one part that is, hey, we're just all in this together, right, and the esprit de corps that comes with. We're tackling big projects and that's just part of what comes with it. But there's another part where you just need to shift gears for a little bit and work on something different and give yourself a little recharge time. But how do you guys deal with it? I'm curious how? Chris: Boyer Miller, yeah that's a fair question to turn around on me. I would say it's similar. I think it's. You know to me that you can't underestimate the power of a team and if you have the right people on the team, there's some self-motivation just within that group, Right. And then I think it is the. We are fortunate to have very diverse type projects. We practice in all industries. So we may be doing a, a deal or a project, but it's in a different industry and there's different nuances that make it exciting. And at the end of the day I think it's the one point you highlighted on you can point to something and we're helping clients achieve their goals. So we can, you know, point to a deal that's been done or, you know, maybe it's a merger of two companies, or one that's grown and now has a new building and doing whatever. But you can point to those successes that you, where you've helped the client achieve, you know something really big for them and their business and their life. And so I think all of that continues the motivation. Yes, sometimes at the end of a big deal, you need just a little bit of a breather, but you just jump right back in and get going. So it makes it fun. Brian: Well, if you'll let me share. So you and I first met in person, had an opportunity to meet at one of your big forums, and that was a bunch of your customers and clients were there, and I love meeting new folks, as you probably saw, and I you know, walking around just saying, hey, I'm Brian, what do you do? And almost every one of them I would ask like, hey. So how do you know Chris, how do you know this group? You know, have you worked with them? And they all had a story. That was exactly that. You know, whatever thing it was that you helped them. We did XYZ project and it was awesome. We use them all the time for all these things. It was just very striking how passionate your customers, your clients, are with the help they've gotten from you guys, and so, anyway, that is extremely commendable and what I've seen from your team has just been amazing. Chris: Well, I appreciate the feedback. It's always good to get that, especially from different sources. So you know, like I think, we're always trying to create raving fans so that they'll keep coming back and tell their friends. So you get a unique seat and I think it's similar. You kind of analogize back to us. I think we get a unique seat to work with Texas entrepreneurs, and that's a pretty cool thing to do, in my view. What's, what would you or how would you describe the Texas entrepreneurial spirit if you could, based on your experience? Brian: Yeah well, I'm a native Texan. I have this hypothesis that part of the reason we're such a proud bunch is that when you go through I don't know if you grew up in Texas, chris but then also this sense of like we can do big things and big audacious things and we can make big asks and ask big questions and go get it done. And so we see a lot of that down here. And so you know, if you were sitting in I'll make this up Iowa and you said you know I want to have a space business and we want to go put hardware on the moon, and you know your neighbors would look at you and kind of scratch their head and in Texas they'd go oh yeah, that's intuitive machines and they're down the street, you should go. You know, go talk to them. They'd love to work with you. So that kind of spirit is really something special. When I was in industry I traveled all over the country working projects. There's something very special about this region, this community, this state, and that translates into why people want to come here. You know we keep Texas and Houston keep winning all these awards for business, new businesses coming here, people moving here, and that's not by accident, it's not by coincidence. It's because we have a great, great story to tell, whether that's workforce and the capabilities, the affordability of being here, the caliber of people you can work with and who your competitors are, and the level of intensity in the game that we play here is high and that creates the right ingredients for a really thriving community, for entrepreneurs, but also for industry any size. Chris: Right, very good. So what advice would you give to entrepreneurs out there that might be looking to start a business, let's say specifically, kind of within your region? If not, maybe beyond that in Houston? What's? Some of the advice you might give them if they wanted to get involved in some of the all the things you've been talking about. Brian: Yeah, dive in. It's a great community and a great ecosystem and there's a reason people are investing here and making a great run at it. We try to make that as easy as it can be. Now it is not easy. There's no illusions that starting a company you know scaling and growing a company all those things are very challenging. So the question I find myself asking I don't know that I'm in a position to give you know this immense amount of wisdom about these things, but what can we as a community and we as an organization be doing to help that entrepreneur? How do we help them build a relationship so that if they're having trouble with a permit, they know who to go ask, who to go talk to If they have a big idea, who might be good partners If they want to bounce something off, a retired executive who they might go talk to about that has the right skillset, so that we can create the conditions for them to be successful? And so that's really how we find ourselves interfacing that ecosystem is how do we put the right players together to go make things happen? Chris: Very good. So the other thing I'm curious to know is what do you see? You mentioned your five big industries. What have you observed of those industries working together to create innovative ideas to help each other? You got to move forward. Brian: Yeah, there's been a lot of. So workforce has been one of the biggest, especially over the last few years, where there's been this really high intensity competition amongst folks. And I wouldn't be surprised if you have been in some of that with, you know, recruiting and retaining high talent attorneys, right Is that? That's been, and so we've spent a lot of time and I've observed a lot of our members in this community go with that as a spirit of, hey, we're not really doing anybody any good If we're just poaching each other's people and you know, and creating pain points and friction between senior executives and those kinds of things. Let's go look at other communities and go figure out hey, what are the best universities and how do we get the professors that are training the students in it to send resumes to our area, right, and that we have a coalition of companies, not just one company has a relationship with one professor and that company benefits from that it's. How do we build that relationship as a community and say to them hey, we have a very strong demand signal, let's work together on things like that and so feeding that workforce pipeline so we're not divvying up the pie, we're growing it. And so, on the workforce side. I hate to be cliche because everybody's talking about AI, but we've had a couple of membership meetings about it. We've been working with partners about integration of it. We've adopted different technologies that have come out of it. But that stuff really, I mean it's the wave that we're living in right now, and so the integration of that into systems, both the how to do it and the mitigation of risk. I think I saw over the weekend that the new DeepSeek had a big not terribly surprised, but had a giant data leak and compromise, and so when you know when you're using that, I can only imagine, chris, I'd be curious how y'all are integrating it. But you know everything you put in there. You got to assume that at some point, somebody you don't want to have access will at least have the opportunity to have access to it, and so you have to be quite careful about how you integrate it. I, just as an aside, how are you guys using it much? Have you all banished it? What's the? Chris: Well, I'd say it's a little bit of both. I mean, we are definitely looking at and finding ways to integrate it. We've adopted a policy, but it starts with, as you mentioned, with us. It starts and stops with maintaining client confidentiality. So there's some systems out there through recognized kind of legal researchers. So Westlaw comes to mind, where they developed AI tool that is solely within their database. So it's secure, it's, it's all legal. You don't have to worry about we were still spot. You still have to check things right the human element of that. But if you're searching, for example, using the AI tool within Westlaw, you don't have to worry about the fake cases you've seen in the news. But our attorneys, you know, if you're going to use it, it has to be approved through the firm which are only a handful. You can't use anything outside and everything has to be double checked by a person to make sure for accuracy, etc. But so it is. I mean, the confidentiality side is a real concern, not just for law firms, for everybody, any company using it, and unfortunately that's just gonna be more and more what we see right. The more that we're moving everything to cloud, you're going to have people coming after it to try to. You know, on the bad side of that and certain countries it's not illegal to be a hacker. So it's just, you know, that's the world we live in now. Yeah Well, you know, brian, this has been a very interesting conversation and the you know, the last time we spoke I came away with the same feeling, and that is, we talked a lot about a lot of opportunity going on in the three to six o'clock region of greater Houston and we didn't even scratch the surface, I'm sure. But my takeaways have been it doesn't matter what industry again, I said earlier, you always kind of automatically think of space and NASA, but it's every type of business you could think of. An industry you could think of Sounds like you've got ample opportunity for businesses and entrepreneurs to start, grow, expand and be there and thrive. Brian: Well, perfectly said, and I think we get a recording. I may use that in some of our promotional material. Chris, that's exactly right. Great time, great place to be and welcome folks to reach out to us to help however we can if they're interested in looking at opportunities down here for that Before I lose you. Chris, one of the favorite questions that you had sent over that I wanted to ask you that you didn't get a chance to ask is what your favorite recreation vacation spot in the state of Texas is. Chris: Well, I'll answer that. I was about to ask you that. I would say if it's kind of a vacation spot in Texas, it would probably be anywhere along the Texas coast to relax a little bit and get some fishing in. Brian: Perfect. Chris: How about you? Brian: We are huge campers, like we love going camping. My kids are eight and 11 and we have state parks pass, and so any day I'm in a state park is a good day for me. But Inks Lake is one of my favorites and McKinney Falls between the two of those. Those are my top two right now, but we've probably been to Keene and we're just checking off the box to hit them all, and maybe we'll upgrade to National Parks as we get a little bit older. But I love our visiting our state park system. They're just absolutely wonderful. Chris: That's great. Okay, last question You're native Texan, so do you prefer Tex-Mex or barbecue? Brian: Oh, I feel like that question is going to get me in trouble, but if you made me choose, I'd pick barbecue. I'll eat it all day, every day, as it shows how about you, how about you? Chris: I think it's a tough one, so I've had some guests. You know, it depends on the day. I probably lean Tex-Mex more than barbecue. But I love the restaurants now that are combining the two, so brisket tacos or brisket nachos or something like that. It's a great combination. Brian: Yeah, there should be an answer all of the above there. Chris: So we're getting close to the rodeo time in Houston, so I have to go with barbecue for now and then back to Tex-Mex, I guess. Brian: Well, I look forward to seeing you at the kickoff event, where we get to go sample a little everything. Deal, that sounds good. Well, I look forward to seeing you at the kickoff event, where we get to go sample a little everything. Chris: Deal. That sounds good. Brian, thanks again for taking the time. Really appreciate your friendship and definitely appreciate what you and your team are doing for all the things business down in the Bay Area. Brian: Well, right back at you, Chris. Thanks for your leadership and all the great work you're doing with your team. Appreciate the opportunity to visit with you today. Thank you. Special Guest: Brian Freedman.

Manager Minute-brought to you by the VR Technical Assistance Center for Quality Management
VRTAC-QM Manager Minute – Fiscal Team Insights-Reflections on Fiscal Challenges and Opportunities in VR

Manager Minute-brought to you by the VR Technical Assistance Center for Quality Management

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 2, 2025 29:41


Join host Carol Pankow in this thought-provoking episode of Manager Minute as she sits down with VR fiscal powerhouses Katie Marchesano, Chris Merritt, Allison Flanagan, and Sarah Clardy. Together, they unpack the pressing fiscal issues shaping the vocational rehabilitation (VR) landscape, including: ·  Navigating fiscal forecasting challenges · Addressing technology gaps · Strengthening collaboration between program and fiscal teams The conversation highlights the vital role of policies, training, and institutional knowledge in sustaining VR programs while anticipating future shifts, such as technological advancements, fiscal constraints, and potential WIOA reauthorization. Don't miss this episode, packed with actionable insights and expert reflections to keep VR programs thriving!   Listen Here   Full Transcript:   {Music} Katie: I'm really excited for that tool to be shared, and I think it's going to be a really helpful tool for the agencies.   Carol: This job takes constant attention to detail in what is happening. It is always going to be work.   Chris: More people are going to be reaching out asking for fiscal forecasting and understanding how to look at this program in the future.   Allison: One of the things that pops in my mind that might happen over the next three years is reauthorization of WIOA.   Sarah: I think we're going to see some new resources, hopefully in the technology world develop, that will assist our agencies so that their focus can remain on the customers where it belongs.   Intro Voice: Manager Minute brought to you by the VRTAC for Quality Management, Conversations powered by VR, one manager at a time, one minute at a time. Here is your host Carol Pankow.   Carol: Well, welcome to the manager minute. Joining me in the studio today are my colleagues Katie Marchesano, Chris Merritt, Allison Flanagan and Sarah Clardy. So this might be a little bit of calamity for our listeners, but we're going to do it. So how y'all doing today?   Sarah: Great   Chris: Great.   Allison: Good.   Katie: Wonderful.   Carol: Awesome to hear it. Well, we have had quite a journey on the QM for the past four years. The fiscal focus was a new aspect of the grant, and we are so grateful to then Commissioner Mark Schultz for realizing that TA in this area was an essential element to the work. And since we're in this final year of the grant, we wanted to have a chance to visit together, share our insights with the listeners into the whole fiscal picture across the VR program, and discuss our perceptions and perspectives. So buckle up, folks, and we're going to dig in. So I want to start with how you each found your way to VR. And I'm going to start with Chris to talk about your journey into VR.   Chris: Well thanks, Carol. Mine's a little bit different than most people. I did not start in VR. I have a very different background. All fiscal for the most part. But I came to work at a fiscal state unit and learned about VR there. Loved it, loved it, loved it. And then was kind of asked to be part of this Ta team and couldn't say no because it's just an incredible program and it's a little complicated. So being able to help the states understand it better is what brought me to this team.   Carol: Well, not you, and you're being modest now. Tell them about like a little bit more of your background because you have an interesting educational background and all of that.   Chris: Yeah, I do. So I'm an environmental engineer by trade. Worked in that field for a while. Learned that sampling sludge was not a cool thing to be doing. So went to work for a small business that was just starting on Department of Defense World. Loved all the fiscal part of that. Went back to school and got my MBA and have been doing fiscal stuff ever since. So yeah, it's a long road that brought me here, but I'm happy I took it.   Carol: Yeah, we're glad you're here. How about you, Miss Allison?   Allison: Well, it's kind of hard to believe that I have over 30 years in this VR journey, and it actually started out in the field as a VR technician, and I just fell in love with the mission and purpose of VR. So I quickly changed my direction to be a VR counselor, and then that evolved to other promotions and positions throughout the year, where I ended up being director of both Kentucky Blind Agency and then moved to Florida as the General Agency Director. And when the VR TKM opportunity came about, I was ready for a change, especially after being a director through the pandemic and through the implementation of WIOA. I was looking forward to just a new opportunity, new learning areas, so this has been a great jump for me. I've enjoyed it very much.   Carol: Why don't you tell them too about your other gig with NRLI a little bit. We'll make a plug there.   Allison: Yeah. So part of the VRTAC-QM is the National Rehabilitation Leadership Institute through San Diego State University. I have the honor of continuing Fred McFarland's legacy, who began this program about 25 years ago. And it is a program that is building the future leaders in the vocational rehabilitation field. And it's been a joy to see these leaders be promoted throughout their careers. Being stepping up, having an interest at that national level, the issues that are facing VR. So it is definitely a part of my job with QM that I hold near and dear to my heart.   Carol: Yeah, it's good stuff, I love it NRLI of our favorite things to participate in when we get to do training. So Katie, over to you next.   Katie: Well, my journey with VR started when my brother was receiving VR services, and he actually is who inspired me to go and get my bachelor's degree in psychology and work in social services. That led me to Department of Workforce Services, where I spent 13 years in various roles and capacities, which ultimately led me back to VR.   Carol: Awesome sauce. And last but not least, Sarah Clardy.   Sarah: So I started out about 24 years ago out of college. I was working in banking full time and going to school full time, and had an opportunity to come on with a state and Missouri vocational rehabilitation, had an opening for an assistant director of accounting and procurement. They had some systems and processes that were a little out of whack and needed some help with reorganizing pretty much the whole accounting structure. So I came over at that time and started in with Missouri, and then spent 20 years there and got to spend half of that time in the field directly with our field staff and counselors and really take this program to heart, and then had an opportunity four years ago to join the VRTAC-QM. I had said for a long time we needed technical assistance in the fiscal realm for years and years. I was thrilled that Mark Schultz saw the vision and made it happen.   Carol: Good stuff. Well, now we're going to enter the danger zone because I have some questions for you all. Not exactly sure how this is going to go, but we are going to do our best. So y'all jump in when you want. So what has been your biggest realization or aha moment since you started with the QM. And Allison, I'm going to have you kick us off and then other folks can jump in.   Allison: Honestly, Carol, there's been a lot of those aha moments for me over the last, you know, almost three years with the Technical Assistance Center since my experience in VR started in the field and I was a counselor, kind of the program side is where my comfort level is or my knowledge and experience. So when I joined the fiscal team there, definitely there was a lot of those aha moments, mainly a lot of the things that I did not know or did not realize even as a director when I came over. So one of those aha's is the director. Even though I received these beautiful monthly budget reports for my fiscal staff, even though I had a leadership team that we reviewed budgets with, understanding the fiscal requirements in and out, the uniform grant guidance and all the regulations. And, EDGAR, all of that, I think, is critical for any director or their leadership team to have knowledge of. And that was definitely one of my aha moments. And one of those things I go back, wow, if I could go back and be a director, I would be a lot smarter after being on the technical assistance side. And like I said, there's been a lot of those aha moments. I could share tons of them, but a couple other ones that jump out is just that critical need for that program side of the House and the fiscal side of the House, to always be communicating and always making sure they're checking with each other. On whether it's a new implementation, whether it's expenses, contracts, doesn't matter. There needs to be that collaboration happening at that level. And then probably the technology challenges is another one of those constant aha moments in the year that we're in and how reliant we are on technology. I am still amazed that there is not technology out there that will do what VR needs it to do, right off the shelf.   Carol: Amen, sister. You said it all. No, but I'm sure there's people that want to say some more.   Chris: I found it interesting when I came over that not every single, not a single state has it right. I thought that there would be more that are fully knowledgeable and are running with it and doing all the great things they are doing, the great things. They just don't have 100% right.   Carol: You are making me laugh with this because I'm just going to say I have to jump in on that. Sarah and I right away, in the beginning, anytime we had met with RSA we learned something new, we're like, uh, I gotta call back to Minnesota, tell them, because we realized, like, hey, we thought we were sort of doing it right, but we all realized things. We went, uh, yeah, we had a little slight misstep on that.   Katie: I would agree with that. Like, we came from a state that was in an intensive agreement. And, you know, I was like, man, we really got it wrong. But then, you know, it's a huge learning curve and there's a lot of people that are putting in their best effort, and they're still just a few things that aren't quite right.   Chris: Absolutely.   Katie: Another realization that I had was we have this table of contents for a grant management manual that we send out to agencies. And when I received it in Wyoming, I was intimidated by all the things that needed to be included. But my aha moment was when you break that down into individual items and you really look at it, it's things that are already in place, the policies and procedures that you're already working on. It's just finding a way to get that on paper and put it into some sort of policy and procedure and internal control. So realizing that states have the capacity to do that, just figuring out how was an aha moment for me.   Sarah: You know, when I came in, I was thinking back to 2017 and RSA came out with guidance on, I'm going to say it, Period of Performance. And it dominated our whole agency for a good nine months, trying to understand the guidance, looking at systems. We had to do a whole overhaul with the way we looked at obligations, just we spent a massive amount of time and effort to right size our systems, internal controls and all of that because prior to performance sets the beat for all of financial within a VR program. So coming into the QM, I really assumed that more agencies knew of Period of Performance and had gone through at least similar steps, or at least had internal conversations. And what I found was completely the opposite. Somehow a lot of folks missed the memo and that work hadn't been done. And of course, we've been running Fred Flintstone style, trying to help agencies get up to snuff. So that's the piece. I think that's been the most interesting. I think for me.   Carol: I think along that same vein for me was really that realization states are more different than I thought because I figured we all had the same information. We all kind of operated sort of the same. You might have your own internal systems, but I remember, Sarah, you and I talking that first year just going like, oh my gosh, everybody is organized so completely differently. They approach their work so completely differently. There isn't just one size fits all. Like, hey, you should do it this way. And like, everybody can do that. Uh uh, it is like having an IPE for how the fiscal is managed. Individualized we need to give very individualized TA. So what do you guys view as the number one challenge facing our programs nationwide? And Sarah, I'm going to have you start us with that.   Sarah: Okay? I'm going to say it I think Allison said it earlier. We are lacking in the technology space. I think a couple of things we have, the pendulum has swung to the other direction and before it was spend, spend, spend, a lot of agencies made adjustments so that they were increasing their spending. The large carryover balances weren't so large. Now my concern is how are we looking at our finances to see if we can still sustain that. And in order to get accurate projections and for leadership teams to have the conversations about where they stand financially, we have to have technology systems in place that are reliable, are tracking period of performance, can provide those fiscal calculations in terms of where we stand on all of the different requirements, so that we have a constant pulse on where do we stand as an agency. And I liken it to being in private industry and a CEO knowing at all times how much does it cost to make the widget? How many widgets are we making and what amount of time? All of those kinds of things. And I feel like in that space right now, we have agencies that are trying to figure that out, and we have some that are in a very delicate position, and it can cause a lot of catastrophe and crisis if that's not solidified. So really, it goes back to having reliable technology that will take care of all of that. And that includes our CMS, our Case Management Systems space. A lot of our vendors are struggling in that Period of Performance area, and we're not there yet. We have a lot more work to do.   Carol: Well, it's like a $4 billion industry, you know, and I feel like we're still using an abacus or something in some cases for tracking the money. It is the most insane thing I have ever seen.   Allison: And, you know, related to that technology challenge, though, is knowing that, that challenge is there, knowing that the technology is not correct. I think what adds to the complexity of that is the fiscal staff or the just the staff within the VR agency. They lack the fiscal knowledge enough to know if their system is working correctly or not, or know how to go in and make the adaptations needed to assist them. And that's a challenge within itself.   Chris: And I will piggyback right on that, because the thing I think that we've struggled with is we have lost so much institutional knowledge that people don't stay in jobs like they used to. And so if these policies and procedures are not written down, you get new people coming in, they don't know what they don't know. And if the technology is not working right, they don't know that that's not something that they can handle. So it's a lack of that long time knowledge that used to be in this program.   Katie: Yeah, Chris, that is exactly where I was going as well, is the loss of staff and institutional knowledge is huge, and it really highlights the importance of getting policies and procedures in place and not waiting till that person has their foot out the door and is ready to head out to make sure that you're getting that in writing. You know, succession planning and really building up success in the team.   Carol: I think for me, one of the things I see, because I love that whole organizational structure and non-delegable responsibilities, I love that area. I think one of the biggest challenges facing the program is the whole shift in how things are organized between if you're in a designated state unit within a designated state agency, and that centralization we have seen of all the fiscal functions along with IT and HR and all of it, but I feel like VR has lost control. And so as these services are centralized, and not that they can't be, but that they get centralized to a point that the VR program has lost complete input control direction. I mean, you've got directors being told you can't spend anything over $5. It has to go through 40 layers. You can't hire anybody. Staff cannot travel to go see customers like all of that. If we can't fix this structure of how things are put into play in each of these states, I really see kind of the demise of the program. As we see things get buried, the program gets buried down within these big agencies. The lack of control ends up leading to problems with them and being able to carry out the mission. And it's really hard to get a handle on that. And I know Congress has given, you know, this leeway so that states can organize like they want. But boy, the way they're organized right now, it's pretty tough.   Allison: It's a double edged sword when you think about it, because you're probably like me Carol, as former directors, we wanted more money going into the consumer services. We wanted it going to support our customers. We wanted to find ways to reduce any kind of administrative type expenses so that that money can go there when the centralized functions were really being pushed at the state levels. In my mind at first, I will say this, at first I saw, yes, this is a benefit because we're going to have these shared services, we're going to be able to spend more of our funds on our customers. And I still somewhat agree with that approach because it is a cost savings. But what has to happen, though, is that balance, what you talked about, the balance where VR still has control over the decisions or they are included in those decisions and the restrictions that have been put in place has to be lifted. But I do see the benefits of those shared services as long as the structure gets set up right.   Carol: Right. And that's been few and far between.   Allison: That needs a national model.   Carol: It does. And that's been a problem. I mean, if there's anything anyone can work on, little congressional assistance in that or whatever, you know, getting some of that rewritten, how that looks.   Sarah: Well, and I came from an agency that was able to retain an entire unit of 13-ish folks when all of those consolidations were occurring because within our Department of Education, our commissioner understood the complexities of our award and knew that if all of those positions rolled up to a department level, they weren't going to be able to support the program and were able to coordinate with our state leadership. And it served the program very, very well. So I think we have a little bit to be desired still in that space to get agencies the support that they need 100%.   Carol: So what has been your favorite thing to work on or accomplishment in your role? And Katie, I'm going to kick that to you to start us off.   Katie: Well, I've really enjoyed my role here with the QM. There's a lot of things that I enjoy, but the task that I've enjoyed the most is really having the ability to dig into the new uniform grant guidance that went into effect October 1st of 2020. For one of the things that I did while doing that was I took the old uniform grant guidance and the new ones and did a side by side where all of the things that were taken out were redlined and all of the things that were added were highlighted, and I'm really excited for that tool to be shared with the agencies right now. That's with RSA to get the stamp of approval, but I've used that tool already to help update all of our things on the website and all the tools that we're sharing with everyone, and I think it's going to be a really helpful tool for the agencies.   Carol: I love that tool, Katie, so much because even when we were down doing to last week and some of the just the nuance pieces that came out, when you're reading it and you go, okay, that language did change. Like there is a slightly nuanced variance to this that I hadn't completely grasped until you see it in the red and the yellow, and it all highlighted up. I mean, it was pretty nice.   Katie: Yeah, they did a lot of plain language changes, which is really evident when you look at the side by side.   Chris: I'll jump in here and tell you what my favorite thing is. And it's when we were working with a state intensively and, you know, we've been working with them for a long time, and you get to know them really well and you understand their environment and how things work, and they come to you and say something really profound, like, I was watching this training the other day and they got this wrong, and they got this wrong and they got this wrong. It is like a proud parent moment. When you go, they understand what the program is supposed to be doing, and they understand when other people not necessarily are getting it wrong, but mostly they're able to recognize what's not absolutely correct. And it just makes you feel like, oh, we have come so far.   Carol: It's like fly, little bird, you're flying.   Chris: Yes.   Allison: That's probably one of my favorite parts too, Chris, is the state work that we've done and how you get to know these state people. There's so many amazing VR staff across the country, and their hearts are all in the right place, and they want to do good. That's what I've enjoyed is getting to know these people better, broadening my network as well because I learn from them. But just being that resource I do like, I'm one of those weird people that likes digging into the laws and regs and finding where is that gray, vague area that we can interpret a little better. So part of the TA work, you know, really digging into some of the laws and some regulatory guidance I've enjoyed as well.   Carol: I have a story I love to share. I was having a breakdown probably a year ago, Sarah's laughing at me, I had a breakdown. You know, you're providing TA to state you're so ingrained with them, especially when they have a corrective action plan, you feel like you're part of them. I always say we, you know, when we're talking because I feel like I'm part of their team and we've been working on a particular piece of it, and nothing that we sent in was anything RSA wanted. All I knew was that this was not what they wanted, but we couldn't exactly figure out what they wanted. And it was driving me crazy. And I'd called Sarah and I said, I think I have to quit being a TA provider because I suck at this. I'm not able to help them. I haven't been able to figure this out. I am done, and I went to bed that night. I actually was on site with another state and I woke up at two in the morning and I do my best thinking as I'm sleeping. It's so weird. I've done it my whole career. I wake up in the middle of the night and have an idea. I woke up at two in the morning. I'm like, oh, I know what they're talking about. And I got up and I typed, I typed for like three hours and then got up for the day and got ready for the other state. But exactly what was needed was that, I mean, when we ended up meeting with the state and then they met with RSA, and that was the thing. It was the thing that was needed to get accomplished. And I felt super proud that we could kind of like, figure it out. It took a while. I almost quit, but, we got there in the end.   Sarah: You know, being in the final year of the grant, everybody's asking the question, what comes next? And of course we don't know what comes next. But I think my favorite part is looking back and building the relationships. So kind of touching on what all of you all have said. Relationships are important to me. Building the trust we are learning alongside of them just like they are. I always say there's no top of the mountain that any of us are ever going to reach when we've arrived. It's a daily learning process, but the program financially is so complex and trying to take those federal requirements And each of the state's requirements, which we've acknowledged already are all different, and bring that together in the center. And there's never been a resource to help agencies get down in the weeds, look at their systems, look at their processes, and help them navigate through that. And so just having something to offer and having directors send an SOS text at 9:00 at night, or we've talked to directors who have been in tears or excited because something really great has happened, and they want to share the success. It's all of that. Just being able to provide that valuable resource and support them along the way has been very rewarding for me. I know, and you all, but especially I think for the States.   Carol: So if you had a crystal ball, what would you predict regarding the financial state of the VR program over the next three years? And Chris, you get to start us on that lovely prediction.   Chris: Okay. Well, since I don't have a crystal ball, I think Sarah touched on this a little bit earlier. So for several years, the message from RSA and from Congress has been to spend, spend, spend. And so there's been a lot of changes in all the agencies to be able to spend more, to spend quicker, to do everything quicker and faster. And I think the spending is catching up. And I think that it might go too far. Like Sarah mentioned, the pendulum is going the other way, and I don't think the fiscal forecasting is robust enough to be able to predict when it's going to get hard. And since most directors do not come from a fiscal background, most directors come with the VR heart that you know is what a counselor has, paying attention to that. Fiscal forecasting is going to be a critical, critical point. And I know that most states are not doing it right. So that's my prediction. More people are going to be reaching out asking for fiscal forecasting and understanding how to look at this program in the future.   Sarah: And I think to tack on to that, I think we're going to see new technology and new resources emerge that will assist our agencies. Again, like Carol said earlier, some days it feels like we have our big chief tablet out and we're still doing things old school. And I think the only direction to go is up. So I think we're going to see some new resources, hopefully in the technology world develop, that will assist our agencies so that their focus can remain on the customers where it belongs.   Allison: And I would have to say ditto to both of that, especially the fiscal forecasting and the pendulum swinging the other way. And a lot of states considering order selection or going into order selection. But one of the things that pops in my mind that might happen over the next three years is reauthorization of WIOA. I know the discussions are happening with Congress right now, and if that implementation happens, you know, what's it going to look like? Because ten years ago when WIOA was passed, it was a huge impact on VR. And it still is. I mean, we're still challenged with trying to get everything implemented, trying to spend the minimum of our 15% on Pre-ETS. There's just so many things that we're still working on through. So very interested to see where that's going to go.   Carol: And I definitely think like nothing ever stays the same. So we always think like we're going to get to the place and it's just going to be even flow, like it's all going to be cool. We don't really have to pay a lot of attention, and I don't think that's ever going to be the state of the VR program. Like it's going to constantly need people paying attention. Whether the pendulum is one way and we have loads of money or it's the other way and we have no money now, like we have to somehow try to like even this out with the fiscal forecasting and all the things you're doing. But if you think you're going to get to the place where like, oh, I've reached it, Nirvana, it's all great. That's never going to be like this job takes constant attention to detail and what is happening. And so it is always going to be work. It's going to take a lot of effort from a lot of people. And as all the new people keep coming and going, figuring that out for the team so that you can sustain the practices and things that you have that help you to understand what's going on.   Katie: Yeah, I would just agree with everything that everyone already said. One of the big pushes that was brought up at CSAVR, is technology, and I think it is going to be interesting to see what kind of technology is introduced in the next three years that's going to help assist our programs.   Carol: So what is your best piece of advice for our listeners? And I'll let anybody open that one up.   Allison: I'm going to say you need to have a deep bench of leaders who are adverse in the financial requirements, maybe incorporating fiscal training for all staff on an annual basis, whether that's just refreshers or making sure new folks being hired understand all the requirements. But fiscal needs to be part of your ongoing training with staff. It's just critical.   Carol: I'd say, for directors coming in, I know the tendency is to want to be like, I have to know everything. I'm the director, I need to know all things. And even when you don't know the things, you pretend, you know the things. Don't pretend you know the things you don't know. Like you need to be humble and figure it out and learn and be willing to learn. For a lot of folks that are growing up in the VR system, having that sort of physical part of your brain, it may not be completely there. You're like, I went into VR because I didn't want to do math, and now you're in charge of, you know, $300 million in a program. And so you've got to just continue to learn and chip away and figure out how you can gain that really strong understanding, because you cannot just hand that off to some other group and think someone's managing that for you, because the buck really does stop with you in the end. As far as the responsibility over the control and allocation of the VR funds. So please keep learning, as Allison said, and be open and be humble when you don't know things and ask.   Sarah: There's a song by the Beatles called With a Little Help from My Friends. Everybody needs a Little help from time to time. And I know over the years we've worked with most of the agencies, but there are some that we haven't, and I've always assumed they're good. They don't need us. They're fine. It's not always necessarily the case. So acknowledging if I pick up a phone and call a peer or a fellow director, or hopefully the TAC continued to exist beyond this grant cycle. Reaching out and asking for help is okay, and it's encouraged.   Katie: Yeah, mine will be through the lens of policy and procedure. That's where I keep hitting. That's my passion on this QM team. We have a ton of resources available, and if you're struggling, you're looking at that table of contents saying, I can't do this. Reach out, give us a call. We can help you with prompting questions just to get the thought process going. And you can do it. It's going to be okay.   Chris: Ok, my piece of advice is to make connections. And I think everybody has kind of said that in their own way. But make those connections so that you have people you can reach out to and ask questions of whether it's us at the TA center, other states, other fiscal people. You need to be able to ask, how do you do this? What do you think of this idea that I have? How would you handle this? I mean, being able to have that connection and that type of conversation is critical 100%.   Carol: Well, I sure appreciate you all. And while we're still around, all our listeners can still connect with us. And we do have a QM fiscal email address. I will spell out for you. It is QM f I s c a l at v r t a c-qm.org. So qmfiscal@vrtac-qm.org. So please do reach out. We still are around for a little while and we can be your phone a friend. So thanks for joining me today guys I really appreciate it.   Chris: Thank you Carol. This was great.   Allison: Thanks for having Us.   Sarah: Thank you.   Katie: Thanks.   {Music} Outro Voice: Conversations powered by VR, one manager at a time, one minute at a time, brought to you by the VR TAC for Quality Management. Catch all of our podcast episodes by subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening!

Building Texas Business
Ep083: Empowerment and Innovation in Childcare with Amyn Bandali

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 20, 2024 37:34


In this episode of the Building Texas Business Podcast, I speak with Amyn Bandali, CEO of Ivy Kids Systems. Amyn shares the story behind Ivy Kids, a premier childcare and education provider founded by his parents. He reflects on how their move to Pearland, Texas, and the challenges they faced finding quality childcare led to the establishment of their first school. Since then, the family business has grown to 20 locations, with 16 more under development. We discuss the decision to franchise the business, the importance of building a culture of empowerment within teams, and Amyn's philosophy on leadership. He explains how empowering employees with autonomy, transparency, and responsibility has been key to Ivy Kids' success. Amyn also talks about navigating challenges, including the impact of the pandemic, which required the business to pivot toward virtual programs and innovative approaches to childcare. The conversation highlights the critical role of early childhood education in shaping lifelong success, the importance of continuous innovation, and how technology like coding and robotics is being integrated into Ivy Kids' curriculum. Amyn also shares insights into managing a franchise system and the value of fostering strategic relationships and learning from setbacks. This episode is filled with practical lessons for entrepreneurs and leaders who aspire to create sustainable growth and a strong company culture. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Amyn Bandali is the CEO of Ivy Kids Systems, a premier childcare brand founded by his parents in Pearland, Texas, offering education from infants to pre-K and afterschool programs. The company was inspired by the founders' personal experience of struggling to find high-quality childcare when they first moved to the United States from Canada. Amyn joined the business in 2015 and initiated the franchising strategy, growing from 5 corporate locations to 20 total locations with 16 more under development. The company emphasizes a culture of empowerment, focusing on giving employees autonomy, transparency, and timely feedback while understanding the "why" behind strategic initiatives. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ivy Kids pivoted to online learning and alternative programs, generating a million dollars in revenue for franchisees despite significant enrollment drops. The company is innovating its curriculum by incorporating coding, robotics, digital parent assessments, and classroom camera access to enhance early childhood education. Amyn's leadership style prioritizes empowering team members, setting clear visions, and allowing individuals to develop their own key performance indicators (KPIs). The company values continuous learning, participating in franchise associations, mastermind groups, and local business networks to share best practices. Amyn learned a critical leadership lesson during the pandemic about truly empowering his team by trusting them during challenging times. The company's educational philosophy is grounded in research showing the critical importance of early childhood learning in a child's development. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Ivy Kids Systems GUESTS Amyn BandaliAbout Amyn TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: Amyn, I want to welcome you to Building Texas Business. Thanks for agreeing to come on the show. Amyn: Yeah, thank you for having me, Chris. Happy to be here. Chris: So you're the CEO of Ivy Kids Systems. Tell the listeners what Ivy Kids is. What do you do? What are you known for? Amyn: Yeah. So Ivy Kids, we are a premier childcare brand, not just a daycare where parents just come in to pick up and drop off. You know, we provide education and that's from the infant level, so as young as two months old, all the way to our pre-K program, which is five and six year olds. And then we also have an afterschool program as well, where parents pick up and drop off from elementary school. The kids come in for homework help. And we're next year celebrating our 20th anniversary. Chris: Congratulations. That is amazing. Amyn: Yes. So what was the inspiration to get into this primary childcare, education, afterschool learning? Where did that emanate from? Amyn: Yeah. So, you know, a little bit about our history. So Ivy Kids was actually founded by my parents, Allen and Layla. You know, we had moved from Canada to the States or to Houston in 1995, and we lived in Pearland. So, as you're probably aware with Pearland, it experienced massive growth during that time. You know, 518 had one stoplight. Now it's a six-lane highway, it feels like. But you know, my parents, you know, with my brother and I being young children, they found out very hard time finding high quality care for us. You know, we would be in the daycare system, mom and pop childcare, quote unquote, you know, prestigious childcare program, and it was, you know, observation, where there was no learning going on, or my brother and I would, you know, be picked up and we'd have a bump or a bruise, and nobody would be able to point out why. Amyn: My parents being engineers and also having a history of entrepreneurship from their parents and their grandparents, you know, they thought about this industry and they thought, hey, we can do a better job of running high quality schools. So I like to say they reversed engineered the childcare. You know, they put a lot of thought, time and thinking, and over that course of 10 years from when we moved to Pearland, to 2005, we opened our first school, and that was in the Pearland area, and it did really well. So from that, we grew from that one corporate location to then five corporate locations. And then when I joined the business in 2015, and I can talk about the reasons why, but that was when we decided to franchise our brand. And, you know, today we are at 20 locations. We actually just opened our 20th location about a month ago and we have 16 under development right now throughout Texas and the Southeast United States. Chris: And, just curious, I mean, the 20 that exists in the 16 under development, how many of those are franchise versus corporate owned? Amyn: Yeah. So we still own all of the corporate locations today. We are at five corporate locations and we are at 15 franchise locations. You know, I think one of the things that shows maybe a strong brand and, you know, happy franchisees is folks opening their second or third locations. And even though we opened our first school in 2017, you know, that's been one of the great things to see. As a franchisor, you know, seeing folks open their second or third location, looking for sites for that. And that's kind of where we are right now in the evolution of the business, which is really exciting to see. Chris: That sounds exciting. So you're going back to the beginning in listening to the story you were telling about your parents. Yeah. It sounds like a very common entrepreneurial inspirational moment where they see a gap and figure out a way to fill that gap or need, right? And in this case, you know, quality childcare. Amyn: Yeah, absolutely. You know, they saw a lot of great things about this business, which really stand today. And it's, you know, if you do right by that family, you do right by that child, you know, you're having that parent for 10 years from when they're infant to that afterschool program. You know, they saw that childcare is a need, not a want. You know, if you have a dual income family, you have to put your child somewhere where, you know, they'll feel safe where they're learning. And from that they saw a need in building their first Ivy Kids to, well, there's so much research out there about the importance of education at an early age that then, you know, catapults a child into future learning, future success, as opposed to not getting that in the early ages. Chris: And the kind of the downward trajectory of the backing cause. Amyn: Yeah. I mean, there's some amazing studies. There was one that was done about eight years ago by Harvard University that basically said 95 percent of who you are is from the first five years that you were born. You know, everything from what your passions are to your ability to learn. So much of that comes from those first five years. And then if you think about, hey, what is the best return on investment then for my education? It's not necessarily those prestigious universities that does have a high rate of return, but the best ROI actually that a family can spend, that a government could spend is that first five years and getting that part right. Chris: Right. You know, if you're doing that, then you are truly building that foundation. And I think that's one of the drivers for why, you know, why families make a decision. You know, they're looking for, they're seeing the benefits, they're understanding more and more of, you know, the link between high quality learning and how their child is going to do. And they're making a smarter decision now with where they're choosing to enroll their child. Chris: So let's go a little bit, so we understand your parents' inspiration. You alluded to this, but I don't understand what drew you into the business. What were you doing before and what was it that caused you to leave that to step in and kind of take over? Amyn: Yeah. So by the time we had opened our first school, I was in, you know, college or close to college and seeing the business up front, you know, seeing the ability to build your own path, create your own destiny, working in the business from everything, from us assembling the furniture when we were opening our first school, actually laying the grass and the sod down in order for us to get our CEO inspection passed, you know, I was just so enthralled by it. I was so excited about it. The ability of owning something and really charting your destiny. And that really didn't leave me. You know, in college, I also took a job. It was with Student Agencies, which is a business run by undergrads and I did sales there. And that also really excited me too. Amyn: And then, you know, I kind of went the route that a lot of students at Cornell did for undergraduate business, which was pursue finance, look at the business consulting route or the investment banking route. And, you know, I learned a lot going down that path, but I missed being in that small business, you know, really building something that was my own working with a dynamic team and a small team. And, you know, I think building some of that foundation, this amazing opportunity came that was presented by my dad to say, hey, let's franchise the business. You know, we've got something great going. This would be an amazing opportunity for other like-minded people to open their own locations and thrive. Amyn: And I just thought, man, this marries what I did earlier. I've got a bit of foundation for working at larger organizations. You know, maybe there's something there and it turned out to be a good decision. Chris: Very good. That's a great, I love the story and how you were able to, I think it's important. You got an education and you got real world experience outside of that, right? To then bring that into and maybe help professionalize a little bit the company, especially as it was launching into being a franchisor. Amyn: Yeah. So you mentioned, you know, working with the team, let's talk a little bit about, you know, some of the ups and downs that you've experienced and maybe you saw your parents early on experience and building the team around you so that the company can achieve that success. Because if I know anything about hiring, it's an imperfect thing, right? Is that part science, part art? But you do your best to get it right. So tell me, let's talk a little bit about those experiences, you know, what you've learned from that. Amyn: Yeah. I mean, I think, you know, going into small business entrepreneurship, there's very much a feeling of working in the business, you know, being so kind of head down and focusing on, hey, how do we survive today? And, you know, I think when you're joining or launching a new business, which really was the franchising part of our business was a brand new business, you are really thinking in that lens and that mindset. And I always feel like hiring, building an infrastructure, it just allows you to think more long term and that just prolongs the lifespan of your business too. So I think making those right strategic hires as soon as we have that capital, thinking ahead about, hey, where do we want to be in the next 5, 10 years and investing in those people and really giving them the freedom and empowerment, you know, to expand their careers, expand their responsibilities as you're seeing them master their role. Amyn: I think that really helped, you know. So one book that I read early on about a year or two after I joined the business was Traction by Gina Wickman. Sure. You know, the entrepreneurial operating system. I mean, that's something that we do today. And I think that was foundational in how I look at people, helping the assistant. Hey, do we have the right people in the right seats? And then are we creating a culture of empowerment? You know, I think about what attracted me to Ivy Kids and starting this franchising part of the business. And it was this idea of taking ownership, having accountability, you know, maybe having a little bit too much rope. Chris: Right. Right. Amyn: And I just think, hey, at a size that we are, those are probably the people that I'm going to be attracting to. And how can I create that where if I were in their shoes, I'd want to be a part of this business. And I think some of that where, hey, there's alignment on goals, but hey, you have the empowerment and you have the ability to achieve it and how you achieve it and how you get to that final product is up to you. You know, I always feel like that allows you to really grow people, especially when you're smaller, maybe you have that limited capital base, you know, and now you can start thinking strategically about your business and then your business can really grow. Chris: So I love that term culture of empowerment. Let's talk about culture. You know, everyone agrees culture is king, right? And every book you read and each strategy, you know, all those clichés. What have you done to kind of foster and build this culture of empowerment within Ivy Kids? Amyn: You know, I think of myself as a generalist. And I think of myself as, hey, I am not the best person in any department. And I think as you grow as a leader, that is just what naturally happens. You know, you have to build a team of people that are smarter, more experienced. I would say better than you in each of these divisions in each of these areas. Amyn: So I think just thinking, hey, if I'm growing or if the business is growing, I have to increase the skill sets of everything around me and I have to play more of that generalist mindset. And with that, it's let me bring these people on and have and let them be the experts in the subject matter experts of what they're doing now. Amyn: Alignment and vision and where we are and ensuring that, hey, prove to me that you can do this job is still very important. Sure. You know, We still need to have check-ins and make sure that, hey, are we all marching in that direction and where we want to go as a company. But at the end of the day, I do think that people are more passionate if they feel a sense of ownership, if they can look back and see, "Oh, I or my team accomplished this." I'm getting praise for those kinds of things. You know, one of the things that we do, we have quarterly town halls and we do shout outs, and it's a thing that I love. We just had ours on Friday. And, you know, the team gives each other shout outs, but I think when people are empowered and we are able to showcase, you did a great job and this is why, and this is what your team is doing, is getting the company moving forward, is amazing. And that might be harder to create that visibility as a company grows. But it is something that I like to keep on the forefront of my mind because empowering people, it's just like this flywheel of positivity, right? Chris: Right. Amyn: It just, it's like the snowball or flywheel effect. It just grows upon itself. You know, the shout outs that you mentioned, I don't think it can be overstated, the value in just simple recognition. Private recognition is great, but the public recognition amongst someone's peers, I mean, it doesn't replace cash rewards, but some people value it as much or more, right? And I think that you would take the time to do that in a thoughtful way, and I can see where that would inspire your people to do more, right? Or, well, gosh, your coworker got it. I'm going to do something so that the next quarter I get it. And it just, to your point, that flywheel effect, it just creates this atmosphere and culture of wanting to achieve and be successful. ADVERT Hello friends. This is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas Business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations, and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the BoyerMiller.com and thanks for listening to the show. Amyn: The other thing I heard you say is there's a key piece of autonomy to create the culture of empowerment within Ivy Kids and giving your people the autonomy to go do what they do, what they've been hired to do without being micromanaged. Chris: Yeah, that's exactly right. Amyn: I mean, I always think back to when I first started out, you know, in my career, you know, as an investment banking analyst, you know, you're spending 80, a hundred hours a week, you're working on these pitch decks. You're grinding until 2 a.m. You're working on this project and now all of a sudden you have this package, you deliver it to your managing director and then they go to a meeting and you never hear back. You come up from the dungeon, right? Chris: Exactly. Amyn: And I always was like, hey, you know what, I wonder what that client thought or if that what I did had an effect. And you know, that's that part where I'm like, well, am I doing that as a leader? And am I these blockages? You know, because people want to learn and people want to be in those meetings. I think everybody wants to be in that meeting and see where their work is leading to. And I just always think, hey, if I were working for me when I was starting off, would I have liked myself as a boss? Chris: Right. Amyn: And that also means, hey, clear vision of where that person is heading. What am I doing right? And what am I not doing well? You know, I think feedback transparency, you know, I really try and instill that criticism is not a negative word, you know, problems are not bad. You know, problems are just identifications of what we can all do better. Chris: Right. Amyn: I like hearing problems to not, you know, and that could be a, you know, what we're doing and just what's going on within the organization. You know, what the way I would phrase what I just heard you say is about, it's about mindset, right? You can view someone's performance from a positive mindset or a negative mindset and say, look, okay, this didn't go well, but that's a learning moment. Let's find the learning as opposed to chastise and criticize and beat someone down. Chris: Yeah, right. And I think, you know, same situations handled, you know, one versus the other can encourage and empower someone to want to do better or discourage them to, you know, put their tail between their legs and maybe leave, even leave your organization when it's not someone you necessarily want to leave. Amyn: Yeah, and this is a thing that comes over time. It comes with empowerment. It comes with, you know, celebrating that publicly. It comes with a culture of positivity. You know, it is also something that I feel like is so important when you are owning a small business, when you're opening a business is separating yourself and your identity and ego in some ways from your business. Chris: Right. Amyn: You know, it's something that I, you know, try and share with our franchisees when they're opening a school and they're having a quality assurance visit or their first, maybe, you know, not ideal interaction with the parent. I mean, there's a real personal feeling there. It's easier said than done, right? Chris: It is. Amyn: But I, to your point, very important to do. So let's kind of dive into some of those subjects because you start the franchise part of the business, I think you said 2017. So it seems to me you're getting it off the ground. It's going well. And then a global pandemic hit. So let's talk about managing through kind of uncertainty, economic downturn, especially when your business is predicated on kids coming into a public, basically facility and gathering together when that wasn't going on. Amyn: Yeah. I mean, I remember March of 2020, I think our average school enrollment was about 200 children. And I think it went to 40 in two weeks, so very stressful period as you can imagine. You know, and one thing that I learned from the pandemic or from our team and in business is you can really pivot on a dime. You know, and I think that's something that I've taken from me too is we went to online learning, you know, for two, three hours every day we were able to orient the company in that direction. You know, it ended up generating a million dollars of revenue for our franchisees, which was a benefit. You know, we were able to do things like private kindergarten. We were able to do a virtual program for elementary school children. They were able to come in our schools and do the virtual learning from the elementary teacher at our schools, and everybody was separated apart. Chris: Wow. Amyn: So we were able to come up with revenue-generating ideas. We weren't able to make up entirely for the lost revenue due to COVID. But we were able to do some really amazing things and stay in really close communication with our franchisees. Yeah. Because as you know, each city, each state had their own requirements. Chris: Right. Amyn: I think I learned a lot from that, that, hey, if you've got a long-term goal, a long-term plan and things change within your business, that doesn't mean you don't change your goal. You know, you can orient things, you can turn things on a dime. And, you know, although things have returned to normal and in many respects, right? Or pre-COVID, I think the learnings from that have helped our innovation and just saying, hey, let's push a little bit more. Let's try a little bit more. Chris: I love it because I think the lesson there is despite what comes at you, whether it was in your control or not, there's always opportunity. Amyn: So again, it goes back to mindset. I thank you. Okay, get the team, you or your team together and go, okay, where are the opportunities out of this that we probably wouldn't have seen before? And I think, like you said, you see so many people, especially in your industry. Now that kids are back in your facilities, it doesn't take away the opportunities for online learning you can do. Chris: Right. Amyn: And it's just added revenue. Chris: Yeah, that's right. You know, I think, you know, a franchisee, they open and they think, oh man, you know, these problems are just centered around me and oh my gosh, I'm opening a business. And it's luckily now you're around 20 years of experience of us operating, but also imagine those franchisees that had that same feeling and they opened during 2020, 2021, right? Amyn: Where we had to do everything virtual. So, you know, I think, you know, a business owner, you have to be an optimist. You have to look for, hey, what are ways that either I could turn this around or generate some revenue. Growth mindset is just so important. Chris: Yeah, so true. So you mentioned innovation. What are some of the things that you have done or that you may be doing now to kind of foster innovative ideas, innovative thoughts within your team that you can then implement with your franchisees, etc.? Amyn: You know, I think so much of that comes from our goals and seeing, hey, what can we continue to do to further differentiate ourselves as being the leading provider of early childhood education? Right. I mean, you look at our curriculum, you know, we have a lot of, you know, mom and pops that are great, you know, and in varying levels of quality and large franchise organizations too. Right. And what you find is there has not been a great deal of innovation in the curriculum space and in education, you know, so really it's us thinking at things differently, like, hey, just because everybody else is doing the same thing. Chris: Right. Amyn: That grounded in the research of today? Right. Does that relate to the teachers of today? What children need to learn in order to be successful in the elementary school, middle schools in the communities that they're in today. I think just always trying to understand the why, you know, I think why is one of the most important questions that you can ask. And that's really what I do in the meetings is understand, hey, why are we doing this? How are we doing this? You know, I think that generates a lot of thought within our team. Then once we have those strategic tools in place, we have those systems in place. Okay, then what is our cadence to see how we're executing on it and seeing how we're going within that? Amyn: So I always think goal setting at the year, understanding what those rocks are each quarter, but then, hey, just because it's a status quo does not mean that's good enough. You know, so even in our curriculum, implementing coding and robotics, parent assessments that are digital. So you can see every, you know, every month, every two months, exactly what your child's doing in the classroom. Camera access. So as a parent, you can see exactly what's going on in your child's classroom. You know, those are not just tried and true things. Those are things that came from great communication with our parents, a team that is, you know, flexible, forthinking about what they would want to see as a parent and then great execution. Chris: Wow. That's great. So you mentioned robotics. I've got to ask, what are you doing or kind of what's on the horizon as it relates to your curriculum and your delivery of this, your childcare and child education, early childhood education as it relates to AI? Amyn: Yeah, I think that's a great question. You know, I think tools like AI are amazing. You know, there's so much that you can do in regards to communication, idea generation. You know, I think for us is just, hey, when it comes to technology, you know, how do we ensure that children today are well-equipped for their technological future? So when we talk about coding and robotics, it's not just sitting in a computer and coding, you know, for it. It's even from that two or three-year-old level of doing logic puzzles, if-then statements. If I take a certain input and I am bringing code puzzles to it, what do those outputs look like? So it's a great way of them to manipulate in a coding language, but not also spending time in the computer and being in front of a screen too, which also which shows you know, a negative impact due to research for that young and FNH, right? We're making steps towards that direction. We are not diving full ahead, you know, to me, it's one thing to be first in an area, but I'd rather do it best, right? And I'd rather do it where, you know, we're not just testing things on children, but we are providing something that is impactful. That's based on research that we know we can implement really well. And I think you're going to continue to see growth in that area, too. You know, other things is just back to a naturalistic component, having things like gardens in our schools, you know, teaching children, hey, the food does not just come from H-E-B. It comes from the ground, and this is why. So, you know, I think innovation is a big part of it. Chris: That's great stuff. I mean, I can imagine parents get excited about hearing about that fundamental learning that their kids are going to get to experience with you. Amyn: Yeah, absolutely. Building strategic relationships, you know, partnerships and things that you have, you know, obviously relationships with franchisees, but other key, you know, advisors or relationships you have. Let's talk in the context of the value you've seen in that, how you think that's helped grow the business and how you lean on those, you know, from time to time to get you through to the next stage, if you will. Chris: Yeah. I mean, I think you always want to be around people that are adding to your skill set and have exceptional talents in those skill sets. You know, I think about continual learning. Luckily, in franchising, it's an amazing model and way for people to share best practices. You know, the IFA International Franchise Association has amazing resources, especially for emerging franchisors. They have great conferences and that's a great way to share ideas. Amyn: You know, I'm part of a mastermind group of franchisors, 50 to 100 units. And just learning and seeing what best practices that they do. You know, they advocate a lot for transparency within a franchise system. Franchisees sharing what their P&Ls look like. What's going well, what's not going well in the business. And franchisees learning from each other and sharing best practices. You know, that's something that is important. We're implementing more in our business with benchmarking and KPIs and performance groups. Even being part of a local community, you know, I'm part of a Vistage group here in Houston. Chris: That sounds like an amazing asset. Amyn: Yeah, I think that is an amazing asset, going and meeting people in person, seeing their businesses, touring their locations. You know, I think sometimes being an entrepreneur, being a CEO can be a very isolating experience. Chris: For sure. Amyn: You know, all the fingers are pointing at you and all the hard questions come to you too. So being able to learn from others. I mean, learning from mistakes is great. Then you're not making them and they're less costly. So I'm always about trying to learn from other people. Chris: You alluded to one of my favorite questions there. So I always, I like to ask a guest, cause I do, we do learn from mistakes and it is nice if you can learn from someone else's, but has there been a setback or something you would describe, you know, a mistake or, you know, again, learning moment, like I mentioned earlier you've encountered? And let's talk about what that was, but what did you do to overcome it? What was the learning and how did it make you better? Amyn: You know, I think the learning that I encountered is not stepping into the business. And I think my idea of being a generalist came from mistakes, you know, being young and eager, wanting to jump in, hey, I can write this operations manual because I've spent time in the business or, you know, hey, use this marketing plan or this idea because it worked for me. You know, I think the big one was COVID early on. Oh my gosh, I was seeing the business totally transform. I felt the need to be in this. I need to be a wartime, you know, CEO or senior member. I need to be here. I need to be calling the franchisees. And really, our team had great ideas and approaches and they were thinking about the business and their fears around the business in a similar way that I was. Chris: Right. Amyn: Yeah. And the moment I snapped out of it was, hey, this training is great. I mean, but think about X, Y, and Z that the franchisee is going through. And I had my operations person tell me that. And I think it was a, oh my gosh, I've sucked myself into this business. Yes, there was a big change, but I talk about empowering my people. That also means not just when moments are good, but when moments are bad as well. So I think that goes both ways and people and relationships strengthen sometimes when you're giving someone the rope when the business is not going that well. Chris: Right. But I mean, that's powerful. I can certainly see how that was an aha moment for you. And again, for your people, right? That you trusted them enough in those times had to go a long way. Amyn: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, you know, it's kind of like war stories during COVID or the up and down, but, you know, having a kind of a business history and having institutional knowledge, I mean, those are amazing tenants. You know, a franchisee joins, they have now someone on the operations team that's been with you for 20 years. But you're also incorporating, you know, newer people who are excited about the culture that we're trying to build. That's really important. Chris: Yeah. Well, I think you've talked around this, but just to kind of crystallize it, I do want to ask, how would you describe your leadership style and how do you think that's changed or evolved over time? Amyn: That's a really good question. I mean, I would say I like to empower people, you know, I like to set goals and a vision. You know, we have a vision of where we want to be as a company, and I want to understand what people think and how they see us getting there. And I want us, and I'd like to see that individual develop KPIs. What they think are the right metrics. And I want to understand the rationale behind that. And then we'll get together and figure out alignment there. But I like to see how people think. I like to see thinking. I want a demonstration of why they are getting to that problem or what their reasoning is around that problem. Chris: That makes sense. Amyn: Then we check in and I let them do it. I always think about how I, you know, if I was the low man on the totem pole, how empowered would I feel? You know, what are my responsibilities? And I think that attracts, you know, passionate people. Chris: Yeah. Amyn: And that's what I want to see. I want to see passion because I'm giving that responsibility. You know, as you were talking, it made me think. You know, we talked about learning from bad experiences or, you know, maybe learning, seeing something and going, okay, I experienced this, but I don't want to repeat that. And I can't help but think you learned so much as an early analyst and how you were treated. Chris: Yes. Amyn: You go, if I'm ever in a position of leadership, I'm not going to do these things. And it probably serves as a good reminder and a guidepost for you. Chris: Yeah. Amyn: To say, no, you know, remember what I didn't like, and let's do the opposite. Chris: Right. Amyn: Yeah, you learn a lot from great managers and you learn a lot from not so great managers. Yeah. And, you know, I think I had a lot of those on my bucket list and I think a lot of just reflection too. I mean, you know, I really try and take feedback and I really try and understand. Hey, you know, I mean, I've made a lot of mistakes and I think it's just, hey, let me try not to make that same mistake a second time. Chris: Right? Amyn: But you know, the sad truth is you're going to make some more, as will I, and the goal is trying to make the same one twice, right? Chris: That's right. I mean, this has been great. What an exciting business you have going. I want to, before we wrap up, I just always like to ask a few, you know, maybe less serious questions. What was your first job outside of Ivy schools? Amyn: My first job was a company called Student Agencies, in college. I sold ad space on the maps that you'd see around the Ithaca campus and these brochures. And I also helped with marketing promotions. A promotion I actually dressed up in a mascot outfit was a big light bulb because it was for an entrepreneurship idea competition. Chris: That's great. Amyn: So, I was a light bulb for a few weeks around campus. Talk about humility, right? Chris: That's right. And if you sold ad space for a brochure, I have to believe you got used to hearing the word no. Amyn: Oh man, yeah. No is common. No is very common. Chris: Okay, so, grew up in Pearland, you know, Texan as you can get, so do you prefer Tex-Mex or barbecue? Amyn: Oh, Tex-Mex for sure. Chris: Something you missed when you were up in Ithaca, I guess. Amyn: Oh, man, yeah. You didn't see much Tex-Mex over there. Chris: Well, I mean, this has been a great conversation. Congratulations on the success of the family business and where you've taken it, you know, since joining and the franchise side of things. Really appreciate you sharing that story with us and wish you the best success in the future. Amyn: All right. Thank you so much, Chris. I enjoyed it. Special Guest: Amyn Bandali.

Building Texas Business
Ep082: From Corporate to Curls with Renee Morris

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 23, 2024 44:35


In this episode of Building Texas Business, I chat with Renee Morris, Chief Curl Officer at Uncle Funky's Daughter. We explore her path from management consultant to leading a national hair care brand. Renee shares her approach to maintaining business control by relying on personal savings and family support rather than external investors. She discusses forming partnerships with major retailers like Target and Walgreens while building a creative team to drive innovation. I learned how she tackles recruitment challenges and ensures brand visibility at a national level. Looking ahead, Renee explains her vision to expand into skincare and education, and serving communities of color in new ways. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Renee Morris discusses her journey from management consultant to Chief Curl Officer at Uncle Funky's Daughter, emphasizing her desire to balance career ambitions with family life. We explore Renee's decision to purchase an existing company rather than starting from scratch, leveraging her experience in sales and marketing strategy within the consumer products sector. Renee highlights the importance of having a financial safety net when transitioning to entrepreneurship, sharing her personal experience of not drawing a salary for years and relying on her husband's support. We talk about Renee's strategic decision to avoid third-party investors to maintain control over her business, focusing on conservative growth and solving customer problems. Renee explains her approach to forming strategic partnerships with major retailers like Target and Walgreens, discussing the role of distributors in helping small brands enter national markets. We discuss the challenges of recruiting and nurturing talent, emphasizing the importance of fostering a collaborative environment that encourages innovation and creative thinking. Renee outlines her vision for expanding the brand into adjacent areas such as skincare and education, aiming to serve the community of color more broadly. We explore Renee's leadership style, focusing on adaptability and learning from failures as she considers new business ventures. Renee shares personal insights from her early career and hiring experiences, emphasizing the importance of trusting one's instincts during the recruitment process. We examine the role of social media and influencers in maintaining customer confidence and visibility during brand transitions, particularly when changes are made to product packaging. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Uncle Funky's Daughter GUESTS Renee MorrisAbout Renee TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In this episode you will meet Renee Morris, chief Curl Officer at Uncle Funky's Daughter. Renee shares her passion for helping curly girls solve their hair problems with unique and innovative natural hair products. Renee, I want to thank you for coming on Building Texas Business. It's so glad, happy to have you as a guest. Renee: Thank you, I'm excited to be here. Chris: Okay, so you won the award so far for having the coolest and, I would say, funky, but that would be. Renee: Play on words Right. Chris: But as far as a name for a company, uncle Funky's Daughter, yes. Okay, tell us what is your company known for and what do you do? Renee: So Uncle Funky's Daughter is a hair products company. We're based here in Houston, texas. I bought the company, so the parent company is Rotenmore's Consumer Group. But I bought the brand Uncle Funky's Daughter 10 years ago from a husband and wife team. So Uncle Funky's Daughter curates natural hair products for women, men and children who choose to wear their hair naturally, and so that's shampoos, conditioners, curl definers, moisturizers, stylers, finishers. Shampoos, conditioners, curl definers, moisturizers, stylers, finishers you name it, we make it. We also have a thermal protection line for women who want to blow dry and style their hair with heat, and we're distributed nationally Target, walgreens, kroger, cvs, heb, locally, so you name it, other than Walmart, we're there. Chris: Beauty Easy to find, easy to find, easy to find well, I have to ask this because I have daughters. I mean Sephora or Ulta. Renee: No, Sephora or Ulta. Yet we've been working that line. We can talk about that as part of this deep dive, but we've been working that line and but no land in Sephora or Ulta just yet okay, very good. Chris: So how did you find your way into the hair care product world? Because you didn't start there. Renee: No, I am a former management consultant 20 years management consulting, advising clients multi-billion dollar companies on how to drive revenue growth and through sales and marketing. And I was a mother of three kids. At the time my son was probably three or four, my daughters were two and I was flying back and forth between Houston and New York for a client. And I had this realization that I didn't want to do that as a mom. I needed to be home, but I still wanted to be a career person. So I knew I am not built to be a stay-at-home mother. That is not who I am, and COVID taught me that with isolation. And so what I started deciding was I wanted to figure out what I wanted to do next and I realized I had some options. Right, it's that fork in the road that you go through. You start to look inwardly every time you have that fork in the road and I did that and I said okay, your option A is to go find a company based in Houston and be a VP or senior VP of some operation. Option B is you find a small company and you're like a big fish in a small pond kind of thing. Option C is you just go do your own thing. And after I kind of went through it, I realized I worked for the Coca-Colas, like in GE Capitals of the world, in my past. I didn't want to go work for a big company. I didn't think I wanted to work for a small company because of my personality style, right, um. And so I decided I wanted to go buy something and then or have my own company. And so then the question becomes do you build or do you buy my? I'm a management consultant by heart, so it's always go buy something. Why? Because I can take it, I can fix it and I can grow it. And so then it became all right, well, what are you going to go buy? And so, like most people out there, they're thinking about buying a company. I started reaching out to brokers, I started doing some networking, calling attorneys, people that work on deals, that kind of stuff, just putting my name out there, and I got all the things that you normally get when you're looking to buy a company the gym, the dry cleaner, the storage facility, the gas station, all the things that I didn't want to buy because I didn't have a passion for them. And so, also, for background, my consulting experience in sales and marketing strategy has been predominantly in consumer products. So I know consumer products, I know revenue growth, I know marketing strategy. So I was like okay, so I kept looking and I used this hair product called Uncle Funky's Daughter. I found it when I first moved here in 2000. Like all curly girls out there back then, that was almost 20 years ago, my goodness. But 15 years ago back then there weren't a lot of natural hair products out there for women of color and women of curly hair with curly hair specifically. And so I googled when I first moved here natural hair products, curly hair, houston and Uncle Funky Stoddard came up. I've never heard of this company right. So I go to rice village and buy this product and I start using it. Extra butter, start using it. And for those out there that are, you know, african American descent, you know thick, curly hair, we do this thing called two strand twists to what. I love it. Two strand twist. Chris: Okay. Renee: So, you take your hair and you twist it in like instead, instead of braiding it, you put it in twists, and there are single twists all over my head right. So that's how I would style my hair wear it, rock a two strand twist. Those out there will understand that, look it up and then Google it and then and so that worked on my hair really well. And so, again, for those with tight, curly hair, finding the right hair product that works for your hair is tough. It is not easy, as you know. One of your team members, courtney, was talking about. She's gone through all the products Because you go through this product journey trying to find something that works for you right. So found Extra Butter, worked, loved it, and then I would stop using it while I'm traveling because I would forget it right at home sure. I would go back to some other competitive brand and it didn't work for my hair. So I'm like, okay, uncle Funky's daughter is the only thing that works for my hair. So I go in to get my Uncle Funky's daughter one day, after I, you know, had braids and wash them out. And yada, yada, yada. I'm going in, I'm getting my extra butter and this guy behind the counter who I bought hair products from for the past at this point, five years, says yeah, my wife and I are going through a divorce and I'm like, oh, so I do have an MBA right. I'm not some, you know, trying to sound like a shark, but my MBA said distressed asset might be willing to sell stress asset might be willing to sell. Like literally, that is the voice that went in my head. And so I was like, oh really. So I stood there in that store and I just chatted with him for hours and about the company, you know what, you know personally what he was going through, because divorce, you know, for those that may have gone through it, can be an emotional, you know troubling time. So I was a listening ear. But as I'm listening, I'm also thinking about like, okay, what's the story behind the brand? Is this going to resonate? And I'm also watching people come in and out, right. And so I said, well, if you guys are you guys thinking about selling it? And he gives me a story about you know what's happening with the sell and cell and I said, well, if you're ever thinking about selling it, let me know. So I walk out, I Google, because you know this is horrible to say, but divorces are public right right. Chris: Is it filed in state court? Renee: it's a public record so I'm figuring out what's happening with the divorce and I find out that the company is in receivership. And for those who don't know, because I did not know at the time what a receivership was, a receivership happens when a divorce is happening and the husband and wife aren't operating, behaving appropriately. Chris: Well, they can't agree on the direction of the company and it can be not in a divorce. But basically, owners cannot agree and a court may appoint a receiver to run the company. Renee: Exactly. Thank you, that's why you're the attorney and a court may appoint a receiver to run the company Exactly. Chris: Thank you. That's why you're the attorney. Renee: Have a little experience with that yes, so the judge had appointed this guy to be the receiver. I reached out to the gentleman and I said I'm interested in the sale of Uncle Funky's daughter, if that so happens to be the case. And so the one thing I did learn and you can probably expound on this is oftentimes in a divorce, when the receiver comes in, at that point that receiver is really thinking about how to get rid of this asset. And so those are all the things that I learned during this process, and I was like, okay, so he wants to sell because he wants to get paid and he knows nothing about this business. Chris: He was, you know no offense, no emotional tie to it, for sure no emotional tie. Renee: He's an older white gentleman who knows nothing about black hair products and so I was like, okay, so he doesn't know, he doesn't have an appreciation for the value of the company. And so I reached out and I said, okay, here's a number. You wouldn't believe the number I gave him and he counted with some minor you, some minor adjustment, and we bought this company for less than $100,000. And they had a revenue at the time. When I saw their tax returns, I think it was maybe a million or so that they claimed in revenue. At some point they said, but at least for sure I think our first year of revenue was probably around and it was a partial year. Probably a quarter million dollars is what revenue they generated, and so we really, if you talk about a multiple of sales, we bought it on a tremendous it's a heck of a deal the deal. Okay, I can't find those deals these days. If anybody has one of those deals, you come let me know and so. So that's how we ended up buying this company ten years ago and shortly thereafter, target comes knocking at the door and says, hey, we were having this discussion with the owners about, you know, potentially launching. Would you be interested? And I'm like, absolutely. And it was because they were going through this divorce that they couldn't get over the finish line, right? And so shortly after we buy, we're launching in target. But before I did that, one of the first things I did was because, if you ever, if any, it's probably so old you can't find it. But the label. When I first bought the company, when I was buying it, it was this woman's face with a big afro on the front and it had a cute little 70s vibe on it and it was in this white hdpe bottle which, by the way, those aren't recyclable. So I said first, we need to change this, we got to change the packaging, we got to upgrade the label, we need to make it universally appealing to all curly girls, because if I look at a woman with a big afro, I think tight, curly hair like mine right and our products work across the spectrum from wavy, like Courtney, to really tight, like Renee, and that wasn't representative on the label okay so we redesigned the label, changed the bottle from an HDPE bottle to a PET bottle, which is recyclable, and then just upgraded this packaging to what I consider a sleeker new look. Chris: Very good, Great story, Thank you. So back up a little bit, share a little bit, because so you go from big corporate consulting job some comfort in there probably. You mentioned travel and you did mention the mom aspect playing a role. But let's talk a little bit about actually getting the courage to take that leap out of the big corporate role into. I'm going to buy something that's all on me now to either make it or break it. Yeah, that had to be scary. Renee: It was, and I am fortunate in that. You're right. I had comfort. We have financial security. I had a husband who was, who still is, who's a senior executive in medical devices has nothing to do with anything about consumer products, but you know, we have the luxury for him to say I can carry this load, financial load, and I think that's the big mix, right? I tell people all the time if you're going to take that leap, you got to make sure you've got cash flow, because for not only for your, you know, for the company, but for you personally, right? Because there were several years where my husband called my business a hobby Because I was contributing nothing to the financial plan. Chris: In fact, you were probably taken away. Yeah, I was taken away. Renee: So every year I mean. So I wasn't drawing a salary. I didn't draw a salary for a couple of years after I, I didn't draw a salary until our tax accountant said you have to draw a salary because we're changing you from whatever tax to an S-corp. And I was like oh, wow, really Okay. So what am I going to pay myself? Okay, and then he goes Well, you have, and it has to be reasonable. So for probably three or four years after I bought the company, I didn't draw a salary. I was paying my employees but I wasn't paying myself. And so I think and I say all that to say yes, it takes a leap, but it also takes the ability and the willingness to take that financial hit Right. So were there things that we probably wanted to do as a family that we didn't do? Probably so. Chris: Yeah. Renee: Because I'm growing this brand and was there times I went to my husband like I need another thirty thousand dollars? Probably so. And because one of the things I specifically had chosen is I did not want, and I currently still don't want, to pull in private equity, vc any type of third party investor funding. That is a personal decision I've made and it's because I am a former accountant and I'm extremely financially conservative and I also don't want different incentives to help influence how I run my business, different incentives to help influence how I run my business, and what I mean by that is I personally just didn't want to have a PE company saying you need to do these three things because your multi, your EBITDA needs to look like this and your revenue growth needs to look like that. Right, so I could have we could have easily grown really fast, like a lot of brands do, and grown themselves out of business, or, but I chose the path to grow really conservatively Now, and so I think I say all that to say I think, yes, financially speaking, having the bandwidth to be able to float yourself and your company for a while is critical, and so don't take the leap if you're still, if you're at your job today, living paycheck to paycheck right, you have to have a cushion. Your job today, living paycheck to paycheck right, you have to have a cushion. So what that means is, maybe if you're trying to start the company, then you're running your business while you're living paycheck to paycheck and oh, by the way, you gotta stop living paycheck to paycheck because you got to start to build that cushion, right. So some of the you got to make sacrifices and I think that's the hard thing. Not everyone's willing to make the financial sacrifice that it takes to really run and grow a business without third party support. Now, in today's world, you can go get bc capital funding and you know money is flowing, or at least it was, you know but there, but there's sacrifices, but there's sacrifices with that, and so, yeah, that's great advice, you know. Chris: The other thing that you mentioned, as you were evaluating companies is one of my favorite words when it comes to business is passion. You passed on a ton of things because you weren't passionate about it. Renee: Yeah. Chris: You found something you were passionate about, and I think that's a lesson for people too, right Is? It's not easy to do. As you mentioned. Sacrifices have to be made. So if you're not really passionate about that decision to go be an entrepreneur, start your own business. It's going to be tough. Renee: Yeah, it's going to be tough, and so, because I have to wake up every day, I my passion is really helping people solve problems, and I do that through hair, because hair is a problem in the curly hair community. How do I maintain frizz? How do I keep it under control? How do I keep it healthy so it doesn't break? How do I keep it healthy so it can grow? How do I stop the scalp irritation? There's so many problems that happen in hair and so I what I think about. Like literally yesterday I was with my marketing team and we're talking about a campaign for the next month for products etc. Or really November, and I said, OK, what problem are we helping her solve? And that's literally the way I think about stuff what problem are we helping her solve? Because if we're not helping her solve a problem, then I don't have anything to talk about. Chris: Ok, Right, yeah, it's not going to move off the shelf. Renee: It's not going to move off the shelf thing to talk about. Chris: Okay, right, yeah, it's not going to move off the shelf. It's not going to move off the shelf. So another thing that you kind of alluded to, you went through somewhat. It sounds like a kind of transforming the business that you took over, right? You mentioned the product label and packaging. Let's talk. What else did you, you know, in taking that business over, did you find yourself having to change, and how did you go about making those decisions? Are either prioritizing them and you know we can't do it all- at once yeah, so what walk? us through some of the learning you went through that well, you know what's interesting is. Renee: So it wasn't much of a transformation, but it was. If you think about learning from a marketing standpoint, if you're going to buy a business, especially a consumer product company, and you buy it in today's world where we're so used to knowing who the owner is the first people don't like change. So one of the first things I had to do was convince our current customers that nothing had changed other than the label. The minute your package changes and it looks different, they're like the formulas have changed, it's not the same be the same. It's not the same product. So the first thing I had to do was convince them that this is the same product. In fact, I brought back discontinued SKUs that the receiver had stopped selling because they were slow moving. **Chris: How did you go about convincing the existing customer base? Nothing changed. Renee: So news articles, facebook articles, facebook social ads, like having live conversations, going live on social media all of those were things that I had to go in and dispute or Dubuque being like I was the person respond. There was no team, it was me and one other person. The first person I hired was a social media person. Okay, wasn't a warehouse person, it was a social media person because I knew being the being in the face of the customer was so important. So being live and answering questions online, answering the phone and people would call they will go. I heard that this wasn't the same formula. No, ma'am, it's the same formula. And actually having those, it was me having those live, one-on-one conversations. And so I think really touching the customer and being personal with her was the key to our success in in gaining that confidence. And we also you know this was early in the days of influencers we also had to partner with people to be able to talk about. Like it's the same stuff, guys, this is the bottle. This is the old bottle. This is the new bottle. This is both sides of my hair, no change. Chris: Okay, okay, very smart to especially, like you said, I mean so many people now the social media influencers have such impact on what products get picked up in the mainstream. Advert Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom, and thanks for listening to the show. Chris:So let's move forward a little bit. Part of changing things new products. There's a level. You mentioned your marketing meeting yesterday. What do you do within the company to help kind of foster innovation and inspire your people to be innovative about the products? Renee: That's a tough one because it's hard. Here's the challenge that we have as a small company. As a small company, it's hard for me to afford to pay me like the equivalent of a me right. The woman or a man with the MBA in marketing who's got, you know, 10 years at Coca-Cola. I am oftentimes recruiting talent, that's learning and I'm teaching, as they, you know, grow up in our company and so innovation is really. You know, I'm usually in that meeting asking the provocative question Like do these assets, does this story come together like cohesively, what problems are we helping them solve? Like, I am there helping them think through and push their thinking a little bit forward. We'll sit and we just do brainstorming with, you know, little toys in the room and stuff to play with, but it's really just helping them kind of. All right, just toss some ideas out there. Let's just throw like what is this, what does this mean? What's her brand voice? What does she sound like? What does she look like? Like asking those questions to help them just kind of think outside of the box. Now, if she looks like this, so what kind of tone is she going to have? All right, so what would she say then? Okay, so let's talk about, like how then that manifests itself and how it shows up creatively, and so just helping them kind of drill down to the so what is really kind of the role I like to play. It's the role I'm playing right now because I'm looking for a marketing director. Chris: Okay, yeah, anybody listening out there. Renee: Anybody listening out there? Submit resumes. Chris: So you talked about some major players as partners that you have right, yeah. Target and Walgreens and CVS, et cetera. So let's talk a little bit about that. How did you go about? You kind of you told a little bit about Target, but what have you done and what have you found to be successful? And maybe strategies that weren't successful in forming those relationships, but maybe, even more importantly, fostering and maintaining those relationships. Renee: So forming on the forming side retailers. For those who may or may not know the space, they want to come to you in one of two ways either direct or indirect through a distributor. For a small brand like mine, it's usually hey, I don't want to service direct, I want you to go through a distributor. And usually it's because when you first launch, you're going to be in a handful of their stores not full distribution is what they call it so not in all 1700 Target stores, but I think we started out in a hundred and so we had to go through a third-party distributor, and so that distributor then opened the door to other national retailers for us. So if you're thinking about launching into a national retail partner and you're a small company like mine, your best route to market is finding a distributor that represents your category in a national retailer. So whether that's peanut butter, hair products, lotions, flat tires, whatever, so you have to go and find that distributor. So that was step one. Once we got that relationship, our job is to grow it by driving traffic through the stores and getting that sell through. If it's not generating units per store per week, it gets pulled right. So one person wisely said a retail shelf space is like real estate. Once you buy your home, you don't want to lose it to foreclosure. So once you've got that slot, my job is to defend those two slots. And when I say we're national retailers, we're not like a P&G where P&G dominates the shelf. We've got sometimes two slots, sometimes four, but we're not, we don't have 10. So our slots are really important for us at a retailer and so for me, maintaining the relationship comes back to driving the traffic to the store. But, more importantly, supply chain. So when I talked about growing too fast for some brands and having measured growth, it was very important for me because I understood I came from a consulting company, although I did did sales and marketing most of what we did as an organization was supply chain. I wasn't the supply chain person, but I like to say I knew enough to be dangerous when I bought Uncle Plunky's daughter. So because I understood supply chain, I knew that not, we could not risk. We needed to have safety stock, we need to have inventory levels that look like x, and so that's why I did what I called measured growth. And so you know the distributor may come to me and go. I can get you into Kroger, walmart. Nope, we're going to do one retailer a year, one big guy a year, because I need to make sure I can scale, I need to make sure my contract manufacturers can scale, I need to make sure my team knows what to do and they know how to execute and fulfill the requirements of that specific retailer and so that we are successful. So that was the way that we grew and that's kind of the way we've continued to grow. Chris: That's so smart, that discipline right. It's easier said than done, because you just start a company and you go a couple years not making any money, or what you do make you put back in the company and then you got all these great opportunities. Come at you once. Renee: It's easy to say yes yes, yes, yes and yes, but you can't fulfill those promises, no one will come back. And there are horror stories where brands have been like yes, I'll go into Target, walmart, kroger, heb, cvs and Walgreens all at the same time and they can't meet the demand or they launch and they don't have enough awareness in the consumer market to be able to support and drive the traffic in all of those stores. So you really have to focus on how you're going to grow, where you're going to grow, and how you're going to drive traffic into these markets and into those stores. Chris: I mean any details you can put behind that, just as some examples to make it a little more tangible of things that you did, things that you thought about. Okay, we have to get this right to kind of prove that we can go to the next level. Renee: Yes. So for Target we did a lot of in-store events, so we took Target. So imagine if I was doing replicating this across like five different retailers. But for Target back in the day, for social media was much more organic and less pay-per-play than it is now, right, so we would do like it's a 10-day countdown. You know, to Target we're launching in 10, 9, 8, like on social media, it was like running ads. Then we did a find us in the Target, so we would do these fun games on social media and our followers would have to find us in their local Target and if they found us and they won a gift card, so we were doing anything we could. We would do in-store events where we would just have a table popped up where you can try products, give away products, get coupons, you name it. We were doing it. Gotcha, we were doing events outside the store. Inside the store. I was rogue because I didn't have permission from Target to do this. I mean because that would have cost me tens of thousand dollars, right, Target, I hope you're not listening and so we would literally just grab a camera and kind of come in and we would kind of sneak our little basket through the store down the hall and we would sit in there and the manager would come like, oh, we're just doing some footage, and I would say I just launched and I'm really trying to help my business and they would get it because you know, their local store manager, and so they would allow us to do like a little bit of a, a little bit of a pop-up shop kind of thing, and they would allow it. Now, today they probably wouldn't allow it because we're probably a lot more disciplined, but 15 years ago, 10 years ago, they would allow it and so, yeah, so those are the things that we had to do. So imagine if I was doing that for sally, for walmart, for kro, all in the same year, and I'm still trying to drive the traffic right, because we were still a small brand. Chris: Sure. Renee: I still call us a small brand because you know, if I go to you and I say, have you heard of Uncle Funky's Daughter? And your answer is no, then I'm a small brand, right. If I say you cause, everybody's heard of Clorox, coca-cola, pepsi, all the things, right, lacroix, you name it, they've heard of it, they haven't heard of Uncle Funky's Daughter. And so we're still in constant mode of brand awareness, and so trying to build that brand awareness and drive demand in every retail shelf at the same time would have been a daunting task for a brand like ours. Chris: Sure, do you still have the Rice Village? No, okay, shut that down we shut it down. Renee: I shut it down when I bought the company. That was the condition of the acquisition, because the day that I went and discovered who the owner was of the brand and I was sitting there chatting up the guy, in about a four hour period that I was there, maybe three people walked into that door okay so that you know, my brain said all right, that's a like a revenue killer. I'm not, you're not driving revenue right you need to focus on driving traffic on the retail shelf, and so are. We have no physical retail store now. Will we once again one day, maybe in a different format? Right, because now you, my friends? Other people have said you guys should open up a salon, and I'm like so maybe we'll open up a salon where the products are available and featured, but a retail store exclusively focused on our products will not be in a timeline. Chris: Okay. So there's an example right of an idea from friends. Maybe you thought about it, of branching out from what's core to your business. So far you've said no because you haven't done it. Maybe it's still out there. Why have you not done that? And I guess what could you counsel some listeners if they're faced with that? Or maybe they've done it and trying to make it work Again. That's another danger point, right Before you kind of branch into something different. Renee: So there are two things what I think about. Again. I always go from management consultant first right when I think about my business. I don't think about it personally, right, I think about it objectively. So I can go deep in my vertical or I can go wide horizontally, and I can do both. And so right now, where we are as a brand, honestly, is we need to go deeper in R&D and innovation. So we have not had an opportunity to launch a new product since COVID, and so we're in the process of developing a new product, so that's my primary focus. A new product line so we're developing a new product line, so that's my front focus. New product line so we're developing a new product line, so that's my front focus. Then, as I start to think about adjacency, about how do we take our core and expand and pivot beyond. Do you go to Skin next and stay in consumer products and go into Skin? Do you go in the two places that I'm more actively looking at Skin is out there as a product extension, but that's still core to Uncle Funky's Daughter. Do you go and do you buy another small company within Rote Morris Consumer Group and now you build a portfolio of brands? Because that's, really what I wanted to do when I started Rote Morris Consumer Group. My vision is to have a portfolio of consumer goods brands that meet the needs of the community of color, whether it's beauty, so for beauty. So that could be hair, that could be skin, it could be makeup, it could be a variety of different things that help her solve her problems every day. So that's really the vision. And then I bought this building a couple years ago and we have this wonderful, amazing space, and so and I open up this space I'm looking around. What are we gonna do with the rest of this space? We have this whole first floor, we have a whole second floor that's unoccupied, and even before I bought the building, this idea of building talent and a pipeline of funky junkies is what we call our followers funky junkies yeah that's what we call our followers, our customers. But how do you start to build not only a pipeline of loyal customers but a pipeline of loyal users? And so I started thinking about what if you actually had a trade school? What if you actually started? What if you were the next Paul Mitchell for African-American hair products, right when there's a Paul Mitchell school and you're teaching natural hair instead of you know other treatments that they do, and those exist outside of Texas. There's one that exists in Houston, but not focused on natural hair, but focused on beauty school. And so for those people out there who choose to have a different path in life and not go to college, but they're looking for a vocation or trade school and they want to be a hairstylist or barber, do you create a space for them to be able to do that? So that's the second adjacency. And then the third adjacency is then do you go the other end? So I know how to do hair, I'm learning how to do hair, I've got hair products, I'm doing hair on the other side and that's where the salon comes in. So in all both ends of the spectrum, I am a deep analytical person, so it's understanding what's happening in the market. So in the salon side, you look and you have to figure out and this is for anyone right. You never take a leap in adjacencies just because you think you have the money, the capability, the resources, whatever. You have to understand what's happening in the market because you're not smarter than the whole market. You might be smarter than a couple people in the market, but not the whole market. And so when I look at the hair salon space, I knew of several people in the Houston market that had launched salons and they had failed. They had failed within a three-year cycle and they had failed because the type of offering service offering that they wanted to provide was challenging. And that's the same service offering that we would need to provide as a brand. Chris: Right. Renee: And resources and talent. Going back to this other end of the pipeline I was talking about, in the supply chain, those can be sometimes challenging resources to recruit and retain in a salon side, and so when I do the analysis, it's looking at the risk versus reward. How am I smarter than the next person? How do I learn from those failures and ensure that I can recruit talent where I'm not? I don't have a high degree of turnover. I can create brand consistency. I can create service levels that meet the needs of not only what I want to offer, but what our customers expect. I need to exceed it, and so, because I haven't gotten that magic formula yet, we're leaving the salon right here in the marketplace. Chris: It's still on the drawing board right. Still on the drawing board, I like. I like it well, as it should be, until you figure it out, right? Yeah well, so let's turn a little bit and talk a little more about you yeah in leadership. How would you describe your leadership style? How do you think that's changed or evolved in the last 10 years? Renee: so I am a type a, hardcore type a. I am a driver and I know that about myself. But I also know that one of my weaknesses as a leader is I don't micromanage. What I have learned to evolve because of my consulting background, right In a consulting world you know 20 plus years is how I was trained. I'm a former salesperson. You just go get it done right, you know. So that is that's kind of like my bread and butter, and you have a team of type A's that are pretty much driven just like you are. So when you guys have a clear plan and you've got the end goal, all you're doing is managing the type A's to make sure that they get to the goal right at a very high level. No one needs to. You set meetings to review the spreadsheet and the spreadshe's done right. Fast forward to Uncle Funky's daughter. You set meetings to review the spreadsheet and it's like, oh, I wasn't sure what I wanted to do, what you wanted me to do, so it requires much more. What I'm learning is it requires me to evolve my leadership style from one that's hands off, that's a little bit more hands-on, to make sure that my team understands where the bar of excellence is what our customers want from us, what the implications are when we miss deadlines, what the implications are if we ship the wrong product to the wrong customer, and so showing them and teaching them is where I've kind of learned. That's where my role is as a leader, really helping them really understand the implications of behaviors. And so I've evolved to from a leader that's I'm still. I still tell my team hey, I don't micromanage. If I have to, if I know it before you do, that's probably a problem, and so so they understand that, and so I think I'm still evolving my leadership style to adapt to a smaller company with a different team that thinks differently from the type A consultants with the MBAs that I'm used to working with, to the ones who you know maybe they don't have the MBA or maybe they're going to get it, or maybe they have a desire to get there, and so it really has required. It's a growth opportunity for me that I'm still learning to grow in, to be able to shift my mental mindset away from I got a team of driven people to I got a team that needs to be inspired, you know. Chris: Yeah, that's great. So what have you done to try to help you in the hiring process? Make sure you're making the best decision you can make about who you're bringing on your team? Renee: You know it's the hire slow, fire quick. Chris: Yes, another easier said than done. Renee: Easier said than done and that's where I am right now. Even in this open marketing director job that I'm looking for, it's really making sure I've gone through I go through so many, I go through all the resumes. My assistant will filter out the trash. But once she's filtered out the trash, I'm looking at those resumes going okay, is this someone who's going to? Because I'll openly say the reason I'm looking for a marketing director. I'll tell you this story. So I hire this person and she's from Adidas. She comes from Adidas background in marketing and she's Under Armour in marketing and she was in Latin America director of Latin America markets and she's just moved from Houston. So I'm thinking I've got a Latina because it's part of my demographic. That's awesome. She's got this global brand experience that's awesome. All in athleisure but transferable skills. It's marketing. She quits three months later, found another job in athleisure. So I interviewed, interviewed and found this one and this woman, you know, sold me on. I mean we had multiple conversations. I was like you know, sold me on. I mean, we had multiple conversations. I was like you know, hey. Chris: I'm really concerned about whether or not you know you can migrate from big company to this small company Cause it is a very valid concern. Renee: It's a big change. Right, you don't have a team. Your team is a team of three, not a team of 20. Right, and so your role really changes. And so she. You know, she convinced me that, but the lesson learned was that you know my spidey senses. I didn't listen to them. Like my spidey senses said, she may not stay. Like there were little things that happened along the way you get enamored with all the other stuff. Right, but I was so hungry to have a big company, someone to come in to show my team other than me, for them to hear it from someone other than me that this is what marketing looks like, Right, this is the marketing discipline that we need to have. And so she came in. She brought some marketing discipline. She heard that, you know she brought some value in the three months, but it was. It's been really a painful learning process, right, because now I'm short of marketing director, I'm stepping in, yeah, yeah. Chris: Well, what you alluded to there, right, is just the cost hard cost and soft cost when you make a bad hiring decision yeah Because you know you're having to fill the role or someone else. Renee: Yep, so that distracts, you, it's me right now. Chris: It distracts you from doing your full-time else. Yep, so that distracts you. It's me right now. It distracts you from doing your full-time job. Yep, you're now spending time going through resumes and going to be interviewing and you wasted, if you will, all the time on the one that only lasted three months. Yeah, so there's a lot of cost there. There's a lot of cost there. Renee: And then you're sitting there and knowing I've got to restart this whole process, I've got to try to maintain the momentum within my team this is the second marketing person they've had in the past year so and so how do you start to just kind of manage through that and so, instead of and when you get burned, that one time, as I'm looking at resumes, I'm looking at people with deep experience in a particular industry and I'm going oh nope. Chris: Learn, that is, that there's that bias creep right you're. You have to not let yourself penalize these people you've never met, just as they might look the same on paper yeah, as the one bad actor in the group. Renee: Yeah, and so you and you're right, and so I'm going well, and I'm having these conversations and then yeah, so it's just. Yeah, I think that's like one hiring, firing, hiring slow, firing quick. Chris: Sometimes, even when you hire slow, you still get I tell people it's part science, it's part art and it's the more process I think you can put in place and follow the better. But you're never going to be 100 right and I think figuring out the characteristics that work in your organization is something that you can incorporate into your hiring process and know that this is the kind of background traits, characteristics that thrive here. Renee: Yeah, and even and I would also say, listening to that, you know, those spidey senses that are coming with those thoughts creep in like, and they were coming like there were things, there were triggers that happened through the hiring process. Then I was like I'm not sure she's going to be a good fit. Like you know, for example, she called and said hey, can I work from home? I was like no, you cannot work from home. So that was like that was. Oh, renee, we're gonna do a whole episode on work from home. Oh yeah, oh yeah. And so those were the triggers of like, okay, she might not be the good fit. And when those were the when that happens to you, you got to listen to it and like and be okay with backing out. But I didn't listen to the trigger because we were so far down in the negotiation and I should have just said, you know, I don't think this is going to work out Right, and rescinded the offer. But I had already extended the offer, right, and I didn't want to have egg on my face. Chris:Sure. Renee: So I mean I, what I should have done is just let my ego go, rescinded the offer and continue to look. Chris: Yeah, or at least be upfront about this is starting to give me concerns. Here's why. Renee: Yeah. But I you know you know it's which I did that I did that okay, she covered it up she covered that up. She told me exactly what I wanted to hear, but still the those doubts were in my head and I should have listened to my gut. And that gut is a powerful thing. You know that, maxwell Galt, maxwell Galt Gladwell, it's a powerful thing. And if, when you listen to it, you're usually right, 100%. Yeah, 100%. Chris: Renee, this has been a fascinating conversation. Just to wrap it up, I have a few just personal things. I always like to ask yeah, what was your first job as a kid? Renee: Newspaper. I was a newspaper girl. You had a newspaper route? Yes, Absolutely I did. I'll be darned. My sister got up in the morning and helped me through my newspapers. Chris: You're not the first guest. That was their first job it was fairly common. Renee: You had to make me dig deep for that one. Chris: Okay, you made me dig deeper on this one. Sometimes people say this is the hardest question. Yeah, do you prefer Tex-Mex or barbecue? Renee: Barbecue no sauce Seasoned, very well seasoned, no hesitation. Chris: No, no hesitation and the woman knows what she wants. Yes, right. Renee: Don't bring me brisket with sauce on it. No. Chris: No sauce Extra seasoned. Renee: I want seasoned brisket, the moist kind. Okay, and, by the way, I'm not a Texan, but I moved to Texas and now I've been here 15 years and now it's like brisket barbecue. It's the only thing that I eat. Chris: I eat it's the only thing I want to eat. I might die of a heart attack, but it's the only thing I want to eat. I love it All right. So because you have four kids and I know your life's running crazy, this will be more of a fantasy. Renee: Yeah, if you could take. Chris: If you could take a 30 day sabbatical, where would you go? What would you do? Renee: Oh, I would be somewhere, probably in South Africa, in the, probably on a safari. I would tour safaris. I would go South Africa, kenya. I want to see the migration of animals. I would do that. Chris: I love it. Renee: That's where I would be. Chris: Renee, thank you so much for being on. This has been just a pleasure getting to know you and hear your story. Renee: Thank you. This is awesome. I listened to NPR how I built this. So this is like my. I feel like I'm excited. I've kind of done the NPR check. I like the how I built this check. Do you listen to that? Chris: I do, I do, I love it. I love that analogy. Renee: Yeah, it's great. Chris: Thanks again. Renee: Thanks for doing this. Special Guest: Renee Morris.

The End of Tourism
S5 #9 | We Will Dance With Stillness w/ Craig Slee

The End of Tourism

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 17, 2024 60:31


On this episode, my guest is Craig Slee, a disabled writer, consultant and theorist dealing with mythology, folklore, magic and culture, exploring life through the lens of landscape, disability and fugitive embodiments.He has contributed essays and poetry focusing on the numinous and disability to various anthologies including The Dark Mountain Journal. Craig has also co-facilitated multiple seminar series at the Dresden Academy for Fine Arts, regarding ableism in the arts, as well as how ableism affects our relationship to space. In 2023 he was one of the speakers at the World Futures Studies Federation 50th Anniversary Conference, introducing the concept of (Dis)abling Futures. Craig resides in the northwest of England.Show NotesCornwall and the Seasons Who Gets to Decide What it Means to Know a Place?The Folding in of Identity to TourismA Question of Productive vs Generative AbilityAbleism and AttentionFinger Bending and the Freedom of MovementRedefining and Remembering Other Forms of MovementWhat is Stillness?The Dance of MountainsObeying LimitsHomeworkCold Albion (Craig's Blog)Goetic Atavisms (Hadean Press)Craig's Blue Sky Page | Facebook PageTranscriptChris: Welcome to the End of Tourism, Craig. Craig: Thank you for having me. Chris: Yes, it's great to be able to speak with you today. I've been ruminating for a couple of years now as to the themes that we might speak of. And I was introduced to you via a mutual friend and have come closer to your work via the Emergence Network's online gathering, We Will Dance With Mountains, in the last quarter of 2023.And so, to begin, I'd like to ask you first where you find yourself today and what the world looks like for you, where you are. Craig: Where I find myself today is by the canal in my flat, looking out the window, just as evenings coming in, in the northwest of England, in Lancaster, and it's chilly here which is actually a good thing, I guess, these days.Chris: Perhaps I could ask you to elaborate a little bit on what Lancaster looks like, but I know that, you know, from our conversations previous that you grew up [00:01:00] in Cornwall, a place that was previously, a town, an area devoted to fishing and mining, and from what you've told me, it's also become a massive tourist trap that you know, from the little that I've seen online, that the area receives around 5 million visitors a year, and tourism makes up about a quarter of the local economy.So I'm curious what you've seen change there and what do you think has happened to Cornwall and its people as a result and maybe there's something in there as well regarding Lancaster. Craig: Yeah, so I should emphasize this. I was born in Cornwall. My family has been lived down there for many many generations anyway and my father's side of the family actually, at various points, worked in the tourist trade as well before they went on to other things.And, [00:02:00] yeah, I mean, I left because, frankly, there was no jobs that weren't tourism. I came to Lancaster to study because one, I have a physical disability which means that Cornwall is a very rural area, so you need to drive everywhere, and that's fine, I drove at that point, but for good or ill, a more urban center was better for me later in life as I left.But the way that it shifted, even in the years when I was growing up, was that, you know, essentially was a rural area where nothing really happened socially or culturally that much until the summer seasons. So, you were very, very aware of the seasons in terms of, you'd have visitors [00:03:00] starting, and that was when the town would wake up, and then it was kind of dead for the rest of the year, so it was very much one of those things where the tourist trade has actually made me more aware of human rhythms in the natural world than perhaps I would have been, because it's so based on seasonal stuff.And just looking at the way the infrastructure because a lot of the towns and areas, they boomed a little bit well, quite a lot in certain areas with the tin mining of the 19th century. But a lot of the architecture and things like that was 19th century. So you had small villages and slightly larger towns, and they have very, well, I guess some people, if they were tourists, would call "quaint, narrow streets."And when you have that many visitors, in the summer, you can't get down the streets. [00:04:00] You can't drive it because it's full of people walking. You know, there's an interesting anecdote I'd like to recount of when my father, he was a vicar, he was a priest, moved to a new area he would go to the local pub and all the locals would greet him as the priest and be like, very polite.And then when it would come out that my dad was actually a local, that he was born down there and part of the family, everybody would relax. And there was this real sort of strange thing where people came and stayed because it was a lovely area, but there was still that whole issue with second homes and certainly keeping an eye on things from a distance here during the pandemic when people left cities during the pandemic, they went down there amongst places in Britain.And that meant that, [00:05:00] literally, there were no houses for newly starting teachers, you know, teachers who had got jobs and were moving down there, couldn't find places to live because during the 2020 and sort of 2022 period, everything was just opening up either as Airbnb because there was this influx from the cities to the more rural areas because it was supposedly safer.You know, and I feel like that's a reflex that is really interesting because most people think of it as, oh, "a tourist area," people go there for leisure, they go there to relax and get away from their lives, which is true, but under a stressful situation like a pandemic, people also flee to beautiful quotes isolated areas, so there's that real sense of pressure, I think and this idea that we weren't entirely sure, growing up, [00:06:00] whether we would have a place to live because a lot of the housing was taken up by people with second homes. And plenty of people I went to school with because it's a surfing area took the knowledge that they learned in the tourism trade, and actually left and went to Australia. And they live on the Gold Coast now. So it's this self perpetuating thing, you know? Chris: Well, that leads me to my next question, which kind of centers around belonging and being rooted and learning to root, maybe even becoming a neighbor or some might say a citizen of a place.And with tourism or a touristic worldview, we seem to be largely stunted in our ability to know a place, to become part of that place in any significant or enduring sense of the word. And so, I'm curious what your thoughts are on what it means to know a place, [00:07:00] and perhaps on the often mad rush to say I know a place for the sake of social capital, you know, given the context of the kind of relative difficulties that one might incur, or in a place like Cornwall, and the relative degree of exile that forces people out.What do you think it means to know a place in the context of all of these economic pressures denying us that possibility, or at least making it really, really difficult. Craig: I think we have a real problem in modernity with the idea of knowing as a sense of capture, right? So if I know you, I have this boundary of this shape, this outline of Chris, right, that I can hold, that I can grasp. And I think sometimes when we say, "oh, I know a place," or, "oh, I know a person" there's no concept of the [00:08:00] ongoing relationality. You know, you capture the image and then you keep it. And it's a whole construct of extractive knowledge that really, I think, comes down to the idea that the humans are the ones who get to decide what a place is, right?So. I could say in the standard sense, "Oh, I know Cornwall because I, you know, I grew up there for nearly 20 years." My family has been there since about the 1500s. You know, "I know a place, it's in my bones." Yada yada yada. All the metaphors you want to use. But the fact of the matter is, the place itself influences me more than I influence it. So there's this strange sense of belonging in which modernity [00:09:00] says "I belong" or "it belongs to me" rather than perhaps the place has extended hospitality to me and allowed me to grow and I could live/work in a place for 30 years and never know it because we're not comfortable as a culture with the idea of going, "I don't know this place."And it's a variety. It's always changing. And I think about all the times I used to watch the sea and talk to folks whose parents were fishermen or lifeboatmen, and they'd be like, "Yeah, we know the waters, but the waters can change. We know roughly what they do under certain conditions, but we don't know them completely, because they can always surprise us."And So, when somebody says, "oh, you're from Cornwall, you're a Cornishman," and all that sense of identity, [00:10:00] I'm like, "yeah, but that's, that's both really fluid for me, because, you know, there's a lot of history." Is it the tourist world of the 20th and 21st century, or is it the farming and the mining that goes back to the Neolithic?How we relate to a place purely in a modern sense isn't, to my mind anyway, the only way to conceive of belonging because, even though I'm now 300 miles away from there, I have its isotopes, its minerals from drinking the water in my teeth, you know. So, on some level, the idea that you have to be in a place also to belong to a place is something that I'm curious about because, there's this whole notion, [00:11:00] "you're only in the place and you've been in a place for this long and that means you know it and you're local." Whereas growing up, there was this sort of weird thing where it was like, "yeah, you might have been here 30 years and everybody knows you, but you're not a local." Right? You still belong, but there was this other category of " you're not local or something like that."And so it's complicated, but I really do, for my personal take, tend to look at it as a, the landscape, or wherever it is, influences my sense of belonging in a non human context, or more than human context, if that makes sense. Chris: Hmm. Yeah, there's so much there. Yeah. I mean, I'm also, in the context of identity, also wondering in what ways, not only has the tourism industry shaped one's identity of being local, which [00:12:00] is, I think, a huge issue in over touristed places in the last, you know, 10 or 20 years, as identity politics rises into the mainstream, and but then also not just the industry and the interaction with foreigners or, or guests, or tourists, but the way in which the image of that place is crafted through, often, ministries of culture or heritage, you know, so you could grow up in a place that isn't necessarily overly touristed or anything like that. But then have your identity crafted by these ideas of culture or heritage that the government's, federal and otherwise, have placed on people.Craig: And especially because where I come from, Cornwall, actually had its own language, which died out, which was on the verge of dying out in the 19th century. And slowly there are more speakers of it now. And you go back there now and you'll find, [00:13:00] even when I was growing up it wasn't so prevalent, but you'll find a lot of the signs for the street signs will have the English and the Cornish.So that's where the government has embraced this identity and enhanced it after people have been saying, you know, "this is a language we've rebuilt it. It's cousin to Welsh and Breton. We should use it. It's part of our identity and it's got folded into that." And so the infrastructure itself is now been part of that. You know, those very same streets have a name that wasn't known for like, 50, 60, maybe to 80 years, and suddenly people are now deliberately using the old names in non English languages because of that. And it's very strange because, especially in the UK, what with all [00:14:00] of Brexit and all that, there is a very weird sense wherein the rest of England, i. e. North and London and those sort of areas don't understand because Cornwall was a peripheral area and much like Wales, there's a lot of distrust of central government. Hmm. So, you've got this whole construction of a personal identity of nobody actually really understands what goes on outside. Either they're incomers, either they're emmets. You know, which "emmets" is the old English for "ants." Referring to tourists as ants in a kind of, yeah, they get everywhere. And the whole notion of who we are is always constructed. But in that case, going away and coming back to visit, I'm going, "Well that street didn't [00:15:00] have that label on it when I left. But it does now. And so in a certain sense it's the same place, but it's got this overlay of somewhere different that really enhances that sense of layers for me of "which Cornwall?" "Which of any of these places are we talking about?"Like you say, is it the one you see on a picture postcard or an Instagram or is it the ones who sat there as kids going, right, 'there's nothing to do, let's go and drink in a field?' You know and all of these things can co exist.Chris: Hmm, right. Yeah, I just interviewed a friend of mine, Christos Galanis, who did his PhD on hillwalkers, as well as homecomers in the Scottish Highlands, so people who spend their weekends climbing, summiting the Highland Mountains, and also the Canadian or Americans who travel to Scotland on heritage trips or ancestral [00:16:00] journeys. And he mentioned how in the Highlands that the governments have placed the original Gaelic place names on all of the the signs there, whether you're entering a village or perhaps on the street signs as well.And that he said that something like "only three percent of the of the people in Scotland actually speak, speak Gaelic," so they see the sign, they see the name, the vast majority of people, and they have no idea what it means. And I also remember the last time I was in Toronto, which is where I'm from originally, or where I grew up.And my family grew up in the east end of town, and the main thoroughfare in the east end of town is largely referred to as "Greek Town." You know, when I was a kid it was certainly Greek Town. The Greek letters, the Greek alphabet names as well as the English names of the street signs in that area.But it's much, much, much less Greek than it was 25 years ago, right? So again, [00:17:00] this question of like, is that to some extent trying to solidify the kind of cultural geography of a place. That people come to that street and that neighborhood because they want to experience Greekness in its diasporic kind of context.And yet, so many of those people, so many of those families have moved on or moved along or become more Canadian in their own sense of the word, so. Craig: Yeah. It's very strange as well because things like that attract... there's a loop obviously, because you'll get people coming to experience the greekness or the cornishes, and people will be like, oh, we should open a business that will enhance the greekness or the Cornish of the place, and that will draw, and it just becomes this thing and, yeah.Yeah, it's very strange. And I would totally agree with you on that one. Chris: Yeah. [00:18:00] Yeah. Until like a Greek person from Greece or a Cornish grandmother comes into town and says like, what? No, that's not Yeah. Oh, yeah. So I'd like to shift the conversation, Craig, a little bit towards ableism, and begin with this question that comes from our dear mutual friend Aerin and who admits that she's happily robbed it directly from Fiona Kumari Campbell.Yes. So, you might have heard this question before but she she felt the need to kind of pose it anew and and so the question is this. How does disability productively color our lives and Aerin wanted to ask it, to modify it slightly and ask, how does disability generatively or creatively color our lives? Craig: I can't speak to anybody's life other than my own really. But I would say that for me disability has, [00:19:00] one, given me a real sort of ability to look at the world and go, "you guys think this is how everything works and it clearly doesn't."You know, it has given me a generative gift of going, "hold on, what people think of the default really isn't the default, because I was never born as the default, and so I've had to find my own way of relating to the world" and that means that anybody goes anytime anybody goes "Oh, well, everybody knows..." or "the only way to do it is this?" I am always going "are you absolutely sure about that?" You know, "are you absolutely sure that what you're looking at or experiencing or noticing is only perceivable in one way, it's only ever [00:20:00] frameable, in one context?" But also this idea for me that disability is simply a fact.It's not good or bad. It is a thing that exists in the world and ableism is essentially the urge to measure against the vast field of disability and impairment and go, "We don't want that. That's the worst thing to be. So, we will strive to not be that." As Fiona Kumari Campbell would say, " It sets up a ranking and notification and prioritization of sentient life."So, this is why we, to a certain extent, we have such a obsession with youth culture. Young, healthy, fit folks are in some way better than the elderly. Oh god, nobody wants [00:21:00] to get old cause, if you're of white extraction, "oh, they'll probably stick you in a home."Nobody wants to conceive of the idea that actually you can have a generative and intimate relationship with somebody, not necessarily a romantic one, but a deep, deep friendship that also involves, frankly to put it crudely, perhaps wiping somebody's arse, right? There's this whole notion of messiness and failure and why Aerin reworded it from "productive" to "generative" is that whole idea of being productive, of having capitalist use, to produce, to make for purposes. And for me, disability and the field of disability in which I exist says "I exist and I don't have to be productive." it really [00:22:00] challenges the capitalist framework for me. And also, ableism, because it's set up to rank things like speed, mobility, all kinds of things like that, having a disability where you're sitting there going, but there are other ways to do this. There are other ways to exist. To notice the way our bodies move that are mostly ignored in the sense of "yeah, we don't pay attention to our posture or our muscle structure or what our guts are doing because we're all already forced along to the next thing.You know, we're already touring from, "okay, I've got up in the morning. Next thing I've got to do is have breakfast," right? And if you can easily shift between those stages, so you get up in the morning, start your breakfast, put your clothes on easily. [00:23:00] You don't think about it as much, but if it takes you 10, 20 minutes to even get out of bed and you have to do specific things, maybe exercises, maybe things like that, the whole process thickens.And in a sense, for me, it's an antithesis to escapism because there are things you cannot escape. There are things you have to deal with. And because there are things you have to deal with, you have to pay attention to them more. And that means the most ordinary mundane thing becomes or can become, if you're willing to gently sense it, a lot richer.So, this is one of those interesting things where if people want to go places to experience new things, Okay, that's a whole issue that you've obviously talked about throughout the podcast, but there is a certain sense in [00:24:00] which we don't even know where we started from. We've not explored our own bodies.I mean, I wrote a piece in 2020 when all the lockdowns hit that got shared around various bits of the internet and I think even in the newspaper at one point in, but I got a request to syndicate it, of how to exist when you're stuck in your house. You know, what do you do to "keep," in inverted commas, "sane," which, of course, is an ableist framework, but what do you do to stop yourself from losing mental health? How do you function? And I broke it down and I sort of made practical suggestions of, this is how I, as somebody that doesn't actually have a, quotes, "normal life," and spends a lot of his time unable to travel or go out much, stops myself from feeling isolated, [00:25:00] because I've ended up having to learn to explore what some might regard as a limited domain.But to me, that limited area, that limited domain has given me this sense of vastness that's, you know, I can't remember which philosopher it is, but there is a philosopher who basically says, I think it is a Camus, who says "you just need to reopen when you're in your room and the whole world will reveal itself to you."And when you don't have a choice, when you're stuck in chronic pain, or sickness, or something like that and you have to work out what to do with your limited energy, to embrace life, there becomes a sort of challenge, to go, "okay, how can I feel like things are enriching? How can I, almost metabolize the things that other people would reject.⌘ Chris Christou ⌘ is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.You know, [00:26:00] because disability is so "Oh, it's so sad he's disabled. Or we've got the cure for this and that. And we've got to cure it." And it's not really about ameliorating suffering. Which is a good thing. It's an analoid good to ameliorate any form of suffering. But there is this sense that the only way to perceive the world is through a so called "non disabled" abled body.The only way to experience a rich world, and again, I'm not knocking people who do a lot of travelling per se, but the only way to experience the world is to go on long journeys, and backpack and explore you know, new ways of thinking. That's great. And I'm not saying you can do exactly the same at home, but you can also become radically hospitable to yourself and to the environment in which you find [00:27:00] yourself.And that opens a whole lot of doors that I think I would regard as generatively colouring life and revealing life. In a way that was possibly occluded before. Chris: Yeah, I mean, so much of what I've come to in the research around tourism and hypermobility is this question of limits.And that certainly comes up in other themes, in other contexts. But not just the limits to one's place. Like, where does your place end? But also the limits of the human body. And, when we talk about freedom generally in the West, or in, in the context of modernity, it's so often pinned or underpinned via the freedom of movement, in part, because I know you're coming from the other side of the Atlantic, but certainly in, in this part of the [00:28:00] world, in the Americas and especially North America, freedom is understood as freedom of movement because that's in part how, the states and, and the nation's existences are justified.And so, I would just ask you what you think of that in the context of freedom being, of course a synonym for liberation. And how so many of our western notions of freedom are attached to movement and have. To a large degree become glorified in the hyper mobility of our times.Craig: I would agree with you. I think it was always there because of the colonial urge, but I think North American notions of freedom have, through a certain cultural hegemony, filtered back. You get it in the media, even Star Trek, you know, the final frontier, you know. Things like that. Or wide open spaces. There's still this notion of, freedom to move, room to live. It has its own European context and [00:29:00] horrors, unfortunately.But also, I think the notion of freedom as freedom to move. There is a question there for me, because I'm not sure we know what we're doing when we move. Right? And one of the questions that always was raised for me is, if I raise my finger, as I'm doing now, and I bend it so it's 90 degrees, how did I do that?What did I do? Well, science would say, okay, you used all your tendons and so on and so forth, and I'm like, yeah, "okay, those are nice descriptors. But what did I actually do?" Where's the connection between the impulse and the urge to bend my finger? Right. I don't know what I did there. I just thought I'm gonna bend my finger and the [00:30:00] finger bent But there's a whole bunch of stuff going on.So when I'm thinking about freedom of movement First the question is, "freedom to move in what way?" Right? So the the classic example is, in perhaps North America and and English speaking countries is "to go where I want, when I want, with none to to gainsay me, none to say you can't go there," which has been problematized thanks to the history of enclosure of land and capture by state and political actors, but also this notion that if you get into a city and you can go and people go, "Oh, I'm free to go wherever I want."I always sit there and I'm going, "yes, but you can go wherever you want, but if a place has stairs and no lift..." right? I [00:31:00] can't go there. So do I have less freedom? Well, according to the traditional notions of freedom, yes. I am less free. When I grew up, as an example in the UK I went to America when I was about four or five, and I was absolutely stunned by the amount of public toilets that had a disabled toilet.Right? Because virtually nowhere where I grew up at that point had a disabled toilet. This was due to the fact that the U. S. has a disability rights movement that was slightly ahead of the U. K. 's. So I was freer to go about my holiday in the U. S. than I was technically at home. I couldn't go certain places because there weren't toilets, or there weren't ramps, because that had not been legalized. You know, there'd been no legislation. In the UK, there was [00:32:00] no disability legislation until 1995. You know, so technically, I was born in 1981. I had no specific extra legal rights that I needed for 14 years. Now some would say, "oh, that, you've got freedom there... the law has given you freedom.It's giving you the ability to move, but it's only given me the ability to move in approved ways, right? And so every single time somebody talks about room to move, my query is always, okay. "One, as I said, move in what way? And two, who taught you what method of movement is approved or disproved?" So, particularly in Europe, we have folks like the Romani, the Irish travellers, [00:33:00] even the so called New Age travellers, right, who are nomadic folks.And despite this obsession with freedom, the idea that people are nomadic, are shiftless and rootless, still exists. Yes, a degree. The degree of privilege, the degree that I could be, quote, "more confident going into public spaces." And you'll see this in American history and throughout European history as well.And when I was talking about the nomadic folks, I was saying, you know, there are only certain people who are allowed to move in certain ways, to travel in certain ways that are approved. In similar ways with disability there were only certain kinds of people who were allowed into public spaces.They might not have been legislated against in the mid twentieth century. They might have struck those off the books, but at [00:34:00] various points, at least in the US, if you look up the Chicago Ugly Laws, people who were regarded as vagrants or unsightly, were not allowed in public spaces. They could be jailed for that.It's not just loitering. It was very much anything that could give offense because they were physically disabled. Or, the idea that the physically disabled are more likely to be begging or doing things like that. That was all folded in. So, this notion of freedom as the ability to move and move in space.Despite the North American urge to be like, "well, nobody can tell me what to do." There's still a certain level of certain forms of movement are privileged or regarded as normal versus others. So, you know it's weird if you don't stay [00:35:00] in one place or perhaps, it's weird if you don't have a reason for your seasonal job, right?When I was a kid and a teenager... like I said, where I grew up was kind of known for surfing, right? And I met folks who would come from places like Australia and live in Volkswagen transporter vans and work in the seasonal hotels and then go surfing. And then sometimes in the winter they disappear off to Morocco.And you wouldn't see them for six months and they'd come back and there's all this kind of idea of Differing rhythms, which has really influenced my entire life because those folks, they were there there were hundreds of them you could see them parked on every road and I knew several of them very very well, but the fact of those seasonal rhythms, which weren't [00:36:00] approved. It wasn't approved that they didn't stay in one place and pay taxes. To some that might be, you know, "Oh, that's freedom! That's telling the government, I don't have to pay your taxes or I don't have to stay in one place and be a registered visible citizen. I can be a free spirit and go to Morocco whenever I want. But, the fact of it is, if you walked on the, on the roads, people would look at you funny, right?If you look at people who do long distance walking in areas that are drivable, I mean, especially I guess in North America, that's looked at as very, very, very strange, because you guys don't have the infrastructure. So, for me, it's this really strange notion that we're fixated on particular kinds of movement to do with agency and power, right?And we, we will say, "oh, [00:37:00] that's mobile, that's fast, that's quick, that's agile." And I'm always curious about what criteria we're using to say, "oh, that's fast, that's agile, that's nimble," when you look at the so called natural world, and you've got plants that are seemingly immobile, but they actually turn to the sun.You just don't notice it until you stick it on a stop motion camera. And then you're like, "wow, they move." But you could go past that plant every single day and be like, "yeah, it doesn't move. It's a plant. It just stays there." Right? Because our perception of what movement is and what is approved is based around one, what we're taught and two, what we see every day.But also three. What we can't notice unless we're forced to look at the same thing over and over again, right? [00:38:00] Because our tendency is to see one thing, think, "Oh, I know it. I've spotted it. I know what it is. I've identified it. It's fitted into my matrix of identity. I can move on now. It's all sorted." But the whole ethos, I guess, that I'm coming at iswhat if you don't know? What if you don't know? What if that microphone that I'm speaking into and you're speaking into it looks like a particular thing and you think you could describe a microphone to somebody but go down to say the flows of the electrons and it's a context issue. You know? And, and So, I'm interested in thinking about what are the contexts are in the room with us right now that we're not even paying any attention to, and not even in the room, in our own bodies, in our own language.Chris: Wow. Yeah, again, there's so much there. My [00:39:00] my thoughts just flew off into a million different directions. And I feel like it would probably take me a while to to gather them in.Craig: No problem. You do what you need to do. I mean, that's, that's the whole point. Chris: Yeah. So I had a queer crip travel writer named Bani Amor on the podcast in season three.And we were talking about the fallout and the consequences of the COVID 19 pandemic. And she said something like, you know, "the settler can't stay still. That the pandemic showed us that we can't stay still." In the context of that time that so many people who had been engaged in and who glorify or who simply have been taught to live a hyper mobile life, that there was this opportunity to question [00:40:00] that, to bring it into a different context.And I know a lot of people, couldn't necessarily leave their houses in the quote unquote lockdowns. But I don't think that wouldn't necessarily stop people from tending to or allowing themselves to witness the more than human world in that way. And so, my question is, assuming we have the opportunity, in some manner, in any manner, how do you think we might have our understandings of movements subverted, or at least challenged, by virtue of looking at the movement in the more than human world.Craig: Great question. I think one of the biggest notions, and I just want to return to that phrase, "the settler can't stay still." And really, agree with that, and so add to secondary things of what actually is stillness, right? We have [00:41:00] this idea of stillness as immobility, as, as, as perhaps staying in one place.Not moving, but actually, if we look at what we're doing when we're actually apparently still, there's still movement going on, right? There's still movement going on in our bodies. There's still a different kind of mobility going. And we're not the only ones, right? The more than human does this exactly as well.If you look at a rock, oh, you think a rock doesn't move? I mean, it doesn't move, but then you have erosion, right? Then you have the rain, and the way that particles are shaved off it, and it shifts. So, when we're thinking about outside, when we're thinking about... and when I say "more than [00:42:00] human," I'm not saying "better than human," I'm saying "exceeding the human," I just want to make that clear, it exceeds the boundaries of the human. Disability as mutual friend Bayo would define it is, I believe he said "it's a failure of power to contain itself." So, that's Bayo Akomolafe. And this notion that the world and the modern human flows through and beyond any sort of boundary, right? So, any outline we form is not immune in the sense of there's no boardwalk, right?A wall is not an untouchable upright edifice. It's actually touched and permeated, right? So everything in the more than human context interrelates and is, to a certain extent, degrees of [00:43:00] permeable. So, yeah, our cells keep certain things out, and let certain things in, but even the things they keep out, they're in contact with.They're relating to. Right? Because in the same way, with COVID 19 vaccine, people think, "oh, it's a vaccine. It's immunity, right? It'll stop me getting COVID. Or it'll stop me getting this, or stop me getting that." What it actually does is it has an interaction with your, the vaccine has an interaction with your immune system.There's a dialogue, there's a discussion, a call and response, which then engenders further responses in your body, right? So, there's constant relation that is ongoing. So, nothing is one and done, right? To borrow from Stefano Hani and Fred Moten No motion is ever completed, right? Nothing's [00:44:00] ever finished. It's not like we're gonna get off this and, and you'll be like, "oh, I've finished recording the podcast." Sure, you've hit the stop recording button, but the recording of the podcast is still ongoing. And there's this fundamental ongoingness, which is a product of the world.The world is worlding, right? And that means the most ordinary, mundane thing you can think of is ongoing. The mug I have right in front of me right now with tea in it. It's ceramic. It's been painted, but it's still ongoing, right? It still has the relation to the machines that shaped it. And it also has this ongoingness with the human history of pottery.Right? And people go, Oh, that's ridiculous. That's not practical. You know, "it's a mug," but I always [00:45:00] think. Isn't that just commodification? Like, is that not just saying it's a commodity, it doesn't have a story? Like, I don't want to get all Marxist here, but there's that real alienation from ongoingness and the fact that we also are ongoing attempts at relation. We're not even fixed identities. Our movements cannot be technically circumscribed because I have a disability which means I can't dance. Right? I use a wheelchair. I can't dance. I can't do the tango. Right? Okay. But everybody uses dance in a context of bopping to the music and doing all this thing and it's a bit like freedom. You know, everybody assumes that dance is a particular thing.But as Bayo and We Will Dance with Mountains, the course, the whole point of it being [00:46:00] called We Will Dance with Mountains is the fact that mountains don't dance like humans. Mountains dance like mountains. And the only way we spot how mountains dance is to actually pay attention to them and attempt to relate to them.We can't get out of our framework completely, but we can be open to say, what does our framework for a mountain miss about those massive landforms? What are we missing when we say a mountain doesn't move? And that's where you have references to indigenous and local stories that actually talk about these landforms, these places, these folklore places, as the living, moving beings that they actually are.Hmm. You know. Yeah, "okay, that stone circle over there was because a bunch of women were dancing on a [00:47:00] Sunday and in a Christian country, that's bad, so they got turned to stone," or in Scandinavia, "that rock there, it's actually a troll that got caught out in the sun." that these are living, ongoing beings and events, which it's not woo, it's actual or intellectual, I think.If you look at anything for long enough, you start to notice what's ongoing with it, even something that's solid and fixed. And that, to me, the gripping is the bending of the perception, right? That is queering, but crip-queering is that point where you have the restriction involved. People will talk about queer liberation, and yeah, we want crip liberation. That's cool. But if you think about crip liberation as, it might actually be the limits that bring us liberation.And then, if you track back [00:48:00] into mythologies long enough. You've got figures like Dionysus or then poetic gods who say, they're the ones that fetter you. They can bind you, but they can also set you free. And that is really interesting to me that a lot of these liberational figures also have a side that they can tie you up.And I don't just mean in a bondage sense. It's this notion that the two things, the two complexes are part of a whole thing, and you can't divide it into restricted and free and you can't escape. You can't pull a Harry Houdini from existence, which, to a certain extent, some people, when they go on holiday, engage in tourism, they're trying to escape for a little while, their other lives. But we all know you can't escape them. Mm-Hmm. But the inescapability of it is not bad. Right. By default, it's not [00:49:00] bad. It can be, but the assumption something is inescapable, just like, oh, something is disabling. Mm-Hmm. the assumption of good and bad. If you can hold that in abeyance and actually look at it for a second and go, Okay, what's going on here?Maybe our conceptions of this need reevaluating. Now the reason we don't do this on the regular, even in modernity, is because it takes a lot of effort and time to focus. And that's another benefit that I get as a disabled person, right? Because I can't use my time for a whole bunch of things that non disabled folks can.So I've got more time, I've got a different relationship to time and space, which means that I can sit and look at things with that differing relation to time and space, and be like "Huh, I never noticed that." And then I get to talk [00:50:00] about this stuff to folks like you, and people get surprised.And they're like, "you think about this all the day." I'm like, "no, I don't think about this. This is my life. This is how I live. This is my embrace of life, right? And this is my freedom to literally, Be like, " well, okay, my restrictions. How do they actually open me to the world?" And I'm not offering a prescription here, because everybody's different.But it strikes me that even the most nomadic person always carry stuff with them, right? And to borrow from Ursula K. Le Guin with her "Carrier Bag Story of Fiction," which Bayo talked about in We Will Dance The Mountains, the idea of what we're carrying is really interesting, but how often do we rummage in our own bags?Hmm. [00:51:00] Right? How often do we take off our backpacks and rummage just for the sake of it? Often we just look in the backpacks for something specific. Hmm. Right? Oh, I need a map. Oh, I need a chocolate bar. Oh, I need my, you know my iPad. We rarely stick our hands in and notice the way our clothing might shift around our fingers or the way, you know, the waterproofing is possibly coming off and means that the fabric has these different textures because we don't take the time and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's the fact that we don't have that relationship to time and space.And babies, kids do. It's why kids put things in their mouth. All those things where you're like, "Oh no, don't put that in your mouth, it's bad for you." They don't know that. But the whole point of putting it in their mouth and feeling it is to try and not [00:52:00] understand it, not get it.There's nothing there in a baby in its early function that says, "I must understand what that is." The understanding comes upon you through experience. But there's no bit, at least as far as I can work out, that's like, "I must understand what it is that I'm putting in my mouth."It's more like, "hmm, that tastes interesting, it has some interesting textures," and then your brain does all the work or your brain and your body mind do all the work, but the personhood isn't also doing all the work, just like the "I" of my body, right, my relationship with the "I", as in my sense of self, I have to expand that to my entire body, You know, because there's so much going on right now in this conversation that I'm not aware of, right?There's stuff going on in my room that I'm [00:53:00] not aware of, but it's going on now. And so I have to expand and that expansiveness also means I sometimes have to venture into realms of pain, right? Because I have chronic pain. And in order to fully experience that, sometimes I have to encounter that pain.I have to slow down and focus and go, "Oh, the chronic pain that I was mostly ignoring because just in the background, it suddenly leaped to the fore because I'm paying attention." Now, modernity says you shouldn't do that. You shouldn't do stuff that causes you pain. Understandable in a certain context, but If I didn't understand that the pain was also part of the experience and changes how I move, if I didn't understand that chronic pain changes how time stretches, then I wouldn't be where I am.So the more than human permeates the human in ways [00:54:00] that the human is either deliberately trained to deny or doesn't even know is going on and the pandemic basically was, in my eyes, the more than human kind of knocking on the door going you are not this completely hermetically sealed box, right? Your society is not a hermetically sealed box. Chris: Amen. Amen. I mean, could have gone in a lot of different directions, but here we are, at least being able to reflect on it in a good way, and I'm reminded, this notion of abeyance and attention and, and the expansion of the I.I'm reminded of this, this line from Simone Weil who said that "absolutely unmixed attention is prayer." And so, I think that it, something like that is worthy of the times we, we wish to live in and perhaps sometimes do. Craig: [00:55:00] Definitely.Chris: And so, you know, I wish we had more time, Craig really getting into some beautiful black holes there. But hopefully we get the opportunity to speak again sometime.Craig: I'd be, be happy to. Be happy to. Chris: And so before we depart, I'd just like to ask the kind of token question that always comes at the end of interviews, which is where can our listeners find your work?And I'm pretty sure you had a book that came out last year entitled, Goetic Atavisms, if I'm not mistaken. Craig: Yes, I did. So you can find me on my mostly moribund, but strange little blog at cold-albion.net. And you can also pick up the book, which is, to be clear, more of an occult angle on this, but it also brings in the disability angle directly from the publisher Hadean Press or you could get it from, you know, the Bezos Behemoth, if you really [00:56:00] wanted. I am also not really on social media as a project, but I'm also on you know Blue Sky, so you can search me up there, or Mastodon, which you could always search me up there, and I occasionally post things on there.Chris: Wonderful. Well, I'll make sure that all those links and connections are available for our listeners once the episode launches. And I very much look forward to reading Goetic Activisms myself. So, thank you so much, Craig.Chris: Thank you, Chris. Get full access to ⌘ Chris Christou ⌘ at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe

Building Texas Business
Ep074: Reinventing Corporate Culture with Mike Snavely

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 12, 2024 35:25


In this episode of Building Texas Business, I chat with Mike Snavely, CEO of Phunware. Mike details Phunware's evolution from a mobile development agency into a thriving SaaS company delivering high-ROI apps to hotels and healthcare providers. Hear how shifting culture from rigid control to empowering autonomous teams with accountability revived success. Key strategic maneuvers included trimming the workforce judiciously and securing capital patiently. Timely decisions breathe new life into businesses' surfaces repeatedly. We delve into crafting a trusting, candid culture. Difficult conversations are promptly addressed and failures learned foster innovation and resilience. I share that I founded such an environment at a former startup. Mike's unique hobby of creatively mapping dream destinations blends work wisdom with life's pleasures, crafting an episode uplifting attendees' strategies and spirits. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Mike Snavely explains the evolution of Phunware from a mobile solution development agency to a SaaS company that specializes in customized mobile apps for hotels and healthcare institutions. We discuss the strategic decisions and cultural shifts necessary during the transition to new leadership at Phunware, including capital injection and reshaping the balance sheet for growth. Mike highlights the move from a command-and-control culture to one that champions autonomy and accountability, emphasizing the importance of empowering team leaders. We explore the significance of building a leadership team grounded in trust, accountability, autonomy, and candor, and how these principles contribute to a positive organizational culture. Mike shares his personal career journey, detailing his long-standing experience in mobile technology and his eventual rise to the CEO position at Phunware. We examine how Phunware fosters a culture of appreciation and collaboration through a Slack channel called Momentum, which recognizes and celebrates employee contributions. Mike talks about balancing professional obligations with personal passions, including the importance of prioritizing family and maintaining a positive trajectory in both areas. We discuss the importance of in-person engagement for building and maintaining key relationships with stakeholders, despite the trend toward virtual interactions. Mike reflects on past experiences and learnings, including the value of having prompt and honest conversations to avoid delays in decision-making and mitigate potential failures. We delve into Mike's hobby of pinning dream travel destinations on Google Maps and how this practice turns travel planning into an immersive and memorable adventure. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Phunware GUESTS Mike SnavelyAbout Mike TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In today's episode, you will meet Mike Snavely, ceo of Funware. In building and maintaining key relationships with your stakeholders, mike shares his opinions on why there is no substitute for being in person to engage on a human level. Mike, I want to welcome you to Building Texas Business and thank you for taking time to come on the show with me. Glad to be here. Thanks for the invitation. So, as the CEO of Funware, let's start by just orienting the listeners to what is Funware and tell us what the company's known for. Mike: Sure so. Funware is a 15-year-old publicly traded company based in Austin, Texas. We build mobile experiences that help hotels and healthcare institutions engage their guests and patients while they're on premises in ways that drive satisfaction and monetization. Chris: Very interesting. So you said the company started I guess in the early 2000s. Mike: Then it would have been in 2009. The company started. It was private for the first 11 or so years of its existence and then we went public via SPAC transaction in 2000. I believe it was 20. Chris: Okay, and it sounds like a fairly niched focus for the company. How did it come to be that the company, I guess, was so focused on kind of those two industries and providing that type of, I guess, service to those customers? Mike: Well, originally it wasn't. So over 15 years, you might imagine, there's been an evolution in the focus of the company, and so the company in 2009 was really more of a mobile solution development agency. So some of the biggest brands you know in the world really selected Funware back in the timeframe to build some of their first mobile apps in the app store. So companies like Fox, the NFL, the Sochi Olympics, wwe, a number of airports and so on were spending a lot of money to build their first mobile application and then to develop their first mobile audience. For lots of reasons and that was two years after the iPhone was introduced. It was actually before the iPad was introduced and so obviously there's a lot of evolution of consumer expectations when it comes to engaging on mobile, and those brands were spending a lot of money in the early comes to engaging on mobile, and those brands were spending a lot of money in the early days to build their first mobile presences. That's evolved over time, and so agencies are really not, they really don't drive the valuation that a SaaS company does, and so we've, over time, evolved into becoming a SaaS company. So we license our technologies. We'll essentially build an app, configuring it for the customer, launch it into the app store and then generate license fees off that app for as long as it exists and is available for download. That's a much better valuation model because typically when our customers get involved with us they stick around. Our retention rate is very high because we drive a positive ROI. So we've kind of followed the evolution of mobile from really high investment work for hire, boutique agency-like development all the way through today where we charge between 50 and $150,000 a year for a given property, whether it's a hotel or a hospital, to have their own mobile app in the app store, to have their own brand in front of their users or guests and then ultimately to develop that one-on-one relationship with that guest or patient in a way that drives repeat business and satisfaction and additional monetization. Chris: That's fascinating. Now you mentioned retention rate. What do you which obviously is very important for success of a company, especially like yours what do you attribute that successful retention rate to? Mike: Well, we do good work and I can make available to you a list and you could even put it in the podcast if you'd like of the apps that we build, or some of the apps that we build. They're beautiful apps. So, number one, we do really high-quality work that all of our customers are proud to have their name on. And then, number two, we drive ROI, plain and simple. For a dollar they put into our solutions, they get between $5 and $50 back, depending on who they are and the specifics of their business. And you know, if I could give you a machine that would, you put a dollar bill in, you get a five or a 50 back out. You would say how many dollar bills can I put in there? Chris: Yeah, no, no, kidding, right Well. I mean, but fundamentally, you mentioned at least you know two fundamental things that is key to customer retention. That's one provide good service. If you're in the service industry, it starts with providing good service and I think an outcome of that is your customer sees a valuable return on the investment for your service. Those are not unique to software but for any kind of service type business right, exactly, that's right. Let's talk a little bit about your. So you're the CEO. The company was founded by others than yourself. How did you come, I guess, to work at Funware and I know just a little bit that you've had this is like your second stint there but give us a little background on your connection to the company and how it was you became the CEO. Mike: Yeah, sure enough. So I've really made a career of pursuing technology trends. So I'm kind of an old guy so I've been in business for a long time. But I started off in offline marketing technologies, sending out snail mail and running telephone centers. Then I evolved into social marketing with a startup in Austin, texas. I then got into mobile and I've been in mobile really kind of on and off ever since. Mobile's a big deal because you've got a device that knows who you are and knows where you are, you tell it all your secrets. It really is an indispensable. It's become an indispensable tool. And so I've really made kind of a career over the last shoot 15 years at this point in mobile. And so I was originally with my first stint in mobile was with a little mobile application development boutique in Austin called Mutual Mobile. That was 2008, 9, 10, 11 timeframe Did something else and then I was recruited to come to Funware by somebody who had worked for me at Mutual Mobile and I said look, we're building out this platform company. We're very interested in having somebody who can really help to drive revenues. Would you be interested in joining? So that in 14, I joined Funware for the first time and I came to run the software business. So I was responsible for all revenues for the software business of Funware from 14 through 16 or so, got to know the company, got to really understand the technologies Actually, a number of the people who were there then are still with the company. Then I went off, worked at a Silicon Valley startup and did a couple of other things, couple of other things. And then, when the founding CEO left in 23, they hired a guy that I had worked with at Mutual Mobile back in the day as the new CEO and he said look, mike, I know that you're great at building businesses on the revenue side. Would you like to come and be my CRO, as I'm CEO of Funware? And he said I'll make it worth your while. So I said no a couple of times and then eventually I said yes. Well, this was September of last year that I rejoined the company and 30 days in the board said look, you know, what we really need is somebody with sales DNA at CEO. Let's try that again. Easy for me to say CEO role. So, mike, would you like to step in as CEO? So I actually I had a buddy who brought me back to be a CRO and then wound up taking this job. We're still friends, we still talk all the time and he was very supportive of that move. But a long story short, I think that the company for a time kind of lost its way in the simple fact of selling, servicing accounts and driving revenues, and that's something I've had the good fortune to develop pretty good skill at, and so now I'm the CEO and I'm going to tell you I think the E in CEO stands for extra. Everything about it is extra, but it really is the best job I've ever had and I'm really enjoying it. I still spend a lot of time working with customers, selling, identifying strategic partnerships and that kind of thing, because I enjoy it, I feel like I'm good at it and it's absolutely critical to positioning the company for growth and valuation, which is exactly my job. Chris: There you go, so let's talk a little bit about that. What are some of the things that you do to build and maintain relationships with those partners, customers, strategic relationships that you think someone listening might learn? Mike: from. Well, it's funny, there's been a real trend away from in-person, and so you and I are meeting today on Zoom. Our business, funware, is essentially 100% virtual at this point, and what I find is there's no substitute for hopping on a plane and going to see somebody, breaking bread with them, getting to know them as a person, understanding what it is they're trying to accomplish, what their hopes and dreams are, what their fears are. Once you get to that point and really just kind of understanding them as a person, and then exposing yourself as a person and say, look, you know, this is what I'm trying to accomplish, mr and Ms, partner or prospect, and really kind of, you know, engaging on a human level, which you know is a whole lot easier for sitting across the desk from somebody, and that's that to me, is is where I spend a lot of my time. I do invest a lot of time in in person, you know, spending time with customers, prospects, partners and the rest of it, and I really just don't think there's much of a substitute for that. Chris: Couldn't agree more. I think that's how, really, until the pandemic, it's how business got done in person. I don't think anything's changed here. I think, especially these days, I think it says so much more that you take the time to do that when you could otherwise, yeah, do a Teams or Zoom call or whatever, and just the human interaction I mean. As humans, I think we're meant to be together, right and interact, and I think that just fosters the relationship. So great advice there. Keeping on that kind of theme you've come back in not in an easy economic time, so let's talk a little bit about managing through kind of some economic uncertain, rising interest rates and all the stuff that's out there in the news. Let's talk about kind of what are some of the things you've done to stay focused and keep your people focused on driving the business forward? Mike: Sure enough. Well, there are some benefits and some drawbacks to being a public and trading company. Of course One is access to the capital markets. That's a benefit, and we certainly have the ability to draw capital out of the markets in ways that don't require us to be as susceptible to excuse me, the interest rate environment, but that doesn't mean that our customers aren't susceptible to that environment. And so we've had to do some things. Selling into hospitality and healthcare, I mean, we're typically selling into pretty big organizations and they have a little bit of a buffer, I suppose, from the ebbs and flows of the economy, particularly when you look at luxury hospitality. I mean, COVID aside, luxury hospitality has really been on a growth tear because of the generation of a lot of wealth on the part of a lot of people and they're wanting to spend it on high-quality experiences. But that doesn't mean that we don't have to be creative from time to time when it comes to pricing a deal or generating terms that are acceptable to the customer. They can digest, they can maybe capitalize the expense as opposed to turning into an OPEX expense and that kind of thing, and certainly we've had to be creative there. When I first took on the CEO role. The company was having a little bit of financial trouble and you could read in our public filings all about it. But, long story short, we were having problems with access to capital and I had to work with my CFO and others you know capital partners to really inject some capital into the company from the market in ways that allowed us, you know, the ability to move forward without paying a lot of interest, frankly. So we were able to kind of reshape the balance sheet in a way that puts us in a great spot for growth today Smaller companies I can only imagine what it must be like if you're dealing with debt financing, distinct from capital financing, and what some of the challenges there must be. We had to make some hard decisions in connection with the recapitalization of the company that had to do with people, in large part because that's our number one expense and those are hard things to do, and I spent many a sleepless night, you know, because I had to do some of those things. But the fact of the matter is that most companies don't cut fast enough and they don't cut deep enough because of those reasons, and it feels terrible, but preserving the company and giving ourselves the ability to go forward and thrive is really kind of the job for the shareholders. Chris: Yeah, and yeah, I agree. I think, regardless of the size of the company, making those people decisions are extremely difficult because, again, we went back to in person and it's human and these people have been with you typically and but it's what they say, right, it is when you have to make the hard cuts, you have to cut muscle and those can be challenging decisions. On the flip side of that, sure, as you come into the CEO role, you are either have or still in the process of building your team. What are some of the things that you do? Processes maybe you've created to help you identify the right people to surround yourself with to further the mission and strategies of the company. Mike: Well, there are two non-delegable duties that the CEO has, in my belief. Number one it's setting the strategy of the company. So we're going to be a SaaS company serving these markets, we're going to drive toward these margins, we're going to deliver in this way, and these are the things that are important for the strategy of the business. Number two is the culture of the business, and so I can't hire somebody to give me a culture. I've got to work with the company to create the culture that we want, and so I'll give you a little bit of a story there. So I have a lot of respect for the fellows who founded the company, a lot of respect for them, because they built something that I now have the good fortune to run and take to the next level. But there was a lot of. They were literally army guys, and there was a lot of army DNA in the company. Now that there's nothing wrong with that, there's nothing at all wrong with that, and the company was successful for a number of years, but and the culture that was built was one of command and control, because that's what the army is Right. Chris: Well, it's not. I'll just interrupt it. That's also not atypical of kind of startup mentality. Right, it's dominant kind of leadership. Got to get it done, got to get this off the ground. Mike: Yep, dominant leadership plus the military background equaled very much a command and control structure, a bit of a cult of personality around the founding CEO, and all of that, you know, paid great dividends. For a long time, I could not be any more different from the founding CEO. I'm not an army guy, you know. And so one of the first things I did when I took on the job is I said look, you know, you know if you're the vice president of sales or you're the vice president of, you know of product or delivery or deployments or whatever it is. You're the CEO of your own business and I'm not going to tell you what to do. I'm going to give you an objective and I'm going to give you the flexibility and the support to go and achieve that objective. You need people. You get people. You need investment. You get investment. But your accountability is to go and run your portion of the business as if you were the CEO. I'm not going to micromanage the decisions at all. I'm going to empower you to do the right thing number one for the customer, because then that ultimately becomes the right thing for the company over many observations and so that was a transition that some people are still working through. Frankly, in leadership roles within the company. It's sometimes people get comfortable being told what to do and we just we don't do that anymore. And you know a couple of people have left as a result of that. They did not have that comfort and that's okay because it's not the right job for them anymore. But most people have really embraced the opportunity of agency and empowerment and the ability to kind of run their own part of the business. ADVERT Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom. And thanks for listening to the show. Chris: Yeah, I mean, there's a lot to unpack there, but clearly what you're talking about in my terms are giving people autonomy, but with accountability, which I think is the right way to go. However, organizations evolve over time, just like people. So I think we talk about command and control in the early days. That, for most companies, may make sense, but where this company is now and size and scale, you couldn't do that because there's too much going on and you have to then hire the right people, and the people that work for the company in the first few years may not work, you know, 10 years, 15 years later, because different skill sets needed, right, so it sounds like you've got your hands around that pretty well. Mike: Well, you know, it's always a work in progress, and so one of the one of the accelerants to adopting a new cultural tone is bringing in people, you know right. So I brought in a couple of guys and they are both guys, I'm afraid, who I had worked with a number of times in the past, who I knew kind of got the way that we wanted to run the railroad and who are are the kind of guys who just roll up their sleeves every day and make the most of the day. And, you know, those guys are not only in leadership roles within the company but they're also, you know, setting a tone for the others they work with most closely day to day, and I absolutely think it's working. Chris: That's great. So kind of sum that conversation up for us how would you define the culture of Funware today? Mike: I'd say that we're kind of a restart up, but with all the good elements of a startup, and what I mean by that is that we had a revenue profile that grew, grew and then it kind of dropped off. For some reason I wasn't here, and we're in the process of growing back up and we're getting in the right people who are interested in not only doing great work and serving the customers really well and building a terrific product, but also ones who are embracing the autonomy and the accountability that we're providing to them, and I couldn't be any more pleased with the reception that I'm getting. Chris: Anything special that you've kind of put in place to kind of help foster that type of culture so that you can perpetuate it and see it grow. Mike: Well, we tend to recognize the behaviors that we're looking for, and here's what I mean by that. So you know, somebody will just do a thing right and they'll do it. They'll achieve an accomplishment, whatever that accomplishment may be, and we'll talk. We've got a Slack channel. Slack is a tool we use all day long, every day, and we have a Slack channel called Momentum, and the Momentum channel is really about recognizing the contributions that a person makes, and the deal is that if you put something in Momentum, you've got to recognize somebody else. So you say, hey, a great thing happened, you got to recognize somebody else. So you say, hey, a great thing happened. And I want to thank Bob over here for his contribution to the thing, because Bob, you know, contributed in a way that if he hadn't done that, you know we might not have gotten the outcome that we're looking for. You know that that's something that you see traffic in every single day, that's great. Chris: We obviously I can relate to that we do something similar here at the firm Every single day. That's great, I can relate to that. We do something similar here at the firm, not necessarily on a specific channel, but it's kind of become part of our culture to. We call them core value kudos and it's about recognizing other people not yourself, obviously in efforts that they made and tying them to our mission and values, so that the behaviors and the values marry up right. And then people. It makes it tangible that I want to thank or, you know, congratulate someone for doing X, Y and Z which demonstrated this value in action. Mike: That's terrific. Yeah, I've been in companies that have done that. I think that's something that I may need to reincorporate into my bag of tricks there, for sure that have done that. I think that's something that I may need to reincorporate into my bag of tricks there for sure. Chris: So you know along those lines your software company. I always am interested to know what are you doing to kind of promote or foster creativity and innovation within the company? Mike: Well, some of the things that you know it's interesting, I'm going to I'll give you maybe a little bit longer answer you might be looking for, but there is, and it's really important to kind of separate the day-to-day from the long-term vision. And what I mean by that is that I'm, let's say, a developer and today I have to fix a bug, and I just have to fix the bug because the bug exists and it's in the way of something happening and it's not my favorite part of the job, I'm quite confident of that. Not my favorite part of the job, I'm quite confident of that. Not my favorite part of the job to fix a bug. But there is some long range stuff that I'm really excited about. A big part of what we do is indoor wayfinding and hyperlocal marketing offers, and there are lots and lots of innovations that we're looking at right now, and so we identify people who are interested in innovation. We put together both formal processes for them to say, okay, you're on the R&D team and you're going to be doing this work, but we also give them informal opportunities. Hey, look, I want you to go to Denver to our customer with Gaylord Rockies and I want you to actually go into the physical space that we're trying to map, and I want you to help me figure out a better way to do it. And so that's two things. It's number one, solving a strategic problem for the business, but it's also kind of getting them out of their, since we're all virtual, it's getting them out of their own office, sending them to Denver, take an extra day, engage the customer, do great work, but also enjoy yourself a little bit. So we try to give people an opportunity to get out of the context within which they're working sitting in my home office squashing bugs and get out into the real world where our solutions are deployed in ways that are not only sort of fun but also problem solving. Chris: So you've been in some leadership roles throughout your career, obviously CEO now. How would you describe your leadership style and how do you think it's evolved over the last few years? Mike: Well, I try to work with people. I try to work as best I can. You can't always do that right, but you can absolutely make the investment of time to get to know them, and so I walk into this job. I've got a CFO that I just met very recently, and I had a chief legal officer that I met just recently, and I had a chief operating officer that I had known actually for some time and one of those guys wound up leaving that I had known actually for some time and you know, one of those guys wound up leaving. But you know the other two guys that I had just met. I made it a real point of going to where they were, sitting down with them breaking bread, understanding who they are, what they were trying to accomplish, why they were at the company in the first place and all the rest of it, because it was important for me to understand whether I could trust and whether it was appropriate to invest in these guys. Right and absolutely it was. By the way, I had a couple of gaps in my leadership team and what I did was find people that I'd worked with in the past and I said, look, are you willing to come and work for me again, and the answer in every case was absolutely so, and that's not because I'm the greatest guy in the world or because I gave him a zillion dollars or anything like that. It's because we have, over the years, established a working cadence that's founded on this idea of trust and accountability, autonomy of action and really candor of discussion. There's nothing that the leadership team and I don't discuss in detail and with candor. We're not afraid to tell our truths to each other. We've created what I think is a safe space for us to really talk about what's on our mind and what concerns or challenges we have, or if somebody is all wet, you know, and and that kind of. That kind of culture. The executive table, I think, filters down to the rest of the business in ways that help support the culture we're trying to build. Chris: Yeah, and I was gonna say it sounds like it's a culture of safety to have the hard conversations, but that those conversations are done in a respectful way. Mike: Yeah. Chris: I don't know if there's no better way to do it Right, and it's okay to fail. Mike: And I got to tell you, I used to race, I used to race cars a long time ago and you know, if you don't crash, you're not driving fast enough and so it's okay. It's okay to crash every once in a while because that means you're pushing the envelope, You're trying to get, you know, you're trying to get to the edge of the performance envelope and that's positive. Chris: Yeah, no, let's talk about that, cause I I there. There's always learning, and so I think there's. You know, when you have setbacks or failures, you can learn from them and it can make you better. Don't let it define you. So can you give us an example of more than not the car racing, because crashing is easy to understand as a failure, but in the business world, as a leader something that you felt a failure of yours, a bad decision, a setback that you absolutely grew from, and it's made you better today. Mike: Yeah, sure enough, I think that my greatest learnings are not being decisive enough and not acting quickly enough. And so you know, let's say, for example, I'll give you the example of last company I worked for before. Well, yes, I'll give you that example. So I was working at an AI video startup in Madison, Wisconsin. It was essentially a unit of a publicly traded company that I won't name, but your viewers can certainly look it up. And, long story short, that company is now bankrupt and I don't fault any of the. I don't fault the CEO of that company, which was not me, by the way, in that, but I fault myself. Yeah, exactly, it wasn't me. I didn't bankrupt the company. This was a guy I had worked with before were pretty small, and so what I said was I need this much to make this happen. I was given about half that much and I didn't adequately reset the expectations on how long it was going to take to get that thing done, slash. I should have had probably more pointed discussion about is this worth doing at all, and I didn't do that. And the long story short is that company is now bankrupt for lots of reasons, but the thing that I that my not being as aggressive as I felt like I should have been was a contributor to that. I think it was a small contributor, but you know all that to say that it didn't help. Chris: And so I kind of trace it. I would say the learning for you is kind of having the hard conversations faster right and that's the kind of culture that's terrifically important for me. Mike: So that informs the culture I'm building at Funware, which is like, if this ain't going to work, I just need you to tell me, and I might disagree and I might argue with you, but I will absolutely hear you. I might argue with you, but I will absolutely hear you. It's going to be super important for us to just trust each other enough to be able to have the discussion about you know, without fear. I guess is where I'm coming from. Chris: I understand that, so let's talk a little bit about you know these are important jobs that you've held over the last few years, and as is the current one. I don't like using the term work-life balance, but how do you? Manage work and personal life to try to keep them both going in a positive direction. Mike: Well, I spend a lot of time with my kids. I really, yeah, my daughter. So I'm here in Ohio, I'm spending time with my father and mother, but my daughter came along, my older daughter came along, she's out of school already. I'm going to go next week pick up my younger daughter in boarding school in Colorado, drive her down to Big Bend, where she has never been, and then, you know, spend time with her over the summer. So I mean, it's really about being deliberate about that and working from anywhere, candidly, in my opinion, helps. There's no expectation. I'm going to the office, I'm going to be there during the business day on Monday through Friday, and what I kind of joke is that I mean, I work a lot, no question about it, but I work around my life as opposed to work, as opposed to planning my life around my work, to planning my life around my work. So I might work, you know, 60 hours a week, but that's not going to be five times 12. That's going to be, you know, kind of eight-ish times seven. I'll work every day a little bit, but I'm certainly going to put my kids first and that's just the way it is. Chris: Well, I can identify with that. I think everyone has to find their own way and each job and role requires different things. In different stages of life require different things. So I think that's what people you know should stay focused on, individually as well as the companies to try to make sure you have good people. You don't want to lose them for those types of reasons. People you don't want to lose them for those types of reasons. Yeah, so, mike, this has been a great conversation. Before we wrap up, I just want to kind of get a little bit more less or a little less serious about things. Tell us what was your first job as a kid? Mike: It'd be funny, you should ask. So I'm back in rural Ohio where I grew up. Right now, at my parents' house, as I mentioned earlier, my first job was was am I allowed to say shit on your podcast? Of course, the texas my first, my first job was shoveling hog shit. Chris: Shoveling hog shit for minimum wage and I was nothing that wants to make you go to college and get a degree than that right. Mike: well, the funny thing is that I wound up raising hogs to pay for college. So it was fine to shovel the hog shit, but I was like, if I was fine to shovel the hog shit, but I was like, if I'm going to shovel the hog shit, I'm going to do it for more than $3.35 an hour. I'm going to do it in exchange for a college education. So that's not exactly that way, but that's a big part of how I kind of got off the farm and moving ahead. Chris: I love that, okay, well, yeah, obviously, as we now know, you're from Ohio, but you spent enough time in Texas for me to ask you this question Do you prefer Tex-Mex or barbecue? Mike: I love Tex-Mex. I would eat Tex-Mex every day of the week All right. And sometimes I do. I do love barbecue, but the thing is that the best barbecue is something I don't want to wait in line for and I don't want to drive a long ways. If I happen to be by La Barbecue or Franklin's a little bit over their great barbecue a little bit overhyped, or if I want a great barbecue, I'll just treat it as a destination thing. I'll go down to Lockhart or something like that, but I can get absolutely terrific Tex-Mex around the corner from my house every day of the week. Chris: Yes, it was one good thing. You know, I think we living in Texas both are abundant right. Mike: But you're right. Chris: The marquee barbecue, you know, is tucked away in some places. All right, so my last thing is if you could do a 30 day sabbatical, where would you go? What would you do? Mike: Well, I got a bunch of customers who have really beautiful beach resorts so I might go to one of those. Chris: You might go break bread with them there. Mike: Break bread with the customers at the most beautiful resorts in the world. That would be one thing I might do. There are a lot of places around the world that I'd love to see, so I've got a Google Maps layer that has little flags. There are probably 800 flags on that map and I add some every week. Places that I like to go around the world. Sometimes they're restaurants that I read about. Sometimes they're beautiful. You know natural features, like you know mountain ranges, the Painted Mountains in the Andes, or you know beautiful lake I've never been to Crater Lake, things like that so what I'd probably do is find 30 days worth of those pins in an area that I can consume within that 30-day period and I'd just go knock it out. Chris: I love that. I like the concept of keeping track of the pins. Yep. Mike: And there's too many on the map that you know I'll be dead and gone before I get to see all of them. But you know, it is kind of a it's a memory bank for things that have caught my interest and that I do want to experience at some point, if I can pull it off. Chris: Love it. Love it Well, mike, thanks so much for taking the time to be a guest on the show. Really enjoyed hearing your story, and the things y'all are doing at Funware sound really fun, exciting and innovative. Mike: Thanks a lot. Special Guest: Mike Snavely.

Building Texas Business
Ep072: Balancing Human Values and Business Growth with Jen Sudduth

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later May 15, 2024 39:23


In this episode of Building Texas Business, I welcomed Jen Sudduth, CEO of Sudduth Search, for an insightful discussion on her journey in the executive search industry. Jen shared her story of transitioning from Taylor Winfield to launching her boutique firm focused on transformative growth companies. I learned how Sudduth Search crafts a supportive work culture that prioritizes both productivity and well-being. Our dialogue also uncovered nuances around balancing work responsibilities with life's pleasures. As we wrapped up, Jen reflected on life lessons from mentorship to her commitment to the Special Olympics community SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Jen Sudduth shares her transition from Taylor Winfield to founding Sudduth Search, focusing on middle market private equity and emphasizing the need for leaders who can drive change. We explore the importance of having a business and marketing strategy before starting a venture, as well as considering when to hire based on company growth and values alignment. Strategies for maintaining work-life balance in recruitment are discussed, including setting boundaries and fostering a culture that supports employee well-being alongside business success. The episode delves into the comprehensive selection process for executive search, particularly for pivotal roles such as CFOs, and the role of retained search firms in this process. Jen reflects on the role of empathy in leadership and the importance of mentorship, drawing from her own experiences and her involvement with the Special Olympics. Personal joys, such as a preference for Tex-Mex cuisine and planning for sabbatical destinations like Maine and Santa Fe, are shared as part of achieving a joyful living. The conversation covers the initial opportunistic hiring during COVID and the shift towards a more strategic hiring approach to raise the team's overall expertise. Chris and Jen discuss the benefits of leaving a company the right way, honoring agreements, and how transparency can lead to unexpected opportunities. Jen advises on the importance of planning for success, not just the startup phase, by having operational projections and growth strategies in place. The episode also touches on Jen's past experience as Director of Talent at a consultancy, highlighting how internal hiring insights can improve external recruitment advice. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Sudduth search GUESTS Jen SudduthAbout Jen TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In today's episode, you will meet Jen Sudduth, co-founder and CEO of Sudduth Search, a boutique executive search firm. Jen's advice to aspiring entrepreneurs is to be intentional and purposeful in your business planning, and don't forget to plan for success. Okay, jen, first off, welcome to Building Texas Business. Thanks for being here. Jen: Thank you. Chris: So I'm excited to have this conversation with you today. I want to start by just allowing you to introduce yourself and tell us what your company, Sudduth Search, is known for. Jen: Sure. So we are a seven-person boutique executive search firm, but I think what we do is a little bit unique. We work with the middle market private equity. Probably 75% of our clients are private equity backed. The other are public, private you name it individually owned, it doesn't matter. I think the common denominator with all of them is that all of the companies are going through some sort of transformation, and most of the time that's growth. It could have been that they raised capital. That's a trigger to bring us in and go and replace some of your leadership team. Could be some of our bigger companies going through some sort of culture change. We did 10 positions for a Blackstone-backed company and basically they wanted to pull from outside of their industry and they didn't know how to do that, and so we helped them come up with a concept of how to do that completely, you know, changed their recruiting processes from how they were doing them before, and then they brought in a whole new culture and that's what they wanted. They wanted a different culture than they had before. So it's just, it doesn't matter what the trigger is, but it's usually some sort of change, transformation. You need a leader that can drive that change right. You need someone that is fearless. A lot of times that can come in, and they're you. You know they can make things happen. Right and that's where we play most of the time. Chris: Well, what I find interesting about that is how laser focused it is what inspired you to kind of start a search firm that was so focused on that kind of niche industry. Jen: So I've actually done it for over 20 years and the firm I was with before was called Taylor Winfield. I only bring that up because a lot of people know Taylor Winfield. I started with Taylor Winfield and kind of worked my way up and that's what they focused on. They were more. You know that was 2000, so there was a lot of venture money out there, there was Silicon Valley and they worked a lot in California we did. I was just a lowly junior recruiter back then and that's where I learned the business and that's where I kind of learned that world. And it's not for everyone, both as a candidate and as a recruiter, because sometimes candidates will go well, what are they going to sell? Am I going to still have a job? I'm like, well, you're really not, you're not right for this, because that's not the mentality that we look for in a candidate. But so that's how I got my start and that's how I learned it. And then when I started this up my practice five years ago, I kind of I don't do a whole lot of venture. I have a few here and there. Usually they're a little bit more mature as a company. I think. As I've aged I'm not as patient with the venture. I think they've got a great thing going. But it's just a different world and I think sometimes those, the people that are willing to go and do something really earlier stage, are not the same people that I'm looking for the middle market series, b series, c type folks. So so that's how I had got into. It was really that's kind of what I've done my whole career. Chris: Gotcha. Well, I know that you started this company Suddeth Search around five years ago. Jen: Exactly. Chris: So you had to make some decision to leave and just start fresh on your own. Let's talk about that a little bit. What drove that decision? Jen: So the company that I worked for was actually owned by and I don't usually say this, so you're getting new information here by my stepmother, connie Adair, and I bring that up because she's fully retired now. She's been retired for about two years. But she brought me into the business, not as a multi-generational business. I had to earn my keep, earn my way Right, just like everyone else. She was very big on treating me like everyone else. Chris: The benefit for you that she did that. Jen: Absolutely and I learned from the best. She was really known as one of the best in the industry so I kind of got to see that world and that process. But she sold to private equity and it was a private equity roll up. Like some of them, it didn't go really well. The integration piece was a little rough. Chris: Not unique in that regard, right and I got no benefit from it. Jen: To be quite honest. I stuck around to try to support her and she did well. And then she got another bite of the apple and I tried for two years. I wasn't a big company person and I realized if I can make this kind of money for someone else, I should be doing it for myself. And so I kind of did it because I could, and she fully supported me. She knew that retirement was on the horizon and so when I told her she said you know, I think you should go for it. So that's what I did. Chris: That's great. Well, I mean good to have that encouragement for someone that you were close with but considered to be a trusted mentor Absolutely. So got to be a little bit trepidatious to just start out on your own, even though you know what you're doing and you, I think you can't do that unless you have confidence that it's going to work and confidence that it will work isn't a guarantee that it will Absolutely. But you know what were some of the things you did to kind of set yourself up in those early days of starting your own company, to try to pave the path towards success. Jen: So I will start with the fact that I had a very strict non-compete. I did not get any clients from the company or from her, and I am a devout follower of non-competes. Chris: Well, it's funny, you say that you bring that, yeah, you know, now we devise people, I mean literally every day, on both sides of those, and right because because they exist and obviously you know there's a lot of buzz recently because the ftc came out with the rule to ban them, uh, which is, you know, probably not going to take effect because lawsuits have already been filed to challenge it. Jen: But it's going to be interesting to see how that plays out yeah in the next, over the next few years, I think yeah, and not to say I don't think some non-competes go overboard. I have heard some ludicrous non-competes as I'm interviewing, so sure, I do think a lot of them go overboard. I think the fdc is in the is moving in the right direction with some of them, because I think they're a little too restrictive. Chris: But that's not your question yeah, and even as the rule's written, it doesn't apply to executives, so it wouldn't change your world. Jen: It wouldn't, and I'd been there a long time. Everything I got was under their umbrella. So what I did do was I planned for a long time. I've owned businesses before and so I had a business plan, I had a marketing plan, I had a strategy. The other advantage I had was that I had been I've been asked to be on the board of ACG and so that was a. I knew that was going to be great PR. It's gonna be great relationships there. That's how I met Steve Kasten here at the Boyer Miller and a few others, and so I knew that was coming. But it was pretty far out. You know my tenure had just started. Didn't know I was gonna be president, but I knew that was gonna be on the. I'd have a lot of visibility. So that helped quite a bit. I think that was one factor. Fun story unrelated to your question the day before I quit, the day before my last day, I gave like four months notice and they knew I was leaving. I was unwinding. I had some really big searches, so I was unwinding those and finishing those up for clients, kind of on the bench, but just doing that. So the day of the last day of employment I get a call from that client that I just mentioned wanted to change their culture Blackstone Back Company. He said I got 10 searches for you, jim. I said, well, I can't do them, I'm leaving, today is my last day. And he's well, I'm not doing it without you. And so I called the company and I said here's what's happening. Would you, would we, can we do a fee split? Didn't know that was coming, but that was really great cash flow. And they said yes, and so we worked out a fee split. I continued I worked with that client and then they brought in their team, but it was great cash flow right out of the gates. And and then they brought in their team, but it was great cash flow right out of the gates. And then I developed brand new clients from that point on. But I knew the industry. I think the industry knew me. Chris: So even if it wasn't somebody, I'd worked before, I had a plan and I went after those people. That's a really cool story to hear and there's a lesson. There's probably many lessons, but one that just struck me right between the eyes is the lesson in leaving the right way, when you leave a company versus leaving the wrong way and you just laid out a roadmap for the listeners. If you're thinking about leaving, you left the right way, honoring your agreements, and then, with the transparency to get the slug of business for your new business, for your new company, because you went to them and said here's the deal, because you've done everything else right. It's good to hear that. I guess they could have not honored that, but they did the right thing in my mind too, yeah, by saying yeah, it'd be fair to share this and, by the way, we should. Customer comes first. That's what they want. Let's make them happy. Jen: So customer comes first. That's what they want. Let's make them happy. So, yeah, and I completely agree and I try to tell people and I know there's exceptions, I know there's bosses that are just difficult and if they know you're even looking there, you're gone. I know that happens, but I think majority of the time people are reasonable and if you come to them and sometimes I'll have friends come to me and say I'm thinking about making a change- Grass is greener Right and I'm like I know they're in a great situation. I'm like have you had a really difficult conversation with your boss before you leave, before you start thinking about? Have you told them that you're unhappy You've been there? Chris: 14 years or you've been there seven years. Jen: Have you talked about it? And usually the answer is no, and so I try to encourage them to say go talk to them first and then if it's still you know, in a month you still feel like it's just not fulfilling then talk about leaving. Yeah, but you need to give them a chance. Chris: It's great advice. People unfortunately right. It's kind of human nature to avoid the difficult, uncomfortable conversation, or at least I'll say this, the ones we perceive have it that they're going to be difficult or uncomfortable. And to your point, I think, a lot of times if you actually have the courage to go have it, they usually aren't as difficult or uncomfortable as you work them up in your mind to be. Jen: Absolutely. Chris: And you know I can speak. You know as well as you can. If you give your employer, where you've been otherwise happy for a while, the chance to have that conversation most people if there's a tweak or two that would keep you there, it's probably going to save the company a ton of money. To consider that. Jen: And it might benefit the company. Talk to them about. You know I'd really like to do more sales. You know I'd really like to take on bigger projects. You know what We've been looking for someone that wants to take on bigger projects. You just never know what the company needs. Chris: So we can go back. You mentioned, and just for the listeners ACG Association of Corporate Growth. Jen: Yes. Chris: Indice Group industry in the kind of M&A, a lot of private equity. So sounds like part of that marketing plan was to plug yourself in to the right kind of networking system where you would meet people and build relationships. Jen: That's correct. Yeah, yeah, and I eventually was asked to be president I don't know if you know that and so it was a lot of it was a lot of visibility as well. That's half the battle. Chris: Yes. Jen: Because there's a lot of top of mind search firms out there. Yeah, getting top of mind and helping them see that. I understand private equity, I understand what their challenges are. I understand what they're trying to achieve. I understand how capital's raised. You know I've got the knowledge base to be able to convey that to candidates and to help find the right one that's going to fit that. So I think that helped a lot and it's it was educational for me. You know, going to conferences, hearing panels speak. I know a lot about a lot or a little about a lot. Chris: Let me rephrase that I shouldn't admit that, but it's true, but it does. Jen: It's real educational to hear those conversations and to hear what's happening in the market. You know from your peers that are in the organization. Chris: A couple other takeaways from what you said. That I hope people listening caught is that you had a plan before you did this right, absolutely. You sat down and put it to paper a business plan, a marketing plan, a strategy. Look, I think those are so important and can be overlooked. When people say, look, I'm just going to go chase this dream, that's great because you need the inspiration, but you also need some substance behind it, because if you eventually do go to and most will go to a bank or an investor or something, they're going to be asking about that. So you better be prepared. Jen: Absolutely. Chris: So one of the things and you and I were talking about this, I guess before we got the recording going, and that is you know about this, I guess before we got the recording going, and that is you know, you now have seven employees. Let's talk a little bit about you know. I think there's a few conversations. One is what was it that triggered you each time to make the decision Now it's time to take on an employee or another employee, because those are big investments and then how did you go about making sure they were the right fit? Jen: Yeah. So it was growth that predicated the need. That was the part I didn't plan was when am I going to hire what? You know what? At what point do we need to bring on another person? At what point do we need to bring on a junior person, et cetera, et cetera. I didn't plan that piece of it and I probably should have, but it was really just my bandwidth and being able to do what I needed to do. You know, we were super busy during COVID, which sounds really strange, but I had some. I had that one big client that was still going. I had just so, if you think about I had been in business for about a year and so that year I had been really busy doing marketing and business development and getting out there and making relationships, and so it just it paid off and I think a lot of those people one of my biggest clients I don't know if you know Dave Marchese, he'd be a good guest. Let's do it. He called me out of the blue in the middle of COVID and we had met like five years prior, but he had seen my posts and my marketing and my emails and so he said I can't go out. I'm not going to go out and interview five interview candidates, but we're in the or excuse me search firms because we're in the middle of COVID. So what you got Jen, and so I took it on, and we've probably done 15 different positions over three or four years. Wow, so he's one of our biggest clients. So there that, I think the prior relationships definitely helped us make it. You asked about employees, though. Chris: Yes, well, before we go there. Yeah, one of the things you so interesting. You said I didn't plan for growth. Yeah, probably should have. Jen: Yeah. Chris: So, looking back, what do you think you could have done in that regard that you might offer as advice to someone that you know is maybe about to do something similar that you did five years ago? You know, what have you learned? Looking back, to say I would have, if I was going to do it again, I would plan for growth in this way. Jen: Plan for success. I think I was so focused on how am I going to get there that I didn't say if, when I get there, if when I get there, how am I going to get to the next level? I never did that. I never said, okay, I can handle 12 searches, or whatever it is, at different in different phases. So if I get 14, what do I do? At what point do I, you know? Do I need to start hiring when I get to 9 searches, whatever it? So maybe it was a revenue. I think I should have projected and said, because I've been in the business a while, I know how many searches I can do by myself or with a team, and so I think that would have been very helpful to do kind of like an FB&A analysis, but on the operational side. Chris: Right, Very helpful, that's very helpful. Okay, so now let's go back to kind of set a search. You starting to decide I've hit the point, I can't do this all, I've got to bring someone on. Yeah, you know how did you go about sourcing. I know obviously you've probably had a lot of contacts, but you know just the whole process of how you interviewed to make sure they were going to be a good fit for your company. Jen: So my first hire, I got really lucky because she was a neighbor, a friend who got laid off during COVID and so we brought her on just to do some of this data pushing type stuff. She made phone calls, cold calls, she's fearless, and then she grew into being a really good recruiter. After that first hire it was, oh my God, I can't handle this. I just need a body that can help do, a professional person that can do all this. After that hire I was much more purposeful. After that it was we want experience. We want, you know, degree Now she was degreed. But we want degreed individuals that understand the business world, that understand you know degree Now she was degreed. But we want degreed individuals that understand the business world, that understand, you know. I think every time I made another hire I kind of elevated my expectations. Chris: Right. Jen: And not to say the first hire was. She was a phenomenal employee, but I think every time after that I was much more purposeful about how I, who I wanted to hire and what my expectations of them were. Chris: Yeah, that makes sense to me and you're right, it's not a condemnation of the earlier hires. It's if you're doing things right, I believe you're always learning and your processes can always get better, and it doesn't mean you didn't make bad hires before, but you can get more intentionality around the decisions you're making and I think that's part of growth and when you're a one person show or two because my husband did join me about six months in it's harder to attract talent you know, Now we're about to make an offer to a pretty senior person and we had a really good slate of people that were interested, that were like, yeah, I want to join a boutique firm, I want to do what you're doing. Jen: So it changes too. Advert: Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom. And thanks for listening to the show. Well, that's validating. So you've gone through this process of sourcing people for your company, right, and what have you? What has that process and the learning? Jen: through that done to help you better advise your clients or vet candidates for them. What else about that I'm actually gonna go back to. So I took about five years. I left the executive search world and went to a consultancy and they I was director of talent. We tripled in size in about five years time and then they sold to Accenture about two years after I left. When I left, I think oil and gas was zero. The barrel, the barrel. Chris: I remember that yeah. Jen: So they made a strong comeback and then eventually sold. But being on the inside like that was the best education I could get, because it was. This is what happens when you make a really bad hire. This is what happens to the entire company when you make a really good hire. And we weren't huge I think we ended up being about a hundred but but it was really helpful to me to see. I also learned you know really short tenures on people's resume. There's a reason you know, I know there's reasons that people have to leave jobs absolutely there's good reasons, but when it's over and over and over, and then you hire that person because you're desperate for a data manager or whatever it is. You're desperate for that skill. You're going to find out why they can't stay in a job longer. I learned a lot being on the inside, you know, and I think that job is really what taught me kind of the hard knocks of making a mishire. Chris: Right. Well, I think you're to your point, right, it's if you look there are red flags, pay attention to them, and I know from our we're not perfect either in this business that I have, and you know sometimes you can convince yourself to overlook a red flag here or there, and more times than not you shouldn't. Right, there's exceptions to every rule, but we don't want to run a business based on exceptions necessarily You've got to be purposeful about those hires is really what it taught me. Jen: You know very purposeful. Chris: So just to kind of come back to Sutter's search a little bit so you have seven, about to have eight, and you talked about doing a search for a client where it was a culture change. Let's talk about culture at Sutter Search. What are you, as the kind of co-founder and CEO, doing to try to cultivate a culture? How would you describe it? And what are you doing to kind of, you know, foster it and breathe life into it? Jen: Yeah, it's hard with seven people, eight people, you know, to kind of create that, because you're like oh, we're just eight people, but they need it. Employees need training, they need to be developed, they need to evolve, they need to expand and grow, and so we actually started EOS at the beginning of this year. Are you familiar with entrepreneurial operating system? Chris: Yes. Jen: I think I don't know if Allie was the one that told me about it, but you know I've heard a lot of business owners that have done it, and so we actually started it and I think it's been evolutionary and I'm not selling it, I don't sell anything they do but it has really helped us be very purposeful about what we're doing for our employees, and so my one of our other managing directors is. She's in charge of kind of the HR and training, and so we have a weekly training every single week and it's sometimes it's heavier than others, but we have a weekly training every week and one of the employees actually gives it, so they have to go out and learn themselves and then they come and teach the rest of us. I try to. I'm a big advocate in the old school headhunting world is just dog eat, dog work, and so when I started my firm I was like I don't want to be that way. We're not working 12-hour days, we're not working both coasts, we're going to have a great and I hate to use the words work-life balance because I know it's overused. Chris: That's right. Jen: But we are, we're going to edit that part out. I'm kidding it is overused, but I think in some aspects it's important because you're a better employee if you take your vacation, if you didn't have to work until 9 pm the night before, if your managing director isn't calling you at 6 in the morning because she happens to be on the East Coast that is not the culture that we have. I'm always telling them you're going on vacation. Who's taking your emails? You're going on vacation. Who's taking your emails? You're going on vacation. Who's taking your calls? Did you put your out of? We require out of office messages to be turned on and I'm just, I'm always preaching that. I really think it's important to separate yourself and give your brain a break, because what we do is very, it's very repetitive, it's very. You know you may, if you have ten searches, that you have four candidates at least on what we usually have a hundred, but you have four finalists going through to offer yeah you think about the ups and downs every single day. Chris: It's a lot well, I mean, to your point, what you're doing, I mean, has to be stressful because you're affecting people's lives. Absolutely right, you got four candidates and or maybe see this as a great opportunity and are very hopeful, and you got a, a client, that needs to fill a hole and every day they don't have that whole field, they're losing money. So I can get that yeah to your point, the work-life balance and we could do a whole podcast on that. But I think what my experience has shown, or at least what I feel like I've learned through that, is our work-life balance is different at different times of our career. So it's hard to institutionalize that when everyone's at different stages. We try to use the term more like professional development. Developing our people to be great professionals means you tend to your business, but you tend to you have a life as well and you got to figure out how to manage both in a healthy way, knowing that the way it works for me now is totally different than it was 15 years ago right and that's okay because everything changes and we have new employees here that are going through totally different life stuff than I go through now. but how do we help give them the tools, the training to manage that and still be successful both in the office and in their personal life? Jen: Yeah, and we do we have different? Everybody kind of has a different work methodology. I shouldn't say hours, it's more like hours, you know a 20-something. They like to kind of work late in the day and have their workouts in the morning or whatever. Like everybody's kind of different. And then Hazel and I are about the same age and we like to not be disturbed until 8.30 or something. You know, like we like to go do our thing in the morning and work out and whatever. Read the paper and everybody's a little different, but we are very understanding of each other's different lifestyles. Right To your point. Chris: The key there comes to communication right. Yeah absolutely Absolutely, and so do you have. What is it that you're using as such to make sure those conversations are happening? Yeah, so that people understand how each other works differently, but together you can work for success. Jen: Yeah, we talk about it when they're hired. I say I'm not going to track your hours unless your productivity is not working Right, and then we're going to talk about it. Do you have too of a workload? Or, let's be honest, are you not working enough? You know, because last week you didn't have very many searches. This week you've got a lot. So if I need you to work till six, you gotta admit that last week you didn't have to. And they're very honest with me. A lot of times they'll say, hey, not going to be online until 10 or so, but I'm going to be working late or whatever. Or I stayed up for four hours last night sourcing. So you know I'll be available on phone but I'm not online. Perfectly okay, and we're very flexible that way. It's a little hard sometimes. You know, I'm always like are you working? I'm on the back of my brain and then I have to call myself and go. Of course they are, it's not producing. Chris: So that comes down to two fundamentals no matter what industry, communication, yeah, and what you're willing to do is have what some people might feel like is the harder conversation or uncomfortable conversation, but you approach it with kind of support and transparency. Jen: Yeah. Chris: The other thing. It comes down to productivity. Jen: Yeah, right. Chris: Absolutely. If we're running a business, we're running a for-profit business. We have to be productive to make the business go. So you can't lose sight of that. Some people, I fear at times the extracurriculars overweigh what we do to make our money and what is our. You go into the. This is what fuels our economic engine. We can't lose sight of that. It won't matter how many out-of policies or things we do, we won't have a business to support it. Jen: So it's finding a balance there, right? Yeah, I'd say the common denominator with all my employees is they thrive on success. They thrive on accomplishing things. They're not going to just shut things off if they're not done and they haven't accomplished what they set out to accomplish. They're very driven that way. That's a common denominator. Chris: Very good. So a little bit about your business. So you were saying you know, middle market focused, we're kind of approaching mid-year 2024, which is like just blows my mind that we're, you know, that far into the year already. But you know there are businesses out there that either use services like yourself or maybe contemplating that, and I know, at least in your world there's at least two different ways to go about it Retain, searches or kind of the contingency model. Can you just share maybe a little bit about what each is, the differences, pros and cons, and maybe flow into what a company should consider going one versus the other? Jen: Yeah. So I want to make it clear that I am not pro or con. Either way, I think there's a contingency, there's absolutely a place for it. I have several friends that are in the contingency recruiting world and they say I will never be in the retained world. So there is a place for it and I think if you have a large number of hires, you have a position or a company that is attractive to candidates and you want to get all the resumes you can get and then choose because they want to come to you, that's great. You can use contingency. What we do is a consultancy. So if you're a middle market working with a middle market firm right now, it's a downhole tool. Cfo position this position is critical that they get it right because they have big plans. I'm not going to tell you what those big plans are. They're private equity backed and they have big plans and it's going to happen, but if they don't have a financial expert that can devote time and devote, then it's not going to happen. And so it's critical, and in that situation you absolutely need to find the best person that you can find, and you need to interview a lot of people to make sure that you are choosing the right person, and so that's what we're doing. That's where we come in, and it doesn't have to be a CFO role. We can do. We do VPs and we do directors sure directors but we're going to look at 150 people that we know could do this job, and then we're going to reach out to every one of them and then we're going to interview 20 or 30. I'm going to interview half of those and then I'm going to present and rank the top. So it's not like we're going out and finding five people that are qualified and handing them to you. We're going out and finding 10 times that many maybe not 10 times, but a lot more than that and then finding you the best and ranking those for you to interview. So if it's a critical hire for your company to succeed, I would absolutely recommend retained, because they should be a retained firm, should be a consultancy, they should help you find that person. Chris: So that's really helpful, and hearing you describe it makes the difference very clear for me. I hope for the listeners and what I hear is you're doing a lot more upfront work on the retained side and I guess, as a consumer of these services, you should expect that your retained firm will do a lot more upfront work and vetting the best clients to bring to you. Jen: Yeah, absolutely. And the other thing I think that's important for my clients to know is our database is completely open. Our kimono is open. Is that a bad thing to say? Chris: No, we don't have video, so we're good. Jen: They can see everything we're doing, when we're doing, how we're doing. It's not a we'll talk to you in a month or two and we'll give you three great people. There's no magic thing that happens like that. It's a database they can go in. They can be like ooh, I know that guy and not going to work. Chris: Right, whatever reason, work right, whatever reason. So through, I guess, an online portal that you give them access to. Jen: okay and so it's a process to get to the fine. We meet once a week and I say here's why we chose, here's why we interview these people. What do you think? And a lot of times I'll say you know what? That company doesn't hire well, or they might be an acquisition on the horizon with that company. We can't talk to their people, so we have weekly conversations that get us closer and closer to the best person. And so it's a process, it's a very thorough process that gets us there. But that's 15, 30 minutes a week from our client, that's it. Chris: Okay, Well, they have to be invested, especially in these that are so critical. The positions to fill the client has to be invested. That's right and I like the somewhat. Maybe it's not. It sounds innovative to me that you are creating that opportunity for them to vet and see what's going on whenever they want. Right, but have those weekly check-ins. You know, it sounds like a kind of a white glove service, if you will. Jen: Yeah, and I think a lot of times people are scared, overtained. They're like what if it doesn't? What if you don't find someone? I'm like never happened in the history of 23 years, because we're talking to you and if we're not finding the right people, we're going to pivot, we're going to merge, we're going to figure out why is that happening. Is it the company reputation? Is it our pitch? Is it the way we're describing it? I mean, we're going after the wrong people. We will figure it out. We always fill the positions. Chris: Right Always, because you're invested in it. Right, right, it's not which. Jen: Because it's and it's not a. Here's three resumes, let me know. Chris: Right. Jen: That's not how it works. I got it. Chris: That makes sense. So a little bit, I just want to ask you're obviously, you know, leading this company. What, what would you or how would you describe your leadership style and how would you say that maybe has evolved over time based on your experience? Jen: So I would describe my leadership style as real. It's too real. I like to be pretty open with my employees and I have weekly calls with almost all of them I shouldn't say almost all of them. My fellow managing director we talk almost every day, so I don't have a weekly calls with almost all of them, I shouldn't say almost all of them. My fellow managing director we talk almost every day, so I don't have a weekly call with her. But the others, who I may not speak with, I have weekly calls. We talk about what's happening, what's going well, what is their workload like? I ask them what was the most challenging? Because we all work remote, so that's the other thing. We don't see each other every day right and I'll say what was the most challenging thing and what are you most proud of. And sometimes I had no idea. They're like oh well, I met that candidate at that event. I went to one of my. One of my employees told me that I'm like, I had no idea. Like you went to this networking event and happened to meet the right guy. So you know, just things like that. I try to have the communication very open yeah and they can tell me listen, I'm just not feeling well today or I'm mentally having some issues with home. I'm not going to tell you what it is, but I just need to sit back and I'm like, take the time, whatever you need to do. So I like to think I'm a pretty real manager. Chris: Yeah Well, it sounds like there's a lot of empathy that comes across in those calls, so they feel safe. Yeah, empathy, that comes across in those calls so they feel safe, and I think that's an important thing for a leader to be able to show empathy so that people will be more open and responsive, at whatever level your leadership is in the organization, is an important quality. It's interesting too, I think, that you asked about challenges, because I find it to be helpful to if you're kind of forced to reflect on what was really good about the last week and maybe what was a challenge, because we learn from both. Right, well, that's really good. Anything that you mentioned your stepmother earlier as a mentor, any learning from her that you kind of feel like you're implementing today and kind of carrying on some of the things you learned along the way from her Well, she is my free consultant, so you know, so I call her all the time. Jen: I'm like, okay, more free. Chris: Don't let her listen, she might start charging. Jen: She's fully retired, so she's like no problem. No, I think, being a peer to your clients and telling them no, sometimes you know she's not a yes man and I think I learned that, that you know you've got to push back. When you know, because of your 20 years experience, that something's wrong, you have to call the elephant in the room yeah and you have to say you, you may not skip this recruiting. You know, a lot of times my clients will get very excited about a candidate and they're like, well, can you just come see me tomorrow? And I'm like, no, he cannot because that's too fast for the candidate. They need time to process. You look too eager. I had one client that said it. He said I'm not coming to the first date with a diamond ring. You cannot come to the first date with a diamond ring, you have to let the process happen. But she was always very good about not being a yes man and I've learned that works and it pays off to help your clients be successful. Chris: It's funny that works and it pays off for to help your clients be successful. It's funny that reminds me there's an analogy that applies in all kinds of situations. But it's the cake right. So, just like you were saying, don't be too fast. Yeah, you can have all the right ingredients, mix it up, put it in the oven. If you pull it out too quick, it's going to flop yeah right. So you got to let the process, trust the process, let the process play out, and that applies in so many different aspects of business yeah, and these are humans that we're dealing with. Jen: These are people and they weren't thinking about a job change most likely. Chris: So you've got to let that change management process happen in their head, you know, let them go through that as well so good point to make and we'll repeat it that for what you're doing with these targeted executive searches, most likely the right person was not looking. The ones that are looking there could be one of those red flags there, Not always right, not always, but yeah. So, jen, this has been a fun conversation. Congratulations on your success, thank you. I want to ask you just a few things to wrap up. Yep, so obviously you've been in the search world, or executive search world, for you said 20 plus years. What was your first job? Jen: I remember you asked somebody else this, so I actually worked at a daycare for intellectually disabled kids and adults. Not that fun story that you wanted to hear, but it was fun. I absolutely loved it. I worked every summer. 0:36:20 - Chris: There had to be a lot of life lessons learned in that. Jen: Very challenging. These were kids that were not accepted at other daycares, even for special needs kids. And so I made $4.25 an hour. I was just telling this story because now I'm the chairman of the board for Special Olympics. Chris: Are you really? Jen: I am, and so they asked me my why, and I was like well, I did this for about five years, six years, all through college. I did summer camps and stuff, and so that population has a very soft spot in my heart. Chris: I love how that's come full circle in your life to be able to be doing what you're doing with Special Olympics. As an aside and maybe a plug, isn't Houston hosting the Special Olympics? Jen: next year, next year, I did not tell you that you didn't, but I just know we are right at rice, and is it 2025? Yeah, so that's a big deal, so huge those. Chris: Any listeners in houston, be on the lookout to go support that, what a great cause thank you, appreciate that all right. So my favorite question tex-mex or barbecue? Jen: tex-mex. I'm not a barbecue fan. My husband loves it, but I don't. Chris: Well, you know, you had no problem answering that question. Jen: Some people struggle so I love that In Texas only probably Right. Chris: So another question I get travel ideas from. So if you could do a 30-day sabbatical, where would you go and what would you do? Jen: Maine. Chris: Maine. Jen: We. If you could do a 30-day sabbatical, where would you go and what would you do? Maine, maine. We went to Maine last year. Oh my God, it's beautiful. We're empty nesters and so we're doing two-week working vacations. We just got back from Santa Fe and then we're hoping the next spring we're going to do Maine. Chris: Good for you. Yeah, I like that, kenny. Jen: Bunk or somewhere around there. Chris: Okay Well, you didn't let me finish a sentence, oh sorry, no, so I know you meant it right. Some people have to think about it. Jen: Oh, I knew. Yeah. Well, we're thinking about where we want to go now, so we've got a whole list. Chris: That's a fun process to go through. Yeah, it is so well, jen. Thanks again for coming. Special Guest: Jen Sudduth.

Building Texas Business
Ep071: Crafting Industrial Success with Jason Hayes

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later May 1, 2024 37:11


In this episode of Building Texas Business, we delve into the remarkable journey of Jason Hayes and his family's business, Top Coat Fabrication. Despite the tumultuous nature of the markets, they managed to emerge as an industrial leader, a testament to their resilience and adaptability. He shares Top Coat's blueprint for navigating change while excelling in oil, gas, and petrochemicals. Intentional culture-building through staff gatherings and challenges instilled trust and community, cornerstones of Top Coat's prosperity. In conclusion, his journey to company president wove together personal learning, workplace achievements, nurturing customer bonds, and proactive growth to create the powerhouse that Top Coat is today. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Jason Hayes discusses the transformation of Top Coat Fabrication from its sandblasting roots to becoming an influential player in the oil, gas, and petrochemical industries. We explore Jason's early involvement with the family business, starting straight out of high school and eventually becoming president, as he emphasizes the value of hands-on experience. Jason shares how Top Coat navigated the challenges of the oil industry's downturns and how strategic diversification into fabrication opened new opportunities in the petrochemical sector. Jason and I delve into the pivotal moment in 2010 when Jason embraced intentional leadership and continuous learning, transforming his personal and professional outlook. Jason highlights the cultural shift within Top Coat, illustrating how he cultivates a positive work environment through team-building exercises and weekly staff meetings. We discuss the significance of building strong customer relationships, with Jason explaining his personal approach to post-project follow-ups and the search for honest feedback. Jason reflects on the importance of networking and trusted advisors, detailing how open communication within the leadership team is essential for resolving conflicts and fostering growth. We delve into Jason's leadership style, his efforts to understand team members' goals, and his commitment to maintaining a balance between work and family life. Jason explains the importance of hiring for culture fit, noting that while skills are necessary, alignment with the company's ethos is crucial for long-term success. Personal anecdotes are shared, including Jason's love for Tex-Mex, his first job experiences, and his aspirations to travel more with his family. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Top Coat Fabrication GUESTS Jason HayesAbout Jason TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In this episode, you will meet Jason Hayes, president of Top Coat Fabrication. Jason is the second generation of leadership in a family-owned business and tells how he went from hope to learning to be more intentional about growth. Jason I want to welcome you to. Building Texas Business. Thanks for taking time to come on the show. Absolutely Glad to be here. So I think the best place to start is just tell us a little bit about Topcoat. What is the business and what? Jason: does it do? Okay, we're an industrial fabricator, so we fabricate oil and gas and petrochemical equipment, a lot of welding, piping, structural steel, pressure vessels pretty much anything you see when you drive by chemical plants. That's the type of stuff that we fabricate. Chris: Okay, and y'all been in business. Now for what? 40 plus years, 40 plus years. Jason: This is our 44th year. I think it started in 1980. Okay, yes, it started as a sandblasting and painting company, and that's how they got the name Top Coat. Chris: Oh, okay, that makes sense. And so started by your father, I believe. Mom and dad, okay, still 100% owners. Very good, so what was the I guess, the inspiration that had them start Top Coat to begin with? Jason: I think honestly, if I remember the story right, my dad was working for a contractor down in Freeport and I don't remember the whole story but he didn't get treated right so he got let go or whatever happened. So he decided he was going to start his own thing. So he did they and they started this blasting and painting and it just kind of took off. His work ethic combined with everything else and industry in our area, so there was a lot of oil and gas in our area at that time. Mobile had a big shore base down there, so his contacts led to him doing some blasting painting for mobile and then they asked him if he could do some work offshore on their platforms, because they have platforms out there. So that that led to that part of the business and it just kind of started growing a little bit from there so it's interesting. Chris: So many people that I've talked to have you know unique stories, but there's a there, there's some that have a common theme that it's kind of, out of that hardship or disappointment or something, they decide to go on their own and do it their own way. It sounds like that was the case for your dad. Jason: Yeah, absolutely. I don't know exactly what drove it, you know, but yeah, that's what led to it. Chris: Tell us a little bit then you know how did that lead to. You know what the company is today as it relates to you know the focus and the mission and the purpose of the company. How has those early days influenced where you are today, some 44 years later? Jason: Well, let me give you a little bit of history about that. So when he started working offshore for Mobile at some point, he was just doing sandblasting and painting, well, on a project. They had asked him if he had any welders or knew any welders, because they needed some welding done out there. So he said yes, as a matter of fact, I do so. Welders because they needed some welding done out there. So he said, yes, matter of fact, I do so that he started hiring welders and doing construction on the platforms as well. So the offshore oil and gas was our bread and butter for many years, 20 plus years at least. So that even when I came on board in 98, that was our biggest business was oil and gas offshore construction. We'd send crews to the platforms and do maintenance and platform installations, platform removals, kind of everything in between. So that was great. The downside was, you know, when oil and gas is great, it's great, but it's dead, very cyclical too, right Big time. So we had a lot of struggles and I didn't see any other struggles that they saw. My mom and dad went through so many downturns that it was everything they could do to survive, but they did Well. Then, after the BP spill, macondo incident. Then the government really cracked down on offshore industry. So pretty much all the platforms we used to work on started coming out of the water. So all the stuff that we used to do existed no more. So that's when we really had to decide and make a big pivot in the business and say you know what we've been doing? A little bit of fabrication that supports the oil and gas, the offshore let's, let's focus on that. We have the knowledge base, we had some experience in it. Let's let's focus on that. So we literally changed the name to top coat fabrication and we didn't do anything off-site anymore. We focused strictly on fabrication and we would ship our stuff, you know, kind of all over. So it opened another big door to us for the petrochemical industry, because down in our area, you know, we've had Dow Chemical, all these chemical plants right in our back door. But it was almost like we swore we'll never work for the plants, we'll never work in the plants, just because it has that stigma of okay, once you get in, you know your foot in Dow, you know it's, it can be great. But then they people say they own you or you know whatever, and so we never did. Well then now with just the fabrication, that's when we started reaching out to these chemical plants and started really digging in and started doing a lot of work for them. So, and then, another big blessing was not too long after that, we got approached by a big company that had property next to us, had a, a facility, and then they wanted to buy our facility for an expansion. So we were on the water, we were on the intercoastal canal because we had crew boats coming in and out. We did a lot of dock services, so none of that existed anymore. So this was just a huge place that we didn't need, so that we used that to actually buy a piece of property, built a brand new shop where we're at now, a brand new facility. We built it the way we wanted. That was, you know, based on fabrication. So that's where we still are. Chris: Okay, that's great. So you know, I guess, a good lesson in the adage of don't put all your eggs in one basket. Yeah, y'all learned to diversify pretty quickly, right? Yes, yeah, exactly. Jason: So now you know we still do oil and gas work, but it's fabrication. We do a lot of stuff for West Texas oil and gas and we ship our stuff out there. We do a ton for the petrochemical industry right in our back door. We're getting into commercial building fabrication now not the buildings themselves but the structural components that go into them. We're looking into the offshore wind generation, solar, anywhere. We can do our fabrication in different industries for that exact reason to diversify. Chris: It's a good lesson right for people out there that you know. Start a business, maybe with that one big customer, that focus. It can be good when times are good, but you got to think about you know what. If this goes away, what else do we have? That is a compliment to it. It's a big liability yeah, if you don't, yeah, it ain't no different than what you were saying if, if you got too far in with someone like Dow, that'd be no different than you know, kind of that singular focus. So let's talk a little bit. How did you get involved and kind of come up through the business? Because you're now the president, I definitely want to talk a little bit once I hear kind of the back story about at some point there was a transition in leadership, so I definitely want to dive into that. Sure. Jason: So right out of high school I worked for Topcoat for the summer between high school and college and I went off to college that next semester. I went to Texas A&M. I was in mechanical engineering program. I wasn't ready for college, so I was there for two semesters and then they suggested that I leave. So I left. After that I came home and started working in 98 at some point and started at the bottom, started as a helper. The summer before college I was just a weed eater. We had this huge facility on the shore basin. I literally just weeded it all summer pretty much. So then when I came back I was a helper, just doing whatever you know in the shop around the facility. At one point we also made a realization or my dad did, because I had nothing to do with management then, but he made a realization that we needed somebody that would take care of the safety. We always had good safety records and good practices, but we needed somebody that could take charge of the program. Right? So I got volunteered to be the safety man. There you go. So I did that for a few years. They call that voluntold. Chris: Yes. Jason: I was being polite, you're exactly right. So I did that for a couple years and then I don't remember how the transition it was kind of a slow transition into just kind of taking more of the reins of the management. So at some point I can't tell you when, but he named me as the general manager. Okay, so he was the president, I was the general manager and then so I had, you know, a couple of people that kind of reported directly to me and then all the work happened underneath them. So that, and that was the case for a pretty good while. And I mean I'll be brutally honest that I was not into leadership back then. I wanted to be the top dog, right, I wanted to be the guy in charge, but leadership as I understand it now was not in my repertoire. Chris: Yeah, well, I mean, it's easy to want to be the guy, yeah, but there's a lot that goes with it that not everyone understands. Right To do it, the right way To do it right? Yeah, I knew nothing about leading people. Well, what have you done to try to help educate yourself, get some experience to become a better leader? Jason: I think it started with a desire wanting to be better. When you hit that point in 2010, I hit a really low point in my life. That's when I turned my life over to God and became a Christian. It just really changed the way I was thinking. So that kind of led me into leading my family and at some point, you know, I started reading books, I started learning more, listening to podcasts, and that just literally flowed into work. Okay, there's a realization. Okay, now I need to be a better leader at work. And what does that look like? So I started going to conferences, reading books, listening, just consuming as much content as I could, yeah, and then just slowly started putting things into practice at work, which was awkward, you know, at times when you try to bring some new thought processes and stuff to the team where it's never been before. You know, this is the way we've always done it type of mentality, and I was the same way. Chris: So it's a struggle, it's a beautiful story. It's an easy trap to fall into, right For people. Well, we were just doing it this way, because we've always done it that way. That is a eventually that becomes a death sentence for a company because no one will. Eventually that becomes a death sentence for a company because no one will innovate or think differently. And so I definitely applaud you for coming to that point. And you know, and as you know, now it's a, it's an everyday. You know you got to keep learning and keep growing, yeah for sure. So let's go back to the kind of the transition, because at some point you become president I don't know what your dad's title is now, but you kind of take over the reins. Let's talk about how did that decision kind of come about? And then how did y'all manage through the transition where you became kind of the. Jason: It was gradually happening already, so my dad is still the CEO now and he was like saying he was the president back then and it was just I, I probably just. It was a combination of me taking more and taking more initiative and him being able to release more right. So there wasn't anything set like, okay, I'm going to give you more, I need you to take more. Chris: It was just kind of I started pulling and he started giving well the given parts, probably the hardest of those two, oh, I'm sure'm sure, allowing himself to let go and trust. How did y'all manage the communication within the company? Did you just let it happen by kind of osmosis? The actual? Jason: leadership just happened. So I've worked really closely with most of my leadership team for gosh I guess 16 or 17 years now several of them and so it just happened. We started really clicking together, growing. A lot of us have the same kind of mentality we want to get better personally, we want to get better in the business. We're, all you know, looking at the big picture type of thing. But the actual transition from me to GM to president, I didn't even know about it. So we have a staff meeting every Monday with the entire company. We have breakfast and I typically show some type of motivational video, tell the whole staff a few things that might be going on within the business. And in one of those meetings my mom shows up. And my mom, she just doesn't. She's never been involved in the business since I've been there. She's part owner but never been involved in it, and so she's. So you know, I said hi to her before I'm going to the meeting and I didn't think anything about it. Well, during that meeting my dad gets up and says okay, I want to announce that jason is now the president of the business and I'm he. I don't think he said this, but he was stepping up to the ceo. So it was like a we both kind of moved up okay. But he mentioned, you know, that he just that he just wanted to. He knew I was passionate about it, I was passionate about the business, passionate about the people, and he knew I wanted to take it to new places. So he named me president. So nobody knew, not me, not anybody else, it just happened one day oh, we don't. So it was a cool honor and you know it didn't change much. It didn't change much because the structure was already there. Yeah, it was just a matter of a title really then. But I think I started taking it even more serious then. Chris: Makes sense. So I guess we talk about as it exists today. Then you're still working with your dad, but more the responsibility for the day-to-day falls on you, Right? Yes, definitely. Jason: He's there almost every day. I mean he's there every day that he's around. If he's not, you know, gone out of town or something, he's there. He's typically in his shorts and flip flops or you know shorts and shoes and fishing shirt. But he is there, which is great to have him. I'm honored to be able to work with him. He still lets me pretty much do what I want. I mean trusts me. Chris: So one of the things I noticed in getting ready to meet you today was on your website, the company's website. You're very big on your people and your culture, so let's talk a little bit about how you would describe the culture at Top Coat and what are some of the things you think you've done to help kind of build to get to that type of culture. Jason: The culture is amazing at Top Coat and that's my passion. My passion is the culture. That's one of the biggest things I think spend most time thinking about. One of the first things I did was start having a just a like a weekly meeting with my, the leadership team. We started doing that, I would bet, six or eight years ago, Just a weekly meeting. We didn't really have any structure, I just wanted us to meet, put our heads together and talk about things going on. So that was the first thing I started. And then, after that, we started the full staff meetings. After we moved to our new place, we actually had a place we could meet, but we started having our full staff meetings once a week too, and we kind of used that as a transition. I don't remember how it came about, but we started doing a type of physical challenge where every Monday after our staff meeting, we'd have some kind of challenge where it would be, we'd do push-ups, we'd do dead hangs. We've done just about everything you could imagine. Some of them are physical, some of them are not, but we do that and it's we literally make the people pay. If you want to play five bucks, Everybody puts in five bucks and wants to do it. Winner takes all, unless it's a team sport. You know, we've done tug of war, We've done dodgeball tournaments and little things like that. It just creates like maybe 15, 20 minutes of fun and there's trash talking from all the you know, the audience and everything else. But it's that's just a tiny layer that just it just adds a little bit of fun into the workday. It makes it a little more human, right? Yes, and that's one of the biggest things my dad fought me on at the very beginning was doing these. You know his mentality was you know, think about what that's costing the company. You know you have this entire crew shut down for 30 minutes additional. What do you think that's costing us? And I wrapped my head around it and I thought about it and I understood. But at the same time I tried to make him understand. I think it's way more valuable to spend that time and spend that money on this time, because I think overall it's going to be well worth it. Chris: Yeah, kudos to you for that, because it's easy to look at the black and white and ensure there's a cost to that. But I think you're right when you evaluate it holistically. If you're creating engagement and fostering that environment where everyone kind of knows each other better and feels more like a team, I think the returns are exponential. Right, you can't necessarily put dollars on it, but you probably can't look at lack of turnover, maybe better productivity once they're back at work. So I think to your point it was it's a wise investment to making your people yeah, I agree, and I mean to this day. Jason: If you look on our LinkedIn page or Facebook, when I put up videos of the challenge that we do, that's even on LinkedIn. Those are the posts that get so many comments, so many shares. It's people connect with it and so many people say, man, I wish we did that at our place, or I wish my company would do stuff like that. And it's like it's those little things that people I don't know if they don't think about them or they just don't think it's worth it, but for us it's been kind of a game changer. Advert Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom. And thanks for listening to the show. Chris: So one of the things you mentioned kind of as the company's evolved is, you know this diversification into fabrication and doing other lines of business. What are some of the things you do as the president of the company to kind of create those relationships with the new customers, new vendors, and maintain those strong relationships? Jason: We have a sales team that does a lot of the actual interaction. But most of our customers I'll know their name, I'll know their contact information and I'm the one that reaches out to them personally. For if we're going to do it, then let's say we sponsor a lot of golf tournaments, you know skeet shooting teams for fundraisers and that sort of thing, and I'm the one that normally reaches out to the people and ask them if they want to you know, participate with us. We had an industry night a couple of weeks ago and I call all the what the customers that I know and have the contact information. I'm the one that calls them and I also do customer follow-ups. With every project that we do that ships out, I do a customer follow-up call with everyone. I call them personally, just as me, thanking them, number one for their business and then number two just seeing if there's anything we can do to improve that I love. Chris: And I'll tell you we tried here and we're not consistent with it. Love, and I'll tell you we tried here and we were not consistent with it, but that kind of what I would call customer survey, satisfaction survey. So you've got it baked into your routine to do it on every order. Jason: That's amazing, I learned that from Mattress Mac. Okay, we bought some furniture from him and I think twice now, and every time sometime afterwards he calls personally and just thanks us for his business. Oh we darn. Chris: Yeah, Well, I think it's a great lesson for people you know that are listening to this and have their own business. That personal touch and that follow-up can go so far in creating that customer loyalty Right. So that's amazing. I guess you report back to your people on what you learned from that so that's amazing. Jason: I guess you report back to your people what you learned from that. Yeah, so we have a Teams, our Teams folder that we open up every day or every week in our leadership meeting and I keep the spreadsheets in there so we review it every week. Any ones that I call, you know, I'll be honest, I'll let them build up, because our project coordinator sends me. Every time we ship one out, he sends me the contact, you know, until I know what the project was, who the contact name is and so forth. And I will, all honesty, I let them build up because sometimes I'll procrastinate doing it, you know, because I'm like, oh, it's one more thing I gotta do, right, right. But then after I do, let's say, just the day before yesterday I called six, six clients and every time I do it I'm so glad that I did because I feel better, I'm sure you know, I feel better because I let them know, number one I that I them. Number two we're trying to ask them if there's anything that we can do to improve and be better. We want to know and I don't think. I think it's so uncommon that people don't people say they want feedback. But I think they want the five-star rating Right. They don't want the honesty, they just want okay, how many five stars can we get? Chris: Yeah, they want the high google rating, right right which it feels good to get that. Jason: But we're not going to get any better if, especially if there's a client that's not happy about something, some most of them aren't going to come and just out and tell us, hey, so and so went wrong. But if I ask, is there anything we could do to better, that's when they're going to say, as a matter of fact, there is. Yeah, I haven't got that yet, but we will sure you will. I mean, that's the point, that's what I want. Chris: I think that's great. You know, sitting here thinking I need to do more of that. You know that, as I told you before we came on, I learned from all the guests and I've at least learned that from you today. I think that's wise advice. Jason: And it has to come from the top. If my project coordinator is talking to the clients, you know 24 seven7. It's not going to be the same Right. Chris: That's right. So let's talk a little bit. I mean, it's been up and down in the economy the last few years. What have you experienced at Top Coat kind of as it relates to the last four or five years and kind of the you know turbulent environment, and what are some of the things you've done to kind of manage through? Jason: that We've stayed pretty steady the last several years. Now. Last year ended up being our best year in history revenue-wise. Revenue and profit-wise. Several stars aligned for that, some great projects from some longtime customers. But the few years before that we were okay, we were steady, right, and that's. I think that's one thing that Vistage taught me is to be proactive. I'd sit back for years and say, man, I hope this company grows, I hope this company grows. And then, with you know, the Vistage group and just everything that I've been involved in so far with that has just really taught me that you have to be intentional, you have to, we have to make it happen. So we going to grow, how are we going to make this happen? So that's where the big focus is now. I mean we since I've been there, you know, 26 years we've had some horrible years. I mean when we first take great story, when we first built our new facility beautiful shop, beautiful, everything we had no work, zero. We got down, I believe seven people in the company completely, and I remember just like it was. Yesterday we're having my staff meeting, so it's a small group, but I'm kind of telling them look, we literally had 75 grand in the bank and we said this is all the money we had left. We had all this money from selling our property, but we'd spent on this new facility and we had some money, but it had just dwindled down to nothing because the work had died, and so that was in 16, I think 2016, 2017. Okay, so I'm telling the whole team look, guys, I don't know what we're going to do. We're going to figure this out, but I really don't know what I do, what we're going to do. And then, literally during that meeting, our phone, our office phone, rang. There was nobody in the office, so I turned around and I answered the phone. Quick, five-minute conversation. It was a guy driving by our facility. He was an inspector for Chevron, phillips and Sweeney and he said I'm leaving the shop and I'm the inspector and I can't stand Something along the lines of I can't stand working with these guys. They keep lying to me, I need to find another shop and I've just been driving by your place. I want to see if I can come talk to you about doing some fabrication work for us. That led to us doing $2 million to $3 million a year for them almost every year since. Oh, wow, and so that was. It was like that was. Since I've been in the business, that was the lowest point that I felt, because I was really feeling that pressure of what am I going to do? What am I going to do? And there was no strategy to this. It was like it was a God moment of having him drive by all this stuff at the same time by having a new facility help? yes, absolutely if we had not been there, he never would have driven by our place, because where we were before nobody drove by right, so nobody knew so so that's it. Chris: I mean well, that's an incredible deal. So 2016 is seven employees, $75,000 in the bank. How did you end 2023? How many employees and what was your revenue? Jason: 2023,. We had $22 million in revenue and for most of the year we were probably around close to 100 employees. Wow. Chris: That's an amazing turnaround, congratulations. Appreciate it yeah, congratulations, appreciate it. So, yeah, I like what you said earlier, when it was you were hoping to grow and you've learned to go think about how to grow and be intentional, because that otherwise you hear there's another cliche hope's not a strategy, right? So sounds like you mentioned vistage, so you're a vistage member, that sounds like, and other vistage members, including myself. I know how valuable it can be to grow as a leader, but then how you think about your business. Jason: Sure, absolutely yeah. And, like I was telling you earlier, the network that you meet the people, the different people in every area of business yourself for legal, whether it's taxes, insurance, whatever has to do with business. There's people that I'm connected with, literally one-on-one, that I can call, I can sit down with. Most of them will just meet me for lunch. If I need to bounce an idea off of them. That's the biggest thing. Chris: Something I tell people that have businesses all the time is you've got to build a solid network of trusted advisors that you can reach out to, whether it's a banker, insurance person, accountant, lawyer, another entrepreneur or business owner right, that you can just reach out to, because even when you're having a bad day and maybe they can you know, hey, I've been there before, so you'll feel, because a lot of times you feel alone. What are some of the things I guess, as you've evolved as a leader that you've found to kind of whether it's a particular book or conference you go to that have really been valuable to you to kind of grow as a leader? Jason: I can't think of a specific book, but I think, the mentality of giving your people the tools that they need to do what they have inside their head. You know, I think so many times I've learned that even our leadership team at work they have so many ideas and great ways to do different things, but they don't always let them out. So I think creating number one, creating a safe place, like our leadership meetings that we have every Wednesday morning, that's a safe place. Whether it's a conflict that we have, whether it's an issue that they've been holding in, whatever it may be, that is the place where we draw those things out and we squash them or whatever we need to do. To me, that's probably been the biggest thing. Chris: It's a hard thing to do, but you're so right that safe place where people feel like they can share without being judged or criticized is unique, I think, but so important. Jason: And it's so simple, but we're all humans, especially at work. Yeah, and it's so simple, but we're all humans, especially at work. I'm sure we all swallow a whole lot more at work than we do anywhere else, because maybe we're afraid of our job, we're afraid of whatever. But I think it's been really good for us. We've solved so many issues just because we've created the structure for it. Chris: So one of the things I like to ask folks that come on is can you tell us a setback you've encountered in your professional life? Maybe it's your personal life, but something that sets you back. But you learned so much and you grew from it that you're better off because of it today. Man. Jason: I know there's plenty of them. Chris: That's what most people say. Jason: Yeah, there's plenty of them. Chris: I'm just trying to think what would come to mind, maybe something right after you kind of took over being either general manager or president at Topco, maybe something in those early days. Jason: I think one of the real struggles is it's not a moment but learning the business finances. You know I struggle a lot with okay, we need this piece of equipment to get better, we should just go buy it. Well, my dad has the finances and the history of the accounting behind it and I've struggled because he and I butted heads quite a bit on things I think would be a good investment and things he thinks wouldn't be a good investment. So that's become something we both had to work on. Really, I mean, I lean on him a lot for his knowledge and different things when we're purchasing, making big purchases or expanding our facility, whatever we're doing. But I think having those conversations was probably some of the toughest things we've had to do. Gotcha, and it's just like anything else, it's just like with the leadership team. It's creating a space that we can have those. I mean, he and I have worked together for literally 26 years, so we work well together and we communicate fine together. But it's me getting up the courage to ask those questions too. That's been a struggle. Chris: So what I hear you saying in that and I think it's a natural struggle for people in leadership because, like you said, from day one, you wanted to be the top dog. Sure, it's having the humility to ask your father or mentor someone that you don't know or don't know enough, right. Sure, so that takes a lot of humility, yeah, for you, and I think it's also a blessing that you have the courage to use it. Jason: Is you have a built-in, you know, advisor, mentor, right there, you know, letting you grow and being there to kind of guide you along the way yeah, and I don't utilize them as much as I should, but every time we have a conversation like this, it reminds me how much I should I, how much I do and should you know, put more value in that another thing that you mentioned was mentioned was y'all can butt heads. Chris: So what have y'all done? Because I guarantee I've had other people that have done what you've done on the show, that have taken over a family business. I guarantee there's people who are going to listen to this, that are doing that or see that in their future when you get to that place of how will you and your dad communicate on big issues. If you all kind of got it agreed upon, let's do this in private and really hash it out and not let other people see what's going on. I mean, is that something that's one that you all kind of have a practice of doing? If so, how does that work? Jason: Yeah, definitely. I mean, he's in our leadership meeting. He sits in our leadership meetings pretty much every week. He's pretty quiet, you know, off to the side, he's just mainly listening, but there's plenty of times where I'll you know if I have an issue with something he said, or vice versa. He'll either come to my office and shut the. I always, I constantly, have to remind myself that this is his baby. This whole company is. I've had a lot to do with the growth and where we're at in you know the current state, but at the end of the day, this is his and he. He created it and I'm just a part of it. Yeah, so I have to constantly remind myself of that. And then he I mean, he tells me multiple times that you know I'm doing a good job of running it. So he's constantly having to remind himself that he gave me the authority and the power to run it. But it's definitely a team effort. Chris: I think it would have to be. The other thing that comes to mind again, kind of unique to family-owned business and second generation of leadership of that family-owned business is how well do you and your dad do at leaving the issues at the office versus trickling over to the Thanksgiving table or anything like that? Jason: Yeah, he's probably better at that than I am, but even I don't know. From the time I was born, he and I have had an absolutely solid relationship always. He was gone a lot when I was growing up for many years because he was doing a lot of offshore work. So he was gone a lot when I was growing up for many years because he was doing a lot of offshore work. So he was gone a lot, but we always had just a top-notch relationship. Yeah, so I think without that it would have been a hundred times worse. Yeah, but I don't think I can't remember a single time where any tension between me and him ever stayed very long period, but certainly much less made it out the door. Yeah, yeah, we could have this tough discussion and then say, all right, let's go get some lunch yeah, you know that's good here and you know. Chris: The other thing is, I think when you're an entrepreneur and you own this business, you live and breathe it, so you you're going to be thinking about it when you're at home and those conversations could come up versus, just as natural, when they happen at the office right it. Jason: It always has. Yeah, I mean, whether we're at my house, his house, it's typically something with work is going to come up and we're going to talk about it. Chris: It just happens. So let me ask you this just about your own personal leadership style. How would you describe your leadership style today? How do you think it's evolved or developed over the last several years? Jason: I would say my style is to. This is just off the cuff, but I would say my style is to help anybody that I'm leading, make sure they have the tools to do what they need to do. You know I'm really passionate about I haven't been extremely proactive about mentoring all of my leadership team, but I want to know their goals, not just professionally but personally too, and I think a lot about like, what can I do to help them succeed? If the person is going after what they were put on this earth to do and I can be a part of that and help guide them to that, I think that is the ultimate definition of success when it comes to leadership. Yeah, so that's kind of my passion. I haven't been as good at the mentoring side and maybe the personal side. We talk about business roles and stuff quite a bit but I really want to be more involved with their goals in life overall. Sure, Not involved in them, but what can I do to help? How can I help? Chris: Well, at least understand them, so you know how you can be a resource. Jason: Yeah, and again, I want all my resources to be their resources too. Chris: So that brings up kind of a good subject. When you think about that, and maybe I'm going to ask you about yourself, what do you do to try to maintain some type of balance in your life right between work and family, knowing that you're always thinking about the business, right? Jason: I've done pretty good with that for the most part. I've never been a workaholic, just not me. I've been a huge family guy always. I have four kids, ages 15 down to 7, so we stay busy, sounds like it, but that's another. Passion of mine, too is just the kids and the family. I've never had a struggle with staying at work when I should be at home. Chris: Now having the leadership team that I have is what makes that possible. I was going to say you got to have some tools in place to help facilitate that. So hiring good leaders to work with you, Anything that you look for, or when you do interview or interview someone for a leadership position and or think about promoting them to one. Jason: Culture is the number one thing. That's what I always start with. Will this person be a fit for our culture? And that's typically if we're going to hire not just leadership team, but maybe even the level right. You know, underneath that, most of the time I'll. I want to know the person. I want to have a one-on-meeting. You know, I've met several people for coffee that we were interviewing for a project manager position, just because I want to just get to know the person. The resume says what they've done. The resume says everything that they've accomplished. But I want to know are they going to fit with us? And if they don't, then that's an immediate no. So I think that hiring for the culture is the number one thing. Chris: So many people, including myself, believe that right. Lots of people have skills that could fit with what you do, but are they a type of person that fits with who you are and who you want your people to be? Right, and I believe the people that are culture fit. Jason: You never know where they might end up, even with the company. We've hired a couple of people that were a great fit for us and they were doing one thing. Well then, as soon as we get, they get in and they're a great fit, and then we start seeing all the stuff that they're capable of. Then they start getting snagged by this person and next thing you know they're just keep moving up because everybody's starting to see. Chris: You know they're capable of yeah, but it started with the fit right. That's great. Well, jason, I love the story and the family transition. I think it's a beautiful story when they're done right. They're not always are. I want to always wrap up on a few off-topic personal things. Okay, what was your first job? Was it something at Top Coat or something other than that? Jason: Yeah, it was Top Coat, the one right after high school, so weed eating, yeah, it was great. Chris: So great. All right, what's your preference? Tex-mex or barbecue Tex-Mex? I could eat it every day. I mean, I didn't even finish the sentence. Jason: I know you jumped on that one, I know. Chris: No question. Jason: So I always ask people if you could take a sabbat Ooh 30 days, oh man, for at least a week I'd take my wife and we'd just sit on a beach somewhere. Yeah, without a doubt. Yeah, and then I would just do some traveling, a lot of traveling. I want to do a lot more traveling. The only place out of the states I've been is to Mexico, for me and my wife on our honeymoon. Okay, so I've got so many places I want to see, but I just don't make the time or make the plans to do it. Chris: Well with the four kids as you described, you got your hands full right. Yeah, well again. Jason, thanks for taking the time to come on the show. Really enjoyed getting to get to know you better and meet you. Jason: I appreciate the opportunity man. Special Guest: Jason Hayes.

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots
thoughtbot's Incubator Program Mini Session 3: Episode 08: Goodz with Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 23, 2024 28:35


If you missed the other episodes with thoughtbot Incubator Program partcipants and founders Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito of Goodz, you can listen to the first episode (https://podcast.thoughtbot.com/s3e2incubatorgoodz) and the second episode (https://podcast.thoughtbot.com/s3e4incubatorgoodz), and the third episode (https://podcast.thoughtbot.com/s3e6incubatorgoodz) to catch up! Lindsey Christensen and Jordyn Bonds catch up with the co-founders of Goodz, Chris Cerrito and Mike Rosenthal, where they share insights from their journey during the Incubator program, including the usefulness of the application process in aligning their vision and the challenges and benefits of user interviews and the importance of not overreacting to single user feedback and finding a balance in responding to diverse opinions. They reveal the varied reactions of users to Goodz's product, highlighting the different market segments interested in it. As the Incubator program nears its end for Goodz, Chris and Mike reflect on their achievements and future plans. They've made significant progress, such as setting up an e-commerce site and conducting successful user interviews. The co-founders discuss their excitement about the potential of their product and the validation they received from users. Mike mentions the importance of focusing on B2B sales and the possibility of upcoming events like South by Southwest and Record Store Day. Transcript: LINDSEY: Thanks for being here. My name's Lindsey. I head up marketing at thoughtbot. If you haven't joined one of these before, we are checking in with two of the founders who are going through the thoughtbot Startup Incubator to learn how it's going, what's new, what challenges they're hitting, and what they're learning along the way. If you're not familiar with thoughtbot, we're a product design and development consultancy, and we hope your team and your product become a success. And one way we do that is through our startup incubator. So, today, we are joined by our co-founders, Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito, Co-Founders of the startup Goodz. And we also have another special guest today, Danny Kim, from the thoughtbot side, Senior Product Manager at thoughtbot. So, I think, to start off, we'll head over to the new face, the new voice that we've got with us today. Danny, tell us a little bit about your role at thoughtbot and, specifically, the incubator. DANNY: Yeah, sure. First of all, thanks for having me on, and thanks for letting me join in on all the fun. I'm one of the product managers at thoughtbot. I typically work for the Lift-Off team. We usually work with companies that are looking to, like, go into market with their first version MVP. They might have a product that exists and that they're already kind of doing well with, and they kind of want to jump into a new segment. We'll typically work with companies like that to kind of get them kicked off the ground. But it's been really awesome being part of the incubator program. It's my first time in helping with the market validation side. Definitely also, like, learning a lot from this experience [laughs] for myself. Coming at it specifically from a PM perspective, there's, like, so much variation usually in product management across the industry, depending on, like, what stage of the product that you're working in. And so, I'm definitely feeling my fair share of impostor syndrome here. But it's been really fun to stretch my brand and, like, approach problems from, like, a completely different perspective and also using different tools. But, you know, working with Mike and Chris makes it so much easier because they really make it feel like you're part of their team, and so that definitely goes a long way. LINDSEY: It just goes to show everyone gets impostor syndrome sometimes [laughter], even senior product managers at thoughtbot [laughter]. Thanks for that intro. It's, you know, the thoughtbot team learns along the way, too, you know, especially if usually you're focused on a different stage of product development. Mike, it's been only three weeks or a very long three weeks since last we checked in with you, kind of forever in startup time. So, I think the last time, we were just getting to know you two. And you were walking us through the concept, this merging of the digital and physical world of music, and how we interact with music keepsakes or merchandise. How's my pitch? MIKE: Good. Great. You're killing it. [laughter] LINDSEY: And has anything major changed to that concept in the last three weeks? MIKE: No. I mean, I can't believe it's only been three weeks. It feels like it's been a long time since we last talked. It's been an intense three weeks, for sure. No, it's been going really well. I mean, we launched all sorts of stuff. I'm trying to think of anything that's sort of fundamentally changed in terms of the plan itself or kind of our, yeah, what we've been working on. And I think we've pretty much stayed the course to sort of get to where we are now. But it's been really intensive. I think also having sort of Thanksgiving in there, and we were kind of pushing to get something live right before the Thanksgiving break. And so, that week just felt, I mean, I was just dead by, you know, like, Thursday of Thanksgiving. I think we all were. So, it's been intense, I would say, is the short answer. And I'm happy, yeah, to get into kind of where things are at. But big picture, it's been an intense three weeks. LINDSEY: That's cool. And when we talked, you were, you know, definitely getting into research and user interviews. Have those influenced any, you know, changes along the way in the plan? MIKE: Yeah. They've been really helpful. You know, we'd never really done that before in any of the sort of past projects that we've worked on together. And so, I think just being able to, you know, read through some of those scripts and then sit through some of the interviews and just kind of hearing people's honest assessment of some things has been really interesting. I'm trying to think if it's materially affected anything. I guess, you know, at first, we were, like, we kind of had some assumptions around, okay, let's try to find, like...adult gift-givers sounds like the wrong thing, adults who give gifts as, like, a persona. The idea that, like, you know, maybe you gift your siblings gifts, and then maybe this could be a good gift idea. And I think, you know, we had a hard time kind of finding people to talk in an interesting way about that. And I think we've kind of realized it's kind of a hard persona to kind of chop up and talk about, right, Chris? I don't know [crosstalk 04:55] CHRIS: Well, it also seemed to, from my understanding of it, it seemed to, like, genuinely stress out the people who were being interviewed... MIKE: [laughs] CHRIS: Because it's kind of about a stressful topic [inaudible 05:03], you know, and, like, especially -- LINDSEY: Why? [laughs] CHRIS: Well, I think, I don't know, now I'm making assumptions. Maybe because we're close to the holiday season, and that's a topic in the back of everybody's mind. But yeah, Danny, would you disagree with that? Those folks, from what we heard, seemed like they were the most difficult to kind of extract answers from. But then, if the subject changed and we treated them as a different persona, several of those interviews proved to be quite fruitful. So, it's just really interesting. DANNY: Yeah. It really started, like, you kind of try to get some answers out of people, and there's, like, some level of people trying to please you to some extent. That's just, like, naturally, how it starts. And you just, like, keep trying to drill into the answers. And you just keep asking people like, "So, what kind of gifts do you give?" And they're just like, "Oh my goodness, like, I haven't thought about buying gifts for my sister in [laughs], like, you know, in forever. And now, like [laughs], I don't know where to go." And they get, like, pretty stressed out about it. But then we just kind of started shifting into like, "All right, cool, never mind about that. Like, do you like listening to music?" And they're like, "Yes." And then it just kind of explodes from there. And they're like, "This last concert that I went to..." and all of this stuff. And it was much more fruitful kind of leaning more towards that, actually, yeah. LINDSEY: That's fascinating. I guess that speaks to, especially at this stage and the speed and the amount of interviews you're doing, the need for being, like, really agile in those interviews, and then, like, really quickly applying what you're learning to making the next one even more valuable. MIKE: Yeah. And I think, you know, like, we launched just a little sort of website experiment or, like, an e-commerce experiment right before Thanksgiving. And I think now, you know, we're able to sort of take some of those learnings from those interviews and apply them to both sort of our ad copy itself but also just different landing pages in different language on the different kind of versions of the site and see if we can find some resonance with some of these audience groups. So, it's been interesting. LINDSEY: Are you still trying to figure out who that early adopter audience is, who that niche persona is? MIKE: I think we -- CHRIS: Yes, we are. I think we have a good idea of who it is. And I think right now we're just trying to figure out really how to reach those people. That, I think, is the biggest challenge right now for us. MIKE: Yeah. With the e-commerce experiment it was sort of a very specific niche thing that is a little bit adjacent to what I think we want to be doing longer term with Goodz. And so, it's weird. It's like, we're in a place we're like, oh, we really want to find the people that want this thing. But also, this thing isn't necessarily the thing that we think we're going to make longer term, so let's not worry too hard about finding them. You know what I mean? It's been an interesting sort of back and forth with that. CHRIS: From the interviews that we conducted, you know, we identified three key personas. Most of them have come up, but I'll just relist them. There's the sibling gift giver. There was the merch buyers; these are people who go to concerts and buy merchandise, you know, T-shirts, albums, records, things along those lines to support the artists that they love. And then the final one that was identified we gave the title of the 'Proud Playlister'. And these are people who are really into their digital media platforms, love making playlists, and love sharing those playlists with their friends. And that, I would say, the proud playlister is really the one that we have focused on in terms of the storefront that we launched, like, the product is pretty much specifically for them. But the lessons that we're learning while making this product and trying to get this into the hands of the proud playlisters will feed into kind of the merch buyers. MIKE: Yeah. And I think that, you know, it's funny, like, this week is kind of a poignant week for this, right? Because it's the week that Spotify Wrapped launched, right? So, it's like, in the course of any given year, it's probably, like, the one week of the year that lots and lots and lots of people are thinking about playlists all of a sudden, so trying a little bit to see if we can ride that wave or just kind of dovetail with that a bit, too. LINDSEY: Absolutely. And do you want to give just, like, the really quick reminder of what the product experience is like? MIKE: Oh yeah [laughs], good call. CHRIS: This is a prototype of it. It's called the Goodz Mixtape. Basically, the idea is that you purchase one of these from us. You give us a playlist URL. We program that URL onto the NFC chip that's embedded in the Good itself. And then when you scan this Good, that playlist will come up. So, it's a really great way of you make a playlist for somebody, and you want to gift it to them; this is a great way to do that. You have a special playlist, maybe between you and a friend or you and a partner. This is a good way to commemorate that playlist, turn it into a physical thing, give that digital file value and presence in the physical world. LINDSEY: Great. Okay, so you casually mentioned this launch of an e-commerce store that happened last week. MIKE: It didn't feel casual. LINDSEY: Yeah. Why [laughter]...[inaudible 09:45] real casual. Why did you launch it? How's it going? MIKE: I don't know. Why did we launch it? I mean, well, we wanted to be able to test some assumptions. I think, you know, we wanted to get the brand out there a little bit, get our website out there, kind of introduce the concept. You know, this is a very...not that we've invented this product category, but it is a pretty obscure product category, right? And so, there's a lot of sort of consumer education that I think that has to go on for people to wrap their heads around this and why they'd want this. So, I think we wanted to start that process a little bit correctly, sort of in advance of a larger launch next year, and see if we could find some early community around this. You know, if we can find those core people who just absolutely love this, and connect with it, and go wild around it, then those are the people that we're going to be able to get a ton of information from and build for that persona, right? It's like, cool, these are the people who love this. Let's build more for them and go find other people like this. So, I think, for us, it was that. And then, honestly, it was also just, you know, let's test our manufacturing and fulfillment and logistics capabilities, right? I mean, this is...as much as we are a B2B, you know, SaaS platform or that's what we envision the future of Goodz being, there is a physical component of this. And, you know, we do have that part basically done at this point. But we just, you know, what is it like to order 1,000 of these? What is it like to put these in the mail to people and, you know, actually take orders? And just some of that processing because we do envision a more wholesale future where we're doing, you know, thousands or tens of thousands of this at a time. And so, I think we just want to button up and do some dry runs before we get to those kinds of numbers. CHRIS: I think it also it's important to remember that we are talking in startup time. And while this last week seems like an eternity, it's been a week [laughs] that we've had this in place. So, we're just starting to learn these things, and we plan on continuing to do so. MIKE: Yeah. But I think we thought that getting a website up would be a good way to just start kind of testing everything more. LINDSEY: Great. Danny, what went into deciding what would be in this first version of the site and the e-commerce offering? DANNY: I mean, a lot of it was kind of mostly driven by Chris and Mike. They kind of had a vision and an idea of what they wanted to sell. Obviously, from the user interviews, we were starting to hone in a little bit more and, like, we had some assumptions going into it. I think we ultimately did kind of feel like, yeah, I think, like, the playlisters seem to be, like, the target market. But just hearing it more and hearing more excitement from them was definitely just kind of like, yeah, I think we can double down on this piece. But, ultimately, like, in terms of launching the e-commerce platform, and the storefront, and the website, like, just literally looking at the user journey and being like, how does a user get from getting onto a site, like, as soon as they land there to, like, finishing a purchase? And what points do they need? What are the key things that they need to think through and typically will run into? And a lot of it is just kind of reflecting on our own personal buyer behavior. And, also, as we were getting closer to the launch, starting to work through some of those assumptions about buyer behavior. As we got there, we obviously had some prototypes. We had some screenshots that we were already working with. Like, the design team was already starting to build out some of the site. And so, we would just kind of show it to them, show it to our users, and just be like, hey, like, how do you expect to purchase this? Like, what's the next step that you expect to take? And we'd just kind of, like, continue to iterate on that piece. And so... LINDSEY: Okay. So you were, before launching, even showing some of those mockups and starting to incorporate them in the user interviews. DANNY: Yeah, yeah. I mean, we tried to get it in there in front of them as early as possible, partially because, like, at some point in the user interviews, like, you're mostly just trying to first understand, like, who are our target customers? Who are these people? And we have an assumption of or an idea of who we think they are. But really, like, once you start talking to people, you kind of are, like, okay, like, this thing that I thought maybe it wasn't so accurate, or, like, the way that they're kind of talking about these products doesn't 100% match what I originally walked into this, you know, experiment with. And so, we, like, start to hone in on that. But after a certain point, you kind of get that idea and now you're just like, okay, you seem to be, like, the right person to talk to. And so, if I were to show you this thing, do you get it, right? Like, do you understand what's happening? Like, how to use this thing, what this product even does. And then also, like, does the checkout experience feel intuitive for you? Is it as simple as, like, I just want to buy a T-shirt? So, like, I'm just going to go by the T-shirt, pick a size, and, you know, move on with my life. Can we make it as seamless as that? LINDSEY: And so, you mentioned it's only been a week since it's been live. Have you been able to learn anything from it yet? And how are you trying to drive people to it today? MIKE: Yeah, I think we learned that sales is hard [laughs] and slow, and it takes some time. But it's good, and we're learning a lot. I mean, it's been a while since I've really dug deep in, like, the analytics and marketing kind of metrics. And so, we've got all the Google Tag Manager stuff, you know, hooked up and just, you know, connecting with just exploring, honestly, like the TikTok advertising platform, and the YouTube Pre-Rolls, and Shorts. And, like, a lot of stuff that I actually, since the last time I was heavily involved in this stuff, is just totally new and different. And so, it's been super interesting to see the funnel and sort of see where people are getting in the site, where people are dropping off. You know, we had an interesting conversation in our thoughtbot sync yesterday or the day before, where we were seeing how, you know, we're getting lots of people to the front page and, actually, a good number of people to the product page, and, actually, like, you know, not the worst number of people to the cart. But then you were seeing really high cart abandonment rates. And then, you know, when you start Googling, and you're like, oh, actually, everybody sees very high cart abandonment rates; that's just a thing. But we were seeing, like, the people were viewing their cart seven or eight times, and they were on there sort of five times as long as they were on any other page. And it's this problem that I think Danny is talking about where, you know, we need to actually get a playlist URL. This gets into the minutiae of what we're building, but basically like, we need to get them to give us a playlist URL in order to check out, right? And so, you sort of have to, like, put yourself back in the mind of someone who's scrolling on Instagram, and they see this as an ad, and they click it, and they're like, oh, that thing was cool. Sure, I will buy one of those. And then it's like, no, actually, you need to, you know, leave this, go into a different app, find a play...like, it suddenly just puts a lot of the mental strain. But it's a lot. It's a cognitive load, greater than, as you said, just buying a T-shirt and telling what size you want. So, thinking through ways to really trim that down, shore up the amount of time people are spending on a cart. All that stuff has been fascinating. And then just, like, the different demographic kind of work that we're using, all the social ads platforms to kind of identify has been really interesting. It's still early. But, actually, like, Chris and I were just noticing...we were just talking right before this call. Like, we're actually starting to get, just in the last 12 hours, a bunch more, a bunch, but more people signing up to our email newsletter, probably in the last 12 hours that we have in the whole of last week. Yeah, I don't know, just even that sort of learning, it's like, oh, do people just need time with a thing, or they come back and they think about it? CHRIS: Yeah. Could these people be working on their playlists? That's a question that I have. MIKE: [chuckles] Yeah, me too. CHRIS: It's like, you know, I'm making a playlist to drop into this product. It's really interesting. And I think it gives insight to kind of, you know, how personal this product could be, that this is something that takes effort on the part of the consumer because they're making something to give or to keep for themselves, which is, I think, really interesting but definitely hard, too. DANNY: Yeah. And I also want to also clarify, like, Chris just kind of said it, like, especially for viewers and listeners, like, that's something that we've been hearing a lot from user interviews, too, right? Like, the language that they're using is, like, this is a thing that I care about. Like it's a representation of who I am. It's a representation of, like, the relationship that I have with this person that I'm going to be giving, you know, this gift to or this playlist to, specifically, like, people who feel, like, really passionate about these things. And, I mean, like, I did, too. Like, when I was first trying to, like, date, my wife, like, I spent, like, hours, hours trying to pick the coolest songs that I thought, you know, were like, oh, like, she's going to think I'm so cool because, like, I listen to these, like, super low-key indie rock bands, and, like, you know, so many more hours than she probably spent listening to it. But that's [laughs] kind of, like, honestly, what we heard a lot in a lot of these interviews, so... LINDSEY: Yeah, same. No, totally resonates. And I also went to the site this week, and I was like, oh damn, this is cool. Like, and immediately it was like, oh, you know, I've got these three, you know, music friends that we go to shows together. I'm like, oh, this would be so cool to get them, you know, playlists of, like, music we've seen together. So, you might see me in the cart. I won't abandon it. MIKE: Please. I would love that. CHRIS: Don't think about it too long if you could -- [laughter]. LINDSEY: I won't. I won't. CHRIS: I mean, I would say I'm really excited about having the site not only as a vehicle for selling some of these things but also as a vehicle for just honing our message. It's like another tool that we have in our arsenal. During the user interviews themselves, we were talking in abstract terms, and now we have something concrete that we can bounce off people, which is, I think, going to be a huge boon to our toolset as we continue to refine and define this product. MIKE: Yeah, that's a good point. LINDSEY: Yeah. You mentioned that they're signing up for, like, email updates. Do you have something you're sending out? Or are you kind of just creating a list? Totally fine, just building a list. MIKE: [laughs] No. CHRIS: It's a picture of Mike and I giving a big thumbs up. That's, yeah. [laughter] MIKE: No. But maybe...that was the thing; I was like, oh great, they're signing up. And I was like, gosh, they're signing up. Okay [laughter], now we got to write something. But we will. LINDSEY: Tips to making your playlist [crosstalk 19:11] playing your playlist -- MIKE: Yeah [crosstalk 19:13]. CHRIS: Right. And then also...tips to making your playlists. Also, we're advancing on the collectible side of things, too. We are, hopefully, going to have two pilot programs in place, one with a major label and one with a major artist. And we're really excited about that. LINDSEY: Okay. That's cool. I assume you can't tell us very much. What can you tell us? MIKE: Yeah. We won't mention names [chuckles] in case it just goes away, as these things sometimes do. But yeah, there's a great band who's super excited about these, been around for a long time, some good name recognition, and a very loyal fan base. They want to do sort of a collection of these. I think maybe we showed the little...I can't remember if we showed the little crates that we make or not, but basically, [inaudible 19:52] LINDSEY: The last time, yeah. MIKE: So, they want to sell online a package that's, you know, five or six Goodz in a crate, which I think will be cool and a great sort of sales experiment. And then there's a couple of artists that we're going to do an experiment with that's through their label that's more about tour...basically, giving things away on tour. So, they're going to do some giveaway fan club street team-style experiments with some of these on the road. So, first, it's ideal, provided both those things happen, because we definitely want to be exploring on the road and online stuff. And so, this kind of lets us do both at once and get some real learnings as to kind of how people...because we still don't know. We haven't really put these in people's hands yet. And it's just, like, are people scanning these a lot? Are they not? Is this sort of an object that's sitting on their shelf? Is it...yeah, it's just, like, there's so much we're going to learn once we get these into people's hands. LINDSEY: Do you have the infrastructure to sort of see how many times the cards are scanned? CHRIS: Mm-hmm. Yep, we do. MIKE: Yeah. So, we can see how many times each one is scanned, where they're scanned, that sort of thing. CHRIS: Kind of our next step, and something we were just talking about today with the thoughtbot team, is building out kind of what the backend will be for this, both for users and also for labels and artists. That it will allow them to go in and post updates to the Goodz, to allow them to use these for promotion as people, you know, scan into them to give them links to other sites related to the artists that they might be interested in before they move on to the actual musical playlist. So, that's kind of the next step for us. And knowing how users use these collectibles, both the kind of consumer Good and the artist collectibles that we were just talking about, will help inform how we build that platform. LINDSEY: Very cool. And right now, the online store itself that's built in Shopify? MIKE: Yeah. The homepage is Webflow that Kevin from the thoughtbot team really spearheaded in building for us. And then, yeah, the e-commerce is Shopify. LINDSEY: Y'all have been busy. MIKE: [laughs] LINDSEY: Is there anything else maybe that I haven't asked about yet that we should touch on in terms of updates or things going on with the product? MIKE: I don't know. I don't think so. I think, like Chris said, I mean, we're just...like, now that the site has kind of stood up and we're really switched over to kind of marketing and advertising on that, definitely digging into the backend of this kind of SaaS platform that's going to probably be a big focus for the rest of the, you know, the program, to be honest. Yeah, just some other things we can do on the next front that could eventually build into the backend that I think can be interesting. No, I guess [laughs] the short answer is no, nothing, like, substantial. Those are the big [crosstalk 22:26] LINDSEY: Yeah. Well, that was my next question, too, which is kind of like, what's next, or what's the next chunk of work? So, it's obviously lots more optimization and learning on the e-commerce platform, and then this other mega area, which is, you know, what does this look like as a SaaS solution? What's the vision? But also, where do we start? Which I'm sure, Danny, is a lot of work that you specialize in as far as, like, scoping how to approach these kinds of projects. DANNY: Yeah. And it's interesting because, I mean, we were just talking about this today. Like, part of it is, like, we can, like, really dig into, like, the e-commerce site and, like, really nailing it down to get it to the place where it's like, we're driving tons more traffic and also getting as low of a, like, cart abandonment rate as possible, right? But also, considering the fact that this is in the future, like, large-scale vision. And there's, like, also, like, we're starting to, I think, now iron out a lot of those, like, milestones where we're kind of like, okay, like, we got, like, a short-term vision, which is, like, the e-commerce site. We got a mid-term vision and a potential long-term vision. How do we validate this long-term vision while also still like, keeping this short-term vision moving forward? And, like, this mid-term vision is also going to, like, help potentially, either, like, steer us towards that long-term or maybe even, like, pivot us, like, into a completely different direction. So, like, where do you put your card, right? Like, how much energy and time do we put into, like, each of these areas? And that's kind of, like, the interesting part of this is starting to talk through that, starting to kind of prioritize, like, how we can maximize on our effort, like, our development and design effort so that things just kind of line up more naturally and organically for our future visioning, so... MIKE: Yeah. A lot of different things to juggle. I saw there was a question. Somebody asked what the URL is, but I don't seem to be able to [crosstalk 24:10]. LINDSEY: The same question as me. We got to drop the link for this thing. MIKE: Yeah, getthegoodz.com. CHRIS: That's G-O-O-D-Z. LINDSEY: Get in there, folks MIKE: Yeah, get [crosstalk 24:23]. LINDSEY: And let us know how it goes. MIKE: Yeah, please [laughs]. Any bugs? Let us know. Yeah. I think that those...yeah, I mean, it's a good point, Danny, in terms of juggling kind of the near-term and longer-term stuff. You know, it's a good kind of reminder our big focus, you know, in the new year is going to be fundraising, right? We're already talking to some investors and things like that. So, it's like, okay, yes, as you said, we could tweak the cart. We could tweak the e-commerce. Or, like, can we paint the big picture of what the longer-term version of this company is going to be in a way that makes it compelling for investment to come in so that there can be a long-term version of this company? And then we can build those things. So yeah, it's definitely a balance between the two. LINDSEY: Oh, also, just casual fundraising as well. [crosstalk 25:06] MIKE: Yeah, yeah. LINDSEY: [laughs] MIKE: But it's hard. It's like, you wake up in the morning. It's like, do I want to, like, write cold emails to investors? Or do I want to, like, look at Google Analytics and, like, tweak ad copy? That's actually more fun. So, yes. LINDSEY: Yeah, life of the founder, for sure. All right. So, that's getthegoodz (Goodz with a z) .com. Check it out. We'll tune in and see what happens with the e-commerce site, what happens with the SaaS planning the next time that we check in. But Chris, Mike, Danny, thank you so much for joining today and sharing what's been going on over the last few weeks: the good, the bad, the challenge, the cart abandonment. And, you know, best of luck to you over the next few weeks, and we'll be sure to check in and see how it's going. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions. Transcript:  LINDSEY: Thank you to our viewers and listeners. We are catching up once again with one of the startups going through the thoughtbot Incubator. My name is Lindsey Christensen. I'm joined today by Jordyn Bonds, who heads up the thoughtbot incubator, as well as our Co-Founders of Goodz, Chris Cerrito and Mike Rosenthal. Welcome, everybody. MIKE: Thanks, Lindsey. LINDSEY: Before we get started, before we put Chris and Mike back in the hot seat, at the top here, Jordyn, we have a special announcement for our viewers and listeners. JORDYN: Application window is open for session 1 of 2024, folks. You can go to thoughtbot.com/incubator and apply. And Chris and Mike can tell you how easy or hard applying was. MIKE: It was easy. It was totally easy. It's a very straightforward process. CHRIS: Yeah, it was way more straightforward than a lot of applications that we've dealt with in the past, for sure. JORDYN: Ha-ha. And if you've got a business idea that involves software but you haven't gotten anything out there yet, come talk to us. We will help you make sure that it's a good idea and that there are people who might buy it, and maybe get you even a little further than that. MIKE: We actually have a friend who's considering applying. I'll tell him applications are open. He's worried his idea is not big enough to actually be a business idea, so we'll see. CHRIS: Even the process of doing the application was really helpful for us because it helped us get aligned on exactly what we were doing, yeah. JORDYN: I love that. And I found that to be true when I was a founder applying to some of these things, in particular, applying for an SBIR grant was one of the most challenging things that we did, but it was so productive. I was so annoyed by it at the time, and then I cribbed from that thing. It actually sort of forced us to make a business plan [laughs], and then, basically, we ran it, and it was great [laughs]. CHRIS: Yeah. I think that was, for us, that was our point where we were like, "Is this idea fleshed out enough to move forward?" And we were like, "Yes, it is. Let's go. Let's do this." JORDYN: So, use the application as a forcing function, everybody. It will help you clarify your thinking. LINDSEY: Yeah. Jordyn, what would you say to Mike's friend who's questioning if their idea is big enough? How do you respond to that sentiment? JORDYN: That is a fascinating sentiment because I feel like so much more often, I am trying to help founders with the opposite problem where they think this thing is so big that they are not thinking about what step 1 is going to look like. They're just, like, in 10 years, we're going to be the next Amazon, and I'm like, "Maybe [laughter]. Let me help you figure out how to get to that giant vision." So, I don't come across the "Is this big enough to be a business?" question as often. And, I don't know, what would I say? I guess I need the details. LINDSEY: It could be a perfect fit MIKE: It could be. JORDYN: It could be a perfect fit. LINDSEY: In a way, that's what you're answering, right? MIKE: Right. LINDSEY: In some of this work. MIKE: That is true. So, yeah, you guys would certainly...just thinking through the process we've gone through the last two months, it would definitely help them flesh that out. LINDSEY: Which is a great segue. MIKE: Great segue. LINDSEY: Chris and Mike, we're actually coming up to the end of your incubator time. CHRIS: It's so sad. LINDSEY: Can you believe it? MIKE: It's gone by really fast. I mean, eight weeks is not a long time, but it has gone by very, very fast. CHRIS: It felt like a very long time in the middle of it. MIKE: [laughs] CHRIS: But now that it's over, it feels like a blink that it's coming to a close. MIKE: I don't know. It's funny. I think we had some note in our retro today that was like, maybe the very end of the year is not the best time to do an accelerator just because you have, like, the holidays kind of jumping in here in the end. So, that might have helped make it feel like a... I feel like the end of the year always feels like a rush anyway. So, I think just life gets a little bit busier this time of year, too, but yeah. CHRIS: Yeah, my gingerbread man decorating game is, like, really down this season because we've been so busy. Tragic. LINDSEY: Chris, can you remind our viewers and listeners who might not be familiar what was the idea that you and Mike have been exploring with the incubator or, like, what did you come in with? CHRIS: So, with Goodz, what we're trying to do is make little, physical collectibles objects that connect back to the digital content that a user loves. The idea being that today, we are awash in these digital files, links, so many things on our desktops, on our phones, on our devices, and it's really hard to tell which part of those are really, really important to us. So, by giving them a presence in the physical world, that denotes that's something that's really important, worth keeping, worth sharing, and showing off to your friends and family. And to start this off, mostly because Mike and I are both kind of music nerds, we're starting off with a music focus, but at some point, we're hoping to move into other realms, too. LINDSEY: And a lot of the incubator, as repeat listeners will know, is focused on really kind of evolving user interviews all the way through and narrowing in on, you know, a core audience, a core market. Mike, how has that evolution been? I think the last time we chatted was around three weeks ago. What has the latest iteration of user interviews looked like in terms of the people you're talking to and even what you're asking them? MIKE: It's been a really fascinating process. I mean, I'm trying to think of where we were exactly the last time we talked to you, but I think we'd probably just launched the e-commerce site that we had been experimenting with putting up. LINDSEY: Yeah, exactly. MIKE: And so, and we really then started cranking on user interviews kind of once that was live. And so, moving away from the conceptual and more into like, "Okay, share your screen. Here's the link. Like, tell me what you think is going on here," and really sort of getting users who had never, you know, never heard our pitch, never been involved with us to sort of try to wrap their heads around what we are and what we're doing just based on that website and trying to sort of make iterative changes based on that. You know, for me, because I had not done user interviews very much in the past, like, it's very tempting, like, you get sort of 1 note from 1 person in 1 interview, and you're like, oh, we need to change this word. That word didn't make any sense to them, or this thing needs to be blue instead of pink. I think, for me, it was like, all right, how do we kind of synthesize this data in a responsible way? And it emerged naturally, which, I mean, Jordyn and all thoughtbot folks said that it would, but you sort of started hearing the same things again and again. And we never really got to a place where, like, you heard the exact same things from everyone. But there were enough buckets, I feel like, where we're like, okay, like, this part really isn't making that much sense to people, or, like, we do really need to, you know, structure this differently to convey. So, it was a bunch of that kind of work over the last three weeks or so and sort of just getting a sense of like, are we conveying our message? It's hard. I mean, it's a new, like, we're not the only people making physical products with NFC chips in them, but it is not the most common, like, product. Like, it is kind of a new category out there. And so, really trying to understand just right off the bat, do people get it? And you get wildly different answers [laughs] as to whether they get it or they don't, which has been fascinating, too. JORDYN: Yeah. [crosstalk 7:12] LINDSEY: Chris or Jordyn, anything to add there? JORDYN: Yeah. You get the best, like, bootcamp in the don't overreact to a single user interview experience in some ways because we [laughs]...it would literally be like, interview in the morning someone says this thing. Interview in the afternoon, someone says the exact opposite thing [laughter]. And you're like, okay [laughs], like, which one of these things are we going to respond to, if either of them? CHRIS: Yeah. It's hard. As somebody with, like, a strong desire to please, it's hard to reign yourself in and want to change things immediately, but it definitely makes sense to do so in the long run. MIKE: But yeah, but, I mean, like I said, I do feel like it kind of came down to buckets. It's like, okay, you're that. I can, like, categorize you with all those other people and you with all those other people. And yeah, I hear you. I'm like, yeah, it's tempting to want to please them all. But I think with this one, we're fighting hard to be like...or we sort of have a philosophy that this product is emphatically not for everyone because, at the end of the day, you get a lot of people who are like, "Wait, you're just putting a link to a streaming playlist on a physical object? Why don't I just text someone the link?" And sometimes that breaks down by age group, like, 18-year-olds being like, "What are you talking about, old man? LINDSEY: [laughs] MIKE: Like, why the hell would I do that? It makes no sense." But it sort of skews all over the age ranges. But then there'll be other people who are 18 or 20 years old who are like, "Wow, I never had cassettes when I was growing up," or "I never got to make, you know, mixtapes or CD-Rs for people." And like, you know, so it's, yeah, it's about finding the people who are the early adopters. As Jordyn has said a lot, it's like, we need to find those early adopters and, like, make them love us, and then other people will come later. CHRIS: I mean, some of the most gratifying moments, I think, are there's been some interviews where people have been so excited that after the interview, they've gone and purchased our products, which is just, like, the coolest feeling ever. LINDSEY: Wow. MIKE: Yeah, it's pretty cool. LINDSEY: Are you open to sharing a little bit more about what those buckets or what those segments look like? CHRIS: I mean, I think there's folks who outright just get it almost immediately, and I think those people tend to be hardcore music collectors, hardcore music fans, Jordyn and Mike, please feel free to jump in if you disagree with any of this. They just get it right off the bat. Then I think there's, in my experience, there's another bucket of people who are a little more hesitant, and maybe they wouldn't buy it, but they seemed really excited about the idea of getting one as a gift, which is really interesting. They're like, "I don't know if I'd buy this, but I'd really like to have one." And then there is another segment, like, which Mike just mentioned, of folks who just don't see the value in this whatsoever, which is totally fair. MIKE: Yeah, totally. I think it's also...I see it almost as, like, a matrix. There's, like, desirability, and, like, technical understanding because people were like, "I technically understand what this is, and I do not want it in my life." Or like, "I get what this is and, oh my God, I have to have that," or like, "I don't really understand what you're talking about, but, man, I love physical stuff. Like, sure I want..." you know, it's like, it goes across those two planes, I think. JORDYN: I will say that it, I think you alluded to this before, Mike, but, like, we're going to run a whole analysis of...because we did a ton of interviews, and we haven't actually done that, like, sort of data-driven thing of like, are there trends in the demographics somewhere that we're not getting? Because the pattern has not been there. Like, someone will talk to an 18-year-old, you know, at 1:00 p.m. who is just, like, "Why on earth would I ever want this?" And then I, like, you know, will talk to a 21-year-old who is like, "I love this." And it's like, why? Like, this is the answer. The thing we're trying to get out now is, like, what is the difference between those two people? It's not a demographic thing that we can see from the outside, so what is it instead? But with consumer stuff like this, often, you don't necessarily...you don't need that in such great detail when you're starting. You just kind of, like, throw it out there and see who grabs it, and then you start to build sort of cohorts around that. And that is kind of what these interviews have shown us is that there are people who will grab it, and that was part of what we were trying to validate. Are there people who Mike and Chris do not know personally who will, like, get this and be psyched about it immediately? And that is, you know, check unequivocally true. Like Chris said, there are people that we were, you know, that we had recruited on this user interviews platform [chuckles] who then just turned around and bought the product because they were so psyched about it. One of the guys I interviewed was like, "Can I invest in your company right now?" Like, during the interview, and I was like, "Maybe?" [laughs] CHRIS: There was, like, another person who wanted to work for us immediately... JORDYN: Yes, great. CHRIS: Which was really interesting and kind of awesome. JORDYN: Yeah, they're like, "Are you hiring?" You're just like, okay. So, it's validating that there are people all over that spectrum. Like, where those trends lie, though, which is, I think, what you were asking, Lindsey, not as straightforward and in a fascinating way. So, we still have a little more, like, number crunching to do on that, and we may have an answer for you later. LINDSEY: That's exciting. Exactly. I'm curious: what are the connecting dots between the folks who are really into it, and how might that impact how you approach the business? MIKE: Yeah, it's hard. It's definitely going to be a niche to start. And so, we got to figure out kind of got to crack the code on how we find those people. LINDSEY: And, Mike, I think you had also mentioned last time that, you know, you or both of you have a network kind of in the music industry, and you've been floating the idea past some people there. Have you been having more of those conversations over the last few weeks, too? MIKE: We have, yeah. Well, so yeah, we've had a couple more just kind of straight-up pitch calls versus like, "Hey, there's this cool thing we're doing," and having those people be like, "Cool. Let's do a pilot." And so, they're ordering, you know, 500 or 1,000 units at a time, which is rad. LINDSEY: Whoa. MIKE: For the first...yeah. LINDSEY: Okay, very cool. MIKE: Yeah. The first two or three of those should happen in January or maybe early February, but yeah, those are done and in production and arriving soon. So, that's really exciting with some cool bands. We won't say the names in case it doesn't [laughs] work out, but it does look like it's going to work out. LINDSEY: And so, it's specific bands that are creating merch for their fans. MIKE: Yeah, yeah. So, we're working with one artist manager on a band that he manages, and then we're working with a record label. And they're going to try with a couple of smaller artists. And so, yeah, it's actually really good for us. One is going to be straight-up sales, most likely, and it's, like, selling these things. And the other ones will be given away as kind of promo items on tour artists, which is also a really interesting use case for us, too, that we're excited about and using them as a way to sort of get email addresses and, like, fans engaged and stuff, so... And then yeah, then I had another conversation, and they want to talk about doing some pilots. So far, like, that side of things is going great. We're sort of 3 for 4 in terms of initial calls leading to pilots right off the bat, which is kind of unheard of from [laughs] my experience. LINDSEY: Yeah, I'd say so. No, a lot of very good signals. MIKE: Really good signals. But then we were able to turn some of those into user interview conversations, actually, as well over the course of the last couple of weeks, which has been really helpful, like, talking to manager and label-type people about what they might want out of a software product that is associated with this because we're not just thinking about making physical products but sort of coupling that with an online toolset. And that part, we haven't gotten as far along as we did with the direct-to-consumer e-commerce, but it's been fascinating. LINDSEY: So, what has been happening with the online shop? As you noted the last time we talked, it was just a baby less than a week-old Shopify site getting, you know, some first hits of people going around maybe putting things in their basket. I'm sure a lot has happened over the last few weeks. What kind of work, what kind of insights have you seen around the site? CHRIS: We've been, I mean, we've been selling stuff at a slow but steady pace. It's been great because it's enough to, you know, because our product really straddles the line between physical and digital; there's a lot of physical aspects to this that we need to figure out and kind of the level of orders that we've been getting have been really...it's, like, the perfect number to think about fulfillment issues, things like what kind of package does this go in? How do we mail this out? Things along those lines, just very basic, practical questions that needed to be answered. But yeah, it's been great. We actually, I mean, we hit our goal for the amount of these that we wanted to get in people's hands before Christmas, which is pretty awesome. And we continue now with the lessons learned. I think our plan is to try and make a push for Valentine's Day because these seem like they would be a great Valentine's Day present: make a playlist; share it with your loved one; share it with a friend; share it with somebody you don't like at all. Who knows? LINDSEY: [laughs] CHRIS: But yeah, that's kind of our next sales push, we think. LINDSEY: The hate playlist. CHRIS: [inaudible 15:40] hate playlist. MIKE: Yeah, perfect. Real passive-aggressive. CHRIS: Just Blue Monday, like, by New Order, like, 14 times. LINDSEY: [laughs] Yeah, every song is just like a sub-tweet... MIKE: [laughs] LINDSEY: About something they've done and [inaudible 15:53] Have you updated the site? Like, how do you decide what gets updated on the site? [laughter] Everyone laughed. MIKE: It was a little haphazard, I would say, there for a minute. But -- CHRIS: We got the site up very, very quickly. And from my perspective, I've been dealing a lot with the physical side of things, just getting great product photos up there, which is, like, something that thoughtbot has actually been super helpful with. You know, everybody on the team is starting to submit photos of their Goodz in the real world and using their Goodz, which is great. And we continued to update the site with that but also making sure our text made sense, refining copy in response to things that people said during user interviews. The checkout process, the process of adding the URL that we point the Good to that, we did a bunch of experimentation there based on what people were saying during user interviews. So, it has been a little haphazard, but we have made a bunch of changes. LINDSEY: Jordyn, has there been any experiment, like, structured experimentation around the site or how you're getting people to the site? JORDYN: Mike actually did a little bit of ad funnel work that I don't think we've, like, even remotely scratched the surface of. So, I wish I could say that was conclusive, but I think we've found a little bit more...here are plenty of sales that are from people that nobody here knows. MIKE: True. JORDYN: So, people are finding out about this somehow [laughs]. But I think it's a little bit, like, word-of-mouth sort of chain of events is our sense so far. I wanted to say, though, about the site, we did get what Chris was saying about, like, this experiment was, in part, about fulfillment and figuring out how fulfillment would work and packaging, and not just messaging and not just closing the sale with consumers, but also, just, like, how do you fulfill these? But one of the really fun things we've managed to do in the last, since we talked last time, which I can't even believe...I feel like this wasn't even a gleam in our eyes for this project, but we managed to get out, like, stood up and out the door, and working in production in the last few weeks is a way for folks to actually assign the URL to their mixtape themselves. Previously, the plan had just been for Chris and Mike to do that, which is fine but a little bit unscalable, right? CHRIS: That was a huge dream or, like, that was high on our wish list. And we didn't think we'd get to it. And it's been pretty amazing that we have, yeah. JORDYN: Yeah, so that was one thing that is an update to the site. So, then we had to do a little bit of, like, micro iterating, on, like, the messaging around that. Like, how do you communicate to people? This is, like, a little bit of an abstract challenge, right? Like, here's this object. It's going to point to a digital thing. How do you tell the physical object which digital thing it's pointing to [laughs]? So, a lot of our recent interviewing has been to sort of get inside the mind of the consumer about how they're thinking about that and how we can best communicate that to them. So that's been a lot of the, like, recent iteration is getting that mechanism stood up and then the messaging around it. CHRIS: It's also really cool because it adds to the utility of the object itself in the sense that now our Goodz, when a user gets one, they can add a URL to their Good themselves, but they can also change that URL. So, it's much more malleable. JORDYN: Which is something that in one of our early user interviews was, like, a hot request [laughs], and we were like, "Someday, someday." And it's, you know, I should actually go back to her and be like, "Someday is today." [laughter] MIKE: Well, yeah, and just as Chris was saying, it just makes it so much easier to ship these out without having to manually load them, and you could sell them, and yeah, retail outlets, like, it just opens up a lot of opportunities for us for them. LINDSEY: And Mike mentioned that some of the, like, kind of future looking aspirations for the solution are, you know, how might you figure out the B2B, like, SaaS aspect of it? Jordyn, is that something that's been explored at all at this point, or is it early? JORDYN: That experiment I just described is actually sort of the link between the two projects. It sort of proves the concept and proves the value in some ways, and it has given us a little bit more visibility into sort of how we're going to execute some of this technical stuff. Like, how easy, how difficult is it going to be? These little experiments all build your confidence around your ability to do those things and what it's going to look like. And so, this experiment absolutely feeds into that question. But I would say it was really this week where we got to have a really fun brainstorming sort of blue sky conversation about that that I don't think would have been nearly as both creative and blue sky or rooted in reality as it was if we hadn't done these experiments and hadn't talked to so many...we had so much work...we could participate in a conversation like that so much more confidently and creatively because all of us had a lot more shared context. So, we really got to dream big, like, what is a SaaS platform built around these physical objects? And I don't want to, you know, I'm not going to give it away at this moment because we had a lot of, like, really cool ideas. It's one part talking to the B2B customer, which, you know, you mentioned earlier, getting what their pain points are, and what they're looking for, what they need, but then also dreaming big about now we understand the technology a little bit more and how it feels to use it. What does that unlock in our brains? The analogy I used in that conversation and that I use all the time is like, the users of Twitter invented hashtags, right? Twitter did not invent hashtags. And so, hey, everybody out there, newsflash: users invented hashtags, not Twitter or something else, if you didn't realize that Twitter was where those things kind of emerged. But there was just a user behavior that was happening in the wild, and Twitter was just very good at making that easier for them, looking at that and being like, "Oh, hey, is this a thing you all want to do? Here, we'll make that even more useful for you." And it was part of Twitter's early success that they were able to do that. And so, that was the kind of thinking we were trying to employ here is, like, now that we have these objects and we understand a little bit more how it feels to use them, you get these second order effects. What does that then make us think of? What is then possible to us that we wouldn't have been able to dream of previously because we didn't quite get it? So, that was really happening this week. LINDSEY: So, as the incubator time wraps up, what are the kind of final activities or deliverables, one, that Goodz wants and you know that they're going to get? What are the parting gifts as we send you out into the next phase? MIKE: Yeah, well, loads of stuff. I mean, we're getting all that code that [SP] Guillermo and the guys worked on to let people set their own playlist settings. And we've got that up in a GitHub repository now. And we've got a bunch of great design work that's all being handed over, like Chris was saying, product shots that a bunch of the team members were taking, synthesizing all the user interviews. We're actually sort of making some kind of final reports on those, so it's kind of more usable, actionable data for us. The whole website, you know, that didn't exist before. And that will sort of continue to grow as the entire website for Goodz moving forward. I don't know. That's a lot. What else was there, Chris? CHRIS: As a result of all that, I mean, one of the things I'm most excited about is now we have a small user base who actually has the physical products that, hopefully, we can get them to answer questions. That's huge for what's coming next. Starting the path towards the SaaS platform, too, it's really helped narrow our scope and think about, you know, how to make that successful or if it will be successful. LINDSEY: Yeah, that sounded like a big discussion this week that I know has been on your minds from the beginning. Wait, the last time, also, you said you were starting to get emails, too. Have you emailed anyone yet, or are you still holding on to them? MIKE: Oh. No, I still haven't sent a newsletter out [laughs], actually, but we have Mailchimp set up. Yeah, no, we've got a good kind of core of our, yeah, early folks on there. We'll start getting a newsletter out with some sort of regularity. We're building up the socials very slowly just focusing on Instagram mostly right now and trying to get back into that game. It's been a long time since I've had to do kind of social marketing stuff. And so, it's a lot of work, as it turns out, but we'll get all that cooking. I think this was just such a sprint, working with the thoughtbot folks and trying to get all this stuff done. Before the end of the year, now we can sort of take a breath and start engaging folks in the new year. LINDSEY: Yeah. Well, so, do you know what you want to do next or what the next phase looks like? Are you going to do fundraising? MIKE: We're certainly going to continue to have some fundraising conversations. We've had some conversations emerge over the last, you know, since we've been in thoughtbot, again, not the greatest time of year to try to be raising a round. But we're also not, like, desperately, urgently needing to do that right this second. I think, you know, part of it is the fundraising landscape, you know, doesn't look amazing. And we're still sort of building out a lot of traction, and sort of every week, there's some new, exciting thing, or we've got some new, big artists who wants to do something. So, I think, in some ways, to the extent that we can bootstrap for a little while, I think we will, yeah. So, we will focus on...I'd like to get back to focusing on, like, B2B sales. I'd like to hit the ground in January and just start talking to a bunch of music industry folks. And thinking ahead a little bit, sort of Q1 and Q2, like, what are the big tentpole events? You know, you got South by Southwest coming up in March. You got Record Store Day in April, or whenever it is. But, you know, there's, like, a bunch of those sorts of things that it's like, oh, let's not let those things suddenly be tomorrow. Like, right now, they're all still two or three/four months out. Like, let's make sure we're queued up for those things and see what happens. And Jordyn has been giving really good advice on the fundraising side where it's just like, just keep getting cool stuff like that and just do almost like little drip campaigns with funders who aren't maybe giving you the time of day or think it's too early, and just kind of keep going back to them. Like, the best excuse to go back to funders is like, "Hey, we just closed this new thing. We just launched this new thing. We just got this thing working. Hey, we're launching with this major band," Like, enough of those happen, and I think the fundraising will happen more organically. It's a strategy. CHRIS: I think we're really lucky in the fact that, you know, now, at this point, we're not talking about vapourware, you know, like, these are actual things that actually exist that, like, anybody could go onto our site right now and buy, which is awesome. And because of that, the product's going to continue to evolve, and, hopefully, our sales record will continue to evolve, too. LINDSEY: Amazing. Well, that feels like a good place to wrap up, maybe. Are you going to hang around in our incubator Slack, the thoughtbot incubator Slack for all our past founders? MIKE: Yes. Emphatically, yes. LINDSEY: Okay. We're holding you to it then [laughs]. CHRIS: I'm excited about that. We met with the other founders yesterday for the first time, and it was a really great and interesting conversation. It was cool seeing how diverse all these projects are and how folks are working on things that we had no idea about and how we're working on stuff that they have no idea about, and it was really great. It felt like a good cross-pollination. MIKE: Agreed. LINDSEY: That's awesome to hear. Jordyn, any final thoughts? JORDYN: [inaudible 26:58] out there listening and watching and want to join this community of founders [laughs], don't you want to have office hours with Chris and Mike? LINDSEY: All right, thoughtbot.com/incubator. You can apply for session 1 of the 2024 incubator program. And yeah, you two, if you have more recommendations, referrals, definitely send them our way. Chris, Mike, Jordyn, thank you so much once again for joining and catching us up on all the exciting developments for Goodz. MIKE: Thank you. LINDSEY: A lot of really cool milestones. JORDYN: I got to say, so much good stuff. And like, you know, just wrapping it all up almost diminishes the impact of any single one of those things that we just talked about, but it's, like, pretty amazing. People out there, apply to the incubator but also go buy yourself a Goodz mixtape. It's cool with playlists on it. MIKE: It's a good point. JORDYN: Give it to your BFF. Come on. LINDSEY: Getthegoodz.com. MIKE: Getthegoodz.com. Awesome. LINDSEY: All right. Thanks, Chris and Mike. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions. Special Guests: Chris Cerrito, Jordyn Bonds, and Mike Rosenthal.

Your Anxiety Toolkit
5 Most Common Recovery Roadblocks (with Chris Tronsdon) | Ep. 370

Your Anxiety Toolkit

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 19, 2024 42:53


If you want to know the 5 Most Common Recovery Roadblocks with Chris Tronsdon (an incredible anxiety and OCD therapist), you are in the right place. Today Chris and I will go over the 5 Most common anxiety, depression, & OCD roadblocks and give you 6 highly effective treatment strategies you can use today.  Kimberley: Welcome everybody. We have the amazing Chris Trondsen here with us today. Thank you for coming, Chris. Chris: Yes, Kim, thanks for having me. I'm super excited about being here today and just about this topic. Kimberley: Yes. So, for those of you who haven't attended one of the IOCDF Southern California conferences, we had them in Southern California. We have presented on this exact topic, and it was so well received that we wanted to make sure that we were spreading it out to all the folks that couldn't come.  You and I spoke about the five most common anxiety & OCD treatment roadblocks, and then we gave six strategic solutions. But today, we're actually broadening it because it applies to so many people. We're talking about the five most common anxiety treatment roadblocks, with still six solutions and six strategies they can use. Thank you for coming on because it was such a powerful presentation. Chris: No, I agree. I mean, we had standing room only, and people really came up to us afterwards and just said how impactful it was. And then we actually redid it at the International OCD Foundation, and it was one of the best-attended talks at the event. And then we got a lot of good feedback, and people kept messaging me like, “I want to hear it. I couldn't go to the conference.” I'd play clips for my group, and they're like, “When is it going to be a podcast?” I was like, “I'll ask Kim.” I'm glad you said yes because I do believe for anybody going through any mental health condition, this list is bound, and I think the solutions will really be something that can be a game changer in their recovery. Kimberley: Absolutely, absolutely. I love it mostly because, and we're going to get straight into these five roadblocks, they're really about mindset and going into recovery. I think it's something we're not talking about a lot. We're talking about a lot of treatment, a lot of skills, and tools, but the strategies and understanding those roadblocks can be so important. Chris: Yeah. I did a talk for a support group. They had asked me to come and speak, and I just got this idea to talk about mindset. I did this presentation on mindset, and people were like, “Nobody's talking about it.” In the back of my head, I'm like, “Kim and I did.” But we're the only ones. Because I do think so many people get the tools, right? The CBT tools, they get the ERP tools, the mindfulness edition, and people really find the tools that work for them. But when I really think of my own personal recovery with multiple mental health diagnoses, it was always about mindset. And that's what I like about our talk today. It's universal for anyone going through any mental health condition, anxiety base, and it's that mindset that I think leads to recovery. It shouldn't be the other way around. The tools are great, but the mindset needs to be there. Kimberley: Yeah. We are specifically speaking to the folks who are burnt out, feeling overwhelmed, feeling a lack of hope of recovery. They really need a kickstart, because that was actually the big title of the presentation. It was really addressing those who are just exhausted with the process and need a little bit of a strategy and mindset shift. Chris: Yeah. I don't want to compare, but I broke my ankle when I was hiking in Hawaii, and I have two autoimmune diseases. Although those ailments have caused problems, especially the autoimmune, when I think back to my mental health journey, that always wore me out more because it's with you all the time, 24/7. It's your mental health. When my autoimmune diseases act up, I'm exhausted, I'm burnt out, but it's temporary. Or my ankle, when it acts up, I have heating pads, I have things I can do, but your brain is with you 24/7. I do believe that's why a lot of people resonate with this messaging—they are exhausted. They're busting their butt in treatment, but they're tired and hitting roadblocks. And that's why this talk really came about. Kimberley: Yeah, exactly. All right, let's get into it here in a second. I just want to give one metaphor with that. I once had a client many years ago give the metaphor. She said, “I feel like I'm running a marathon and my whole family are standing on the out, like on the sidelines, and they're all clapping, but I'm just like faceplant down in the middle of the road.” She's like, “I'm trying to get up, I'm trying to get up, and everyone's telling me, ‘Come on, you can do it.' It's so hard because you're so exhausted and you've already run a whole bunch of miles.” And so I really think about that kind of metaphor for today. If people are feeling that way, hopefully they can take away some amazing nuggets of information.  Chris: Absolutely. That's a good visual. Faceplant. Kimberley: It was such a great and powerful visual because then I understood this client's experience. Like, “Oh, okay. You're really tired. You're really exhausted.” ROADBLOCK #1: YOU BEAT YOURSELF UP! Okay, let's get into it. So, I'm going to go first because the number one roadblock we talked about, not that these are in any particular order, but the one we came up first was that you beat yourself up. This is a major roadblock to recovery for so many disorders. You beat yourself up for having the disorder. You beat yourself up for not coping with it as well as you could. You beat yourself up if you have OCD for having these intrusive thoughts that you would never want to have. Or you're beating yourself up because you don't have motivation because you have, let's say, some coexisting depression.  The important thing to know there is, while beating yourself up feels productive, it might feel like you're motivating yourself, or you may feel like you deserve it. It actually only makes it harder. It only makes it feel like you've got this additional thing. Again, a lot of my patients—let's use the marathon example—might yell at themselves the whole way through the marathon, but it's not a really great experience if you're doing that, and it takes a lot of energy.  SOLUTION #1: SELF-COMPASSION So what we offered here as a strategic solution is self-compassion—trying to motivate and encourage yourself using kindness. If you're going through a hard day, maybe, just if you've never tried this before, trial what it would be like to encourage yourself with kind words or asking for support, asking for help so that you're not burning all that extra energy, making it so much harder on yourself, increasing your suffering. Because I often say to patients, the more you suffer, the more you actually deserve self-compassion. It's not the other way around. It's not that the more you suffer, the less you deserve it. Do you have any thoughts on that, Chris? Chris: Oh yeah. I would say I see that across the board with my clients, this harshness, and there's this good intention behind it, this idea that if I can just bully myself into recovery. I always try to remind clients that anxiety-based disorders, it's a part of our bodies as well. Our brain is a part of our body, just like our arm, our tibia, our leg, all these other bones, but there's a lack of self-empathy that we have for ourselves, as if it's something that we're choosing to do. Someone with a broken leg doesn't wake up in the morning and get mad at themselves that their leg is still broken. They have understanding, and they're working on their exercises to heal. It's the same with these disorders.  So, the reason I love self-compassion is when we go and step in to help one of our friends, we use a certain tone, we use certain words, we tap into their strengths, we use encouragement because we know that method is going to be what boosts them up and helps them get through that rough patch. But for some reason, when it's ourselves, we completely abandon everything we know that's supportive, and we talk to ourselves in a way that I almost picture like a really negative boot camp instructor, like in the military, just yelling and screaming into submission. The other thing is when we're beating ourselves up like that, we're more likely to tap into our unhelpful habits. We're more likely to shut down and isolate, which we see a lot in BDD, social anxiety, et cetera. But that self-compassion isn't like a fake pop culture support. It's really tapping into meeting yourself where you're at, giving yourself some understanding, and tapping into the strategies that have worked in the past when you're in a low moment.  I know sometimes people are like, “I don't know how to do that,” but you're doing it to everybody else in your life. Now it's time to give yourself that same self-compassion that you've been giving to everybody important to you. Kimberley: Yeah, and we actually have a few episodes on Your Anxiety Toolkit on exactly how to embrace self-compassion, like how that might actually look. So, if people are really needing more information there, I can add in the show notes some links to some resources there as well.  ROADBLOCK #2: THERE WILL BE HARD DAYS  Okay. Now, Chris, can you tell us about the second most common or another common anxiety roadblock around this idea that there will be hard days? Chris: There's always these great images if you Google about what people think recovery will look like versus what recovery looks like. I love those images because there is this idea. We see a lot of perfectionism in anxiety disorders. In OCD, we see perfectionism. So, this idea of, like, I should be here and I should easily scoot to the end. It's not going to be like that; it's bumpy, it's ups and downs. We know so much factors into or impact how our mental health disorder shows up. We can't always control our triggers. Sometimes if we haven't slept well or there's a lot of change in our life, we could have more anxiety. So, it's going to ebb and flow.  So, when we have this fixed mindset of like, it has to be perfect, there has to be absolutely no bumps on the road, no turbulence, we're going to set ourselves up for failure because the day we have a hard day, we want to completely shut down. So I really believe, in this case, the solution is thinking bigger. If you're thinking day to day, sometimes if you're too in it, you're dealing with depression, you're really feeling bad, you skipped school because you have a presentation, social anxiety is acting up. You think bigger picture. Why am I here? Why am I doing this? Why have I sought out treatment? Listen to this podcast. What am I trying to accomplish?  SOLUTION #2: KNOW YOUR WHY I know for me in my own recovery, knowing my why was so important. There were certain things in my life that I found important to achieve, and I kept that as the figurative carrot in front of the mule to get me to go. So, that way, if I had a rough day, I thought bigger picture. What do I need to do today to make sure that I meet my goals? And so, I believe everybody needs to know their why.  Now, it doesn't have to be grandiose. Some people want to build a school and teach kids in underprivileged countries. Amazing why. But other people are sometimes like, “I just want to be able to make my own choices today and not feel like I base them out of anxiety.” There's no right or wrong why, but if you can know what beacon you're going to, it really helps you get through those hard days.  What about for you? When we talk about this, what comes up for you? Kimberley: Well, I think that for me personally, the why is a really important mindset shift because often I can get to this sort of, like you said, perfectionistic why. Like, the goal is to have no anxiety, or the goal is to have no bad days. We see on social media these very relaxed people who just seem to go with the flow, and that's your goal. But I have to often with myself do a little reality check and go, “Okay, are you doing recovery to get there? Because that goal might be setting you up for constant disappointment and failure. That mightn't be your genetic makeup.”  I'm never going to be like the go-with-the-flow Kimberley. That's just not who I am. But if I can instead shift it to the why of like, what do I value? What are the things I want to be able to do despite having anxiety in my life? Or, despite having a hard day, like you said, how do I want that to look? And once I can get to that imagery, then I have a really clear picture. So, when I do have a bad day, it doesn't feel so defeating, like what's the point I give up, because the goal was realistic. Chris: For me, a big part of my why in recovery, once I started getting into a place where I was managing the disorders I was dealing with—OCD, body dysmorphic disorder, I had a lot of generalized anxiety, and major depressive disorder—I was like, “I need to give back. There's not people my age talking about this. There's not enough treatment providers.” There was somewhere, like in the middle of my treatment, that I was like, “I don't know how I'm going to advocate. I don't know what that's going to look like, but I have to give back.” And so, on those hard days when I would normally want to just like, “Well, I don't care that it's noon, I'm shutting it down, I'm going into my bed, I'm just going to sleep the rest of the day,” reminding myself like there's people out there suffering that can't find providers, that can't find treatment, may not even know they have these disorders. I have to be one of the voices in the community that really advocates and gets people education and resources. And so, I didn't let myself get in bed. I looked at the day as quarters. Okay, the morning and the afternoon's a little rough, but I still have evening and night. Let me turn it around. I have to go because I have this big goal, this ambitious dream. I really want to do it. So that bigger why kept me just on track to push through hard days. ROADBLOCK #3: YOU RUN OUT OF STAMINA Kimberley: Amazing. I love that so much. All right. The third roadblock that we see is that people run out of stamina. I actually think this is one that really ties into what we were just talking about. Imagine we're running a marathon. If you're sprinting for the first 20 miles, you probably won't finish the race. Or even if you sprint the first two miles, you probably won't finish the marathon.  One of the things is—and actually, I'll go straight to the strategy and the thing we want you to practice—we have to learn to pace ourselves throughout recovery. As I said, if you sprint the first few miles, you will fall flat on your face. You're already dealing with so much. As you said, having a mental health struggle is the most exhausting thing that I've ever been through. It requires such of your attention. It requires such restraint from not engaging in it and doing the treatment and using the tools. It's a lot of work, and I encourage and congratulate anyone who's trying. The fact that you're trying and you're experimenting with what works and what doesn't, and you're following your homework of your clinician or the workbook that you've used—that's huge. But pacing yourself is so important. So, what might that look like? Often, people, students of mine from CBT School, will say, “I go all out. I do a whole day of exposures and I practice response prevention, and I just go so hard that the next day I am wiped. I can't get out of bed. I don't want to do it anymore. It was way too much. I flooded myself with anxiety.” So, that's one way I think that it shows up. I'll often say, “Okay, let's not beat yourself up for that.” We'll just use that as data that that pace didn't work. We want to find a rhythm and a pace that allow you to recover. It's sort of like this teeter-totter. We call it in Australia a seesaw. You want to do the work, but not to the degree where you faceplant down on the concrete. We want to find that balance.  I know for me, when I was recovering from postural orthostatic tachycardic syndrome, which is a chronic illness that I had, it was so hard because the steps to recovery was exercise, but it was like literally walking to the corner and back first, and then walking half a block, and then walking three-quarters of a block, and then having my husband pick me up, then walking one block. And that's all I was able to do without completely faceplanting the next day, literally and figuratively.  My mind kept saying to me, “You should be able to go faster. Everybody else is going faster. Everyone else can walk a mile or a block. So you should be able to.” And so, I would push myself too hard, and then I'd have to start all over again because I was comparing myself to someone who was not in my position.  SOLUTION #3: PACE YOURSELF So, try to find a pace that works for you, and do not compare your pace with me or Chris or someone in your support group, or someone you see on social media. You have to find and test a pace that works for you. Do you have any thoughts, Chris? Chris: Yeah. I would say in this one, and you alluded to it, that comparison, that is going to get you in this roadblock because you're going to be looking to your left and your right. Why is that person my age working and I'm not? It's not always comparing yourself. Sometimes, like you said, it is people in your support group. It's people that you see advocating for the disorder you may have. But sometimes people even look at celebrities or they'll look at friends from college, and can I do that? The comparison never motivates you, it never boosts you; it just makes you feel less than. That's why one of my favorite quotes is, “Chase the dream, not the competition.” It's really finding a timeline that works best for you.  I get why people have this roadblock. As somebody who's lived through multiple mental health disorder diagnoses, it's like, once we find the treatment, we want to escalate to the finish line, and we'll push ourselves in treatment sometimes too much. And then we have one of those days where we can't even get out of bed because we're just beat up, we're exhausted, and it's counterproductive.  I wanted to add one thing too. The recovery part may not even be what you're doing with your clinician in a session that you are not pacing yourself with. My biggest pacing problem was after recovery, not that the disorders magically went away, they were in remission, I was working on doing great, but it was like, I went to martial arts, tennis, learned Spanish, started volunteering at an animal shelter, went back to school, got a job, started dating. It was so much. Because I felt like I was behind, I needed to push myself.  The problem that started to happen was I was focusing less on the enjoyable process of dating or getting a job, or going back to school. I was so fixated on the finish line. “I need to be there, I need to be there. What's next? What's next?” I got burnt out from that, and I was not enjoying anything I was doing.  So, I would say even after you're managing your disorder, be careful about not pacing yourself, even in that recovery process of getting back into the lifestyle that you want. Kimberley: Yeah, absolutely. I would add too, just as a side point, anyone who is managing a mental health issue or an anxiety disorder, we do also have to fill our cup with the things that fill our hearts. I know that sounds very cliche and silly, but in order to pace ourselves and to have the motivation and to use the skills, we do have to find a balance of not just doing all the hard things, but making sure you schedule time to rest and eat and drink and see friends if that fills your cup, or read if that fills your cup. So, I think it's also finding a rhythm and a balance of the things that fill your cup and identifying that, yes, recovery is hard. It will deplete your stores of energy. So, finding things that fill that cup for you is important.   Chris: Well, you just made a good point too. In my recovery, all those things you mentioned, I thought of those as like weakness, like I just wasted an hour reading. Sometimes even with friends. That one, not as much, because I saw value in friendship. But if I just watched a movie or relaxed, or even just hung out with friends, it felt like a waste. I'm like, “How dare I am behind everybody else? I should be working. I should be this. I should move up.” A lot of should statements, a lot of perfectionist expectations of myself.  So, the goal for me or the treatment for me wasn't to then go to the other extreme and just give up everything; it was really to ask myself, like you said, how can I fill my cup in ways that are important and see value and getting a breakfast burrito with a friend and talking for three hours and not thinking like, “Oh, I should have been this because I got to get my degree.” I'm glad that you brought that up. I always think of like we're overflowing our cup with mental health conditions. We have to be able to have those offsets that drain the cup so we have a healthy balance. So, a great point. ROADBLOCK #4: NOT OWNING YOUR RECOVERY Kimberley: I agree. So important. Would you tell us about owning your recovery? Because you have a really great story with this. Chris: Yeah. People ask me all the time how I got better. A lot of people with body dysmorphic disorder struggle to get better. Obviously, we know that with obsessive-compulsive disorder, major depressive disorder, et cetera. So, a lot of people will ask sometimes, and I always say to them, if I had to come up with one thing, it was because I made my mental health recovery number one. I felt that it was like the platform that I was building my whole life on. I'm so bad with the-- what is it? The house, the-- I'm not a builder.  Kimberley: Like the foundation. Chris: Thank you. Clearly, I'm not going to be making tools tomorrow or making things with tools. But yeah, like a house has to have a nice foundation. You would never build a house on a rocky side of the mountain. And so, I had to give up a lot, like most of us do, as we start to get worse. I became housebound and I dropped out of college, and I gave up a job. I was working in the entertainment industry, and I really enjoyed it. I was going to film school, and I was happy. I had to give all that up because I couldn't even leave my house because of the disorder.  SOLUTION #5: MAKE YOUR RECOVERY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING So, when I was going to treatment and I was really starting to see it work, I was clear to that finish line of what I needed to do. So I made it the most important thing. It wasn't just me; it was my support system. My treatment was about a four-hour round trip from my house, so my mom and I would meet up every day. We drive up to LA. I go to my OCD therapist, and I'd go to my psychiatrist and then my BDD therapist and support group, and then come home. There's times I was exhausted, I wanted to give up, I was over it, but I never ever, ever put it to number two or three. I almost had this top three list in my head, and number one was always my recovery. My mom too, I mean, when she talks, she'll always say it's the most important thing. If my job was going to fire me because I couldn't come in because I had to take my kid on Wednesdays to treatment, I was going to get fired and find a new job. We just had to make this important.   As I was getting better, there were certain opportunities that came back to me from my jobs or from school. My therapist and I and my mom just decided, “Let's hold off on this. Let's really, really put effort into the treatment. You're doing so well.” One of the things that I see all the time, my mom and I run a very successful family and loved ones group. A lot of times, the parents aren't really making it the priority for their kids or the kids, or the people with the disorders aren't really making it a priority. It's totally understandable if there's things like finances and things, barriers. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about when people have access to those things, they're just not owning it. Sometimes they're not owning it because they're not taking it seriously or not making it important. Or other times, people are expecting someone else to get them better.  I loved having a team. I didn't have a big team. I came from nothing. It was a very small team. I probably needed residential or something bigger. I only really had my mom's support, but we all leaned on each other. But I always knew it was me in the driver's seat. At the end of the day, my therapist couldn't save me, my mom couldn't save me, they couldn't come to my house and pull me out of bed or do an exposure for me, or have me go out in public during the daytime because of BDD. I had to be the one to do it. I could lean on them as support systems and therapists are there for, but at the end of the day, it was my choice. I had to do it. When my head hit the pillow, I had to make sure that I did everything I possibly could that day to recover.  When I took ownership, it actually gave me freedom. I wasn't waiting for someone to come along. I wasn't focusing on other things. I made it priority number one. I truly believe that that was the thing that got me better. Once again, didn't have a lot of resources, leaned a lot on self-help books and stuff because I needed a higher level of care, but there was none and we couldn't afford it. I don't want anyone to hear this podcast and think, “Well, I can't find treatment in my area.” That's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying, whatever you have access to, own it, make it a priority, and definitely be in that leader's seat because that's going to be what's going to get you better. Kimberley: Yeah, for sure. I think too when I used to work as a personal trainer, I would say to them, “You can come to training once a week, but that once a week isn't going to be what crosses you across that finish line.” You know what I mean? It is the work you do in the other 23 hours of that day and the other seven days of the week. I think that is true. If you're doing and you're dabbling in treatment, but it's not the main priority, that is a big reason that can hold you back. I think it's hard because it's not fair that you have to make it priority number one, but it's so necessary that you do.  I really want to be compassionate and empathize with how unfair it is that you have to make this thing a priority when you see other people, again, making their social life their priority or their hobby their priority. It sucks. But this mindset shift, this recalibration of this has to be at the top. When it gets to being at the top, I do notice, as a clinician, that's when people really soar in their recovery. Chris: Yeah. We had a very honest conversation with my BDD therapist, my OCD therapist, and my psychiatrist, and they're like, “You need a higher level of care. We understand you can't afford it. There's also a lot of waiting lists.” They're like, “You're really going to have to put in the work in between sessions. You're supposed to be in therapy every day.” We just couldn't. All we can afford is once a week. They said, “Look, when you're not in our session, you need to be the one.”  So, for instance, with depression, my psychiatrist is like, “Okay, you're obviously taking the medication, but you need to get up at the same time every day. Open up all your blinds, go upstairs, eat breakfast on the balcony, get ready, leave the house from nine to five.” I didn't have a job. “But you need to be out of the house. You need to be in nature. You need to do all these things.” I never wanted to, but I did it. Or with my OCD and BDD recovery, I didn't want to go out in public. I felt like it looked horrendous. I felt like people were judging me, but I did. Instead of going to the grocery store at 2:00 in the morning, I was going at noon. When everyone's there for OCD, it was like, I didn't want to sit in public places. I didn't want to be around people that I felt I could potentially harm.  My point is like every single day, I was doing work, I was tracking it, I was keeping track, and I had to do that because I needed to do that in order to get better based on the setup that I had.  I do want to also say a caveat. I always have the biggest empathy for people or sympathy for people that are a CEO of a company or like a parent and have a lot of children, or it's like you're busy working all day and you're trying to balance stuff. I mean, the only good thing that came from being housebound is I didn't have a lot of responsibilities. I didn't have a family. I wasn't running a company. I wasn't working. So, I did have the free time to do the treatment. So, I have such sympathy for people that are parents or working at a company, or trying to start their own small business and trying to do treatment too. But I promise you, you don't have to put your recovery first forever. Really dive into it, get to that place where you're really, really stable. It'll still be a priority, but then you will be a better parent, a better employee, a better friend once you've really got your mental health to a level that you can start to support others. You may need to support yourself first, like the analogy with a mask on the plane. ROADBLOCK #5: YOU HAVE A FIXED MINDSET Kimberley: Agreed. That's such an important point. All right, we're moving on to roadblock number five. This is yours again, Chris. Tell us about the importance of specific mindsets, particularly a fixed mindset being the biggest roadblock. Chris: One of the things that makes me the most sad about people having a mental health condition because of how insidious they are is it starts to have people lose their sense of identity. It has them start to almost re-identify who they are, and it becomes a very fixed mindset. So, if you have social anxiety or social phobia, it's like, “Oh, I'm somebody that's not good around people. I say embarrassing things. I never know what kind of conversation to lead with. I should probably just not be around people.” Or, let's say generalized anxiety. “Deadlines really caused me too much strain. I can't really go back to school.” BDD. “I'm an unattractive person. Nobody wants to date me. I'm unlovable.”   We get into these fixed mindsets and we start to identify with them, and inevitably, that person's life becomes smaller and smaller and smaller. So, the more they identify with it, the more that they become isolated from others, and they have this very fixed mindset. I think of like OCD, for instance, isn't really about guidelines; it's all about rules. This is how things are supposed to be. What happens is when I work with a client specifically, somebody that's pretty severe, it's trying to get them to see the value in treatment and to even tap into their own personal values is really difficult. It's like, “Treatment doesn't work. I've tried all the medications. I don't know what I'm going to do. I'm just not somebody that can get better.” SOLUTION #5: GROWTH MINDSET What I tell clients instead is, “Let's be open. Let's be curious. Let's move into a growth mindset. Let's focus on learning, obtaining education, being open to new concepts. Look, when you were younger and the OCD didn't really attack you, or when you were younger and you didn't deal with social anxiety, you were having friends, you had birthday parties, you were going to school, and everything. Maybe that's the real you, and it's not that you lost it. You just have this disorder that's blocked you from it.” And so, when clients become open and curious and willing to learn, willing to try new things, and to get out of their comfort zone, that's where the growth really happens.  If you're listening to this podcast or watching it right now and you're determined like, “This isn't working; nothing can help me,” that fixed mindset is never something that's going to get you from where you are to where you want to be. You have to have that growth, that learning, that trying new things, expanding.  I always tell clients, “If you try something with your therapist and it doesn't work, awesome. That's one other thing that doesn't work. Move on to something else.” That openness. What I always love after treatment is people are like, “I am social. I do love to be around people. I am somebody who likes animals. I just was avoiding animals because of harm thoughts.” People start to get back into who they really are as soon as they start to be more open to recovery. Kimberley: Yeah, for sure. The biggest fixed mindset thought that I hear is, “I can't handle it.” That thought alone gets in the way of recovery so many times. We go to do an exposure, “I can't handle this.” Or, “What if I have a panic attack? I cannot handle panic attacks.” It's so fixed. So I often agree with you. I will often say, this work, this mental health work, or this human work that we do is shifting the way we see ourselves and life as an experiment. We always have these black-and-white beliefs like “I can't handle this” or “I can't do this. I can't get in an elevator. I can't speak public speaking,” or whatever it might be. But let's be curious. Like you said, let's use it as an experiment. Let's try, and we'll see. Maybe it doesn't go great. That's okay, like you said, but then we know we have data, and then we have information on what got in the way, and we have some information.  I think that even just being able to identify when you're in a fixed mindset can be all you need just to be like, “Oh, okay, I'm having a very black-and-white fixed mindset.” Learning how to laugh and giggle at the way our brain just gets so determined and black-and-white, like you can't do this, as you said, I think is so important because, like you said, once you get to recovery, then you go on to live your life and actually do the things that you dream, the dream that you're talking about. It might be you want to get a master's degree or you might want to go for a job, or you want to go on a date. You're going to be able to use that strong mindset for any situation in life. It applies to anything that you're going to conquer.  I always say to clients, if you've done treatment for mental health, you are so much more prepared than every student in college because they haven't gone through, they haven't had to learn those skills. Chris: Yeah, no, exactly. I remember like my open mindset was one of the assets I had in recovery. I remember going to therapy and being like, “I'm just going to listen. These people clearly know what they're doing. They've helped people like me. Why would it be any different?” And I was open. I can see the difference with clients that have a more growth mindset. They come in, they're scared. They're worried. They've been doing something for 10, 15, 16 years, and they're like, “Why is this guy going to tell me to try to do different things or to think different or have different thinking patterns?” But they're open. I always see those people hit that finish line first. It's the clients that come and shut down. The family system has been supporting this like learned helplessness. Nobody really wants to rock the boat. Everything shut down and closed. It's like prying it open, as most of the work. And then we finally get to the work, but we could have gotten there quicker. Everybody's at their own pace, but I really hope that people hear this, though, are focused on that openness. You were talking about like people thinking they can't handle it. The other thing I hear sometimes is people just don't think they deserve it. “I just don't even deserve to get better.” You do. You do. That's what I love about my job the most. Everybody that comes into my office, and I'm like, “You deserve a better life than you're living. Whatever it is you want to do. You want to be a vet. How many animals are you going to save just by getting into being a vet? You got to do it.” My heart breaks a little bit when people have been dealing with mental health for long enough that they start to believe they don't even deserve to get better.  SOLUTION #6: IT'S A BEAUTIFUL DAY TO DO HARD THINGS Kimberley: I love that. So, we had five roadblocks, and we've covered it, but we promised six strategies. I want to be the one to deliver the last one, which everyone who listens already knows what I'm going to say, but I'm going to say it for the sake that it's so important for your recovery, which is, it's a beautiful day to do hard things. It is so important that you shift, as we talked about in the roadblock number one, you shift your mindset away from “I can't do hard things” to “It's okay to do hard things.” It doesn't mean you've failed. Life can be hard.  I say to all my patients, life is 50/50 for everybody. It's 50% easy and 50% hard. I think some people have it harder than others. But the ones who seem to do really well and have that grit and that survivor's mindset are the ones who aren't destroyed by the day when it is hard. They're willing to do the hard thing. They're okay to march into uncertainty. They're willing to do the hard thing for the payoff. They're willing to take a short-term discomfort for the long-term relief or the long-term payout. I think that mindset can change the game for people, particularly if you think of it like a marathon. Like, I just have to be able to finish this marathon, I'm going to do the hard thing, and think of it that way. There'll be hills, there'll be valleys, there'll be times where you want to give up, but can I just do one hard thing and then the next hard thing, and then the next hard thing? Do you have any thoughts on that? Chris: I'm glad that this is the message that you put out there. I'd say, obviously, when I think of Kim Quinlan as a friend, I think of other things and all the fun we've had together. But as a colleague, I always think of both. Obviously, self-compassion. But this idea of it's a beautiful day to do hard things, I like it because we've always talked about doing hard things as this negative thing before you came along, and by adding this idea of it's a beautiful day. When I look at all the hard things I did in my own recovery, or I see clients do hard things, there's this feeling of accomplishment, there's this feeling of growth, there's this feeling of greatness that we get. Just like you were saying, beyond the mental health conditions that I dealt with, when I start getting into real life after the mental health conditions now are more in recovery, every time I choose to do hard things, there's always such a good payoff. I was convinced I would never be able to get through school and get a degree and become a licensed therapist because I struggled with school with my perfectionism. It was difficult for me to get back in there and to humble myself and say, “Hey, you may flop and fail.” But now I'm a licensed therapist because of that willingness to do hard things.  I could give a plethora of examples, but I want people to hear that doing hard things is your way of saying, “I believe in myself. I trust myself that I can accomplish things, and I'm going to tap into my support system if I need to, but I am determined, determined, determined to push myself to a level that I may not think I can.” I love when clients do that, and they always come in, they're like, “I'm so proud of myself, I can't wait to tell you what I did this weekend.” I love that. So, always remember hard things come with beautiful, beautiful, beautiful outcomes and accomplishments. Kimberley: Yeah. I think the empowerment piece, when clients do scary, hard things, or they feel their hard feelings, or they do an exposure, they'll often come in and be like, “I felt like I could do anything. I had no idea about the empowerment that comes from doing hard things.” I think we've been trained to think that if we just avoid it, we then will feel confident and strong, but it's actually the opposite. The most empowered you'll ever feel is right after you've done a really, really hard thing, even if it doesn't go perfectly. Chris: Yeah, and so much learning comes out of it. That's why I always tell clients too, going back to one of our first roadblocks, beating yourself up prevents the learning. Let's say you try something and it doesn't go well. I was talking to a colleague of ours who I really, really like. She was telling me how her first treatment center failed. Now she's doing really well for herself down in San Diego. She's like, “I just didn't know things, and I just did things wrong, and I learned from it, and now I'm doing well.”  It's like, whenever we look at something not going the way we'd like as an opportunity to learn and collect data, it just makes us that much better when we try it the other time. A lot of times these anxiety disorders were originally before treatment, hopefully trying to find ways to avoid our way through life—tough words—and trying to figure out, like, how can I always be small and avoid and still get to where I want to be? When people hear this from your podcast—it's a beautiful day to do hard things—I hope that they recognize that you don't have to live an avoidant lifestyle, an isolated lifestyle anymore. Really challenging yourself and doing hard things is actually going to be so rewarding. It's incredible what outcomes come with it. Kimberley: Amazing. Well, Chris, thank you so much for doing this with me again. We finally stamped it into the podcast, which makes me so happy. Tell us where people can hear about you, get in contact with you, and learn more about what you do. Chris: I am really active in the International OCD Foundation. I'm one of their board members. I also am one of their lead advocates, just meeting as somebody with the disorder. I speak on it. Then I lead some of their special interest groups. The Body Dysmorphic Disorder Special Interest Group is one of them, but I lead about four of them. One of their affiliates, OCD Southern California, I am Vice President of OCD SoCal and a board member. We do a lot of events here locally that Kim is part of, but also some virtual events that you could be a part of. And then, as a clinician, I'm a licensed clinician in Costa Mesa, California. I currently work at The Gateway Institute. You can find me either by email at my name, which is never easy to spell. So, ChrisTrondsen@GatewayOCD.com, or the best thing is on social media, whether it's Instagram, Facebook, or X, I guess we're calling it now. Just @christrondsen. You could DM me. I always like to hear from people and get people's support, and anything I can do to support people. I always love it. Kimberley: Oh my gosh, you're such a light in the community, truly. A light of hope and a light of wisdom and knowledge. I want to say, because I don't tell you this enough as your friend and as your colleague, thank you, thank you for the hope that you put out there and the information you put out there. It is so incredibly helpful for people. So, thank you. Chris: I appreciate that. I forgot to say one thing real quick. Every first, third, and fourth Wednesday of the month at 9 a.m. Pacific Standard Time on the IOCDF, all of their platforms, including iocdf.org/live, I do a free live stream with Dr. Liz McIngvale from Texas, and we have great guests like Kim Quinlan on, so please listen. But thank you for saying that. I always try to put as much of myself in the community, and you never know if people are receiving it well. I want to throw the same thing to you. I mean, this podcast has been incredible for so many. I always play some of this stuff for my clients. A lot of clients are looking for podcasts. So, thanks for all that you do. I'm really excited about this episode because I think it's something that we touch so many people. So, now to share it on a bigger scale, I'm excited about it. But thank you for your kind words. You're amazing. It's all mutual. Kimberley: Thank you. You're welcome back anytime. Chris: And we're going to get Greek food soon. It's funny [inaudible] I'm telling you. It's life-changing. Thanks, Kim. Listen to other episodes. Kimberley: Thank you.

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots
thoughtbot's Incubator Program Mini Season 3 - Episode 06: Goodz with Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 9, 2024 26:27


If you missed the first and second episodes with thoughtbot Incubator Program partcipants and founders Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito of Goodz, you can listen to the first episode (https://podcast.thoughtbot.com/s3e2incubatorgoodz) and the second episode (https://podcast.thoughtbot.com/s3e4incubatorgoodz) to catch up! Lindsey Christensen, head of marketing at thoughtbot is joined by Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito, co-founders of the startup Goodz, and Danny Kim, Senior Product Manager at thoughtbot. Mike and Chris discuss the progress of Goodz, focusing on the recent intense weeks they've had. Goodz, a startup merging the digital and physical worlds of music, has stayed on course with its initial concept. Mike details their approach to Thanksgiving and the launch of their e-commerce experiment. He shares insights from recent user interviews, which have influenced their approach and understanding of their target audience. When the discussion turns to the challenges of launching and maintaining their e-commerce platform, Mike and Chris talk about learning from analytics, marketing strategies, and the importance of understanding consumer behavior. They discuss the challenges in balancing short-term and long-term goals, and the upcoming fundraising efforts. Transcript: LINDSEY: Thanks for being here. My name's Lindsey. I head up marketing at thoughtbot. If you haven't joined one of these before, we are checking in with two of the founders who are going through the thoughtbot Startup Incubator to learn how it's going, what's new, what challenges they're hitting, and what they're learning along the way. If you're not familiar with thoughtbot, we're a product design and development consultancy, and we hope your team and your product become a success. And one way we do that is through our startup incubator. So, today, we are joined by our co-founders, Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito, Co-Founders of the startup Goodz. And we also have another special guest today, Danny Kim, from the thoughtbot side, Senior Product Manager at thoughtbot. So, I think, to start off, we'll head over to the new face, the new voice that we've got with us today. Danny, tell us a little bit about your role at thoughtbot and, specifically, the incubator. DANNY: Yeah, sure. First of all, thanks for having me on, and thanks for letting me join in on all the fun. I'm one of the product managers at thoughtbot. I typically work for the Lift-Off team. We usually work with companies that are looking to, like, go into market with their first version MVP. They might have a product that exists and that they're already kind of doing well with, and they kind of want to jump into a new segment. We'll typically work with companies like that to kind of get them kicked off the ground. But it's been really awesome being part of the incubator program. It's my first time in helping with the market validation side. Definitely also, like, learning a lot from this experience [laughs] for myself. Coming at it specifically from a PM perspective, there's, like, so much variation usually in product management across the industry, depending on, like, what stage of the product that you're working in. And so, I'm definitely feeling my fair share of impostor syndrome here. But it's been really fun to stretch my brand and, like, approach problems from, like, a completely different perspective and also using different tools. But, you know, working with Mike and Chris makes it so much easier because they really make it feel like you're part of their team, and so that definitely goes a long way. LINDSEY: It just goes to show everyone gets impostor syndrome sometimes [laughter], even senior product managers at thoughtbot [laughter]. Thanks for that intro. It's, you know, the thoughtbot team learns along the way, too, you know, especially if usually you're focused on a different stage of product development. Mike, it's been only three weeks or a very long three weeks since last we checked in with you, kind of forever in startup time. So, I think the last time, we were just getting to know you two. And you were walking us through the concept, this merging of the digital and physical world of music, and how we interact with music keepsakes or merchandise. How's my pitch? MIKE: Good. Great. You're killing it. [laughter] LINDSEY: And has anything major changed to that concept in the last three weeks? MIKE: No. I mean, I can't believe it's only been three weeks. It feels like it's been a long time since we last talked. It's been an intense three weeks, for sure. No, it's been going really well. I mean, we launched all sorts of stuff. I'm trying to think of anything that's sort of fundamentally changed in terms of the plan itself or kind of our, yeah, what we've been working on. And I think we've pretty much stayed the course to sort of get to where we are now. But it's been really intensive. I think also having sort of Thanksgiving in there, and we were kind of pushing to get something live right before the Thanksgiving break. And so, that week just felt, I mean, I was just dead by, you know, like, Thursday of Thanksgiving. I think we all were. So, it's been intense, I would say, is the short answer. And I'm happy, yeah, to get into kind of where things are at. But big picture, it's been an intense three weeks. LINDSEY: That's cool. And when we talked, you were, you know, definitely getting into research and user interviews. Have those influenced any, you know, changes along the way in the plan? MIKE: Yeah. They've been really helpful. You know, we'd never really done that before in any of the sort of past projects that we've worked on together. And so, I think just being able to, you know, read through some of those scripts and then sit through some of the interviews and just kind of hearing people's honest assessment of some things has been really interesting. I'm trying to think if it's materially affected anything. I guess, you know, at first, we were, like, we kind of had some assumptions around, okay, let's try to find, like...adult gift-givers sounds like the wrong thing, adults who give gifts as, like, a persona. The idea that, like, you know, maybe you gift your siblings gifts, and then maybe this could be a good gift idea. And I think, you know, we had a hard time kind of finding people to talk in an interesting way about that. And I think we've kind of realized it's kind of a hard persona to kind of chop up and talk about, right, Chris? I don't know [crosstalk 04:55] CHRIS: Well, it also seemed to, from my understanding of it, it seemed to, like, genuinely stress out the people who were being interviewed... MIKE: [laughs] CHRIS: Because it's kind of about a stressful topic [inaudible 05:03], you know, and, like, especially -- LINDSEY: Why? [laughs] CHRIS: Well, I think, I don't know, now I'm making assumptions. Maybe because we're close to the holiday season, and that's a topic in the back of everybody's mind. But yeah, Danny, would you disagree with that? Those folks, from what we heard, seemed like they were the most difficult to kind of extract answers from. But then, if the subject changed and we treated them as a different persona, several of those interviews proved to be quite fruitful. So, it's just really interesting. DANNY: Yeah. It really started, like, you kind of try to get some answers out of people, and there's, like, some level of people trying to please you to some extent. That's just, like, naturally, how it starts. And you just, like, keep trying to drill into the answers. And you just keep asking people like, "So, what kind of gifts do you give?" And they're just like, "Oh my goodness, like, I haven't thought about buying gifts for my sister in [laughs], like, you know, in forever. And now, like [laughs], I don't know where to go." And they get, like, pretty stressed out about it. But then we just kind of started shifting into like, "All right, cool, never mind about that. Like, do you like listening to music?" And they're like, "Yes." And then it just kind of explodes from there. And they're like, "This last concert that I went to..." and all of this stuff. And it was much more fruitful kind of leaning more towards that, actually, yeah. LINDSEY: That's fascinating. I guess that speaks to, especially at this stage and the speed and the amount of interviews you're doing, the need for being, like, really agile in those interviews, and then, like, really quickly applying what you're learning to making the next one even more valuable. MIKE: Yeah. And I think, you know, like, we launched just a little sort of website experiment or, like, an e-commerce experiment right before Thanksgiving. And I think now, you know, we're able to sort of take some of those learnings from those interviews and apply them to both sort of our ad copy itself but also just different landing pages in different language on the different kind of versions of the site and see if we can find some resonance with some of these audience groups. So, it's been interesting. LINDSEY: Are you still trying to figure out who that early adopter audience is, who that niche persona is? MIKE: I think we -- CHRIS: Yes, we are. I think we have a good idea of who it is. And I think right now we're just trying to figure out really how to reach those people. That, I think, is the biggest challenge right now for us. MIKE: Yeah. With the e-commerce experiment it was sort of a very specific niche thing that is a little bit adjacent to what I think we want to be doing longer term with Goodz. And so, it's weird. It's like, we're in a place we're like, oh, we really want to find the people that want this thing. But also, this thing isn't necessarily the thing that we think we're going to make longer term, so let's not worry too hard about finding them. You know what I mean? It's been an interesting sort of back and forth with that. CHRIS: From the interviews that we conducted, you know, we identified three key personas. Most of them have come up, but I'll just relist them. There's the sibling gift giver. There was the merch buyers; these are people who go to concerts and buy merchandise, you know, T-shirts, albums, records, things along those lines to support the artists that they love. And then the final one that was identified we gave the title of the 'Proud Playlister'. And these are people who are really into their digital media platforms, love making playlists, and love sharing those playlists with their friends. And that, I would say, the proud playlister is really the one that we have focused on in terms of the storefront that we launched, like, the product is pretty much specifically for them. But the lessons that we're learning while making this product and trying to get this into the hands of the proud playlisters will feed into kind of the merch buyers. MIKE: Yeah. And I think that, you know, it's funny, like, this week is kind of a poignant week for this, right? Because it's the week that Spotify Wrapped launched, right? So, it's like, in the course of any given year, it's probably, like, the one week of the year that lots and lots and lots of people are thinking about playlists all of a sudden, so trying a little bit to see if we can ride that wave or just kind of dovetail with that a bit, too. LINDSEY: Absolutely. And do you want to give just, like, the really quick reminder of what the product experience is like? MIKE: Oh yeah [laughs], good call. CHRIS: This is a prototype of it. It's called the Goodz Mixtape. Basically, the idea is that you purchase one of these from us. You give us a playlist URL. We program that URL onto the NFC chip that's embedded in the Good itself. And then when you scan this Good, that playlist will come up. So, it's a really great way of you make a playlist for somebody, and you want to gift it to them; this is a great way to do that. You have a special playlist, maybe between you and a friend or you and a partner. This is a good way to commemorate that playlist, turn it into a physical thing, give that digital file value and presence in the physical world. LINDSEY: Great. Okay, so you casually mentioned this launch of an e-commerce store that happened last week. MIKE: It didn't feel casual. LINDSEY: Yeah. Why [laughter]...[inaudible 09:45] real casual. Why did you launch it? How's it going? MIKE: I don't know. Why did we launch it? I mean, well, we wanted to be able to test some assumptions. I think, you know, we wanted to get the brand out there a little bit, get our website out there, kind of introduce the concept. You know, this is a very...not that we've invented this product category, but it is a pretty obscure product category, right? And so, there's a lot of sort of consumer education that I think that has to go on for people to wrap their heads around this and why they'd want this. So, I think we wanted to start that process a little bit correctly, sort of in advance of a larger launch next year, and see if we could find some early community around this. You know, if we can find those core people who just absolutely love this, and connect with it, and go wild around it, then those are the people that we're going to be able to get a ton of information from and build for that persona, right? It's like, cool, these are the people who love this. Let's build more for them and go find other people like this. So, I think, for us, it was that. And then, honestly, it was also just, you know, let's test our manufacturing and fulfillment and logistics capabilities, right? I mean, this is...as much as we are a B2B, you know, SaaS platform or that's what we envision the future of Goodz being, there is a physical component of this. And, you know, we do have that part basically done at this point. But we just, you know, what is it like to order 1,000 of these? What is it like to put these in the mail to people and, you know, actually take orders? And just some of that processing because we do envision a more wholesale future where we're doing, you know, thousands or tens of thousands of this at a time. And so, I think we just want to button up and do some dry runs before we get to those kinds of numbers. CHRIS: I think it also it's important to remember that we are talking in startup time. And while this last week seems like an eternity, it's been a week [laughs] that we've had this in place. So, we're just starting to learn these things, and we plan on continuing to do so. MIKE: Yeah. But I think we thought that getting a website up would be a good way to just start kind of testing everything more. LINDSEY: Great. Danny, what went into deciding what would be in this first version of the site and the e-commerce offering? DANNY: I mean, a lot of it was kind of mostly driven by Chris and Mike. They kind of had a vision and an idea of what they wanted to sell. Obviously, from the user interviews, we were starting to hone in a little bit more and, like, we had some assumptions going into it. I think we ultimately did kind of feel like, yeah, I think, like, the playlisters seem to be, like, the target market. But just hearing it more and hearing more excitement from them was definitely just kind of like, yeah, I think we can double down on this piece. But, ultimately, like, in terms of launching the e-commerce platform, and the storefront, and the website, like, just literally looking at the user journey and being like, how does a user get from getting onto a site, like, as soon as they land there to, like, finishing a purchase? And what points do they need? What are the key things that they need to think through and typically will run into? And a lot of it is just kind of reflecting on our own personal buyer behavior. And, also, as we were getting closer to the launch, starting to work through some of those assumptions about buyer behavior. As we got there, we obviously had some prototypes. We had some screenshots that we were already working with. Like, the design team was already starting to build out some of the site. And so, we would just kind of show it to them, show it to our users, and just be like, hey, like, how do you expect to purchase this? Like, what's the next step that you expect to take? And we'd just kind of, like, continue to iterate on that piece. And so... LINDSEY: Okay. So you were, before launching, even showing some of those mockups and starting to incorporate them in the user interviews. DANNY: Yeah, yeah. I mean, we tried to get it in there in front of them as early as possible, partially because, like, at some point in the user interviews, like, you're mostly just trying to first understand, like, who are our target customers? Who are these people? And we have an assumption of or an idea of who we think they are. But really, like, once you start talking to people, you kind of are, like, okay, like, this thing that I thought maybe it wasn't so accurate, or, like, the way that they're kind of talking about these products doesn't 100% match what I originally walked into this, you know, experiment with. And so, we, like, start to hone in on that. But after a certain point, you kind of get that idea and now you're just like, okay, you seem to be, like, the right person to talk to. And so, if I were to show you this thing, do you get it, right? Like, do you understand what's happening? Like, how to use this thing, what this product even does. And then also, like, does the checkout experience feel intuitive for you? Is it as simple as, like, I just want to buy a T-shirt? So, like, I'm just going to go by the T-shirt, pick a size, and, you know, move on with my life. Can we make it as seamless as that? LINDSEY: And so, you mentioned it's only been a week since it's been live. Have you been able to learn anything from it yet? And how are you trying to drive people to it today? MIKE: Yeah, I think we learned that sales is hard [laughs] and slow, and it takes some time. But it's good, and we're learning a lot. I mean, it's been a while since I've really dug deep in, like, the analytics and marketing kind of metrics. And so, we've got all the Google Tag Manager stuff, you know, hooked up and just, you know, connecting with just exploring, honestly, like the TikTok advertising platform, and the YouTube Pre-Rolls, and Shorts. And, like, a lot of stuff that I actually, since the last time I was heavily involved in this stuff, is just totally new and different. And so, it's been super interesting to see the funnel and sort of see where people are getting in the site, where people are dropping off. You know, we had an interesting conversation in our thoughtbot sync yesterday or the day before, where we were seeing how, you know, we're getting lots of people to the front page and, actually, a good number of people to the product page, and, actually, like, you know, not the worst number of people to the cart. But then you were seeing really high cart abandonment rates. And then, you know, when you start Googling, and you're like, oh, actually, everybody sees very high cart abandonment rates; that's just a thing. But we were seeing, like, the people were viewing their cart seven or eight times, and they were on there sort of five times as long as they were on any other page. And it's this problem that I think Danny is talking about where, you know, we need to actually get a playlist URL. This gets into the minutiae of what we're building, but basically like, we need to get them to give us a playlist URL in order to check out, right? And so, you sort of have to, like, put yourself back in the mind of someone who's scrolling on Instagram, and they see this as an ad, and they click it, and they're like, oh, that thing was cool. Sure, I will buy one of those. And then it's like, no, actually, you need to, you know, leave this, go into a different app, find a play...like, it suddenly just puts a lot of the mental strain. But it's a lot. It's a cognitive load, greater than, as you said, just buying a T-shirt and telling what size you want. So, thinking through ways to really trim that down, shore up the amount of time people are spending on a cart. All that stuff has been fascinating. And then just, like, the different demographic kind of work that we're using, all the social ads platforms to kind of identify has been really interesting. It's still early. But, actually, like, Chris and I were just noticing...we were just talking right before this call. Like, we're actually starting to get, just in the last 12 hours, a bunch more, a bunch, but more people signing up to our email newsletter, probably in the last 12 hours that we have in the whole of last week. Yeah, I don't know, just even that sort of learning, it's like, oh, do people just need time with a thing, or they come back and they think about it? CHRIS: Yeah. Could these people be working on their playlists? That's a question that I have. MIKE: [chuckles] Yeah, me too. CHRIS: It's like, you know, I'm making a playlist to drop into this product. It's really interesting. And I think it gives insight to kind of, you know, how personal this product could be, that this is something that takes effort on the part of the consumer because they're making something to give or to keep for themselves, which is, I think, really interesting but definitely hard, too. DANNY: Yeah. And I also want to also clarify, like, Chris just kind of said it, like, especially for viewers and listeners, like, that's something that we've been hearing a lot from user interviews, too, right? Like, the language that they're using is, like, this is a thing that I care about. Like it's a representation of who I am. It's a representation of, like, the relationship that I have with this person that I'm going to be giving, you know, this gift to or this playlist to, specifically, like, people who feel, like, really passionate about these things. And, I mean, like, I did, too. Like, when I was first trying to, like, date, my wife, like, I spent, like, hours, hours trying to pick the coolest songs that I thought, you know, were like, oh, like, she's going to think I'm so cool because, like, I listen to these, like, super low-key indie rock bands, and, like, you know, so many more hours than she probably spent listening to it. But that's [laughs] kind of, like, honestly, what we heard a lot in a lot of these interviews, so... LINDSEY: Yeah, same. No, totally resonates. And I also went to the site this week, and I was like, oh damn, this is cool. Like, and immediately it was like, oh, you know, I've got these three, you know, music friends that we go to shows together. I'm like, oh, this would be so cool to get them, you know, playlists of, like, music we've seen together. So, you might see me in the cart. I won't abandon it. MIKE: Please. I would love that. CHRIS: Don't think about it too long if you could -- [laughter]. LINDSEY: I won't. I won't. CHRIS: I mean, I would say I'm really excited about having the site not only as a vehicle for selling some of these things but also as a vehicle for just honing our message. It's like another tool that we have in our arsenal. During the user interviews themselves, we were talking in abstract terms, and now we have something concrete that we can bounce off people, which is, I think, going to be a huge boon to our toolset as we continue to refine and define this product. MIKE: Yeah, that's a good point. LINDSEY: Yeah. You mentioned that they're signing up for, like, email updates. Do you have something you're sending out? Or are you kind of just creating a list? Totally fine, just building a list. MIKE: [laughs] No. CHRIS: It's a picture of Mike and I giving a big thumbs up. That's, yeah. [laughter] MIKE: No. But maybe...that was the thing; I was like, oh great, they're signing up. And I was like, gosh, they're signing up. Okay [laughter], now we got to write something. But we will. LINDSEY: Tips to making your playlist [crosstalk 19:11] playing your playlist -- MIKE: Yeah [crosstalk 19:13]. CHRIS: Right. And then also...tips to making your playlists. Also, we're advancing on the collectible side of things, too. We are, hopefully, going to have two pilot programs in place, one with a major label and one with a major artist. And we're really excited about that. LINDSEY: Okay. That's cool. I assume you can't tell us very much. What can you tell us? MIKE: Yeah. We won't mention names [chuckles] in case it just goes away, as these things sometimes do. But yeah, there's a great band who's super excited about these, been around for a long time, some good name recognition, and a very loyal fan base. They want to do sort of a collection of these. I think maybe we showed the little...I can't remember if we showed the little crates that we make or not, but basically, [inaudible 19:52] LINDSEY: The last time, yeah. MIKE: So, they want to sell online a package that's, you know, five or six Goodz in a crate, which I think will be cool and a great sort of sales experiment. And then there's a couple of artists that we're going to do an experiment with that's through their label that's more about tour...basically, giving things away on tour. So, they're going to do some giveaway fan club street team-style experiments with some of these on the road. So, first, it's ideal, provided both those things happen, because we definitely want to be exploring on the road and online stuff. And so, this kind of lets us do both at once and get some real learnings as to kind of how people...because we still don't know. We haven't really put these in people's hands yet. And it's just, like, are people scanning these a lot? Are they not? Is this sort of an object that's sitting on their shelf? Is it...yeah, it's just, like, there's so much we're going to learn once we get these into people's hands. LINDSEY: Do you have the infrastructure to sort of see how many times the cards are scanned? CHRIS: Mm-hmm. Yep, we do. MIKE: Yeah. So, we can see how many times each one is scanned, where they're scanned, that sort of thing. CHRIS: Kind of our next step, and something we were just talking about today with the thoughtbot team, is building out kind of what the backend will be for this, both for users and also for labels and artists. That it will allow them to go in and post updates to the Goodz, to allow them to use these for promotion as people, you know, scan into them to give them links to other sites related to the artists that they might be interested in before they move on to the actual musical playlist. So, that's kind of the next step for us. And knowing how users use these collectibles, both the kind of consumer Good and the artist collectibles that we were just talking about, will help inform how we build that platform. LINDSEY: Very cool. And right now, the online store itself that's built in Shopify? MIKE: Yeah. The homepage is Webflow that Kevin from the thoughtbot team really spearheaded in building for us. And then, yeah, the e-commerce is Shopify. LINDSEY: Y'all have been busy. MIKE: [laughs] LINDSEY: Is there anything else maybe that I haven't asked about yet that we should touch on in terms of updates or things going on with the product? MIKE: I don't know. I don't think so. I think, like Chris said, I mean, we're just...like, now that the site has kind of stood up and we're really switched over to kind of marketing and advertising on that, definitely digging into the backend of this kind of SaaS platform that's going to probably be a big focus for the rest of the, you know, the program, to be honest. Yeah, just some other things we can do on the next front that could eventually build into the backend that I think can be interesting. No, I guess [laughs] the short answer is no, nothing, like, substantial. Those are the big [crosstalk 22:26] LINDSEY: Yeah. Well, that was my next question, too, which is kind of like, what's next, or what's the next chunk of work? So, it's obviously lots more optimization and learning on the e-commerce platform, and then this other mega area, which is, you know, what does this look like as a SaaS solution? What's the vision? But also, where do we start? Which I'm sure, Danny, is a lot of work that you specialize in as far as, like, scoping how to approach these kinds of projects. DANNY: Yeah. And it's interesting because, I mean, we were just talking about this today. Like, part of it is, like, we can, like, really dig into, like, the e-commerce site and, like, really nailing it down to get it to the place where it's like, we're driving tons more traffic and also getting as low of a, like, cart abandonment rate as possible, right? But also, considering the fact that this is in the future, like, large-scale vision. And there's, like, also, like, we're starting to, I think, now iron out a lot of those, like, milestones where we're kind of like, okay, like, we got, like, a short-term vision, which is, like, the e-commerce site. We got a mid-term vision and a potential long-term vision. How do we validate this long-term vision while also still like, keeping this short-term vision moving forward? And, like, this mid-term vision is also going to, like, help potentially, either, like, steer us towards that long-term or maybe even, like, pivot us, like, into a completely different direction. So, like, where do you put your card, right? Like, how much energy and time do we put into, like, each of these areas? And that's kind of, like, the interesting part of this is starting to talk through that, starting to kind of prioritize, like, how we can maximize on our effort, like, our development and design effort so that things just kind of line up more naturally and organically for our future visioning, so... MIKE: Yeah. A lot of different things to juggle. I saw there was a question. Somebody asked what the URL is, but I don't seem to be able to [crosstalk 24:10]. LINDSEY: The same question as me. We got to drop the link for this thing. MIKE: Yeah, getthegoodz.com. CHRIS: That's G-O-O-D-Z. LINDSEY: Get in there, folks MIKE: Yeah, get [crosstalk 24:23]. LINDSEY: And let us know how it goes. MIKE: Yeah, please [laughs]. Any bugs? Let us know. Yeah. I think that those...yeah, I mean, it's a good point, Danny, in terms of juggling kind of the near-term and longer-term stuff. You know, it's a good kind of reminder our big focus, you know, in the new year is going to be fundraising, right? We're already talking to some investors and things like that. So, it's like, okay, yes, as you said, we could tweak the cart. We could tweak the e-commerce. Or, like, can we paint the big picture of what the longer-term version of this company is going to be in a way that makes it compelling for investment to come in so that there can be a long-term version of this company? And then we can build those things. So yeah, it's definitely a balance between the two. LINDSEY: Oh, also, just casual fundraising as well. [crosstalk 25:06] MIKE: Yeah, yeah. LINDSEY: [laughs] MIKE: But it's hard. It's like, you wake up in the morning. It's like, do I want to, like, write cold emails to investors? Or do I want to, like, look at Google Analytics and, like, tweak ad copy? That's actually more fun. So, yes. LINDSEY: Yeah, life of the founder, for sure. All right. So, that's getthegoodz (Goodz with a z) .com. Check it out. We'll tune in and see what happens with the e-commerce site, what happens with the SaaS planning the next time that we check in. But Chris, Mike, Danny, thank you so much for joining today and sharing what's been going on over the last few weeks: the good, the bad, the challenge, the cart abandonment. And, you know, best of luck to you over the next few weeks, and we'll be sure to check in and see how it's going. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions. Special Guests: Chris Cerrito and Mike Rosenthal.

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots
500: Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots 500th Episode!

Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 16, 2023 72:17


We released episode one of this podcast on June 11, 2012. Now, more than a decade later, we're celebrating the 500th episode of our show. In honor of this milestone, Victoria, Will, and Chad caught up with each of the past hosts of the show: Ben Orenstein, Chris Toomey, and Lindsey Christensen. We chatted about what they're up to now, what they liked and learned from hosting the show, their time at thoughtbot, and more! Follow thoughtbot on X (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. WILL: And I'm your other host, Will Larry. CHAD: And I'm your other host, Chad Pytel. We released episode one of this podcast on June 11, 2012. Now more than a decade later, were celebrating this: the 500th episode of our show. In honor of this milestone, Victoria, Will, and I caught up with each of the past hosts of the show: Ben Orenstein, Chris Toomey, and Lindsey Christensen. We chatted about what they're up to now, what they liked and learned from hosting the show and their time at thoughtbot, and more. First up: Ben Orenstein. Ben was the very first host of the show back in 2012 when he was a developer at thoughtbot. He is now the co-founder and Head of Product at Tuple, a remote pair programming tool for designers and developers. Ben, it's great to talk to you again. It's been a while since you and I talked. How have you been? BEN: I've been decent, yeah. It's fun to be back to my roots a little bit. I told some folks that I work with that I was coming back to the pod for the 500th Episode, and they were stoked. So, it's kind of a treat to get to be on these airwaves again. CHAD: What have you been up to since you left this show and thoughtbot? BEN: Well, I started a company. So, I was at thoughtbot for a while; I think it was seven years. And I eventually sort of struck out to start my own thing–had a false start or two here and there. And then, I ended up starting a company called Tuple, and we still exist today, fortunately. Tuple is a tool for doing remote pair programming. We started off on macOS and then wrote a Linux client. And we're launching a Windows client now. But it's sort of, like, screen sharing with remote control for developers who are actually writing code and want to have great, low latency remote control and who care about screen share quality and that sort of thing. I started that about five years ago with two co-founders. Today, we are a team of 11, I think it is. And it's been going well. Our timing was really great, it turned out. We launched a little bit before COVID. So, remote work turned into a lot more of a thing, and we were already in the market. So, that helped us a ton. It was quite a wild ride there for a bit. But things have calmed down a little lately, but it's still fun. I'm, like, really enjoying being a co-founder of a software company. It was what I've always sort of wanted to do. And it turns out it actually is pretty fun and pretty great. Although there are, of course, the ups and downs of business ownership. It is never quite as calm or relaxing as being an employee somewhere else. CHAD: You started Tuple instigated by...full disclosure: thoughtbot's an early customer of Tuple. We're still a customer. We use it a lot. BEN: Woo-hoo. I appreciate that. Thank you. CHAD: If I remember right, you started and were sort of instigated to create Tuple because there was a prior product that then Slack bought, and then it started to degrade. And now, it no longer exists in the same way that it did before. BEN: Yeah. So, there was this tool called Screenhero, which I actually started using -- CHAD: [inaudible 02:14] BEN: Yeah, first at thoughtbot. Some other thoughtboter introduced me to it, and we would use it for pair programming. And I was like, oh, this is nice. And then yeah, Slack kind of acqui-hired it and more or less ended up shutting the product down. And so, there was this gap in the market. And I would ask my friends, I would ask thoughtboters and other developers, like, "What are you using now that Screenhero is gone?" And no one had a good answer. And so, after a while of this thing sort of staring me in the face, I was like, we have to try to solve this need. There's clearly a hole in the market. Yeah, so we were heavily inspired by them in the early days. Hopefully, we've charted our own path now. But they were definitely...the initial seed was, you know, let's do Screenhero but try to not get bought early or something. CHAD: [laughs] How did you or did you feel like you captured a lot of the Screenhero customers and reached them in those early days? BEN: I think so. The pitch for it was sort of shockingly easy because Screenhero had kind of blazed this trail. Like, I would often just be like, "Oh, we're making a thing. Do you remember Screenhero?" And they'd go, "Oh yeah, I loved Screenhero". I'd be like, "Yeah, we're going to try to do that." And they'd be like, "Nice. Sign me up." So, it for sure helped a ton. I have no idea what percentage of customers we converted. And they were a pretty large success, so probably a small fraction, but it definitely, like, made the initial days much easier. CHAD: Yeah. And then, like you said, COVID happened. BEN: COVID happened, yeah. I think we had been around for about a year when COVID hit. So, we were getting our feet underneath us. And we were already, like, the company was already growing at a pretty good rate, and we were feeling pretty good about it. I don't think we had quite hit ramen profitable, but we were probably pretty close or, like, flirting with it. Yeah, the business, like, I don't know, tripled or quadrupled in a matter of months. We had a few big customers that, like, just told everyone to start using Tuple. So, we had, like, thousands and thousands of new users kind of immediately. So, it was a crazy time. Everything melted, of course. We hadn't quite engineered for that much scale. We had a really rough day or so as we scrambled, but fortunately, we got things under control. And then had this, like, very nice tailwind. Because we started the company assuming that remote work would grow. We assumed that there would be more remote developers every year. And, you know, it's probably maybe 5% of dev jobs are remote or maybe even less, but we expect to see this number creeping up. We don't think that trend will reverse. And so, COVID just, like, it just yanked it, you know, a decade in the future. CHAD: You haven't tripled or quadrupled your team size, have you? BEN: No. Well, I mean, I guess, I mean, we started as 3, and now we're 11, so kind of. CHAD: [laughs] Yeah, that's true. BEN: Expenses have not grown as fast as revenue, fortunately. CHAD: That's good. That's basically what I was asking [laughs]. BEN: Yeah, yeah. We're still a pretty small team, actually. We have only, like, four or five full-time engineers on the team at the moment, which is kind of wild because we are now, you know, we have three platforms to support: Linux, Windows, and Mac. It's a pretty complicated app doing, like, real-time streaming of audio, webcams, desktops, caring about OS-level intricacies. So, I think we will be hiring more people soon, although we haven't said that for a long time. We sort of have always had a bit of a hire-slow mentality to try to get the right team members and, like, feel a real pain before we hire someone into it. But we have been getting a bit more aggressive with hiring lately. VICTORIA: Well, I really appreciate Tuple. I installed it when I first started working here at thoughtbot. And we have random pairings with everyone across the company. So, I'll randomly get to meet someone halfway across the world who's working on similar projects. And I think they really enjoy that I have a tool they like working to share what they're working on. So, I want to thank you for that. And I'm curious about when you really started to scale during COVID, what were some of the technology architecture trade-offs you came across, and where did you land with it? BEN: Well, we got fairly...I don't know if it was lucky, but we...for a long time, for years, even through COVID, maybe the first four years of the company, all Tuple calls were purely peer-to-peer. And there was no server that we owned intermediating things. This was, like, kind of one of the keys of, like, not having expenses. The scale of revenue was we could have lots more calls happen. And it wouldn't cost us bandwidth or server capacity. To this day, still, for any calls with three or fewer participants, they're purely peer-to-peer. And this is nice for latency purposes because it just...we can find the most direct path to the internet between two people. It's also nice from our cost perspective because we don't need to pay to send that data. And that was hugely useful as call volume went up immensely. Didn't have to worry too much about server load and didn't have to worry too much about bandwidth costs. CHAD: Today, is there a central service that makes the initial connection for people? BEN: Yes, yeah, yeah. So, there is a signaling server. So, when you launch the app, you sign in, and you see, like, oh, which of my co-workers are online? So, there is actually a Rails app that handles that, actually, increasingly less the Rails app. We have now...I think it's a Go service that actually manages all those. I'm further and further from the code every year. Some of the technical questions might be a little bit beyond me, or I might have slightly out-of-date info. But back to the architecture question for a second, we did a pretty big refactor when we decided to go from just being a Mac client to supporting other platforms, where we split out a cross-platform real-time communication engine written in C++ so that we could use that for all of the heavy lifting, all the managing of the connections, and the tricky bandwidth estimation, and all this stuff, and use that across different platforms. And so, today, you have the cross-platform engine, and then on top of that is a, like, a less specific layer for each of the operating systems that we support. CHAD: So, you mentioned you're less and less in the code these days. So, what do you spend your time doing then? BEN: It's a mix of things. These days, it's basically mostly -- CHAD: Just cocktails on the beach, right? BEN: Cocktails, yes [laughs], cocktails on the beach, appearing on podcasts trying to sound important and impressive, yeah. Mostly product work. So, right before this, I just got off a call with some folks from The Browser Company. They are some of our first alpha users for our new Windows clients. So, I hopped on the call with them and, like, watched three of them install the product and inevitably run into some bugs. And, you know, chatted through those with the engineer that was working on it, prioritized some stuff, made some decisions about what's coming up next, and what we're going to ignore. So, mostly product work these days. For the first five years of the company, I was CEO, so I was doing kind of everything: marketing, and also hiring, and also product. About two months ago, I stepped down as CEO, and one of my other co-founders, Spencer, stepped up. And so, now my focus has narrowed to be mostly just product stuff and much less on the marketing or hiring side. VICTORIA: Yeah, you mentioned that it was a little more comfortable to be an employee than to be a founder. I don't know if you could say more about that because, certainly, a lot of engineers are smart enough and capable enough to run their own company. But what really informed your choice there, and do you regret it? [laughs] BEN: I definitely don't regret it. thoughtbot was a close second in terms of wonderful professional experiences. But running my own thing has been the most interesting professional thing I've done by a big margin. It has also been more stressful. And, Chad, I don't know if you remember, I think, like, maybe eight years ago, you tweeted something like, if you want to sleep well at night, and, like, value that, like, peace of mind, like, don't start a company or something. I have experienced that. CHAD: [laughs] BEN: A lot more, yeah, like waking up in the middle of the night worrying about things. It feels a little bit like the highs are higher; the lows are lower. Being an employee somewhere, it's like, if this company fails, I know I can go get another job, right? Like, you're a developer. You're extremely employable. But as the owner of the company, if the company fails, like, a huge chunk of your net worth is gone. Like, this thing you poured your life into is gone. It's way more stressful and traumatic to have that happen, or have that threatened to be happening, or just imagine that happening. So, overall, I have found the trade-off to be totally worth it. It's awesome to make your own decisions and chart your own path. And when it works, it can work in a way that being a salaried employee can't. So, I'm happy with those trade-offs. But I think that is a good question for people to ask themselves as they consider doing something like this is, like: is that the kind of trade-off that you want to make? Because it has significant downsides for sure. WILL: I am a big fan of Tuple also. I love it. It [inaudible 10:08] easy, especially with remote work. You hit the jackpot with COVID and remote work, so kudos for that [laughs]. Was there anything...because I know from our previous companies, about over...hopefully a lot more of the good stuff than the bad stuff. But was there anything that you learned? Because you were at thoughtbot for seven years. Was there anything that you're like, oh my gosh, I learned that, and it's helped me till this day while I'm running my company? BEN: Yeah, quite a bit, actually. I think it'd be hard to tease apart exactly which lessons, but I do...so I ran Upcase for thoughtbot and also FormKeep. So, I got a chance to kind of run a small division of the company, while still being a normal employee and, like, having not much of that risk. And I think that was a really wonderful opportunity for me to, like, practice the skills that I was interested in. Just, like, how do you market a thing? How do you design a product and have it be good? How do you prioritize user feedback? There were a ton of lessons from those days that I feel like made me better at running our company when we actually took a shot at it. So, there were, like, the specific things that I learned by the work I was doing there. But then just, like, I mean, I think I am the programmer I am today because of, like, the weekly dev discussions that happened. Like, spending so much time with Joe Ferris and, like, trying to copy as much of his brain as possible, like, really, like, imprinted on me as, like, a programmer. And also, just, like, a lot of the sort of cultural things from my time at thoughtbot of, like, you should be sharing the things you're learning. Like, writing blog posts is a great use of time. Like, doing open-source work is a great use of time. And maybe you can't directly trace how doing, like, working in public or sharing information benefits the company. It's hard to, like, attribute it from a marketing sense. But if you sort of have faith that in the large, it's going to work out, it probably will. That feels like a thoughtbot lesson to me, and I think it has served us really well; where I recorded a weekly podcast for a long time called The Art of Product. I'm recording a new podcast called Hackers Incorporated with Adam Wathan of Tailwind fame. And I don't ever think, like, hmm, how many new leads do we think we get per episode, and how many hours has that taken? What's the ROI? I just have this sort of reflex that I developed from thoughtbot time of, like, you should be putting stuff out there, or you should be giving back. You should help other people. And that will probably help your business and make it work in the long term. CHAD: That's a good lesson [laughs]. One of the other things, you know, while you were a host of Giant Robots, you were the first host. I remember, you know, encouraging you to be the first host, and I think we talked about that in one of the episodes along the way. But we also transitioned the format a little bit, especially as you started to work on products here; you know, it was more about the building of those products and following along with those. And one of the things that sort of half-jokingly defined, I think, your impact on a lot of products was pricing, experimenting with pricing, learning about pricing, increasing prices more than people were maybe comfortable doing so. How has that worked out with Tuple, pricing in particular? BEN: It's really hard to say. It's hard to know what, like, the other path would have been through the world-. We sort of decided from, like, the early days that we wanted to have, like, a fairly premium price. Like, we wanted to be the product that was really good and was, like, a little bit annoyingly expensive, but you still paid for it because it felt worth it. And I think people could debate in both directions whether we nailed that or not. We have had a price increase that we ended up rolling back. We went, like, a little too far one time and said, "You know what? I think we're a little bit over," and we reverted that. But I would say even today, we are still a fairly pricey product. I mean, I'm pretty happy with how the company has done. I can't prove to you that, like, if the price were half what it is, we would have, you know, better success or not. CHAD: I think it'd be very hard to make the argument that if it was half that, you would have double the number of customers. BEN: Yeah, that's probably not true. CHAD: Not with the customers that you have, who are companies that will pay for products that they use as much as Tuple. BEN: Yeah, I'm happy serving the kind of companies, and they end up being mostly tech companies that really value developer happiness. When their developers come to them and they say, "We don't want to pair over Zoom. We like this thing. It's better. It feels nicer to use," they say, "Okay," and they buy the tool for them. There are places where that's not the case. And they say, "We already have a thing that does screen sharing. You're not allowed to buy this." We don't invest a lot of time trying to sell to those people or convince them that they're wrong. And I'm pretty happy serving sort of the first group. CHAD: So, you've mentioned that you've still been podcasting. To be honest, I didn't realize you were starting something new. Is it live now? BEN: It is live now, yeah. CHAD: Awesome. Where can people find that? BEN: hackersincorporated.com. It's about the transition from developer to founder, which is kind of what we've been touching on here. Yeah, hopefully, the audience is developers who want to start something or have started something who are maybe a little bit further behind progression-wise. And it's kind of, like, I have some lessons, and Adam has some lessons, and, you know, we don't think that we're experts. But sometimes it's useful to just hear, like, two people's story and sort of see, like, what seemingly has worked for them. So, we've been trying to share things there. And I think people will find it useful. VICTORIA: I was going to ask you for a lesson, maybe give us a little sample about how would you advise someone who's built a product and wants to market it, and it's targeted towards developers since you mentioned that previously as well. BEN: Yeah, in a way, the question already contains a problem. It's like, oh, I built the product; now how do I market it? It's a little bit indicative of a very common failure mode for developers, which is that. They sort of assume, okay, after you make the product, you then figure out how you're going to market it. And marketing is sort of a thing you layer on later on when you realize that just, like, throwing it on Twitter or Product Hunt didn't really work. When we started building Tuple, I was out there marketing it already. So, I had two co-founders, so this is a luxury I had. My two co-founders were writing code, and I was out doing stuff. I was recording podcasts. I was tweeting about things. I was making videos. I was giving conference talks. And I was getting people to hear about our product well before it was done. In fact, I was even selling it. I was taking pre-orders for annual subscriptions to the app while it was still vaporware. So, I would say, like, you basically can't start marketing too early. If you start marketing early and no one really cares, well, then you don't really have to build it probably. I would actually even go a little further and say, like, I started marketing Tuple before we had a product available. But in reality, I started marketing Tuple seven or so years before that when I started publishing things through thoughtbot. It's like when I was traveling around giving talks about Ruby, and when I was making screencasts about Vim, and when I was running Upcase, I was, over time, building an audience. And that audience was useful for thoughtbot, and it also was useful for me so that when I left, I had something like 10,000 Twitter followers or something, a few thousand people on our mailing list. But there were a lot of developers that already sort of knew me and trusted me to make fairly good things. And so, when I said, "Hey, I've made a new thing, and it's for you," I really benefited from those years of making useful content and trying to be useful on the internet. And in the early days, we had people sign up, and they would say, "I don't even really think I'm going to use this. But I've learned so much from you over the years that I want to support you, so I'm going to pay for a subscription." VICTORIA: I like your answer because I think the same thing when people ask me, like, because I am an organizer for Women Who Code, and I know all these great people from showing up for years in person months over months. And so, then people will ask, "Oh, how do I recruit more women in my company?" I'm like, "Well, you got to start showing up [laughs] now and do that for a couple of years, and then maybe people will trust you," right? So, I really like that answer. WILL: How has your relationship with Chad continued to grow since you left? Because seven years at the company is a lot. And it seems like you're still on really, really good terms, and you're still friends. And I know that doesn't happen at every company. BEN: I mean, it was tough deciding to leave. I think, like, both of us felt pretty sad about it. That was the longest I'd ever worked anywhere, and I really enjoyed the experience. So, I think it was tough on both sides, honestly. But we haven't kept in that much touch since then. I think we've emailed a handful of times here and there. We're both sociable people, and we sort of get each other. And there's a long history there. So, I think it's just easy for us to kind of drop back into a friendly vibe is sort of how I feel about it. CHAD: Yeah. And the way I explain it to people, you know, when you're leading a company, which Ben and I both are, you put a lot of energy into that and to the people who are on that team. If you're doing things right, there's not really hard feelings when someone leaves. But you need to put in a lot of effort to keep in touch with people outside of the company and a lot of energy. And, to be honest, I don't necessarily do as good a job with that as I would like because it's a little bit higher priority to maintain relationships with them, the people who are still at thoughtbot and who are joining. BEN: What you're saying is I'm dead to you [laughter]. That's CEO, for you're dead to me. CHAD: No. It's just...no hard feelings. BEN: Totally. CHAD: I think one of the things that has been great about the show over the years is that we haven't been afraid to change the format, which I think has been important to keeping it going. So, there is sort of; in fact, the website now is organized into seasons. And I went back and re-categorized all the episodes into seasons. And when the seasons were made up of, like, sort of the format of the show or particular hosts...when we started, it was just an interview show, and it was largely technical topics. And then we started The Bike Shed, and the technical topics sort of moved over there. But it also went with your interests more under the product and business side. Then you started working on products at thoughtbot, so it started to go even more in that. And I think Chris joined you on the show, and that was sort of all about those topics. BEN: Yeah, that makes sense. I think if you don't let the hosts kind of follow their interests, they're going to probably burn out on the thing. It's not fun to force yourself, I think, to record a podcast. CHAD: Yeah. And then when you left, you know, I took over hosting and hosted by myself for a while, went back to the interview format, but then was joined by Lindsey for a little while. We experimented with a few different things: one, interviews, but then we did a whole, just under a year, where we followed along with three companies. And each month, we would have an interview episode where we talked to them, all three companies, about the same topic. And then, we also did an episode with just Lindsey and I talking about that topic and about what we learned from the startup companies that we were following along with for the year. And now we're back to interview freeform, different guests, different topics. It seems like we're going to stick with that for a little while. But, obviously, as Will and Victoria have said, like, we'll probably change it again in some way, you know, a year, two years, three years from now. VICTORIA: Yeah, and I'm definitely bringing my interest around DevOps and platform engineering, so you'll see more guests who have that focus in their background. And with that, sometimes my interview style is more; how do I ask a question that I can't read from your developer docs and that I might not understand the answer to? [laughs] That's kind of where I like to go with it. So yeah, I'm really excited about...it's probably one of my favorite parts of my job here at thoughtbot because I get to meet so many interesting people. And, hopefully, that's interesting to everyone else [laughs] and our guests, yeah. BEN: Totally. Well, I dramatically underestimated how awesome it would be to meet all kinds of cool people in the industry when I started the podcast. I didn't truly connect in my head, like, wait a second, if I have a 45-minute conversation with, like, a lot of prominent, awesome people in our field, that's going to be really interesting and useful for me. So, I think, yeah, it's nice to be in the hosting seat. VICTORIA: And it's so surprising how I'll meet someone at a conference, and I'll invite them onto the podcast. And the way it winds up is that whatever we're talking about on the show is directly relevant to what I'm working on or a problem that I have. It's been incredible. And I really appreciate you for coming back for our 500th Episode here. CHAD: Ben, thanks very much again for joining us, and congratulations on all the success with Tuple. And I wish you the best. BEN: Thank you so much. Thanks for being a continuing customer. I really appreciate it. CHAD: Next, we caught up with Chris Toomey, who had a run as co-host of the show with Ben throughout 2016. CHRIS: Hi there. Thanks for having me. So, we're talking with all of the past hosts. I know you joined the show, and you were on it with Ben. And then you moved over to The Bike Shed, right? CHRIS: Yeah. So, I had co-hosted with Ben for about six months. And then I think I was transitioning off of Upcase, and so that ended sort of the Giant Robots “let's talk about business” podcast tour for me. And then, I went back to consulting for a while. And, at some point, after Derek Prior had left, I took over as the host of The Bike Shed. So, I think there was probably, like, a year and a half, two-year gap in between the various hostings. CHAD: Are you doing any podcasting now? CHRIS: I'm not, and I miss it. It was a lot of fun. It was, I think, an ideal medium for me. I'm not as good at writing. I tend to over-edit and overthink. But when you get me on a podcast, I just start to say what's in my head, and I tend to not hate it after the fact. So [chuckles], that combination I found to be somewhat perfect for me. But yeah, lacking that in my current day-to-day. CHAD: Well, what's been taking up your time since you left? CHRIS: I had decided it was time to sort of go exploring, try and maybe join a startup, that sort of thing. I was sort of called in that direction. So, just after I left thoughtbot, I did a little bit of freelancing, but that was mostly to sort of keep the lights on and start to connect with folks and see if there might be an opportunity out there. I was able to connect with a former thoughtbot client, Sam Zimmerman, who was looking to start something as well. And so, we put our act together and formed a company called Sagewell, which was trying to build a digital financial platform for seniors, which is a whole bunch of different complicated things to try and string together. So, that was a wonderful experience. I was CTO of that organization. And I think that ran for about two and a half years. Unfortunately, Sagewell couldn't quite find the right sort of sticking point and, unfortunately, shut down a little bit earlier in this year. But that was, I would say, the lion's share of what I have done since leaving thoughtbot, really wonderful experience, got to learn a ton about all of the different aspects of building a startup. And I think somewhat pointedly learned that, like, it's messy, but I think I do like this startup world. So, since leaving Sagewell, I've now joined a company called August Health, which has a couple of ex-thoughtboters there as well. And August is post their Series A. They're a little bit further along in their journey. So, it was sort of a nice continuation of the startup experience, getting to see a company a little bit further on but still with lots of the good type of problems, lots of code to write, lots of product to build. So, excited to be joining them. And yeah, that's mostly what's taking up my time these days. CHAD: So, I know at Sagewell, you made a lot of technical architecture, team decisions. It was Rails in the backend, Svelte in the frontend, if I'm not mistaken. CHRIS: Yep, that's correct. CHAD: You know, hindsight is always 2020. Is there anything you learned along the way, or given how things ended up, that you would do differently? CHRIS: Sure. I was really happy with the tech stack that we were able to put together. Svelte was probably the most out there of the choices, I would say, but even that, it was sort of relegated to the frontend. And so, it was a little bit novel for folks coming into the codebase. Most folks had worked in React before but didn't know Svelte. They were able to pick it up pretty quickly. But Inertia.js was actually the core sort of architecture of the app, sort of connected the frontend and the backend, and really allowed us to move incredibly quickly. And I was very, very happy with that decision. We even ended up building our mobile applications, both for iOS and Android. So, we had native apps in both of the stores, but the apps were basically wrappers around the Rails application with a technology similar to Turbolinks native–if folks are familiar with that so, sort of a WebView layer but with some native interactions where you want. And so, like, we introduced a native login screen on both platforms so that we could do biometric login and that sort of thing. But at the end of the day, most of the screens in the app didn't need to be differentiated between a truly native mobile app and what like, mobile WebView would look like. So, we leaned into that. And it was incredible just how much we were able to do with that stack and how quickly we were able to move, and also how confidently we were able to move, which was really a nice thing. Having the deep integration between the backend and the frontend really allowed a very small team to get a lot done in a short time. CHAD: Does that code live on in any capacity? CHRIS: No. CHAD: Oh. How does that make you feel? [chuckles] CHRIS: It makes me feel very sad, I will say. That said, I mean, at the end of the day, code is in service of a business. And so, like, the code...there are, I think, probably a couple of things that we might be able to extract and share. There were some interesting...we did some weird stuff with the serializers and some, like, TypeScript type generation on the frontend that was somewhat novel. But at the end of the day, you know, code is in service of a business, and, unfortunately, the business is not continuing on. So, the code in the abstract is...it's more, you know, the journey that we had along the way and the friends we made and whatnot. But I think, for me, sort of the learnings of I really appreciate this architecture and will absolutely bring it to any new projects that I'm building from, you know, greenfield moving forward. VICTORIA: I'm curious what it was like to go from being a consultant to being a big player in a startup and being responsible for the business and the technology. How did that feel for you? CHRIS: I would say somewhat natural. I think the consulting experience really lent well to trying to think about not just the technical ramifications but, you know, what's the business impact? How do we structure a backlog and communicate about what features we want to build in what order? How do we, you know, scope a minimal MVP? All those sorts of things were, I think, really useful in allowing me to sort of help shape the direction of the company and be as productive of an engineering team as we could be. CHAD: A lot of the projects you worked on at thoughtbot were if not for startups, helping to launch new products. And then, a lot of the work you did at thoughtbot, too, was on Upcase, which was very much building a business. CHRIS: Yes. I definitely find myself drawn in that direction, and part of like, as I mentioned, I seem to be inclined towards this startup world. And I think it's that, like, the intersection between tech and business is sort of my sweet spot. I work with a lot of developers who are really interested in getting sort of deeper into the technical layers, or Docker and Kubernetes and orchestration. And I always find myself a little bit resistant to those. I'm like, I mean, whatever. Let's just...let's get something out there so that we can get users on it. And I am so drawn to that side, you know, you need both types of developers critically. I definitely find myself drawn to that business side a little bit more than many of the folks that I work with, and helping to bridge that gap and communicate about requirements and all those sort of things. So, definitely, the experience as a consultant really informed that and helped me have sort of a vocabulary and a comfort in those sort of conversations. WILL: How did Upcase come about? Because I know I've talked to numerous people who have gone through Upcase. I actually went through it, and I learned a ton. So, how did that come about? CHRIS: I think that was a dream in Ben Orenstein's eye. It started as thoughtbot Learn many, many years ago. There was a handful of workshops that had been recorded. And so, there were the video recordings of those workshops that thoughtbot used to provide in person. Ben collected those together and made them sort of an offering on the internet. I think Chad, you, and I were on some podcast episode where you sort of talked about the pricing models over time and how that went from, like, a high dollar one-time download to, like, $99 a month to $29 a month, and now Upcase is free. And so, it sort of went on this long journey. But it was an interesting exploration of building a content business of sort of really leaning into the thoughtbot ideal of sharing as much information as possible, and took a couple of different shapes over time. There was the weekly iterations of the video series that would come out each week, as well as the, like, longer format trails, and eventually some exercises and whatnot, but very much an organic sort of evolving thing that started as just a handful of videos and then became much more of a complete platform. I think I hit the high points there. But, Chad, does that all sound accurate to you? CHAD: Yeah, I led the transition from our workshops to Learn, which brought everything together. And then, I stepped away as product manager, and Ben took it the next step to Upcase and really productized it into a SaaS sort of monthly recurring billing model and took it over from there. But it still exists, and a lot of the stuff there is still really good [laughs]. CHRIS: Yeah, I remain deeply proud of lots of the videos on that platform. And I'm very glad that they are still out there, and I can point folks at them. VICTORIA: I love that idea that you said about trying to get as much content out there as possible or, like, really overcommunicate. I'm curious if that's also stayed with you as you've moved on to startups, about just trying to get that influence over, like, what you're doing and how you're promoting your work continues. CHRIS: I will say one of the experiences that really sticks with me is I had followed thoughtbot for a while before I actually joined. So, I was reading the blog, and I was listening to the podcasts and was really informing a lot of how I thought about building software. And I was so excited when I joined thoughtbot to, like, finally see behind the curtain and see, like, okay, so, what are the insider secrets? And I was equal parts let down...actually, not equal parts. I was a little bit let down but then also sort of invigorated to see, like, no, no, it's all out there. It's like, the blog and the open-source repos and those sort of...that really is the documentation of how thoughtbot thinks about and builds software. So, that was really foundational for me. But at the same time, I also saw sort of the complexity of it and how much effort goes into it, you know, investment time Fridays, and those sort of things. Like, a thoughtbot blog post is not a trivial thing to put up into the world. So many different people were collaborating and working on it. And so, I've simultaneously loved the sharing, and where sharing makes sense, I've tried to do that. But I also recognize the deep cost. And I think for thoughtbot, it's always made sense because it's been such a great mechanism for getting the thoughtbot name out there and for getting clients and for hiring developers. At startups, it becomes a really interesting trade-off of, should we be allocating time to building up sort of a brand in the name and getting ourselves, you know, getting information out there? Versus, should we be just focusing on the work at hand? And most organizations that I've worked with have bias towards certainly less sharing than thoughtbot, but just not much at all. Often, I'll see folks like, "Hey, maybe we should start a blog." And I'm like, "Okay, let's just talk about how much effort that [laughs] actually looks like." And I wonder if I'm actually overcorrected on that, having seen, you know, the high bar that thoughtbot set. CHAD: I think it's a struggle. This is one of my [laughs] hot topics or spiels that I can go on. You know, in most other companies, that kind of thing only helps...it only helps in hiring or the people being fulfilled in the work. But at most companies, your product is not about that; that's not what your business is. So, having a more fulfilled engineering team who is easier to hire—don't get me wrong, there are advantages to that—but it doesn't also help with your sales. CHRIS: Yes. CHAD: And at thoughtbot, our business is totally aligned with the people and what we do as designers and developers. And so, when we improve one, we improve the other, and that's why we can make it work. That is marketing for the product that we actually sell, and that's not the case at a SaaS software company. CHRIS: Yes, yeah, definitely. That resonates strongly. I will say, though, on the hiring side, hiring at thoughtbot was always...there was...I won't say a cheat code, but just if someone were to come into the hiring process and they're like, "Oh yeah, I've read the blog. I listen to the podcast," this and that, immediately, you were able to skip so much further into the conversation and be like, "Okay, what do you agree with? What do you disagree with? Like, let's talk." But there's so much. Because thoughtbot put so much out there, it was easy to say, like, "Hey, this is who we are. Do you like that? Is that your vibe?" Whereas most engineering organizations don't have that. And so, you have to try and, like, build that in the context of, you know, a couple of hour conversations in an interview, and it's just so much harder to do. So, again, I've leaned in the direction of not going anywhere near thoughtbot's level of sharing. But the downside when you are hiring, you're like, oh, this is going to be trickier. CHAD: Yeah. One of the moments that stands out in my mind, and maybe I've told this story before on the podcast, but I'll tell it again. When we opened the New York studio, it was really fast growing and was doing a lot of hiring. And one of the people who had just joined the company a couple of weeks before was doing an interview and rejected the person was able to write an articulate reason why. But it all boiled down to this person is, you know, not a fit for thoughtbot. Based on what they were able to describe, I felt very confident with the ability or with the fact that they were able to make that call, even though they had been here only a couple of weeks, because they joined knowing who we were, and what we stand for, and what our culture and our values are, and the way that we do things, and all that kind of thing. And so, yeah, that's definitely a huge benefit to us. VICTORIA: I've certainly enjoyed that as well, as someone who hires developers here and also in meeting new companies and organizations when they already know thoughtbot. That's really nice to have that reputation there, coming from my background—some really more scrappier startup kind of consulting agencies. But, you know, I wanted to talk a little bit more about your podcasting experience while you're here. So, I know you were on both The Bike Shed and Giant Robots. Which is the better podcast? [laughter] So, what's your...do you have, like, a favorite episode or favorite moment, or maybe, like, a little anecdote you can share from hosting? CHRIS: Well, I guess there's, like, three different eras for me in the podcasting. So, there's Giant Robots with Ben talking more about business stuff, and I think that was really useful. I think it was more of a forcing function on me because I sort of...Both Ben and I were coming on; we were giving honest, transparent summaries of our, like, MRR and stats and how things were growing, and acted as sort of an accountability backstop, which was super useful but also just kind of nerve-wracking. Then, when I joined the Bike Shed, the interviewing sequence that I did each week was just a new person that I was chatting with. And I sort of had to ramp them up on, hey, here's a quick summary on how to think about podcasting. Don't worry, it'll be great. Everybody have fun. But I was finding each of the guests. I was sort of finding a topic to talk about with them. So, that ended up being a lot more work. And then, the last three years chatting with Steph that was by far my favorite. There was just such a natural back-and-forth. It really was just capturing the conversations of two developers at thoughtbot and the questions we would ask each other as we hit something complicated in a piece of code or, "Oh, I saw this, you know, article about a new open-source repository. What do you think about that?" It was so much easier, so much more natural, and, frankly, a lot of fun to do that. And, two, I actually do have an answer to the favorite podcast episode, which is the first episode that Steph was ever on. It was before she actually joined as a co-host. But it was called “What I Believe About Software.” And it was just this really great, deep conversation about how we think about software. And a lot of it is very much, like, thoughtbot ideals, I would say. But yeah, Steph came in and just brought the heat in that first episode, and I remember just how enjoyable that experience was. And I was like, all right, let's see if I can get her to hang out a little bit more, and, thankfully, she was happy to join. WILL: What was your favorite position, I guess you can call it? Because you say you like the mixture of business and, you know, development. So, you've been in leadership as development director, CTO. You've been a web developer. You've been over content, like, with Upcase. What was your favorite position [inaudible 16:43] you were doing, and why was it your favorite? CHRIS: The development director role feels like sort of a cheating answer, but I think that would be my answer because it contained a handful of things within it. Like, as development director, I was still working on client projects three days a week. And then, one day a week was sort of allocated to the manager-type tasks, or having one-on-ones with my team sort of helping to think about strategy and whatnot. And then, ideally, still getting some amount of investment time, although the relative amounts of those always flexed a little bit. Because that one sort of encompassed different facets, I think that's going to be my answer. And I think, like, some of what drew me to consulting in the first place and kept me in that line of work for seven years was the variety, you know, different clients, as well as, even within thoughtbot, different modes of working in podcasts or video. Or there was a bootcamp that I taught, a session of Metis, which that was a whole other experience. And so, getting that variety was really interesting. And I think as sort of a tricky answer to your question, the development director role as a singular thing contained a multitude, and so I think that was the one that would stand out to me. It's also the most, you know, the one that I ended on, so [laughs] it might just be recency bias, but yeah. VICTORIA: Oh, I love that. Is there anything else that you would like to promote on the podcast today? CHRIS: No, although as you ask the question, I feel like I should, I don't know, make some things to promote, get back into some, I don't know, content generation or something like that. But for now, no. I'm, you know, diving into the startup life, and it's a wonderful and engrossing way to do work, but it does definitely take up a lot of my headspace. So, it's an interesting trade-off. But right now, I don't know; if folks are online and they want to say hi, most of my contact information is readily available. So, I would love to say hi to folks, anyone that listened in the past or, you know, has any thoughts in the now. Would love to connect with folks. But otherwise, yeah, thank you so much for having me on. CHAD: In 2017, I took over from Ben as solo host of the show but was joined by Lindsey Christainson as cohost in 2019. After some time away from thoughtbot, Lindsey is back with us and we sat down to catch up with her. VICTORIA: Why don't you tell me about your current role with thoughtbot? LINDSEY: I am currently supporting marketing and business development at thoughtbot, as well as working as a marketing consultant for thoughtbot clients. VICTORIA: Great. And I understand that you had worked with thoughtbot many years ago, and that's when you also came on as a co-host of Giant Robots. Is that right? LINDSEY: Yeah, a couple of years ago. I left thoughtbot in spring of 2021. And I forget how long my stint was as a co-host of Giant Robots, but over a year, maybe a year and a half, two years? CHAD: Yeah, I think that's right. I think you started in 2019. LINDSEY: Yeah. Yeah, that sounds right. And Chad and I were co-hosts, I think, similar to the setup today in which sometimes we hosted together, and sometimes we were conducting interviews separately. CHAD: And then we sort of introduced a second season, where we followed along with a batch of companies over the course of the entire season. And that was fun, and we learned a lot. And it was nice to have consistent guests. LINDSEY: Yeah, that was a lot of fun. I really liked that format. I don't know; they almost were, like, more than guests at that point. They were just like other co-hosts [laughs] that we could rely on week in, week out to check in with them as they're working on early-stage companies. So, every time we checked in with them, they usually had some new, exciting developments. WILL: I really like that idea. How did y'all come up with that? CHAD: I'm not sure. I think a few years before I had taken over hosting of the show, and I forget...my memory maybe is that I went to Lindsey and said, "You know, let's do something different." But I'm not sure. Does that match your memory, Lindsey? LINDSEY: Yeah, I think there were two main drivers; one was I think you were feeling like you were having similar conversations in the interviews every time. Like, you couldn't get to a certain depth because every time you were interviewing someone, you were doing, like, the, "Well, tell me your founding story." And, you know, how did you raise funding? It kind of got a little bit repetitive. And then, on the side, the few we had done together, I think we both really enjoyed. So, we were thinking, like, what's the format in which the two of us could co-host together more regularly? Because I'm a pleasure to talk to [laughter]. I think you were like, I need to talk to Lindsey more. [inaudible 3:13] VICTORIA: What is your hosting style? How would you describe your approach to hosting a podcast? LINDSEY: I mean, obviously, it's a podcast about products and business. I think as a marketer, I am, you know, drawn a lot to the marketing side, so tending to ask questions around go-to-market audience, users. That's always just, like, a particular interest of mine. But then also, like, the feelings. I love asking about the feelings of things, you know, how did it feel when you started? How did it feel when you made this tough decision? So, that's another thing I think I noticed in my interviews is asking about some of the emotions behind business decisions. VICTORIA: And I like hearing about how people felt at the time and then how they felt afterwards [laughs]. And, like, how people around them supported each other and that type of thing. That's really fun. I'm curious, too, from your marketing background and having to do with podcasts like; some founders, I think, get the advice to just start a podcast to start building a community. But I'm curious on your thoughts about, like, how does podcasting really play into, like, business and marketing development for products? LINDSEY: Oh yeah. It's become definitely, like, a standard channel in B2B these days. I feel like that it's pretty typical for a company to have a podcast as one way that they engage their audience and their users. In marketing, you're really vying for people's attention, and people's attention span is getting shorter and shorter. So, like, if you have an ad or a blog, you're getting, like, seconds, maybe minutes of someone's attention. And whereas something like a podcast offers a unique channel to have someone's undivided attention for, you know, 30 minutes, an hour, and if you're lucky, you know, checking back in week over week. So, it became a really popular method. That said, I think you're probably also seeing the market get saturated [laughs] with podcasts now, so some diminishing returns. And, you know, as always, kind of looking for, you know, what's the next way? What's the next thing that people are interested in in ways to capture their attention? CHAD: What is the next thing? LINDSEY: I don't know, back to micro-content? TikTok videos -- CHAD: Yeah, I was going to say TikTok, yeah. LINDSEY: Yeah, you know, 10-30 seconds, what can you communicate? VICTORIA: I see people live streaming on Twitch a lot for coding and developer products. LINDSEY: Yeah, I think we've seen some of that, too. We've been experimenting more at thoughtbot with live streaming as well. It's another interesting mechanism. But yeah, I don't know, it's interesting. It's another form of, like, community and how people engage with their communities. So, it's always evolving. It's always evolving, and sometimes it's not. Sometimes, people just do want to get in a room together, too, which is always interesting. WILL: What has been, in your experience, the good the bad? Like, how do you feel about the way that it has shifted? Because I think you started in, like, 2000, like, kind of earlier 2000, 2005, something around there. And it was totally different than now like you're saying. Because I feel like, you know, Channel 5 30-second ad, you know, with some of the marketing depending on what you're doing, to now to where you're, like, you're paying influencers to advertise your product, or you're doing an ad. Or it's more social media-driven and tech-driven. What has been your opinion and feelings on the way that it has grown and evolved? LINDSEY: Marketing, in general, yeah, I graduated college in 2005 and started my marketing career. And yeah, you could, like, actually get people to click on banner ads back then, which was pretty [inaudible 07:14] [laughs]. WILL: I forgot about banner ads [laughs]. LINDSEY: I don't know, yeah. I don't know. In order for myself to not just get too frustrated, I think I've got to, like, view it as a game kind of. What new things are we going to try? You know, what do we see work? But it can really depend. And I've always been in B2B side of things. And consumer, I'm sure, has its own kind of evolution around how people engage and how they consume content and byproducts. But in B2B, you know, it can really depend on industry too. You know, I'm working with a client right now in the senior living space, and they're really big in in-person conferences. So, that's how people consume, get a lot of their information and, make connections, and learn about new products. So, it's been interesting to work in an industry that what might be considered, like, a little bit more old-school channels are still effective. And then just thinking about how you weave in the new channels with the existing ones without ignoring them. They might get information in conferences, but they're still a modern human who will then, you know, search online to learn more, for example. VICTORIA: It reminds me of a phrase I like to say, which is that, like, technology never dies; you just have more of it. There's just more different options and more different ways to do things. And some people are always, you know, sometimes you have to be flexible and do everything. CHAD: So, tell us more about what you did in between...after you left thoughtbot, what did you do? LINDSEY: I was heading up B2B marketing for a company called Flywire, which is headquartered in Boston but is a global company now. And they were just kind of starting their B2B business unit, which, as I mentioned, B2B is my personal specialty. I had been connected to their CMO through the Boston startup community. And yeah, I was helping them kind of launch their go-to-market for B2B. The industries they were in before...they got their start in higher education and then expanded in healthcare and found a niche in luxury travel, and then we were figuring out the B2B piece. But yeah, I was there for about a year and a half. They actually went public the second week I was there, which was an interesting [laughs] experience. I knew they were, like, on that journey, but it was kind of funny to be there the second week, and people were, like, "Congrats." And I was like, "Well, I definitely didn't have anything to do with it because I just finished my onboarding, but thank you," [laughs]. CHAD: One of the things that really impressed me when you joined thoughtbot was the way in which you learned about who we were and really internalized that in a way where you were then able to pretty meaningfully understand our market, our positioning in the market, and come up with new strategies for us. I assume that's something you're good at in general [laughs]. How do you approach it? How did you approach it when you joined Flywire, for example? And how was it the same or different than how you approached thoughtbot? LINDSEY: Ooh, yeah, that's a good question. And I appreciate that comment because it's difficult. But I think, yeah, with any new organization that I'm joining, you know, I think starting out with your kind of mini-listening tour of your key stakeholders across, you know, the different departmental focuses to get a sense of, what are the challenges? What are the opportunities? It's actually like, you know, it's the SWOT analysis, kind of trying to fill in your own mind map of a SWOT analysis of where the company is. What are the major hurdles you're facing? Where are people trying to go? What have they tried that's worked? What have they tried that's failed? But then, like, I think for the culture component, I think a part of that maybe is, like, feel, and maybe something that I do have a knack for. Again, maybe this is, like, you know, emotional intelligence quotient, where it's like, you know, but it's the company, you know, who is this company? What is important to them? How do they work and go about things? I know thoughtbot is certainly very unique, I think, in that arena in terms of being, like, a really value-driven company, and one where especially, like, marketing and business work is, like, distributed across teams in a really interesting way. You know, I'm sure the fact that it fascinated me and was something I could get passionate and get behind was something that also helped me understand it quickly. CHAD: I was excited that...or it was sort of a coincidence because I had reached out to you and without realizing that you had left Flywire. And Kelly, who had been doing a combined sales and marketing role, was going on parental leave. And so, it was fortuitous [laughs] that you were able to come back and help us and provide coverage, like, Kelly was out. LINDSEY: Yeah, it definitely felt like stars aligned moment, which, you know, I'm pretty woo-woo, so I believe in [laughter]...I believe in that kind of thing. You know, yeah, it was wild. It really did feel like your email came out of nowhere. And, you know, I mentioned it, obviously, to my partner and my friends. And they were like, "Oh, he definitely knows, like, that you left your last company." And I'm like, "I actually don't think he does [laughter]. I actually don't think he does." Yeah, and then we started chatting about me coming back to help. And it was great. thoughtbot makes it hard to work anywhere else [laughs]. So, I was happy to come back. I missed the team. CHAD: And one of the exciting things, and you've mentioned it, is you're not just doing marketing for thoughtbot now. We have started to offer your services to our clients. LINDSEY: Yeah, I'm super excited about this. And it's something I'd started thinking about. I had decided to take some time off between Flywire and my next thing and had started thinking about doing marketing, consulting. And as I'm doing that, I'm thinking a lot about how thoughtbot does consulting and, you know, wanting to emulate something like that. So, I started back up at thoughtbot. That wasn't part of the plan. I was just going to, you know, fill in for Kelly and help with marketing things. But then, you know, a good opportunity arose to work on a client, and I was really excited. When, you know, Chad, you and I chatted through it, we came to the conclusion that this was something worth exploring under the, you know, thoughtbot umbrella. And it's been a really great experience so far. And we now have brought on another client now. And if you're listening and need early-stage B2B marketing support, reach out to lindsey@thoughtbot.com. CHAD: Definitely. And Lindsey is pretty good, so you're going to like it [laughs]. LINDSEY: Yeah, you're going to like the way you look. WILL: Yeah, definitely. Because I can even feel your presence here, you know, coming back. Because even like, you know, the market where it's at now and some of the suggestions that, you know, you've been helping us. For example, like, I do a lot of React Native, and you're like, "Hey, you know, blog posts have done a lot of traction, you know, let's get some more blog posts out in the market to help with the traffic and everything." So, the question I have with that is, like, thank you for even suggesting that because it's, like, those little things that you don't even think about. It's like, oh yeah, blog posts, that's an easy transition to help the market, clients, things like that. But with the market the way it is, what has been your experience working during this time with the market? I don't know if you want to call it struggling, but whatever you want to call it that, it's doing [laughs]. LINDSEY: Yeah, I mean, the economy is difficult now. We also went through a really tough spot when I was here last time. During COVID, you know, we faced a major company challenge. And, I mean, I'll let Chad speak to it, but I would imagine it's probably one of the bigger, like, economic inflection points that you faced. Would you say that? CHAD: Yeah, definitely. The thing about it that made it worse was how quickly it happened. You know, it was something that you didn't see coming, and then, you know, about 40% of our business went away in a single month. That's the kind of thing that was a real shock to the system. I think the thing that made it difficult, too, was then the aspects of COVID, where we were no longer able to go into our studios. We were all working remotely. We were isolated from each other. And so, that made executing on what needed to be done in order to make the company survive additionally challenging. LINDSEY: Yeah, so I think, like, going through that experience, also, and seeing how the team and the leadership team rallied together to get through it. And then, you know, ultimately, I think 2021 and 2022 have, like, really good years. That was a really positive experience. And something I'll definitely take with me for a while is just, like, keeping a cool head and just knowing you have, like, really smart, talented folks with you working on it and that you can get through it. And just, like, doing some, I mean, we relied on what we did best, which was, like, design thinking, using design exercise to think about, like, how we might re-organize the company, or what other services we might try launching, or how might we re-package, you know, larger services into smaller more palatable services when people have, like, kind of tighter purse strings. So, that was, like, a great educational experience, and I think something we just continue to do now: be open to change, be open to changing how we package services, what clients we go after, and coming at it with, like, an agile, experimental mindset and try to find out what works. VICTORIA: I really appreciate that. And it aligns now with the new service we've developed around you and the marketing that you provide. And I'm curious because I've had founders come up to me who say they need help with marketing or they need to, like, figure out their marketing plans. So, say you've met a founder who has this question, like, what questions do you ask them to kind of narrow down what it is they really need and really want to get out of a marketing plan? LINDSEY: I've been thinking about this a lot recently. And, like, obviously, I see other marketing leaders in the market. Marketers like to talk about what they do on LinkedIn [laughs], so I get to...I read a lot about different people's approaches to this. And some people kind of go in and are like, okay, this is what you need. This is how we're going to do it, and they start executing on it. And I really do take a very collaborative approach with founders. I think they're, especially in early stage, they're your most important asset in a way, and a lot of their intuition around the market and the business, you know, it's gotten them to where they're at. And so, I think starting from the point of, like, taking what they view as priorities or challenges, and then helping them better explore them or understand them with my own marketing experience and expertise, to

Building Texas Business
Ep060: Creating Connections and Nurturing Partnerships with Curtis Hite

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 1, 2023 34:19


In today's episode of Building Texas Business, I speak with Curtis Hite, founder and CEO of Improving. Curtis shares his entrepreneurial journey, from starting at Raytheon to selling his first business and experiencing betrayal, fueling his passion for conscious capitalism. We talk about how Improving has consistently grown during economic downturns by prioritizing employees and culture. Curtis provides valuable insights into his leadership strategies, innovative programs for maintaining connections, and stakeholder models for partnerships. Whether you're an entrepreneur, business leader or interested in leadership, you'll gain inspiring insights on building a resilient company through conscious capitalism. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Curtis Hite, founder and CEO of Improving, shares his entrepreneurial journey from feeling betrayed and undervalued at his previous jobs to founding a successful business that values its employees. We discuss the importance of maintaining a people-centric focus and sharing strategies for leading a successful company. The concept of conscious capitalism, which is a philosophy that Curtis and his team at Improving have strived to embed in their work culture, is explained. He shares his unique leadership style, emphasizing positivity, high energy, and inspiration. We discuss the importance of listening to the ideas of employees and how he prioritizes them in order to benefit both the business and the employees. Curtis introduces a program called Come Together, which helps build and maintain connections among employees. He describes a homegrown product called Engage, used to measure employee involvement and assign values to their contributions, a major part of their profit share is based on this. We emphasize the application of a stakeholder model in business, which is about identifying key partners and building relationships with them. The discussion touches on the importance of leading by example and inspiring with vision, reflecting on how Hype shifted to utilizing personal life books and creating a vision for his organization. The episode ends with a light-hearted conversation about Curtis' first job, barbecue preferences, and cherished family memories. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller GUESTS Curtis HiteAbout Curtis TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In this episode, you will meet Curtis Hite, ceo of Improving. Curtis shares several important lessons he has learned along his entrepreneurial journey, maybe the most important being believe in yourself, but not too much, because you're part of a team. Curtis, I want to thank you for taking the time to join me on Building Texas Business. Curtis: Alright, thank you for having me here. I appreciate you including me. Chris: So let's get started by just you introducing kind of yourself, but more importantly, your company and what it's known for. Curtis: Alright, so Improving is a modern digital services company. I think what we're probably known for most, though, is our participation in leadership in the conscious business movement in the United States. Chris: That's great. What inspired you to start Improving? Curtis: There's actually a story I consider Origin story here, that's good, we're here for stories, okay. And I was working two companies ago at Raytheon. It's a very large company, over 100,000 employees. I was very ambitious as a young man and I had this idea of creating an internal consultancy at Raytheon. Had some skill sets that were fairly unique at the time with the technology transition similar to where we are with AI today but that was object programming, and so I came up with a business plan with my partner there and we presented it to the leadership. It went all the way up to Boston and when a letter came back it included. The words were the sentence tell the software we need to get back to work. Chris: Oh, okay, and so. Curtis: I kind of reflected on that. Being part of 100,000 person organization, those words were never intended. I get that for my eyes right. Right it was intended for more of the senior executives at the organization. But it kind of inspired me to say, well, wait a minute, maybe I can do something different. This is a good business plan and developed it on my own. And instead I took that out and found three partners that were already in the industry and started my first business. But that was the first business, but that's how I got started there. Okay, I kind of pushed there, and this was after four and a half years of being at this larger company. And then the second story, the origins to this one, is rooted in that company, the three partners, that there were, three partners from Raytheon, three partners from this new business, xp, and in the end, without going into a lot of the details, I felt very, maybe betrayed by one of the partners and maybe misled was the a better word Very misled and taken advantage of, and I always remembered that feeling. So take those two stories, plus one more, which was we sold that business to a French organization and we went public during the dot com days and after several years of running that business the French business, let me go and we were experiencing literally record revenues at the time and record profits. Even a majority of the profits of the group are coming out of North America, which I was responsible for. And I remember the shame that I felt in that moment and embarrassment and all the raw feelings that go with that. And there's a little bit of irony there because I might have been thinking about leaving or trying something new, but that kind of jolted me and I had something to prove. I had no intention of going back into the services business again. Yeah, I found myself with something to prove, creating a new services company. That was fueled out of shame, and some people may like that. Chris: Well, essentially you say it that way because my sense is that people were really honest about it. They probably come to the same conclusion you just did and did years ago. Is it maybe some shame or embarrassment that fueled them to prove something wrong and got them going? I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Curtis: Yeah, I'm not going to say there's anything wrong, because shame, if channeled properly, can be a great motivator. Chris: It's not the healthiest of feelings, I get that Right, but it does create a high degree of motivation or denotation, depending on how you are built, how you let it handle or affect you right. Curtis: Right. And so my partner, rick, in this business he actually three or four years in and we very quickly we went from 600,000 to 2 million to roughly 6.8 to 10 million in our first four years and he was worried that I would lose the motivation right, and that really didn't happen. It shifted and motivation came from a different place. But in those early years. Chris: I remember the earlier events and what can I learn when shake this company and I didn't want to mislead anybody, Right. Curtis: From lesson from. Lesson two yeah, I didn't want to feel like a number, anybody that would feel like a number. I was 139662. Chris: That was my number at the large company and that's what you would give that number instead of your name. Curtis: Right, and I felt a little treated that way when it's tell that software, we need to get back to work Right. And so when we formed the company, culture was a very important and perhaps one of, I think, our greatest accomplishments is that we've been named to over 100 best places to work. We've been number one here in Houston, led by Devlin Wells. We've been number one in Dallas, we've been number one in Texas, we've number one in Ohio, and it's not about being number one because in almost all of our offices were recognized, but it's just really about the executives at the company caring about the employees. Chris: Right the way they feel valued. Curtis: Right and that's what I'm genuinely carrying and valuing the employees, although it's not all about the employees all the time either. It's this careful balance. Chris: Sure, Well, if they don't feel valued, you're not going to win awards like that, right? Because they pull into your organization to really try to get a feel for the pulse and what's really going on. Well, thank you for sharing the origins because to me there's so much learning in that and in each entrepreneur's story there's different things that cause inspiration, from ideas and knowledge to emotions and feelings. What I gather from yours is there's kind of a series of three different setbacks, if you will, that you learn from in different ways An idea being disregarded by a large corporation hear those stories all the time. Partner issues in a business and learning from that. Hear that, represent and guide people through those issues all the time, and then this kind of the shock of being let go when you thought you were doing everything right. So I think it's a really cool, well-rounded story. So when did you talk about starting improving with your partner? What year was that? Give us a reference in time. Curtis: The very end of two things. Chris: Okay, so, wow. So you were a few years into that company. You were talking about the success over four years. You had economic crash in 08, but you were thriving through that. Curtis: Right, we actually built the company in the Great Recession and we grew every year through that environment. In fact, we've grown every year in our history, so we've never had a year. Some years it's small, a few percentage points. Other years it's big growth, but that really it's core of one of our values, which I call involvement, or which we call involvement, and that our success is a consequence of our collective involvement and leaning on each other, no matter what the conditions are good times, bad times. So, yeah, really have a big team and I really believe that. Chris: Yeah, so you've then managed at least through a couple of big downtimes. You talked about the Great Recession. Obviously, we had a global pandemic. What are some of the maybe lessons learned that you could share about how you kept focused to allow the business to continue to grow even though the world around you is, like you know, in chaos? Curtis: The first thing is remembering your team. Sometimes, as entrepreneurs, it's easy to become self-reliant, sizing your own role in this and maybe even disregarding the roles of others. So I highly encourage people and I had that lesson early on that I don't have tendencies to do that. In fact, I know deep down the exact opposite is true and pull the team together and what are we going to do in these crises or these downtimes? What are some of the ideas? So that also lets you know you're not alone. It's a good point. A lot of business owners, including myself, I often feel alone. Chris: Sure. Curtis: But I'm reminded that when I ask for help or I'm a little bit vulnerable, then I'm not alone. I'd simply feel alone, often because of the own barriers that I put up for myself, and that would be the number one thing I would remember in any of these downtimes. The second is to remain focused on what is most important, and that's unfortunately sometimes that's keeping a business alive and being not only an active member but considered a leader in conscious capitalism movement. People sometimes misinterpret that means we can't do layoffs. We can't because we're conscious business. How those are contradictory. They're not contradictory. Sometimes we have to make the decisions to keep a business healthy and unfortunately, when you care about the employees, yet at the same time we have to make decisions because you care about the business and the longevity of the employees. It requires difficult decisions. Don't be afraid to make them, but make them with a caring heart. Chris: Right, but I wanna talk more about the conscious capitalism movement. But I think you hit on something that's very important Not losing sight. At the end of the day, you're kind of responsible for a healthy, thriving business. Does it mean you're not gonna face hard decisions that affect people's lives? But the other thing I think I've learned and I'm curious if it's been your experience is, when you're faced with those hard decisions, the sooner that you can make them and not rashly but with good information the better off everyone involved is the employees affected, the company, yourself as a leader and moving through that process. Curtis: That's true. In my career I've had to do layoffs three times. Okay, one was during the dot-com bust and Enron was our largest client. We built their software. Let's not, we don't need to visit that story anymore. It wasn't us but we built the software. And then the second was during COVID was such a rapid decrease, people pulling back in business and services, just a lot of fear in the industry. And then the most recent one was some restructuring that we had to do this year. Chris: Okay. Curtis: In a weaker and very what I call volatile economy, and they're never easy and I know they're imagined by people that are affected, as this is easy but they're not. But we can't be afraid and I learned from I was forced into it with Enron All night. 40% of our business went away in a single day. Covid was the same thing. Chris: Sure. Curtis: Right, we had business units that lost 65% of their business in three weeks and when you look at that, you're forced into very expedient decisions, but it slowed down enough to make the good decisions. Right, and don't be afraid because you're gonna get negative pushback, but treat people with respect and treat people with care, because these are real people that have real lives and it's a very sad thing. Chris: It is. It is, and in other words I'd add there, treat people with dignity. So it is Absolutely. It is not an easy thing to have to go through as the leader making those decisions. So let's talk a little bit about the conscious capitalism movement, because you talked about it and referred to it twice. I was fortunate enough I shared with you, before we started recording, to speak at one of their events. I think what that is all about is just so wonderful for the business world. Share a little bit about how you and improving have been involved in that. Curtis: I got invited in 2009 and I mentioned earlier my motivation was kind of shame when we're trying to survive and build the business. But about three and a half years in, I got invited by a good friend that I still do business with and friends today, to this CEO summit in Austin and it was a phenomenal event and it was really shifting in my motivation. The keynote speaker there really had a statement at the beginning of his presentation that landed with me and it was that, outside of sales professionals, it professionals have the worst perception among CEOs and I got really defensive because we're an IT company and I'm thinking in my head and I'm journaling instead of listening to the presentation and I kind of realized our own business. Wait a second. Our industry has earned some of that, not all of it, and whether it's perception or reality, we have to own it. And that is when I actually shifted the. My own motivation was to change and shift that perception and not feel victimized by it, but to really turn that into energy on how we change that as an organization. So I was inspired by that event, by the people at the event John Mackie of Whole Foods, who originated the Tip Kindle container store, doug Rao of Trader Joe's these are really great leaders inside these businesses and I got inspired by them, plus that message and I wanted to help the organization. So, through helping the organization, the local chapters speaking on it quite frequently, not being ashamed to be a capitalist but knowing that capitalism can be used for something even greater than the good it already does, is becoming the foundation of our business. I call it the philosophy of our guiding principles. Chris: Yeah, I love that. So, taking that, how does that, or how has it and how does it continue to shape and influence the culture at improving? Curtis: Well, the first, a year later, when I was with my partner at a conference or seminar that was being taught by Stephen coming on trust, I kind of had the epiphany that the reason why we had the perception was because the CEOs didn't trust their IT organizations or partners a lot of the time. So we refold our value to include this concept of trust, and I consider three of our values are identity, but one of our values, building trust, is our ambition, and so this combination of changing this perception by focusing on trust has reshaped our business for the next decade. 70 percent of our employees participate in trust pods every week, voluntarily. They don't have to trust pod is a group of five to 15 individuals talking about these 13 trust behaviors, how they're going to use them in their daily lives with their clients, our stakeholders right, but the biggest effect is how it affects you outside of business, how it affects your relationships at home and with your friends. But this is a relentless pursuit when you think that 70 percent of our employees voluntarily join these groups and talk about building trust every week. Chris: That's. That's amazing what I guess I'm, what I'm assuming occurs in the through the participation of these trust pods, is almost a blending of work and work life and family or personal life, and there is allowing for a bridge, which to me is so important, because I think it's a mistake when people think I'm going to drop who I am as a person or what goes on in a personal life when I step in the office and vice versa, because there's a, to me, a natural blend. It's like let's just acknowledge that it's there, but how can we help them coexist? Curtis: I completely agree. Different conversation, different presentation. But I really don't believe in the concept of work life balance because it really suggests there's one or the other right. They're not connected in any way. I love many of the premises behind it, but I'm a proponent of an integral life. Yes, work is part of your life and family's part of your life, and health, and maybe faith and or learning right, everybody has the areas of their life that they prioritize, but this is a and work is almost in everybody's life. So how do we integrate these and these trust pods become a significant way of integrating and we help right. At least I like to think, and I often get this feedback that the people who participate in these trust pods with the intent of applying it at work benefit even more at home yeah, I can see that. Chris: So You're a software company let's talk about. I mean just saying that, as it is to me, infers innovation. So what are some of the things that you do as the CEO to help encourage and instill the employees at improving, to be innovative, to act innovative, because with some of that, you know you have to create a safe environment and allow for failure. So what are some of the things that you have done or are doing there to improving, to help foster that? Curtis: I referred to one of our values before, that our success is the consequence of our collective involvement, and I've referred to trust. One of the trust behaviors is to listen first and really combining those two things to try to be innovative, to gather ideas right. As a CEO, you also have to be mindful that you're going to get a lot of good ideas from your employees when you ask, but you can rarely execute on them all right. So at any given time there's probably 100 things on the money put in quotes. The world's be doing right Well, but we can only do three or four of them. So I really try to make an effort to listen, have our other executives at the company listen, try to bubble up some of the most important ideas, but also represent what's important to the business and where the important ideas to our employees overlap with the important ideas to the business are those that we take, because sometimes they don't always overlap right. Employees may want something or the business may want something. That doesn't overlap. So that's a way that we prioritize, but I would say, of the ideas, of the programs we have in place, of the initiatives, we have something called come together. That is a phenomenal gathering and creating connection. The vast majority, 90% don't come from me, they come from the company. Yeah, and it's just listening and finding the good and finding the value is often probably and letting your own ego. You don't have to be. This is for the entrepreneurs up there. You don't have to be the source of all the good ideas. In fact, I would encourage you to be take more pride on identifying the good ideas than being the source of the good ideas. Chris: There's a lot of satisfaction, I think, when you can get to that point of being proud of someone you hired, that maybe you helped train or develop or created an environment where they could be trained, developed, create their own opportunities and reward them for the ideas that they come up with right Absolutely the whole new level of satisfaction. Curtis: It is. Chris: Freeze you up as the leader to do so many more things if the pressure of all the good ideas is off your shoulders. Curtis: That's right, or all the accolades is off of mine or other executives. We actually have a homegrown product. That's, I believe it's part of our competitive advantage. It's called engage, but it's about measuring this involvement that I've talked about. Employees get to enter in things that they are doing to benefit the company, often while benefiting themselves, and it tracks these things and even assigns values to them so that when they do this, they kind of know how they're participating and how they are adding value. A major part of our profit share is based on that. Chris: Oh wow, that's right. Yeah, well, as you know, too right, if you incentivize the behavior, you're likely to get people to behave in that way. So if you incentivize something like that, yeah they're. I imagine the engagement is really strong. Curtis: It is for two reasons. The engage creates visibility. So, as the CEO of a 1600 person organization, how do I get visibility to what people are doing? I have detailed visibility into what people I look at this so they often get accolades. So people that are seeking kind of affirmation and things like that's their reward for something like this. Those that might be more utilitarian and might be more motivated by money there's a money component to it for those people, but not everybody's motivated in one way, so we try to create a mixture. Chris: I like that. So changing the subject a little bit, but still to building a company, driving it to success. You have to work outside your organization with other stakeholders or surrounding yourself with a strong team. You know external professionals. What are some of the things that you have done to identify key partners, build and maintain those relationships that have benefited, I guess, are allowed for improving, to grow, to the company it is today? Curtis: You use a very important word for me, which is a stakeholder. Here we're big proponents of a stakeholder model, not just a shareholder model, and it's very important, I believe, to make sure, like you would your own employees that all of the stakeholders have a certain alignment with your values and your ethos. You're never going to get perfect alignment because these organizations have their differences, which are wonderful, but you should kind of tell those that align similarly and those that don't. So, when we look at suppliers, what are the suppliers that have a similar set of core values? How do they treat right their own suppliers? Because we treat our suppliers better than our own customers treat us right. Chris: Very important. Sure. Curtis: How are they treating their own suppliers? When we look at partners, right, a lot of partners out there are looking at it. What's in it for me? And despite the rhetoric of us, you can sift through that, because as a partnership, are they sometimes willing to go first? Do we go first? Right, have you conscious capitalism? The movement this way? It's a partnership, but we were going first all of the time, without resentment, right, right. Yet in the long game, that ends up paying, even though that was not our purpose. So looking for this alignment becomes key, just like you would with an employee. Chris: Makes sense. It makes us. I like the treat the suppliers better than the customers, because without those suppliers you can't serve your customers. Curtis: No, right? Well, I'm not saying we treat our customers worse than our suppliers. I said that we treat our suppliers better than our customers treat us. Chris: Oh, that's right yeah. Curtis: Because we give the, we try to treat our suppliers as if they were a customer. Chris: Yeah, Makes sense. We like said they're integral to you delivering on your promise. Curtis: Very. Chris: Let's talk a little bit about leadership style. How would you describe your leadership style and maybe I'm probably pretty certain based on this conversation how you would describe it today versus maybe 15 years ago, and maybe some of the things that occurred to cause or help you evolve to where you are today? Curtis: I would describe myself as very positive, high energy. I genuinely care about people and I believe and this isn't hubris, I think many people would agree that I'll rely on inspiration too and I think I'm fairly inspiring in the right circles, both one-on-one and at least at a larger level. But when I look at some of the lessons, how that inspiration has evolved over time is very important and it's kind of very different. When I was younger I tended to rely on kind of leading by example, and if I did everything, then people would be inspired and follow. And that works to some degree and that's a common source of inspiration for people Like oh my gosh, look how hard Curtis is working. And right, he really cares about the business. I might do the same thing, but I do believe that only goes so far. Chris: It's kind of like the command model, and I think even Jim Collins talks about it. You can only get a company so far if it's the charge up the hill type of leader. Right, you can be successful, but to a point. Curtis: And to a point and I switched to trying to inspire with vision, the vision of what we could be, the vision maybe of what I personally can be. And I started with my own personal life books and creating vision for myself, but switched that to the organization inspired by a leadership group, training, staying out of Dallas and to even put together a 10-year vision for the business. And so today we have a 10-year vision, we have three-year visions, we have one-year vision. These are all written, but I tend to be able to see things and see the good in things, and that's one thing. That's why I sit on positive. So that's I see the good and can inspire around the good versus the negative or polarizing concepts in our world today. Chris: What I like about that because I can identify with that is that positive attitude is kind of how to interpret what you're saying. Is that you're in control of that. Right, you can control whether you're really going to bring up positive mindset to whatever the circumstance is or not, and you choose to say I'm going to look for the positive and then try to be inspirational about what we can do in this circumstance, and I think that's effective leadership right. Curtis: Positivity is a choice. Chris: Yes, right. Curtis: And whether it's in our personal life or our professional life, we can, in almost any circumstance, choose to find something of gratitude in the circumstance. There are things I get it that we it's too hard to find and I'm not diminishing those, but for most things in people's lives and that becomes a choice. I've also found, and for anybody listening to this, think of your three favorite managers, leaders you ever worked for. Would any of your favorites ever be described as negative? I've asked this more than 1000 times and outside somebody hearing this and trying to prove me wrong, nobody, ever, not a single person, has ever said yes, their favorite was negative. It is something of the most effective leaders. Positivity is one of what we have found to be the six most common traits. Chris: It didn't surprise me at all. It didn't surprise me at all. So let's kind of just to wrap up this conversation. What I always like to ask guests to do is we've got an audience of aspiring entrepreneurs, or maybe just started our own business. What are one or two nuggets of you know? My guess, takeaways that you would say, hey, if you're out there doing this or thinking about it, if you don't do anything else, do at least this. One or two, two things, or maybe avoid X and learn from my mistake. Anything that you can draw upon in your experience of you know. Two, I guess, two companies, three companies now that you could share. Curtis: First I would say believe in yourself, but not too much, and remember, remember deeply in your heart that you're part of a team and while the pack maybe nothing without the wolf, you have to remember that the wolf is also nothing without the pack and these things come aligned. So it's a team effort and very early on to and this is a radical idea I shared 87% of the company, and this was not just me, this was my partner coming alongside saying let's do so. My partner and I combined had about 23% of the company voting units, so we could be voted off the island at any time. Interesting that is sharing in the success of the company and that's one of our tenants today of creating a good work environment that we really did share. From an equity perspective, you may not have to share that much, okay, but it worked for us and I'm not and I'm not going to complain. But what I found most commonly, the most owners that we've found true owners in any business has been six and we've talked to hundreds of businesses. Yet we have hundreds of them and we're a privately held company. Chris: Yeah, no, that's impressive and definitely putting your money where your mouth is right about trusting the collective group to be successful, because they'll benefit from it as much as you will. Curtis: And then they. We found people have stayed, they've benefited and they're inspired often, yeah, harder towards a collective goal. Chris: That's great. That's great advice. Yes, thank you for that. Thank you. So on the personal side, we'll lighten up the mood a little bit. So what was your first job? Curtis: Oh, first job was mowing lawns because I got in trouble as a kid. Don't want to share that full story, except me and my brother putting some napalm burn some people's tires, goodness only, and I ended up mowing lawns for a long time to prefer to buy the tires back and all of that. Chris: Oh, that sounds like that. Yeah, there's a deeper story there, for sure. Okay, Tex-Max or barbecue. What do you prefer? Curtis: Barbecue. Chris: Okay, no hesitation there. I like it. Curtis: Love barbecue. Chris: And then last question if you could take a 30 day sabbatical, where would you go and what would you do? Curtis: Wow, I don't know where I'd go, but I know who I'd go with and I would take my two kids, Colin and. Chris: Autumn Awesome, that's great. No, no better people spend time with right that's right, all right. Curtis, thank you for sharing your story and being so open about what you've done through your career, the setbacks, the successes, and what you're doing now to build, improving, to the amazing company it is. Curtis: Thank you so much for having me today.

Screaming in the Cloud
How Tech Will Influence the Future of Podcasting with Chris Hill

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 31, 2023 34:35


Chris Hill, owner of HumblePod and host of the We Built This Brand podcast, joins Corey on Screaming in the Cloud to discuss the future of podcasting and the role emerging technologies will play in the podcasting space. Chris describes why AI is struggling to make a big impact in the world of podcasting, and also emphasizes the importance of authenticity and finding a niche when producing a show. Corey and Chris discuss where video podcasting works and where it doesn't, and why it's more important to focus on the content of your podcast than the technical specs of your gear. Chris also shares insight on how to gauge the health of your podcast audience with his Podcast Listener Lifecycle evaluation tool.About ChrisChris Hill is a Knoxville, TN native and owner of the podcast production company, HumblePod. He helps his customers create, develop, and produce podcasts and is working with clients in Knoxville as well as startups and entrepreneurs across the United States, Silicon Valley, and the world.In addition to producing podcasts for nationally-recognized thought leaders, Chris is the co-host and producer of the award-winning Our Humble Beer Podcast and the host of the newly-launched We Built This Brand podcast. He also lectures at the University of Tennessee, where he leads non-credit courses on podcasts and marketing.  He received his undergraduate degree in business at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga where he majored in Marketing & Entrepreneurship, and he later received his MBA from King University.Chris currently serves his community as the President of the American Marketing Association in Knoxville. In his spare time, he enjoys hanging out with the local craft beer community, international travel, exploring the great outdoors, and his many creative pursuits.Links Referenced: HumblePod: https://www.humblepod.com/ HumblePod Quick Edit: https://humblepod.com/services/quick-edit Podcast Listener Lifecycle: https://www.humblepod.com/podcast/grow-your-podcast-with-the-listener-lifecycle/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/christopholies Transcript:Announcer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Are you navigating the complex web of API management, microservices, and Kubernetes in your organization? Solo.io is here to be your guide to connectivity in the cloud-native universe!Solo.io, the powerhouse behind Istio, is revolutionizing cloud-native application networking. They brought you Gloo Gateway, the lightweight and ultra-fast gateway built for modern API management, and Gloo Mesh Core, a necessary step to secure, support, and operate your Istio environment.Why struggle with the nuts and bolts of infrastructure when you can focus on what truly matters - your application. Solo.io's got your back with networking for applications, not infrastructure. Embrace zero trust security, GitOps automation, and seamless multi-cloud networking, all with Solo.io.And here's the real game-changer: a common interface for every connection, in every direction, all with one API. It's the future of connectivity, and it's called Gloo by Solo.io.DevOps and Platform Engineers, your journey to a seamless cloud-native experience starts here. Visit solo.io/screaminginthecloud today and level up your networking game.Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. My returning guest probably knows more about this podcast than I do. Chris Hill is not only the CEO of HumblePod, but he's also the producer of a lot of my various media endeavors, ranging from the psychotic music videos that I wind up putting out to mock executives on their birthdays to more normal videos that I wind up recording when I'm forced into the studio and can't escape because they bar the back exits, to this show. Chris, thank you for joining me, it's nice to see you step into the light.Chris: It's a pleasure to be here, Corey.Corey: So, you have been, effectively, producing this entire podcast after I migrated off of a previous vendor, what four years ago? Five?Chris: About four or five years ago now, yeah. It's been a while.Corey: Time is a flat circle. It's hard to keep track of all of that. But it's weird that you and I don't get to talk nearly as much as we used to, just because, frankly, the process is working and therefore, you disappear into the background.Chris: Yeah.Corey: One of the dangerous parts of that is that the only time I ever wind up talking to you is when something has gone wrong somewhere and frankly, that does not happen anymore. Which means we don't talk.Chris: Yeah. And I'm okay with that. I'm just kidding. I love talking to you, Corey.Corey: Oh, I tolerate you. And every once in a while, you irritate me massively, which is why I'm punishing you this year by—Chris: [laugh].Corey: Making you tag along for re:Invent.Chris: I'm really excited about that one. It's going to be fun to be there with you and Jeremy and Mike and everybody. Looking forward to it.Corey: You know how I can tell that you've never been to re:Invent before?Chris: “I'm looking forward to it.”Corey: Exactly. You still have life in your eyes and a spark in your step. And yeah… that'll change. That'll change. So, a lot of this show is indirectly your fault because this is a weird thing for a podcaster to admit, but I genuinely don't listen to podcasts. I did when I was younger, back when I had what the kids today call ‘commute' or ‘RTO' as they start slipping into the office, but I started working from home almost a decade ago, and there aren't too many podcasts that fit into the walk from the kitchen to my home office. Like great, give me everything you want me to know in about three-and-a-half seconds. Go… and we're done. It doesn't work. So, I'm a producer, but I don't consume my own content, which I think generally is something you only otherwise see in, you know, drug dealers.Chris: Yeah. Well, and I mean, I think a lot of professional media, like, you get to a point where you're so busy and you're creating so much content that it's hard to sit down and review your own stuff. I mean, even at HumblePod, I'm in a place where we're producing our own show now called We Built This Brand, and I end up in a place where some weeks I'm like, “I can't review this. I approve it. You send it out, I trust you.” So, Corey, I'm starting to echo you in a lot of ways and it's just—it makes me laugh from time to time.Corey: Somewhat recently, I wound up yet again, having to do a check on, “Hey, you use HumblePod for your podcasting work. Do you like them?” And it's fun. It's almost like when someone reaches out about someone you used to work with. Like, “We're debating hiring this person. Should we?” And I love being able to give the default response for the people I've worked with for this long, which is, “Shut up and hire them. Why are you talking to me and not hiring them faster? Get on with it.”Because I'm a difficult customer. I know that. The expectations I have are at times unreasonably high. And the fact that I don't talk to you nearly as much as I used to shows that this all has been working. Because there was a time we talked multiple times a day back—Chris: Mm-hm.Corey: When I had no idea what I was doing. Now, 500-some-odd episodes in, I still have no idea what I'm doing, but by God, I've gotten it down to a science.Chris: Absolutely you have. And you know, technically we're over 1000 episodes together, I think, at this point because if you combine what you're doing with Screaming in the Cloud, with Last Week in AWS slash AWS Morning Brief, yeah, we've done a lot with you. But yes, you've come a long way.Corey: Yes, I have become the very whitest of guys. It works out well. It's like, one podcast isn't enough. We're going to have two of them. But it's easy to talk about the past. Let's talk instead about the future a little bit. What does the future of podcasting look like? I mean, one easy direction to go in with this, as you just mentioned, there's over 1000 episodes of me flapping my gums in the breeze. That feels like it's more than enough data to train an AI model to basically be me without all the hard work, but somehow I kind of don't see it happening anytime soon.Chris: Yeah, I think listeners still value authenticity a lot and I think that's one of the hard things you're seeing in podcasting as a whole is that these organizations come in and they're like, “We're going to be the new podcast killer,” or, “We're going to be the next thing for podcasting,” and if it's too overproduced, too polished, like, I think people can detect that and see that inauthenticity, which is why, like, AI coming in and taking over people's voices is so crazy. One of the things that's happening right now at Spotify is that they are beta testing translation software so that Screaming in the Cloud could automatically be in Spanish or Last Week in AWS could automatically be in French or what have you. It's just so surreal to me that they're doing this, but they're doing exactly what you said. It's language learning models that understand what the host is saying and then they're translating it into another language.The problem is, what if that automation gets that word wrong? You know how bad one wrong word could be, translating from Spanish or French or any other language from English. So, there's a lot of challenges to be met there. And then, of course, you know, once they've got your voice, what do they do with it? There's a lot of risk there.Corey: The puns don't translate very well, most of the time, either.Chris: Oh, yes.Corey: Especially when I mis-intentionally mispronounce words like Ku-BER-netees.Chris: Exactly. I mean, it's going to be auto-translated into text at some point before it's then put out as, you know, an audio source, and so if you say something wrong, it's going to be an issue. And Ku-BER-netees or Chat-Gippity or any of those great terms that you have, they're going to also be translated wrong as well, and that creates its own can of worms so to speak.Corey: Well, let me ask you something because you have always been one to embrace emerging technologies. It's one of the things I appreciate about you; you generally don't recommend solutions from the Dark Ages when it comes to what equipment should I have and how should I maintain it and the rest. But there are a lot of services out there that will now do automatic transcription and the service that you use at the moment remains a woman named Cecilia, who's remarkably good at what she does. But why have you not replaced her with a robot?Chris: [laugh]. Very simply put, I mean, it kind of goes back to what I was just saying about language translation. AI does not understand context for human words as well as humans do, and so words are wrong a lot of times in auto transcription. I mean, I can remember a time when, you know, we first started working with you all were, if there was one thing wrong in a transcript, an executive at AWS would potentially make fun of you on Twitter for it. And so, we knew we had to be on our A-game when it came to that, so finding someone who had that niche expertise of being able to translate not just words and understand words, but also understand tech terminology, you know, I think that that's, that's its own animal and its own challenge. So yeah, I mean, you could easily get away with something—Corey: Especially with my attentional mispronunciation where she's, “I don't quite know what you're saying here, and neither does the entire rest of the industry.” Like, “Postgres-squ—do you mean Postgres? Who the hell calls it Postgres-squeal?” I do. I call it that. Two warring pronunciations, I will unify them by coming up with a third that is far worse. It's kind of my shtick. The problem is, at some point, it becomes too inside-jokey when I have 15 words that I'm doing that too, and suddenly no one knows what the hell I'm talking about and the joke gets old quickly.Chris: Yep.Corey: So, I've tried to scale that back. But there are still a few that I… I can't help but play with.Chris: Yeah. And it's always fun bringing someone new in to work on—work with you all because they're always like, “What is he saying? Does he mean this?” And [laugh] it's always an adventure.Corey: It keeps life fun though.Chris: Absolutely.Corey: So, one thing that you did for a while, back when I was starting out, it almost felt like you were in cahoots with Big Microphone because once I would wind up getting a setup all working and ready for the recording, like, “Great. Everything working terrifically? Cool, throw it away. It's time for generation three of this.” I think I'm on, like, gen six, or gen seven now, but it's been relatively static for the past few years. Are the checks not as big as they used to be? I mean, if we hit a point of equilibrium? What's going on?Chris: Yeah, unfortunately, Big Microphone isn't paying what they used to. The economy and interest rates and all that, it's just making it hard. But once you get to a certain level of gear, it's going to be more important that you have good content than better and better gear. Could we keep going? Sure. If you wanted to buy a studio and you wanted to get Neumann microphones or something like that, we could keep going. But again, Big Microphone is not paying what they used to.Corey: When people reach out because they're debating starting a podcast and they ask me for advice, other than hire HumblePod, the next question they usually get around to is gear. And I don't think that they are expecting my answer, which is, it does not matter. Because if the content is good, the listeners will forgive an awful lot. You could record it into your iPhone in a quiet room and they will put up with that. Whereas if the content isn't good, it doesn't matter what the production value is because people are constantly being offered better things to do with their time. You've got to grab them, you have to be compelling to your target audience or the rest of it does not matter.Chris: Yeah. And I think that's the big challenge with audio is a lot of people get excited, especially I find this true of people in the tech industry of like, “Okay, I want to learn all the tech stuff, I love all the cool tech stuff, and so I'm going to go out and buy all this equipment first.” And then they spend $5,000 on equipment and they never record a single episode because they put all their time and energy into researching and buying gear and never thought about the content of the show. The truth is, you could start with your iPhone and that's it. And while I don't necessarily advise that, you'd be surprised at the quality of audio on an iPhone.I've had a client have to re-record something while they were traveling remotely and I said, “You just need to get your iPhone out.” They took their AirPods, plugged them in and, I said, “No. Take them out, use the microphone on the iPhone.” And you can start with something as simple as that. Now, once you want to start making it better, sure, that's a great way to grow and that does influence people staying with your podcast over time, but I think in the long run, content trumps all.Corey: One of the problems I keep seeing is that people also want to record a podcast because they have a great idea for a few episodes. My rule of thumb—because I've gotten this wrong before—is, okay, if you want to do a whole new podcast, come up with the first 12 episodes. Because two, three, four, of course, you've got your ideas. And then by the—you'll find in many cases, you're going to have a problem by the end of it. Years ago, I did a mini-series inside of AMB called “Networking in the Cloud” where it was sponsored by, at the time, ThousandEyes, before Cisco bought them and froze them in amber for all eternity.But it was fun for the first six episodes and then I realized I'd said all I needed to say about networking, and I was on the hook for six more. And Ivan Pepeinjak, who's his own influencer type in the BGP IP space was like, “This is why you should stay in your lane. He's terrible. He got it all wrong.” Like, “Great. Come on and tell me exactly how I got it wrong,” because I was trying to approach it from a very surface topical area, but BGP is one of those areas where I get very wrapped around my own axle just because I've never used it in anger. Being able to pivot the show format is what saved me on that. But if I had started doing this as its own individual podcast and launched, it would have died on the vine, just because it would not have had enough staying power and I didn't have the interest to continue working on it. Could someone else come up with a networking-in-the-cloud podcast that had hundreds of episodes? Absolutely, but those people are what we call competent and good at things in a way that I very much am not.Chris: Yep. And I completely agree. I mean, 12 is my default number, so—I'm not going to take credit for your saying 12, but I know we've talked about that before. And—Corey: It was a 12-episode miniseries is why. And I remember by ten, I had completely scraped the bottom of the barrel. Then Ivan saved me on one of them, and then I did, I think, a mini-series-in-review, which is cheating but worked.Chris: Yeah. I remember that, the trials and travails of giving that out. It was fun, though. But with that, yeah, like, 12 is a good number because, like, to your point, if you have 12 and you want to do a monthly show, you've got a year's worth of content, if you do bi-weekly, that's six months, and if it's a weekly show, it's at least a quarter's worth of content. So, it does help you think through and at least come up with any potential roadblocks you might have by at least listing out, here's what episodes one, two, three, four, five and so on would be. And so, I do think that's a great approach.Corey: And don't be an idiot like I was and launch a newsletter and then podcast that focus on last week's news because you can't work ahead on that. If you can, why are you not a multi-billionaire for playing the markets? If you can predict the future, there's a more lucrative career for you than podcasting, I promise. But that means that I have to be on the treadmill on some level. I've gotten it down to a point where I can stretch it to ten days. I can take ten days off if I preload, do it as early as I possibly can beforehand and then as late as I possibly can when I return. Anything more than that, I'm either skipping a week or delaying the show or have to get a guest author or artist in.Chris: Yeah. And you definitely need that time off, and so that's the one big challenge, I think with podcasting, too, is like you create this treadmill for yourself that you constantly have to fill content after content after content. I think that's one of the big challenges in podcasting and one of the reasons we see so many podcasts fade out. I don't know if you're familiar, but there is a term called podfade, which is just that: people burning out, fading out in their excitement for a podcast. And most podcasters fade out by episode seven or eight, somewhere in that range, so to see someone go for say, like, you have 500 episodes plus, we're talking about a ton of good content. You've found your rhythm, you've found your groove. That can do it. But yeah, it's always, always a challenge staying motivated.Corey: One thing that consistently surprises me is that the things I care about as the creator and the things the audience cares about are not the same. And you have to be respectful of your audience's time. I've done the numbers on the shows that I put out and it's something on the order of over a year of human time for every episode that I put out. If I'm going to take a year from humanity's collective lifetimes in order to say my inane thoughts, then I have to be respectful of the audience's time. Which means, “Oh, I'm going to have a robot do it so I don't have to put the work in.” It doesn't work that way. That's not how you sustain.Chris: Right. In and again, it takes out that humanity that makes podcasting so special and makes that connection with even the listener so special. And I'm sure you've experienced this too. When you go to re:Invent, like, we're going to have here in just a few short months, people know you, and they probably say things and bring up things that you haven't even thought about. And you're like, “Where did you even learn that I did that?” And then you realize, “Oh, I said that on a podcast episode.”Corey: Yeah. What's weird is I don't get much feedback online for it, but people will talk to me in depth about the show. They'll come up to me near constantly and talk about it. They don't reach out the same way, which I guess makes sense. There are a couple of podcasts that I've really admired and listened to on and off in the car for years, but I've never reached out to the creators because I feel like I would sound ridiculous. It's not true. I know intellectually it's not true, but it feels weird to do it.Chris: One of the ways I got into podcasting was a podcast that just invited me to—you know, invited their listeners to sign up and engage with them. And I think that's something in the medium that does make it interesting is once you do engage, you find out that these creators respond. And where else do you get that, you know? If you're watching a big TV show and you tweet at somebody online that you admire in the show, the chance of them even liking what you said about them online is very slim to none. But with podcasting, there's just a different level of accessibility I find with most productions and most shows that makes it really something special.Corey: One thing that still surprises me—and I don't think I've ever been this explicit about it on the show, but why the hell not I have nothing to hide—Thursday evening, 5 p.m. Pacific time. That's when the automation fires and rotates everything for the newsletter and the AWS Morning Brief. Anything that comes in after that, unless I manually do an override, will not be in the next week's issue; it'll be the week after.That applies to Security as well, which means 5 p.m. on Thursday, it seals it, I write and record it and it goes ou—that particular one goes out Thursday morning the following week. And no one has ever said anything about this seems awfully late. Occasionally, there's been news the day before and someone said, “Oh, why didn't you include this?”And it's because, believe it or not, I don't just type this in and hit the send button. There's a bit more to it than that these days. But people don't need the sense of immediacy. This idea of striving to be first is not sustainable and it leads to terrible outcomes. My entire philosophy has not been to have the first take but rather the best take.Chris: Mm-hm.Corey: Sometimes I even get it right.Chris: And I mean in podcasting, too. Like, it's about, you serve a certain niche, right? Like, the people who are interested in AWS services and in this world of cloud computing listen to what you say, listen to the people you interview, and really enjoy those conversations. But that's not everybody in the world. That's not a very broad audience. And so, I think that those niches really serve a purpose.And the way I've always thought about it is, like, if you go to the grocery store, you know how you always have that rack of magazines with the most random interests? That's essentially what podcasting is. It's like each podcast is a different magazine that serves someone's random—and hyper-specific sometimes—niche interest in things. I mean, the number of things you can find podcasts on is just ridiculous. And I think the same is true for this. But the people who do follow, they're very serious, they're very dedicated, they do listen, and yeah, I think it's just a fascinating, fascinating thing.Corey: The way that I see it has been that I've been learning more from the audience and the things that people say that most people would believe, but… I make a lot of mistakes doing this, but talking to people does tend to shine a light on a lot of this. But enough about the past. Most of my episodes are about things that have previously happened. What does the future of podcasting look like? Where's it going from here?Chris: Oh, man. Well, I think the big question on everybody's mind is, do I need a video podcast? And I think that for most people, that's where the big question lies right now. I get a lot of questions about it, I get people reaching out, and I think the short answer to that is… not really. Or to answer a question I know you love, Corey, it depends.And the reason for that is, there's a lot with the tech of podcasting that just isn't going to distribute to everywhere, all at once anymore. The beauty of podcasting is that it's all based on an RSS feed. If you build an RSS feed and you put it in Apple Podcasts and Spotify, that RSS feed will distribute everywhere and it will distribute your audio everywhere. And what we see happening right now, and really one of the bigger challenges in podcasting, is that the RSS feed only provides audio. Technically, that's not accurate, but it does for most services.So, YouTube has recently come out and said that they are going to start integrating RSS feeds, so you'll be able to do those audiogram-esque things that a lot of people have done through apps like Headliner and stuff for a long time, or even their podcast host may automatically translate a version of their audio podcast into a video and just do, like, a waveform. They're going to have that in YouTube. TikTok is taking a similar approach. And they're both importing just the audio. And the reason I said earlier, that's technically not accurate is because RSS feeds can also support MP4s, but neither service is going to accept that or ingest it directly into their service from what you provide outbound.So, it's a very interesting time because it feels like we're getting there with video, but we're still not there, and we're still probably several years off from it. So, there's a lot of interest in video and I think the future is going to be video, but I think it's going to be a combination, too, with audio because who wants to sit and watch something for an hour-and-a-half when you're used to listening to it your commute or while you do the dishes or any number of other things that don't involve having your eyeballs directly on the content.Corey: We've tried it with this show. I found that it made the recording process a bit more onerous because everyone is suddenly freaking out about how they look and I can't indulge my constant nose-picking habit. Kidding. So, it was more work, I had to gussy myself up a bit more than dressing like a slob like I do some mornings because I do have young children and a deadline to get them to school by. But I never saw the audience to materialize there and be worth it.Because watching a video of two people talking with each other, it feels too much like a Zoom call that you can't participate in, so what's the point?Chris: Right.Corey: So, there's that. There's the fact that I also have very intentionally built most of what I do around newsletters and podcasts because at least so far, those are not dependent upon algorithmic discovery in the same way. I don't have to bias for things that YouTube likes this month. Instead, I can focus on the content that people originally signed up to hear me put out and I don't have to worry about it in the same way. Email predates me, it'll be here long after I'm gone, and that seems to make sense.I also look at how I have consumed podcasts, and times when I do, it's almost always while I'm doing something else. And if I have to watch a screen, that becomes significantly more distracting, and harder for me to find the time to do it with.Chris: I think what you're seeing is that, like, there's some avenues to where video podcasting is really good and really interesting, and I think the real place where that works best right now is in-person interviews. So, Corey, if you went out and interviewed Andy Jassy in person in Seattle, that to me would be something that would warrant bringing the cameras out for and putting online because people would want to see you in the office interacting with him. That would be interesting. To your point, during the Zoom calls and things like that, you end up in a place where people just aren't as interested in sitting and watching the Zoom call. And I think that's something that is a clear distinction to make.Entertainment, comedy, doing things in person, I think that's where the real interest in video is and that's why I don't think video will be for everybody all the time. The thing that is starting to come up as well is discoverability, and that has always been a challenge, but as we get into—and we probably don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but you know, what's happened to Twitter and X, like, discoverability is becoming more of a challenge because they're limiting access to that platform. They're limiting discoverability if you're not willing to pay for a blue checkmark. They're doing all these things to make it harder for small independent podcasts to grow.And the places that are opening up for it to grow are places like YouTube, places like TikTok, that have the ability to not only just put your full podcasts online now, but you can actually do, like, YouTube shorts or highlighted clips, and directly link those back to the long-form content that you're producing. So, there is some value in it, there is a technology and a future there for it, but it's just a very complicated time to be in podcasting and figuring out where to go to grow. That's probably the biggest challenge that we face and I think ultimately, that just comes down to developing an audience outside of these social media channels.Corey: One thing that you were talking about a while back in a conversation that I don't think I've ever followed up with you on—and there's no time like in front of a bunch of public people to do that—Chris: [laugh].Corey: You were talking to me about something that you were calling the Podcast Listener Lifecycle.Chris: Yes.Corey: What's your point on that?Chris: So, the Listener Lifecycle is something I developed, just to be frank, working with you guys, learning from you all, and also my background in marketing, and in building audiences and things, from my own podcasts and other things that I did prior to building HumblePod, led me to a place of going, how can we best explain to a client where their podcast is? How does it exist? Where does it exist? All that good stuff. And basically, the Listener Lifecycle is just that.It's a design—and we'll have links to it because I actually did a whole podcast season on the Listener Lifecycle from beginning to end, so that's probably the easiest way to talk about it. But essentially, it's the idea of, you're curious about a show, and how do you go from being curious about a show to exploring a podcast, to then becoming a follower of the podcast, literally clicking the Follow button. What does it take to get through each one of those stages? How can you identify where your audience is? And basically, it's a tool you can use to say, “Well, this is where my listener is in the stages.” And then once they get to be a follower, how do I build them into something more?Well, get them to be a subscriber, subscribe to a newsletter, subscribe to a Patreon or Substack or whatever that subscription service is that you prefer to use, and get them off of just being on social media and following you there and following you in a podcast audio form. Because things can happen: your podcast host could break and you'd lose your audience, right? We've seen Twitter, which we may have thought years ago that it would never go away, and now we don't know how long it's going to be there. It could be gone by the time we're done with this conversation for all we know. I've got all my notifications turned off, so we're basically in a liminal space at this point.But with that said, there's a lot of risk in audiences changing and things like that, so audience portability is really important. So, the more you can collect email addresses, collect contact information, and communicate with that group of people, the better your audience is going to be. And so, that's what it's about is helping people get to that stage where they can do that so that they don't lose audiences and so that they can even build and grow audiences beyond that to the point where they get to the last phase, which is the ‘true fan' phase. And that's where you get people who love your show, retweet everything you do, repost everything you do, and share it with all their friends every time you're creating new content. And that's ultimately what you want: those die-hard people that come up to you and know everything about you at re:Invent, those are the people that you want to create more of because they're going to help you grow your show and your audience, ultimately. So, that's what it's about. I know that's a lot. But again, like, we'll have a link in the show notes to where you can learn more about it.Corey: Indeed, we will. Normally I'm the one that says, “And we'll include a link to that in the show notes.” But you're the one that has to actually make all that happen. Here's another glimpse behind the curtain. I have a Calendly link that I pass out to people to book time on the show. They fill out the form, which is relatively straightforward and low effort by design, and the next time I think about it is ten minutes beforehand when it pops up with, “Hey, you have a recording to go to.” Great. I book an hour for a half-hour recording. I wind up going through this entire conversation. When we're done, we close out the episode, we chat a bit, I close the tab, and I don't think about it again, it's passed off to you folks entirely. It is the very whitest of white glove treatments. Because I, once again, am the very whitest of white guys.Chris: We aim to please [laugh].Corey: Exactly. Because I remember before this, I used to have things delayed by months because I would forget to copy the freaking file into Dropbox, of all things. And that was just wild to me.Chris: And we stay on you about that because we want to make sure that your show gets out and—Corey: And now it automatically transfers and I—when the automation works—I don't have to think about it again. What is fun to me is despite all the time that I spend in enterprise cloud services, we still use things that are prosumer, like Dropbox and other things that are human-centric because for some reason, most of your team are not also highly competent cloud developers. And I still think it is such a miss that something like S3, which would be perfect for this, requires that level of engineering. And I have more self-respect than that. I'd have to build some stuff in order to make that work effectively on my end, let alone folks who have actual jobs that don't involve messing around with cloud services all day.But it blows my mind that there's still such this gulf between things that sound like you would have one of your aging parents deal with versus something that is extraordinarily capable and state-of-the-art. I know they're launching a bunch of things like Amazon's IVS, which is a streaming offering, a lot of their elemental offerings for media packaging, but I look at it, it's like wow, not only is this expensive, it doesn't solve any problems that we actually have and would add significant extra steps to every part of it. Thanks, but no thanks. And sure, maybe we're not the target market, but I can't shake the feeling that there are an awful lot of people like us that fit that profile.Chris: Yeah. And I mean, you bring up a good point about not using S3, things like that. It has occurred to me as well that, hey, maybe we should find somebody to help us develop a technology like this to make it easier on us on the back end to do all the recording and the production in one place, one database, and be able to move on. So, at some point I would love to get there. That's probably a conversation for after the podcast, Corey, but definitely is something that we've been thinking about at HumblePod is, how do we reach that next step of making it even easier on our clients?Corey: Well, it is certainly appreciated. But again, remember, your task is to continue to perform the service excellently, not be the poster child for cloud services with dumb names.Chris: [laugh]. Yes, yes. And I'm sure we could come up with a bunch.Corey: One last question before we wind up calling in an episode. I know that I've been emphasizing the white glove treatment that I get—and let's be clear, you are not inexpensive, but you're also well worth it; you deliver value extraordinarily for our needs—do you offer things that are not quite as, we'll call it, high-touch and comprehensive?Chris: Yes, we do actually. We just recently launched a new service called Quick Edit and it's just that. It's still humans touching the service, so it's not a bunch of automated, hey, we're just running this through an AI program and it's going to spit it out on the other end. We actually have a human that touches your audio, cleans it up, and sends it back. And yeah, we're there to make sure that we can clean things up quickly and easily and affordably for those folks that are just in a pinch.Maybe you edit most weeks and you're just tired of doing the editing, maybe you're close to podfading and you just want an extra boost to see if you can keep the show going. That's what we have the Quick Edit service for. And that starts at $150 an episode and we'll edit up to 45 minutes of audio for you within that. And yeah, there's some other options available as well if you start to add more stuff, but just come check us out. You can go to humblepod.com/services/quick-edit and find that there.Corey: And we will, of course, put links to that in the show notes. Or at least you will. I certainly won't.Chris: [laugh].Corey: Chris, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me. If people want to learn more, other than hunting you down at re:Invent, which they absolutely should do, where's the best place for them to find you?Chris: I mean@HumblePod anywhere is the quickest, easiest way to find me anywhere—or at least find the business—and you can find me at @christopholies. And we'll have a link to that in the show notes for sure because it's not worth spelling out on the podcast.Corey: I would have pronounced it chris-to-files, but that's all right. That's how it works.Chris: [laugh].Corey: Thank you so much, Chris for everything that you do, as well as suffering my nonsensical slings and arrows for the last half hour. We'll talk soon.Chris: You're welcome, Corey.Corey: Chris Hill, CEO at HumblePod. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you hated this episode, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice along with an angry, insulting comment that I'm sure Chris or one of his colleagues will spend time hunting down from all corners of the internet to put into a delightful report, which I will then never read.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.

Building Texas Business
Ep058: Inside the World of Innovative Workspaces with Amber Jones

Building Texas Business

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 4, 2023 37:34


In today's episode, I chat with Amber Jones from Tangram Interiors about her company's move from California to Texas and how they foster innovation through their unique design process and showroom experience. Amber shares insights on staying ahead within the cyclical furniture industry through careful research and an emphasis on maintaining company culture during times of growth. We also discuss the challenges of managing virtual teams and leading with collaboration. Amber offers perspective on balancing work and family from Brené Brown and shares her wisdom on these topics. It was a thought-provoking discussion exploring transforming workspaces and ideas to enhance life beyond the job SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Amber Jones, the Vice President of Sales at Tangram Interiors, discusses the journey of moving their operations from California to Texas, and how they use unique tools like noise and digital maps to improve their showroom experience. She provides insights into the cyclical nature of the furniture industry, emphasizing the importance of staying ahead of the curve and fostering an environment of innovation within the company. Amber emphasizes the significance of maintaining company culture amidst expansion and managing a virtual team in a post-pandemic world. She highlights the importance of work-life balance, which differs from person to person, and shares Brené Brown's perspective on marriage and the importance of enjoying the people you work with while maintaining a balance with family life. The episode includes a fun chat about Amber's first job and her preference between Tex-Mex and Barbecue. Tangram Interiors creates innovative workspaces, making spaces where people can learn, work, and heal. They use technology and unique tools like noise maps and digital maps to improve their showroom experience. Amber believes in fostering a strong company culture, which she sees as vital when expanding into multiple offices. She emphasizes the importance of planning and research when entering new opportunities or meeting new people. Amber talks about the evolution of leadership styles and the challenges faced due to the pandemic. She highlights the importance of creating workspaces that allow productivity and foster collaboration. She discusses the potential of radical honesty in relationships and how it can foster growth and trust. She also talks about the importance of leading with a collaborative mindset and the need for self-awareness. The episode ends with a discussion on dreaming of a life in France and wishing Amber Jones the best of luck as she expands her business in Texas. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller GUESTS Amber JonesAbout Amber TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In this episode, you will meet Amber Jones, vice president of sales at Tangram Interiors. Amber shares how Tangram uses innovative designs to create amazing places for people to work, learn and heal. Chris: So Amber, I want to welcome you to the podcast. Thanks for agreeing to join us. Amber: Thanks for having me. Chris: So let's talk about Tangram Interiors. I want you to at least start by telling the audience what is the company known for and what do you do. Amber: Yeah, so Tangram is a commercial interiors organization. Basically, we create amazing spaces where people learn, work and heal. So all of the interiors, from the flooring to the walls to the furniture, I'm just really creating spaces where people can go to work or go to learn in classrooms or education or, like I said, heal in hospitals and those types of environments that's great. Chris: How old is the company? When did it start? What was the inspiration for it? Amber: So Steelcase we are Steelcase dealership, which is a major mainline manufacturer, and so they've been around for a hundred years, and the Steelcase dealership that Tangram purchased was in 2000 in California, and so what brings us to Texas is that in 2021, we acquired a dealership here in the Dallas Metroplex, and so that is what's brought me to Texas via Tangram Interiors. Chris: Okay, so you're a transplant Californian, now Texan. I'm one of those. Amber: Yes, but you know I'm really enjoying this place and I you know it's not something that I would have like raised my hand and volunteered for, but honestly I feel so at home here, and I just know that the business world that we found ourselves in over the last two years is exactly where our business is supposed to be. Chris: That's great. Let's talk a little bit about that process of the move. What has it been like from your perspective? You know, moving a basically a California business I know it was by acquisition, but moving that California business to Texas, yeah. Amber: And so, what has it been? Chris: like. Amber: Interesting. You know, it's really it's. I want to say it was a challenge, but it wasn't. I think that the Metroplex is confusing in some ways in that it's large but there's a lot of really close knit relationships here and so we were able to bring on some really great people that had some really existing, really good, strong standing, existing relationships in the market, which helped us to position ourselves in the right way in the right place. But I definitely part of the reason for it and part of what made it so helpful and necessary is that the majority of our customers were looking at moving to Texas, and so when you start thinking about how can we do business in both states with you, it made sense for us to be able to send them away from California and then receive them as they arrived in Texas. So it was really, it was an obvious next step for us and when the position you know, when the dealership position opened itself up, it made sense for us to acquire them for sure. Chris: That makes sense. I can tell you, at least from the legal perspective. I've lost count of how many California companies we have represented and since, say you know, late 2000, early 2001, helping them set up shop in Texas. Amber: Well, it's interesting in that regard, you know. It's like where do you home them from right? Like, are you running your business as a California business that has an extension in Texas, or do you have a Texas business that has an extension in California? Or two independent companies. So, yes, some struggles, as we like learn to adjust about. You know where do we write the laws from as far as, like you know, labor laws, etc. Chris: So, yeah, I can tell you, most of our experience has been the we are doing Texas based entities, that basically converting the California entity into a Texas entity. Amber: There's a bajillion reasons why that makes the most sense. So, yeah, it's definitely the direction that we're heading in. Chris: So you've got this company. You create amazing spaces for your clients. What about for your people? I mean, I guess your showroom has to showcase your talent. So how do you go about designing your showroom and fostering, I guess, that creativity in the workplace for your employees? Amber: Yeah, so it's very important that we have spaces that reflect what we do. So we work in our showroom. So working showrooms are a little bit more interesting than just a regular like office place would be. Everything is pristine and there's lots of choice and control about how and where you work throughout the day. So maybe I'm coming in for a quiet day and so I would locate on the floor plan, on the digital map, as to where it's most quiet for the day in the space and then maybe that's where I want to work so that I have access to the resources, Whereas other days maybe I came into the office to have more of a social day. So I'm going to look on the kind of noise map for the space and decide where it's loudest and maybe that's where I'm going to go set up shop so that I can get that like extroverted you know full feel that I needed in coming into the office. So it's really exciting. I really it's almost like working in a zoo some days because there's just tours happening so regularly that it's. But it's cool because it gives us the opportunity to really use and show the product that we sell. Chris: So you mentioned two things that I've never heard of before. That was a noise map and a I forget the other one a digital map, I guess. So yeah, tell me a little bit about that. I'm just intrigued. So is that something that I guess that you offer your clients where you can and you use it there in the office to figure out what's? Amber: your debt on. So we have a technology arm of what we sell so furniture, technology, walls and we really feel like if you can plan a space that integrates the technology and the furniture together versus an afterthought, you're going to have a much better experience for your users. And so for us, we want we want anyone to come in all day and be able to work wherever they want. So part of that is that we are a view, sonic mood, sonic showroom, and that means that we have different zone maps throughout our space. So when you walk in, there's like literally a floor plan on a big digital screen and it shows you where it's loudest throughout the showroom and then where it's quietest, and then what the noise does and the little iPads is. It allows for you to adjust the soundscapes that pump into that area of the showroom to adjust to how much noise is happening there. I personally am a very loud human being, so we joke that color follows me throughout the showroom as I get louder and walk. But also that means that the white noise that's pumping into the space follows me, so that you can see that I'm talking, but you can't make out what I'm saying while you're on a video call across the room. So we really feel, as we get back, especially post COVID, to how many video calls that we're all having in our workplace. No matter what we do for a living, there must be something in your workplace that allows for you to have that hybrid experience and not have it be choppy. So there has to be a reason for you to leave your house Right and it has to be an office that works for you. And the office that we left pre-COVID, that we didn't do a lot of these video calls, didn't have to have the same things that the office today have, and we really feel like a lot of that is the addition of technology because of the communication that happens on screen. So much now. Chris: It's so true. I think anyone I know I can speak for myself but anyone that's been back in the office and we really came back to the office in May of 2020. Amber: Pretty quickly Very smartly, very carefully. Chris: Most people have their own private office here. Amber: Different experience. Chris: But the number of doors that are shut throughout the day for the reasons you just said to control the noise, because we're on Zoom or team calls can get frustrating because we are very open door policy, very great culture, but it's somewhat counterintuitive. So what you're talking about makes total sense to me. Amber: It's hard because it's like why am I leaving my home office, where I have everything set up and I don't have to drive, so that I can go sit in another private office in a conference in a big building where I had to drive in park, just to shut the door again? Like what am I getting from one or the other? What's the benefit to leaving the house? And so really the challenge is what's the pull? So we say you have to return to something better than you left. It can't be the same office. Chris: Yeah, that's great. So kind of on that topic and he's thinking about your company, the downturn. I mean, you're clearly in a business that requires personal interaction and connection. How did y'all manage through keeping the business going when your employees and probably your customers or potential customers did not want to be in person? Amber: Yeah, it's interesting. I would say that the vertical markets that we cover is one of the benefits of our organization, because when things got bad, hospitals still had a huge need, there was still healthcare requirements that were happening around. Covid Schools still needed to pivot and make changes, so there were still things that were happening in some of those other sections. But certainly furniture is something that people don't buy when they don't have to right, and certainly not when there's not people in the office, and so it was a weird time for sure. But I think that what happens in this industry, specifically with furniture, is it's very cyclical. You can look back at like the 2007, 2008,. Then you can look into like there was like this 2016. I mean, there's like times and moments in time where things like took a little bit of a dip, not as much purchasing was happening. I think those are moments in time where we can be strategic and really align ourselves with where do we see those next verticals growing? Right now, bioscience is huge. That's where we need to be focusing, as we move forward, some of the more opportunities to track the industries, versus just waking up and expecting the same type of business to be there every day, you know. Chris: Makes sense. So innovation's got to be a very important aspect for the well-being and growth of your company. What are some of the things that y'all do to instill or encourage innovative things to be fostered throughout the company and encourage your people to think and act innovatively? Amber: Yeah, so I guess two pieces. Obviously, it's very important that what we're selling is innovative. I think a lot of that is based out of absolute research 100% research-based organizations in Steelcase, and so they spend a lot of time trying to figure out what people need and why. And so when it hits the market and we're selling it, we've got so much history and so much research to back why we're bringing another chair or another table or another thing to the market. Otherwise it's just that right, another table and another chair and who needs those things. But I think internally within Tangram Interiors, we really are a super authentic organization. Anyone can walk up to my desk at any point in time. I don't work in a private office. None of us do. None of the executive leadership ever work in private offices, and really in all of our six offices, the only one that has a private office is the human resource team so that they can have the privacy of lockability. Past that I mean. Really there's no one within the organization that can't have an idea that could be implemented today. I think that's kind of the greatness of any organization is when you have that open door policy. Because there's not a door, they're never one right. It's like if you have an idea and it's something that is helpful to the progress of the organization, by all means, and I think those are things that we reward throughout the year. I mean, we have different focuses and different events, but we have a fact award. So we really want people to be focused, accountable, we want them to be strong culture, advocates that show strong teamwork and strong trust, and those are things that we are pillars of our success on a regular, daily basis, and when we talk about them and we look for those in employees, it is that we expect them to come up with ideas in their team meetings and we expect them to have the trust within themselves and the trust within us to bring those new ideas to us for implementation. So, honestly, I think this whole industry and this whole world is about change and choice and honesty. Like have an idea, let's chat. Chris: Yeah, let's talk about it, so OK. So you're touching on culture, one of my favorite topics. Amber: Mind you. Chris: So let's you know a couple, you know at least a couple of questions on that. For you, you know, one is I always ask all guests kind of, how would you define your culture? And I think for you a corollary to that is how has it migrated east from California to Texas, you know, have you maintained the culture that was built in the roots in California to the Texas office, or has there been some adaption to this new office in a new state, in a new city? Amber: Such good questions. Cultures is one of my favorite topics as well. So in California one of my roles there was on boarding all of the new hires and I think for me that was an opportunity to instill in them the culture that I found at Taingram and I really found it important that as they kind of graduated out of one on one training with me that they moved into the next portion of their organ, of their role in the organization. Really understanding the culture was the basis of it all, the foundation of who we were as a company, and so I think for me it was really hard to leave behind the culture that I feel like I was such a huge part of building in California. In fact, I remember standing in front of everyone here in Texas holding this piece of paper as we were about to like tell them that we just acquired their company, and I was so nervous and I think back now and it's like so funny to think that I was nervous in front of those people but because I didn't know what kind of culture I was walking into and I think it matters so much. So the longest way possible of answering that question is that I brought that culture with me and I spent the last two years trying to foster it here, and I would tell you that we absolutely are the same company in Texas that we are in California because of those kind of cross pollinations and making sure that we've got people flying back and forth from both locations and executive leadership, as well as like marketing and different sales people, and I think that we all have a lot to learn from one another that if we treat each other as like a bench for both cities as opposed to Dallas, tangram and California Tangram, just Tangram continue to have that culture be you know, exemplified in all of our offices. Chris: You really want you branch. I guess it could happen in one office. Amber: That's the thing, yeah. Chris: Yeah Well, once you branch out to more than one office, you really can't have the us versus them or you have a culture. It's just not a healthy one, Right? I mean yeah. Amber: Yeah, so it's actually. It's interesting we just did a company survey and we just got the results back and read them off to the whole organization verbatim for the way that they answered the questions with all of the comments and feedback, and it was such a delight to be able to read the results back to the organization and have results be in like the high 80s for how they felt about our culture and the way that we run our company and how they feel comfortable talking to us. Those are astronomically high percentages. I mean it felt like we should all clap. You know clap because genuinely that's not me or any of the other leadership, that is every single human being that wakes up and says they are part of 10 year materials every day. Chris: We all make sure Very impressive. I mean because you're right, I'm going to be proud of and usually yeah, okay. So we talked about this a little bit before we started recording. I'm going to ask you now so you can tell the story behind you are words to say start right, to finish right. Is that some type of pillar within the company? Or you know how is that? It's not there by accident, right? Amber: No, it's not. And I mean, I think with anything good goes planning, goes research. You know, I think we have a really great network in the people that we work with, and with every opportunity that hits the street, there's a way to go about doing it. That's the strong way, the smart way, that it starts with strategy, and so for us it's like you know, you can send off six emails while you're sitting in a meeting talking about a possible opportunity, or you can spend 10 minutes doing some research and figuring out who might be the warmest opportunity or person to connect. You do that right. There's ways to go about things. So I think, from an organizational standpoint, we look at it like take the time to do your research, to be prepared to show up and make sure that you earn the opportunity to win the business, versus just showing up, which is sometimes easier to do. Chris: Well, you mean it's always easier, or seems easier, to take the shortcut. But you're right being thorough and showing up there, there's no substitute for that. Amber: Sounds easier, until they ask you a question and you're like I don't even know what this company does. Chris: Yeah. Amber: And then you feel silly for an hour and a half in front of that person in person. Like I would rather do the research, find a computer to be prepared to not sound silly. Chris: So do you do some training around that? How do you instill that into your new hires? Amber: Yeah. So I mean I think like the true answer is that we're really good at using our AI and our tools that we have. There may be a little bit big brothery, but I think that there's a mentor that we have within our organization that always says that our network is equal to our network, or, sorry, our network is equal to our network. And it's true. We know so many people within the 400 people that work at Tangeram that there's no reason that we shouldn't be able to have a warm introduction to people that are chasing business in our markets, Whether that's our partners, whether those are GCs or those are, like you know, architect or design firms that we work with. There's got to be somebody that can make a warm introduction rather than you just like going and knocking on someone's door. Nobody likes that. Chris: Yeah. Amber: And so, I think, just be smart, use the tools that we have and use the resources that we have and be thoughtful and it you know we all get cold calls every day. What do you do with most of them? Ignore, yeah, you can tell what the difference is. So like, do you want to be the one that gets ignored, or how do you go about doing it a little bit differently, and it's generally because someone sends you an email that said you know, chris, you should meet Amber. Chris: That's actually how this happened, right? Someone sent an email and said right, so there's. So you know that you touch on a topic that I do like to talk about it, because there's there's always learning. So what do y'all do at Tangram to try to, you know, build and maintain these important relationships with customers, with your partners, with your stakeholders? I mean, they're all so important. So what are some of the things that y'all maybe talk about and try to put into practice to make sure you're building and maintaining those relationships? Amber: Yeah, good, I mean, I think there's kind of there's a million different ways, but I think there's three kind of pillars, if you were to boil it down. One, it's the social touch. Right, let's have a drink, let's go to dinner, let's just get to know each other as people because, truthfully, everybody wants to hang out and do business with people that they know right. Chris: People know what they like, that they like and then, ultimately, they've learned to trust right, exactly right. Amber: So, but the flip of that and it's a double edged sword is that nobody likes to do business with someone that goes out and has a bunch of drinks and doesn't wake up the next day Like no one wants to do business with the party animal either, right? So we say that when you're doing your social touches and you're entertaining and you're getting to know someone as a human being, then you also need to follow that up with. You know, research, information, like what are you doing to add value to what they're doing in their life or their job? And so for us, the ability to bring what other organizations are doing to the table for other companies that are in like situations is a huge benefit for us. So maybe you're a I don't know a science, I don't know. Let me think of something good. Maybe you're in the industry entertaining industry and you are trying to figure out what to do with your new space. Well, we've got five other companies that are in the same industry. So we'll pull together a round table and you guys can talk amongst yourselves about how you, what you're doing to bring people back or what you're doing. That's a little bit different. So I think it's utilizing our resources. It also helps to be able to prove that we've got some customers in that market or that industry right, that vertical, and we know what we're doing in that vertical. Let's bring those people together. So it's again, it's utilizing our network to really help teach each other and in doing that you become a trusted advisor. I think that's it, and consistency, right, just showing that over and over again and not when there's work. Just to say happy birthday, or I thought about you. How's your Tuesday going? Chris: Yeah, be genuine. Amber: The thing that we all want right that they say no one checks in on the strong people Like. Sometimes it's nice to just get a message that says hope, you have a great day. So I mean, I think that's the simplest way of just being human and authentic, but it is so underplayed in this world. Chris: Sad but true. So let's go back to, maybe, the office space. Yeah, I think there's obviously so much that's been discussed from the, you know, the work remote hybrid. Now you start seeing companies are mandating back in the office, so maybe you can talk some about what are some of the trends that you're seeing in, you know, in office space design concept, etc. That companies are asking for or coming to you with to try to create that environment. As you said earlier, that will make it compelling for someone to leave home to be back in the office. Amber: Yeah, I mean I would say number one there there's a lot less private offices that there used to be. If there are private offices, they're on the interior core of the building so that the light can be exposing to all of the stations and the other employees throughout the office space. We're seeing a lot of greenery being added to spaces and lots of areas that should make you feel like you have choice around where you work. So lots, a lot of maybe two employees to one desk type of environments, less dedicated desks so that you can walk in and say you know, today I want to work over in this corner in this little nook, or today I want to work at this desk. Those are the kinds of things that we're seeing a lot of. I think every single area has so much technology that we might have also started forgetting about the analog just whiteboard right. The ability to just pick up and just brainstorm versus having to create a flow chart on a PowerPoint right. So one doesn't cancel out the other. The need for both is still there, and so I think, when you're talking about these kinds of different spaces, when you get to the office it's like are there team breakout rooms that maybe I have whiteboards and monitors and desks that move around and I can set it up for my team for the week and then set it up for another team the next week. So just lots of things that are mobile and allow for the most amount of spaces to work harder than just with one purpose. Chris: Okay, yeah, so just kind of the flexibility. Amber: Massive right now flexibility and technology that's on casters, so it's also mobile right so everything is moving and I think part of that is realizing that, like that, when COVID hit and everything was fixed, it was like how are we going to rearrange, you know, when things then automatically went to casters and it was like we can move around wherever so that you really can't allow yourself to set up for the day the best that works for your goal, for the day at work. Chris: I like that. So I'm going to kind of change subjects a little bit. Amber: Would you like that though? Like, would you like if you didn't have to go into your office? Like, would you feel comfortable working out into the open floor plan? Because you just said you guys all go into your private offices when you get there and but you like having the doors open. If you found yourself in an open environment, do you think it would change the way that you work? Chris: I don't know. It's a great day. I like, well, see this one. I like coming into the office, I like the flexibility of, you know, working remote when it makes sense or when I can, and like to your point, there are some days when, at least given what I do, I get lots of interruptions throughout the day and if I need to not be interrupted, you know I may not come to the office to, so I can focus for four or five hours or whatnot. Amber: Isn't that interesting. And it's so funny because I don't know that I would have said that five years ago. Like if I have a focus day, I'm going to stay home. Chris: Yeah. Amber: Also to think about that, like, what it works for you might not work for the 30 year old mom. Right, they need five hours to focus. They can't do that at home, they're going straight to the office, right, and I have. Chris: We have some young mothers here that will tell you. They come to the office and please don't make me go home to get work done. The other thing that I'll say to you as an aside, that it is part of the younger generation which, unfortunately, I guess I'm not but earbuds while they work, listening not just to music, but they'll be listening to crime podcast or things, and I'm like how are you doing that and still focusing on what you're doing? I, you know, I don't know. Amber: Outwild. Yeah, so I think that's funny. We learned that while we were all in the same storm we were all in very different boats. Right, what your boat was and the size of your boat at home was very different than other people's with kids and talking to people's with kids and toddlers and kindergarten, and yeah, I got to the office and was like, oh, I want to drink hot coffee here in silence. This is heaven. But yeah, the micro or the multitasking and getting a lot of stuff done, it's interesting when we used to see the head, the earbuds that were more like hey, this is my cue to say that I'm doing heads down, quiet work, so don't interrupt me. I'm doing some furniture pieces that allow for you to like kind of pull out and it's a storage piece, but it basically, when it's out, it's the equivalent of your buds and like don't, I'm working, I'm in heads down road right now. For those of us that don't have the private office ability to shut the door. Chris: I think you know to you're asking about our space and it's hard because when we're not, that I mean everyone up here is kind of in a cone of confidentiality with our clients, business. But to be in a, you know, in a private, close space, to be able to have a conversation without a bunch of other people in open space, is, you know, kind of what works in our environment, in our industry related to law. Yeah, yeah, and the and I, you know I would work remote even before Kobe hit, you know, because it's just the nature of what I do and it's what I do and the demands. But I do believe the flexibility is a good thing. We also think we work and what we do, and it may be true for you, when we can collaborate together and, like you said, get on a whiteboard and actually brainstorm something together, you just can't do that on video. And the other thing that I know you're aware of that there's lots of been written you lose that social, there's a social piece that happens kind of before or after in between meetings. That when you're on scheduled zoom and you're going to the next and next, you lose. And that's to me really where culture gets built. Amber: Yes, it's the how is your weekend, which sometimes is grading, because it's small talk, but then it's like then learning that they like X and oh, me too, and right, and it creates a whole another conversation which then leads to brainstorming. And right, I mean like the Googles of the world created a 15 minute line on purpose in their cafeteria so that people from different buildings across the campus would cross pollinate intentionally while they waited for their food. It's exactly the same idea. It's like how do I get these people to stop and talk to other people within the office If they're never here? How do they create a relationship? There is no culture created on a web camera. Right, there's not just a bunch of people themselves in the camera. Chris: That's right. You're distracted by backgrounds and or or I was literally conducting an interview earlier this week via video and the person that was interviewing for the position had a dog barking and finally it was like it has to be, everyone else is on mute, right and but they didn't finally like 20 minutes in. They finally said you know, I'm sorry, my dog, but I was like, oh my gosh. Amber: I would be so mortified. I had a very awkward one early on where there was a naked moment. We'll leave it at that. And yeah, it's been a wild ride. These zoom backgrounds and so, anyway, blurring is best, if nothing else is the lesson. Chris: So let me talk a little bit about you and what the question is kind of you as a leader, how would you describe your leadership style? Let's say this as a today, but how has that evolved? Because I know where you are today is probably not where you were five plus years ago, because we all evolve as we go. Amber: Yeah, I try to be super authentic. I try to be the boss I always wanted to be, which I think if you do it like that, then it kind of keeps you human. I never try to ask anyone to do something that I wouldn't be willing to stay and do with them, and I think that comes with the history of starting in this business and working my way through it, so that there's not really any job here that I don't know how to help with. But I think the ability to know that I'm not just kind of hollowing down from the mountain top and willing to like roll up my sleeves and do it with you Gosh, how have they changed? I think that before I would have had things I would have wanted to say and I would have thought long and hard about how to say them, and I think over the years I've learned that rapid, radical honesty is play. So rather than spending a week and a half trying to come up with the exact way that I might say something that wouldn't offend someone and then dredge it all back up again, I'd rather just address it, talk about it. Hey, this didn't feel right. A better way to do that might have been this had this you know effect and you might not have realized that when you were doing it. Here's a different way. I think if you can address those things instantaneously, even though it might be a little raw in the moment, I think that for me that is really allowed for there to be a lot of growth and honesty in my relationships for people that work with me. Chris: I like that. Amber: And that statement right there people that work with me. That's the other piece the people that work with me. I think something happens when you get into a certain leadership place where you're like the people that work for me and I will never be that leader the people that work with me. Chris: It's a team mentality 100%. I think that's a very it may sound subtle to some, but I think it's a very big distinction and how your mindset is. If you could, if you approach it with the we versus the I and actually in a genuine way, that will your, the people you work with will feel that and sense that, and I think the way they respond to you is exponentially better. Amber: Yeah, you know it's funny because I had a conversation with a colleague recently that said you know, you might be too close to some of the people on your team. And it was funny because in the same way that I'll take the rat, I'll give the radical instant criticism. You have to be able to receive it as well. And I think I took it the other way. I swung the pendulum so hard and I cut all of these really strong relationships that I had made in a business way and kind of turned them into friends and started to try to draw this line. And it took me about six months to realize that I was very sad without those people in my world and I wanted to open back up again and be the person that I had been before. So back to the leadership piece. I think it's important for me to say that while I'm also willing to receive feedback, I'm also not willing to accept it all as fact. Good, that's all of it is stuff that you have to be able to process through and realize what you want to keep and what you want to discard, and then what you want to implement right. And so for me, I tried it and it didn't work and it was like nope, I'm going to go back to this other way. And I think that is what growth is is the willingness to change and change back. Chris: Sure, and I think, being self aware right Absolutely. I think that's that can apply in so many ways. I think to the willingness to try something different, the willingness to be honest about it, whether it's working or not, and it's okay as an example, it's okay. Well, that decision ended up not being right, so let's go back. Amber: For me. Right, it didn't work for me and that's good that it works for others. I think I appreciate that boundary. For other people it's. That kind of work life balance is a funny it's a funny conversation. For me I think that it's a joke, frankly, like some days we spend 90% of our effort and energy in the office and we only have 10% left at home. Sometimes it's like I can give 50 feet and you know it's not an issue. Some days I have got to deal with my familial obligations and it's going to maybe only be a 25 day for the work life and the business life is going to get the rest of it and I think that when you work yourself into an organization that you're happy and comfortable with, that, it allows for me as a leader to have that type of balance, but it also allows for me to provide and allow that type of balance to the people that work with us. Chris: Yes, but we can do a whole episode on work the myth of work life balance. You know it's to me the word balance is probably the worst word you could use for that. I think it's work life integration. Amber: Exactly. Chris: Yeah, it's a way you know there's no you know, and that it all changes depending on your stage of life as well. We used to have work-life balance in our core values. We changed that because what we realized is that's not really a corporate culture, it's more of a personal value or culture, right, because it depends on life. If you're in your late 20s versus your late 40s, your world is different and the way you balance things is going to be very different. Amber: Greatly different. It's so ironic that you say that we have. We used to have some meetings with new hires where we would tell them you know, this is kind of what's been working for their lives, some of the upper leadership and management and early on those 20-somethings we're hearing, if you just make all of your work friends, your own friends, then you'll be fine, which, they heard. Lose your friends because we're going to take over your life, right, and it's like that's not what we're saying. What we actually mean is that you will find a balance there where you do genuinely enjoy hanging out with people that you work with or people that you do business with, and you will find a balance in that and that's a little bit of the integration, but also that you'll be able to give and take where and when you need throughout the day and week. So yeah, it's a. The word balance, I just think in general, is hilarious. It's a funny word, but I do think it's great that we all keep trying. Chris: Well, that's the point, right. As you said, every day's a little different. Do you find the way to make it work and integrate both? And so, yeah, some days are 90 work, 10 families, some are 90 family, 10 work and everything in between. Amber: Yeah, it's funny Brené Brown talks about like in marriage it's not 50, 50,. Like she walks in at home and is like I got 70 today and he's like cool, I got your other 30. And it works like that and I feel like that very much in the office and I think if, if we could all just be honest and stop calling these workplaces families right. Like this is not our family. These are the company that we work for and we enjoy very much the people that we work with, but we all have families at home and you know it's important that they feel as much love as the people that we enjoy working with on a regular basis. And you know it's going to wave and it's going to ebb and flow, but I think that's part of what life is. Chris: That's so true. Okay, this has been really great conversation. I love the hearing in which all are doing to help companies you know, move forward, be innovative in their space. I want to turn now the last minute or so. Just some fun stuff to know about you. So tell us what was your first job. Amber: I ditched school at 14 to go get lunch at Subway and I left with a job. Chris: So, but instead of ordering a sandwich, you got behind the counter. Amber: I ate my sandwich. And then that on car sued offered me a job and I left at 14 as a Subway sandwich artist. My mom was not very pleased that she had to drive me to and from the subway on multiple times a week, but it was a great first job. I loved it. Chris: Okay, did you stay with school? Amber: Yeah, oh, of course yes. No it was an after school job. Chris: I got you. I got you All right. So you're new to Texas. But I ask all my guests do you prefer Tex-Mex or barbecue? Amber: Oh my gosh, I can't even say Tex-Mex, like I feel like I need there to be Mexican food here. So we're just going to default to barbecue, for sure, absolutely. Chris: So you have not adjusted to Tex-Mex. Amber: You know what? I'm 40 years, a Californian, and I don't know that I ever will. I was laughing because they were doing the best tacos in Texas. A little blurb the other day on the news and I was like they're in the wrong state for the best taco competition. This is not where they live, but I'm sorry, I do love your eyes as barbecue. Chris: That's okay. That's okay, we'll forgive you. We will agree to disagree on that. Amber: Okay, all right, you have bomb queso, though I'll give you that. Chris: Okay, we'll meet you, you all, don't have queso in California. Amber: Not like you guys do. You have it at like every Mexican restaurant. It's not a thing there really, oh sure. Chris: I mean, I think the first real food both of my daughters had like at a week old was queso. Amber: We started early. Chris: Yeah, so okay, If you could take a 30-day sabbatical, what would you? Where would you go? What would you do? Amber: Ooh, that's an excellent question. I feel like I would probably go just get an Airbnb in France and just spend a couple of weeks just living life there, cruising around on the bike, traveling with my family, working, painting, just being. I think we spend so much time following a calendar. I would love to just kind of float and see what happens when we're creative without the schedule. Chris: That's where. Amber: I come from and we don't do enough of it. Chris: Sadly, you're right, Amber. This has been awesome. It's been a pleasure, you know, hearing your story, tangram story. Thank you for all the insights you've provided and just wish all the best of luck as you grow your business here in Texas. Amber: Thank you so much, chris, we appreciate it. Chris: All right, take care.

Screaming in the Cloud
Centralizing Cloud Security Breach Information with Chris Farris

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 8, 2023 35:06


Chris Farris, Cloud Security Nerd at PrimeHarbor Technologies, LLC, joins Corey on Screaming in the Cloud to discuss his new project, breaches.cloud, and why he feels having a centralized location for cloud security breach information is so important. Corey and Chris also discuss what it means to dive into entrepreneurship, including both the benefits of not having to work within a corporate structure and the challenges that come with running your own business. Chris also reveals what led him to start breaches.cloud, and what he's learned about some of the biggest cloud security breaches so far. About ChrisChris Farris is a highly experienced IT professional with a career spanning over 25 years. During this time, he has focused on various areas, including Linux, networking, and security. For the past eight years, he has been deeply involved in public-cloud and public-cloud security in media and entertainment, leveraging his expertise to build and evolve multiple cloud security programs.Chris is passionate about enabling the broader security team's objectives of secure design, incident response, and vulnerability management. He has developed cloud security standards and baselines to provide risk-based guidance to development and operations teams. As a practitioner, he has architected and implemented numerous serverless and traditional cloud applications, focusing on deployment, security, operations, and financial modeling.He is one of the organizers of the fwd:cloudsec conference and presented at various AWS conferences and BSides events. Chris shares his insights on security and technology on social media platforms like Twitter, Mastodon and his website https://www.chrisfarris.com.Links Referenced: fwd:cloudsec: https://fwdcloudsec.org/ breaches.cloud: https://breaches.cloud Twitter: https://twitter.com/jcfarris Company Site: https://www.primeharbor.com TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud, I'm Corey Quinn. My returning guest today is Chris Farris, now at PrimeHarbor, which is his own consultancy. Chris, welcome back. Last time we spoke, you were a Turbot, and now you've decided to go independent because you don't like sleep anymore.Chris: Yeah, I don't like sleep.Corey: [laugh]. It's one of those things where when I went independent, at least in my case, everyone thought that it was, oh, I have this grand vision of what the world could be and how I could look at these things, and that's going to just be great and awesome and everyone's going to just be a better world for it. In my case, it was, no, just there was quite literally nothing else for me to do that didn't feel like an exact reframing of what I'd already been doing for years. I'm a terrible employee and setting out on my own was important. It was the only way I found that I could wind up getting to a place of not worrying about getting fired all the time because that was my particular skill set. And I look back at it now, almost seven years in, and it's one of those things where if I had known then what I know now, I never would have started.Chris: Well, that was encouraging. Thank you [laugh].Corey: Oh, of course. And in sincerity, it's not one of those things where there's any one thing that stops you, but it's the, a lot of people get into the independent consulting dance because they want to do a thing and they're very good at that thing and they love that thing. The problem is, when you're independent, and at least starting out, I was spending over 70% of my time on things that were not billable, which included things like go and find new clients, go and talk to existing clients, the freaking accounting. One of the first hires I made was a fractional CFO, which changed my life. Up until that, my business partner and I were more or less dead reckoning of looking at the bank account and how much money is in there to determine if we could afford things. That's a very unsophisticated way of navigating. It's like driving by braille.Chris: Yeah, I think I went into it mostly as a way to define my professional identity outside of my W-2 employer. I had built cloud security programs for two major media companies and felt like that was my identity: I was the cloud security person for these companies. And so, I was like, ehh, why don't I just define myself as myself, rather than define myself as being part of a company that, in the media space, they are getting overwhelmed by change, and job security, job satisfaction, wasn't really something that I could count on.Corey: One of the weird things that I found—it's counterintuitive—is that when you're independent, you have gotten to a point where you have hit a point of sustainability, where you're not doing the oh, I'm just going to go work for 40 billable hours a week for a client. It's just like being an employee without a bunch of protections and extra steps. That doesn't work super well. But now, at the point where I'm at where the largest client we have is a single-digit percentage of revenue, I can't get fired anymore, without having a whole bunch of people suddenly turn on me because I've done something monstrous, in which case, I probably deserve not to have business anymore, or there's something systemic in the macro environment, which given that I do the media side and I do the cost-cutting side, I work on the way up, I work on the way down, I'm questioning what that looks like in a scenario that doesn't involve me hunting for food. But it's counterintuitive to people who have been employees their whole life, like I was, where, oh, it's risky and dangerous to go out on your own.Chris: It's risky and dangerous to be, you know, tied to a single, yeah, W-2 paycheck. So.Corey: Yeah. The question I'd like to ask is, how many people need to be really pissed off before you have one of those conversations with HR that doesn't involve giving you a cup of coffee? That's the tell: when you don't get coffee, it's a bad conversation.Chris: Actually, that you haven't seen [unintelligible 00:04:25] coffee these days. You don't want the cup of coffee, you know. That's—Corey: Even when they don't give you the crappy percolator navy coffee, like, midnight hobo diner style, it's still going to be a bad meeting because [unintelligible 00:04:37] pretend the coffee's palatable.Chris: Perhaps, yes. I like not having to deal with my own HR department. And I do agree that yeah, getting out of the W-2 space allows me to work on side projects that interests me or, you know, volunteer to do things like continuing the fwd:cloudsec, developing breaches.cloud, et cetera.Corey: I'll never forget, one of my last jobs I had a boss who walked past and saw me looking at Reddit and asked me if that was really the best use of my time. At first—it was in, I think, the sysadmin forum at the time, so yes, it was very much the best use of my time for the problem I was focusing on, but also, even if it wasn't, I spent an inordinate amount of time on social media, just telling stories and building audiences, on some level. That's the weird thing is that what counts as work versus what doesn't count as work gets very squishy when you're doing your own marketing.Chris: True. And even when I was a W-2 employee, I spent a lot of time on Twitter because Twitter was an intel source for us. It was like, “Hey, who's talking about the latest cloud security misconfigurations? Who's talking about the latest data breach? What is Mandiant tweeting about?” It was, you know—I consider it part of my job to be on Twitter and watching things.Corey: Oh, people ask me that. “So, you're on Twitter an awful lot. Don't you have a newsletter to write?” Like, yeah, where do you think that content comes from, buddy?Chris: Exactly. Twitter and Mastodon. And Reddit now.Corey: There's a whole argument to be had about where to find various things. For me at least, because I'm only security adjacent, I was always trying to report the news that other people had, not make the news myself.Chris: You don't want to be the one making the news in security.Corey: Speaking of, I'd like to talk a bit about what you just alluded to breaches.cloud. I don't think I've seen that come across my desk yet, which tells me that it has not been making a big splash just yet.Chris: I haven't been really announcing it; it got published the other night and so basically, yeah, is this is sort of a inaugural marketing push for breaches.cloud. So, what we're looking to do is document all the public cloud security breaches, what happened, why, and more importantly, what the companies did or didn't do that led to the security incident or the security breach.Corey: How are you slicing the difference between broad versus deep? And what I mean by that is, there are some companies where there are indictments and massive deep dives into everything that happens with timelines and blows-by-blows, and other times you wind up with the email that shows up one day of, “Security is very important to us. Now, listen to how we completely dropped the ball on it.” And it just makes the biggest description that they can get away with of what happened. Occasionally, you find out oh, it was an open S3 buckets, or they'll allude to something that sounds like it. Does that count for inclusion? Does it not? How do you make those editorial decisions?Chris: So, we haven't yet built a page around just all of the recipients of the Bucket Negligence Award. We're looking at the specific ones where there's been something that's happened that's usually involving IAM credentials—oftentimes involving IAM credentials found in GitHub—and what led to that. So, in a lot of cases, if there's a detailed company postmortem that they send their customers that said, “Hey, we goofed up, but complete transparency—” and then they hit all the bullet points of how they goofed up. Or in the case of certain others, like Uber, “Hey, we have court transcripts that we can go to,” or, “We have federal indictments,” or, “We have court transcripts, and federal indictments and FTC civil actions.” And so, we go through those trying to suss out what the company did or did not do that led to the breach. And really, the goal here is to be able to articulate as security practitioners, hey, don't attach S3 full access to this role on EC2. That's what got Capital One in trouble.Corey: I have a lot of sympathy for the Capital One breach and I wish they would talk about it more than they do, for obvious reasons, just because it was not, someone showed up and made a very obvious dumb decision, like, “Oh, that was what that giant red screaming thing in the S3 console means.” It was a series of small misconfigurations that led to another one, to another one, to another one, and eventually gets to a point where a sophisticated attacker was able to chain them all together. And yes, it's bad, yes, they're a bank and the rest, but I look at that and it's—that's the sort of exploit that you look at and it's okay, I see it. I absolutely see it. Someone was very clever, and a bunch of small things that didn't rise to the obvious. But they got dragged and castigated as if they basically had a four-character password that they'd left on the back of the laptop on a Post-It note in an airport lounge when their CEO was traveling. Which is not the case.Chris: Or all of the highlighting the fact that Paige Thompson was a former Amazon employee, making it seem like it was her insider abilities that lead to the incident, rather than she just knew that, hey, there's a metadata service and it gives me creds if I ask it.Corey: Right. That drove me nuts. There was no maleficence as an employee. And to be very direct, from what I understand of internal AWS controls, had there been, it would have been audited, flagged, caught, interdicted. I have talked to enough Amazonians that either a lot of them are lying to me very consistently despite not knowing each other, or they're being honest when they say that you can't get access to customer data using secret inside hacks.Chris: Yeah. I have reasonably good faith in AWS and their ability to not touch customer data in most scenarios. And I've had cases that I'm not allowed to talk about where Amazon has gone and accessed customer data, and the amount of rigmarole and questions and drilling that I got as a customer to have them do that was pretty intense and somewhat, actually, annoying.Corey: Oh, absolutely. And, on some level, it gets frustrating when it's a, look, this is a test account. I have nothing of sensitive value in here. I want the thing that isn't working to start working. Can I just give you a whole, like, admin-powered user account and we can move on past all of this? And their answer is always absolutely not.Chris: Yes. Or, “Hey, can you put this in our bucket?” “No, we can't even write to a public bucket or a bucket that, you know, they can share too.” So.Corey: An Amazonian had to mail me a hard drive because they could not send anything out of S3 to me.Chris: There you go.Corey: So, then I wound up uploading it back to S3 with, you know, a Snowball Edge because there's no overkill like massive overkill.Chris: No, the [snowmobile 00:11:29] would have been the massive overkill. But depending on where you live, you know, you might not have been able to get a permit to park the snowmobile there.Corey: They apparently require a loading dock. Same as with the outposts. I can't fake having one of those on my front porch yet.Chris: Ah. Well, there you go. I mean, you know it's the right height though, and you don't mind them ruining your lawn.Corey: So, help me understand. It makes sense to me at least, on some level, why having a central repository of all the various cloud security breaches in one place that's easy to reference is valuable. But what caused you to decide, you know, rather than saying it'd be nice to have, I'm going to go build that thing?Chris: Yeah, so it was actually right before the last time we spoke, Nicholas Sharp was indicted. And there was like, hey, this person was indicted for, you know, this cloud security case. And I'm like, that name rings a bell, but I don't remember who this person was. And so, I kind of realized that there's so many of these things happening now that I forget who is who. And so, when a new piece of news comes along, I'm like, where did this come from and how does this fit into what my knowledge of cloud security is and cloud security cases?So, I kind of realized that these are all running together in my mind. The Department of Justice only referenced ‘Company One,' so it wasn't clear to me if this even was a new cloud incident or one I already knew about. And so basically, I decided, okay, let's build this. Breaches.cloud was available; I think I kind of got the idea from hackingthe.cloud.And I had been working with some college students through the Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition, and I was like, “Hey, anybody want a spring research project that I will pay you for?” And so yeah, PrimeHarbor funded two college students to do quite a bit of the background research for me, I mentored them through, “Hey, so here's what this means,” and, “Hey, have we noticed that all of these seem to relate to credentials found in GitHub? You know, maybe there's a pattern here.” So, if you're not yet scanning for secrets in GitHub, I recommend you start scanning for secrets in your GitHub, private and public repos.Corey: Also, it makes sense to look at the history. Because, oh, I committed a secret. I'm going to go ahead and revert that commit and push that. That solves the problem, right?Chris: No, no, it doesn't. Yes, apparently, you can force push and delete an entire commit, but you really want to use a tool that's going to go back through the commit history and dig through it because as we saw in the Uber incident, when—the second Uber incident, the one that led to the CSOs conviction—yeah, the two attackers, [unintelligible 00:14:09] stuffed a Uber employee's personal GitHub account that they were also using for Uber work, and yeah, then they dug through all the source code and dug through the commit histories until they found a set of keys, and that's what they used for the second Uber breach.Corey: Awful when that hits. It's one of those things where it's just… [sigh], one thing leads to another leads to another. And on some level, I'm kind of amazed by the forensics that happen around all of these things. With the counterpoint, it is so… freakishly difficult, I think, for lack of a better term, just to be able to say what happened with any degree of certainty, so I can't help but wonder in those dark nights when the creeping dread starts sinking in, how many things like this happen that we just never hear about because they don't know?Chris: Because they don't turn on CloudTrail. Probably a number of them. Once the data gets out and shows up on the dark web, then people start knocking on doors. You know, Troy Hunt's got a large collection of data breach stuff, and you know, when there's a data breach, people will send him, “Hey, I found these passwords on the dark web,” and he loads them into Have I Been Pwned, and you know, [laugh] then the CSO finds out. So yeah, there's probably a lot of this that happens in the quiet of night, but once it hits the dark web, I think that data starts becoming available and the victimized company finds out.Corey: I am profoundly cynical, in case that was unclear. So, I'm wondering, on some level, what is the likelihood or commonality, I suppose, of people who are fundamentally just viewing security breach response from a perspective of step one, make sure my resume is always up to date. Because we talk about these business continuity plans and these DR approaches, but very often it feels like step one, secure your own mask before assisting others, as they always say on the flight. Where does personal preservation come in? And how does that compare with company preservation?Chris: I think down at the [IaC 00:16:17] level, I don't know of anybody who has not gotten a job because they had Equifax on their resume back in, what, 2017, 2018, right? Yes, the CSO, the CEO, the CIO probably all lost their jobs. And you know, now they're scraping by book deals and speaking engagements.Corey: And these things are always, to be clear, nuanced. It's rare that this is always one person's fault. If you're a one-person company, okay, yeah, it's kind of your fault, let's be clear here, but there are controls and cost controls and audit trails—presumably—for all of these things, so it feels like that's a relatively easy thing to talk around, that it was a process failure, not that one person sucked. “Well, didn't you design and implement the process?” “Yes. But it turned out there were some holes in it and my team reported that those weren't there and it turned out that they were and, well, live and learn.” It feels like that's something that could be talked around.Chris: It's an investment failure. And again, you know, if we go back to Harry Truman, “The buck stops here,” you know, it's the CEO who decides that, hey, we're going to buy a corporate jet rather than buy a [SIIM 00:17:22]. And those are the choices that happen at the top level that define, do you have a capable security team, and more importantly, do you have a capable security culture such that your security team isn't the only ones who are actually thinking about security?Corey: That's, I guess, a fair question. I saw a take on Twitter—which is always a weird thing—or maybe was Blue-ski or somewhere else recently, that if you don't have a C-level executive responsible for security with security in their title, your company does not take security seriously. And I can see that past a certain point of scale, but as a one-person company, do you have a designated CSO?Chris: As a one-person company and as a security company, I sort of do have a designated CSO. I also have, you know, the person who's like, oh, I'm going to not put MFA on the root of this one thing because, while it's an experiment and it's a sandbox and whatever else, but I also know that that's not where I'm going to be putting any customer data, so I can measure and evaluate the risk from both a security perspective and a business existential investment perspective. When you get to the larger the organization, the more detached the CEO gets from the risk and what the company is building and what the company is doing, is where you get into trouble. And lots of companies have C-level somebody who's responsible for security. It's called the CSO, but oftentimes, they report four levels down, or even more, from the chief executive who is actually the one making the investment decisions.Corey: On some level, the oh yeah, that's my responsibility, too, but it feels like it's a trap that falls into. Like, well, the CTO is responsible for security at a publicly traded company. Like, well… that tends to not work anymore, past certain points of scale. Like when I started out independently, yes, I was the CSO. I was also the accountant. I was also the head of marketing. I was also the janitor. There's a bunch of different roles; we all wear different hats at different times.I'm also not a big fan of shaming that oh, yeah. This is a universal truth that applies to every company in existence. That's also where I think Twitter started to go wrong where you would get called out whenever making an observation or witticism or whatnot because there was some vertex case to which it did not necessarily apply and then people would ‘well, actually,' you to death.Chris: Yeah. Well, and I think there's a lot of us in the security community who are in the security one-percenters. We're, “Hey, yes, I'm a cloud security person on a 15-person cloud security team, and here's this awesome thing we're doing.” And then you've got most of the other companies in this country that are probably below the security poverty line. They may or may not have a dedicated security person, they certainly don't have a SIIM, they certainly don't have anybody who's monitoring their endpoints for malware attacks or anything else, and those are the companies that are getting hit all the time with, you know, a lot of this ransomware stuff. Healthcare is particularly vulnerable to that.Corey: When you take a look across the industry, what is it that you're doing now at PrimeHarbor that you feel has been an unmet need in the space? And let me be clear, as of this recording earlier today, we signed a contract with you for a project. There's more to come on that in the future. So, this is me asking you to tell a story, not challenging, like, what do you actually do? This is not a refund request, let's be very clear here. But what's the unmet need that you saw?Chris: I think the unmet need that I see is we don't talk to our builder community. And when I say builder, I mean, developers, DevOps, sysadmins, whatever. AWS likes the term builder and I think it works. We don't talk to our builder community about risk in a way that makes sense to them. So, we can say, “Hey, well, you know, we have this security policy and section 24601 says that all data's classifications must be signed off by the data custodian,” and a developer is going to look at you with their head tilted, and be like, “Huh? What? I just need to get the sprint done.”Whereas if we can articulate the risk—and one of the reasons I wanted to do breaches.cloud was to have that corpus of articulated risk around specific things—I can articulate the risk and say, “Hey, look, you know how easy it is for somebody to go in and enumerate an S3 bucket? And then once they've enumerated and guessed that S3 bucket exists, they list it, and oh, hey, look, now that they've listed it, they know all of the objects and all of the juicy PII that you just made public.” If you demonstrate that to them, then they're going to be like, “Oh, I'm going to add the extra story point to this story to go figure out how to do CloudFront origin access identity.” And now you've solved, you know, one more security thing. And you've done in a way that not just giving a man a fish or closing the bucket for them, but now they know, hey, I should always use origin access identity. This is why I need to do this particular thing.Corey: One of the challenges that I've seen in a variety of different sites that have tried to start cataloging different breaches and other collections of things happening in public is the discoverability or the library management problem. The most obvious example of this is, of course, the AWS console itself, where when it paginates things like, oh, there are 3000 things here, ten at a time, through various pages for it. Like, the marketplace is just a joke of discoverability. How do you wind up separating the stuff that is interesting and notable, rather than, well, this has about three sentences to it because that's all the company would say?Chris: So, I think even the ones where there's three sentences, we may actually go ahead and add it to the repo, or we may just hold it as a draft, so that we know later on when, “Hey, look, here's a federal indictment for Company Three. Oh, hey, look. Company Three was actually this breach announcement that we heard about three months ago,” or even three years ago. So like, you know, Chegg is a great example of, you know, one of those where, hey, you know, there was an incident, and they disclosed something, and then, years later, FTC comes along and starts banging them over the head. And in the FTC documentation, or in the FTC civil complaint, we got all sorts of useful data.Like, not only were they using root API keys, every contractor and employee there was sharing the root API keys, so when they had a contractor who left, it was too hard to change the keys and share it with everybody, so they just didn't do that. The contractor still had the keys, and that was one of the findings from the FTC against Chegg. Similar to that, Cisco didn't turn off contractors' access, and I think—this is pure speculation—I think the poor contractor one day logged into his Google Cloud Shell, cd'ed into a Terraform directory, ran ‘terraform destroy', and rather than destroying what he thought he was destroying, it had the access keys back to Cisco WebEx and took down 400 EC2 instances that made up all of WebEx. These are the kinds of things that I think it's worth capturing because the stories are going to come out over time.Corey: What have you seen in your, I guess, so far, a limited history of curating this that—I guess, first what is it you've learned that you've started seeing as far as patterns go, as far as what warrants inclusion, what doesn't, and of course, once you started launching and going a bit more public with it, I'm curious to hear what the response from companies is going to be.Chris: So, I want to be very careful and clear that if I'm going to name somebody, that we're sourcing something from the criminal justice system, that we're not going to say, “Hey, everybody knows that it was Paige Thompson who was behind it.” No, no, here's the indictment that said it was Paige Thompson that was, you know, indicted for this Capital One sort of thing. All the data that I'm using, it all comes from public sources, it's all sited, so it's not like, hey, some insider said, “Hey, this is what actually happened.” You know? I very much learned from the Ubiquiti case that I don't want to be in the position of Brian Krebs, where it's the attacker themselves who's updating the site and telling us everything that went wrong, when in fact, it's not because they're in fact the perpetrator.Corey: Yeah, there's a lot of lessons to be learned. And fortunately, for what it's s—at least it seems… mostly, that we've moved past the battle days of security researchers getting sued on a whim from large companies for saying embarrassing things about them. Of course, watch me be tempting fate and by the time this publishes, I'll get sued by some company, probably Azure or whatnot, telling me that, “Okay, we've had enough of you saying bad things about our security.” It's like, well, cool, but I also read the complaint before you file because your security is bad. Buh-dum-tss. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Please don't sue me.Chris: So, you know, whether it's slander or libel, depending on whether you're reading this or hearing it, you know, truth is an actual defense, so I think Microsoft doesn't have a case against you. I think for what we're doing in breaches, you know—and one of the reasons that I'm going to be very clear on anybody who contributes—and just for the record, anybody is welcome to contribute. The GitHub repo that runs breaches.cloud is public and anybody can submit me a pull request and I will take their write-ups of incidents. But whatever it is, it has to be sourced.One of the things that I'm looking to do shortly, is start soliciting sponsorships for breaches so that we can afford to go pull down the PACER documents. Because apparently in this country, while we have a right to a speedy trial, we don't have a right to actually get the court transcripts for less than ten cents a page. And so, part of what we need to do next is download those—and once we've purchased them, we can make them public—download those, make them public, and let everybody see exactly what the transcript was from the Capital One incident, or the Joey Sullivan trial.Corey: You're absolutely right. It drives me nuts that I have to wind up budgeting money for PACER to pull up court records. And at ten cents a page, it hasn't changed in decades, where it's oh, this is the cost of providing that data. It's, I'm not asking someone to walk to the back room and fax it to me. I want to be very clear here. It just feels like it's one of those areas where the technology and government is not caught up and it's—part of the problem is, of course, having no competition.Chris: There is that. And I think I read somewhere that the ent—if you wanted to download the entire PACER, it would be, like, $100 million. Not that you would do that, but you know, it is the moneymaker for the judicial system, and you know, they do need to keep the lights on. Although I guess that's what my taxes are for. But again, yes, they're a monopoly; they can do that.Corey: Wildly frustrating, isn't it?Chris: Yeah [sigh]… yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, I think there's a lot of value in the court transcripts. I've held off on publishing the Capital One case because one, well, already there's been a lot of ink spilled on it, and two, I think all the good detail is going to be in the trial transcripts from Paige Thompson's trial.Corey: So, I am curious what your take is on… well, let's called the ‘FTX thing.' I don't even know how to describe it at this point. Is it a breach? Is it just maleficence? Is it 15,000 other things? But I noticed that it's something that breaches.cloud does talk about a bit.Chris: Yeah. So, that one was a fascinating one that came out because as I was starting this project, I heard you know, somebody who was tweeting was like, “Hey, they were storing all of the crypto private keys in AWS Secrets Manager.” And I was like, “Errr?” And so, I went back and I read John J. Ray III's interim report to the creditors.Now, John Ray is the man who was behind the cleaning up of Enron, and his comment was “FTX is the”—“Never in my career have I seen such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy information as occurred here.” And as part of his general, broad write-up, they went into, in-depth, a lot of the FTX AWS practices. Like, we talk about, hey, you know, your company should be multi-account. FTX was worse. They had three or four different companies all operating in the same AWS account.They had their main company, FTX US, Alameda, all of them had crypto keys in Secrets Manager and there was no access control between any of those. And what ended up happening on the day that SBF left and Ray came in as CEO, the $400 million worth of crypto somehow disappeared out of FTX's wallets.Corey: I want to call this out because otherwise, I will get letters from the AWS PR spin doctors. Because on the surface of it, I don't know that there's necessarily a lot wrong with using Secrets Manager as the backing store for private keys. I do that with other things myself. The question is, what other controls are there? You can't just slap it into Secrets Manager and, “Well, my job is done. Let's go to lunch early today.”There are challenges [laugh] around the access levels, there are—around who has access, who can audit these things, and what happens. Because most of the secrets I have in Secrets Manager are not the sort of thing that is, it is now a viable strategy to take that thing and abscond to a country with a non-extradition treaty for the rest of my life, but with private keys and crypto, there kind of is.Chris: That's it. It's like, you know, hey, okay, the RDS database password is one thing, but $400 million in crypto is potentially another thing. Putting it in and Secrets Manager might have been the right answer, too. You get KMS customer-managed keys, you get full auditability with CloudTrail, everything else, but we didn't hear any of that coming out of Ray's report to the creditors. So again, the question is, did they even have CloudTrail turned on? He did explicitly say that FTX had not enabled GuardDuty.Corey: On some level, even if GuardDuty doesn't do anything for you, which in my case, it doesn't, but I want to be clear, you should still enable it anyway because you're going to get dragged when there's inevitable breach because there's always a breach somewhere, and then you get yelled at for not having turned on something that was called GuardDuty. You already sound negligent, just with that sentence alone. Same with Security Hub. Good name on AWS's part if you're trying to drive service adoption. Just by calling it the thing that responsible people would use, you will see adoption, even if people never configure or understand it.Chris: Yeah, and then of course, hey, you had Security Hub turned on, but you ignore the 80,000 findings in it. Why did you ignore those 80,000 findings? I find Security Hub to probably be a little bit too much noise. And it's not Security Hub, it's ‘Compliance Hub.' Everything—and I'm going to have a blog post coming out shortly—on this, everything that Security Hub looks at, it looks at it from a compliance perspective.If you look at all of its scoring, it's not how many things are wrong; it's how many rules you are a hundred percent compliant to. It is not useful for anybody below that AWS security poverty line to really master or to really operationalize.Corey: I really want to thank you for taking the time to catch up with me once again. Although now that I'm the client, I expect I can do this on demand, which is just going to be delightful. If people want to learn more, where can they find you?Chris: So, they can find breaches.cloud at, well https://breaches.cloud. If you're looking for me, I am either on Twitter, still, at @jcfarris, or you can find me and my consulting company, which is www.primeharbor.com.Corey: And we will, of course, put links to all of that in the [show notes 00:33:57]. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me. As always, I appreciate it.Chris: Oh, thank you for having me again.Corey: Chris Farris, cloud security nerd at PrimeHarbor. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, along with an angry, insulting comment that you're also going to use as the storage back-end for your private keys.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.

Screaming in the Cloud
Exciting Times in Cloud Security with Chris Farris

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 21, 2023 32:46


Episode SummaryChris Farris, Cloud Security Nerd at Turbot, joins Corey on Screaming in the Cloud to discuss the latest events in cloud security, which leads to an interesting analysis from Chris on how legal departments obscure valuable information that could lead to fewer security failures in the name of protecting company liability, and what the future of accountability for security failures looks like. Chris and Corey also discuss the newest dangers in cloud security and billing practices, and Chris describes his upcoming cloud security conference, fwd:cloudsec. About ChrisChris Farris has been in the IT field since 1994 primarily focused on Linux, networking, and security. For the last 8 years, he has focused on public-cloud and public-cloud security. He has built and evolved multiple cloud security programs for major media companies, focusing on enabling the broader security team's objectives of secure design, incident response and vulnerability management. He has developed cloud security standards and baselines to provide risk-based guidance to development and operations teams. As a practitioner, he's architected and implemented multiple serverless and traditional cloud applications focused on deployment, security, operations, and financial modeling.Chris now does cloud security research for Turbot and evangelizes for the open source tool Steampipe. He is one of the organizers of the fwd:cloudsec conference (https://fwdcloudsec.org) and has given multiple presentations at AWS conferences and BSides events.When not building things with AWS's building blocks, he enjoys building Legos with his kid and figuring out what interesting part of the globe to travel to next. He opines on security and technology on Mastodon, Twitter and his website https://www.chrisfarris.comLinks Referenced: Turbot: https://turbot.com/ fwd:cloudsec: https://fwdcloudsec.org/ Mastodon: https://infosec.exchange/@jcfarris Personal website: https://chrisfarris.com TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn and we are here today to learn exciting things, steal exciting secrets, and make big trouble for Moose and Squirrel. Maybe that's the podcast; maybe that's the KGB, we're not entirely sure. But I am joined once again by Chris Farris, cloud security nerd at Turbot, which I will insist on pronouncing as ‘Turbo.' Chris, thanks for coming back.Chris: Thanks for having me.Corey: So, it's been a little while and it's been an uneventful time in cloud security with nothing particularly noteworthy happening, not a whole lot of things to point out, and honestly, we're just sort of scraping the bottom of the barrel for news… is what I wish I could say, but it isn't true. Instead, it's, “Oh, let's see what disastrous tire fire we have encountered this week.” What's top of mind for you as we record this?Chris: I think the most interesting one I thought was, you know, going back and seeing the guilty plea from Nickolas Sharp, who formerly was an employee at Ubiquiti and apparently had, like, complete access to everything there and then ran amok with it.Corey: Mm-hm.Chris: The details that were buried at the time in the indictment, but came out in the press releases were he was leveraging root keys, he was leveraging lifecycle policies to suppress the CloudTrail logs. And then of course, you know, just doing dumb things like exfiltrating all of this data from his home IP address, or exfiltrating it from his home through a VPN, which have accidentally dropped and then exposed his home IP address. Oops.Corey: There's so much to dive into there because I am not in any way shape or form, saying that what he did was good, or I endorse any of those things. And yeah, I think he belongs in prison for what he did; let's be very clear on this. But I personally did not have a business relationship with him. I am, however, Ubiquiti's customer. And after—whether it was an insider threat or whether it was someone external breaching them, Krebs On Security wound up doing a whole write-up on this and was single-sourcing some stuff from the person who it turned out, did this.And they made a lot of hay about this. They sued him at one point via some terrible law firm that's entire brand is suing media companies. And yeah, just wonderful, wonderful optics there and brilliant plan. But I don't care about the sourcing. I don't care about the exact accuracy of the reporting because what I'm seeing here is that what is not disputed is this person, who whether they were an employee or not was beside the point, deleted all of the audit logs and then as a customer of Ubiquiti, I received an email saying, “We have no indication or evidence that any customer data was misappropriated.” Yeah, you just turn off your logs and yeah, you could say that always and forever and save money on logging costs. [unintelligible 00:03:28] best practice just dropped, I guess. Clowns.Chris: So, yeah. And there's definitely, like, compliance and standards and everything else that say you turn on your logs and you protect your logs, and service control policies should have been able to detect that. If they had a security operations center, you know, the fact that somebody was using root keys should have been setting off red flags and causing escalations to occur. And that wasn't happening.Corey: My business partner and I have access to our AWS org, and when I was setting this stuff up for what we do here, at a very small company, neither of us can log in with root credentials without alarms going off that alert the other. Not that I don't trust the man; let's be very clear here. We both own the company.Chris: In business together. Yes.Corey: Ri—exactly. It is, in many ways, like a marriage in that one of us can absolutely ruin the other without a whole lot of effort. But there's still the idea of separation of duties, visibility into what's going on, and we don't use root API keys. Let me further point out that we are not pushing anything that requires you to send data to us. We're not providing a service that is software powered to people, much less one that is built around security. So, how is it that I have a better security posture than Ubiquiti?Chris: You understand AWS and in-depth cloud better. You know, it really comes down to how do you, as an AWS customer, understand all of the moving parts, all of the security tooling, all of the different ways that something can happen. And Amazon will say, “Well, it's in the documentation,” but you know, they have, what, 357 services? Are you reading the security pages of all of those? So, user education, I agree, you should have, and I have on all of my accounts, if anything pops up, if any IAM change happens, I'm getting text messages. Which is great if my account got compromised, but is really annoying when I'm actually making a change and my phone is blowing up.Corey: Yeah. It's worth pointing out as well that yes, Ubiquiti is publicly traded—that is understood and accepted—however, 93% of it is owned by their CEO-founder god-king. So, it is effectively one person's personal fiefdom. And I tend to take a very dim view as a direct result. When you're in cloud and you have suffered a breach, you have severely screwed something up somewhere. These breaches are never, “Someone stole a whole bunch of drives out of an AWS data center.” You have misconfigured something somewhere. And lashing out at people who reported on it is just a bad look.Chris: Definitely. Only error—now, of course, part of the problem here is that our legal system encourages people to not come forward and say, “I screwed up. Here's how I screwed up. Everybody come learn from my mistakes.” The legal professions are also there to manage risk for the company and they're like, “Don't say anything. Don't say anything. Don't even tell the government. Don't say anything.”Whereas we all need to learn from these errors. Which is why I think every time I do see a breach or I do see an indictment, I start diving into it to learn more. I did a blog post on some of the things that happened with Drizly and GitHub, and you know, I think the most interesting thing that came out of Drizly case was the ex-CEO of Drizly, who was CEO at the time of the breach, now has following him, for the rest of his life, an FTC order that says he must implement a security program wherever he goes and works. You know, I don't know what happens when he becomes a Starbucks barista or whatever, but that is on him. That is not on the company; that is on him.And I do think that, you know, we will start seeing more and more chief executive officers, chief security or information security officers becoming accountable to—or for the breaches and being personally accountable or professionally accountable for it. I think we kind of need it, even though, you know, there's only so much a CISO can do.Corey: One of the things that I did when I started consulting independently on AWS bills back in 2016 was, while I was looking at customer environments, I also would do a quick check for a few security baseline things. And I stopped doing it because I kept encountering a bunch of things that needed attention and it completely derailed the entire stated purpose of the engagement. And, frankly, I don't want to be running a security consultancy. There's a reason I focus on AWS bills. And people think I'm kidding, but I swear to you I'm not, when I say that the reason is in part because no one has a middle-of-the-night billing emergency. It is strictly a business-hours problem. Whereas with security, wake up.In fact, the one time I have been woken up in the middle of the night by a customer phone call, they were freaking out because it was a security incident and their bill had just pegged through the stratosphere. It's, “Cool. Fix the security problem first, then we'll worry about the bill during business hours. Bye.” And then I stopped leaving my phone off of Do Not Disturb at night.Chris: Your AWS bill is one of your indicators of compromise. Keep an eye on it.Corey: Oh, absolutely. We've had multiple engagements discover security issues on that. “So, what are these instances in Australia doing?” “We don't have anything there.” “I believe you're being sincere when you say this.”Chris: Yes.Corey: However.Chris: “Last month, you're at $1,000 and this month, you're at $50,000. And oh, by the way, it's the ninth, so you might want to go look at that.”Corey: Here's the problem that you start seeing in large-scale companies though. You or I wind up posting our IAM credentials on GitHub somewhere in public—and I do this from time to time, intentionally with absolutely no permissions attached to a thing—and I started look at the timeline of, “Okay 3, 2, 1, go,” with the push and now I start counting. What happens? At what time does the quarantine policy apply? When do I get an email alert? When do people start trying to exploit it? From where are they trying to exploit it?It's a really interesting thing to look into, just from the position of how this stuff all fits together and works. And that's great, but there's a whole ‘nother piece to it where if you or I were to do such a thing and actually give it admin credentials, okay, my, I don't know, what, $50, $100 a month account that I use for a lot of my test stuff now starts getting charged enormous piles of money that winds up looking like a mortgage in San Francisco, I'm going to notice that. But if you have a company that spending, I don't know, between ten and $20 million a month, do you have any idea how much Bitcoin you've got to be mining in that account to even make a slight dent in the overall trajectory of those accounts?Chris: In the overall bill, a lot. And in a particularly mismanaged account, my experience is you will notice it if you're monitoring billing anomalies on a per-account basis. I think it's important to note, you talked about that quarantine policy. If you look at what actually Amazon drops a deny on, it's effectively start EC2 instances and change IAM policies. It doesn't prevent anybody from listing all your buckets and exfiltrating all your data. It doesn't prevent anybody from firing up Lambdas and other less commonly used resources. Don't assume oh, Amazon dropped the quarantine policy. I'm safe.Corey: I was talking to somebody who spends $4 a month on S3 and they wound up suddenly getting $60 grand a day and Lambda charges, because max out the Lambda concurrency in every region and set it to mine crypto for 15 minutes apiece, yeah, you'll spend $60,000 a day to get, what $500 in crypto. But it's super economical as long as it's in someone else's account. And then Amazon hits them with a straight face on these things, where, “Please pay the bill.” Which is horrifying when there's several orders of magnitude difference between your normal bill and what happens post-breach. But what I did my whole post on “17 Ways to Run Containers on AWS,” followed by “17 More Ways to Run Containers on AWS,” and [unintelligible 00:12:00] about three services away from having a third one ready to go on that, the point is not, “Too many ways to run containers,” because yes, that is true and it's also amusing to me—less so to the containers team at AWS which does not have a sense of humor or sense of self-awareness of which they have been alerted—and fine, but every time you're running a container, it is a way to turn it into a crypto mining operation, in some way shape or form, which means there are almost 40-some-odd services now that can reasonably be used to spin up cryptocurrency mining. And that is the best-case breach scenario in a bunch of ways. It costs a bunch of money and things to clean up, but ‘we lost customer data.' That can destroy companies.Chris: Here's the worst part. Crypto mining is no longer profitable even when I've got stolen API keys because bitcoin's in the toilet. So, now they are going after different things. Actually, the most recent one is they look to see if your account is out of the SCS sandbox and if so, they go back to the tried-and-true way of doing internet scams, which is email spam.Corey: For me, having worked in operations for a very long time, I've been in situations where I worked at Expensify and had access to customer data there. I have worked in other finance companies—I worked at Blackrock. Where I work now, I have access to customer billing data. And let me be serious here for a second, I take all of these things seriously, but I also in all of those roles slept pretty well at night. The one that kept me up was a brief stint I did as the Director of Tech Ops at Grindr over ten years ago because unlike the stuff where I'm spending the rest of my career and my time now, it's not just money anymore.Whereas today, if I get popped, someone can get access to what a bunch of companies are paying AWS. It's scandalous, and I will be sued into oblivion and my company will not exist anymore and I will have a cloud hanging over my head forever. So, I have to be serious about it—Chris: But nobody will die.Corey: Nobody dies. Whereas, “Oh, this person is on Grindr and they're not out publicly,” or they live in a jurisdiction where that is punishable by imprisonment or death, you have blood on your hands, on some level, and I have never wanted that kind of responsibility.Chris: Yeah. It's reasonably scary. I've always been happy to say that, you know, the worst thing that I had to do was keep the Russians off CNN and my friends from downloading Rick and Morty.Corey: Exactly. It's, “Oh, heavens, you're winding up costing some giant conglomerate somewhere theoretical money on streaming subscriptions.” It's not material to the state of the world. And part of it, too, is—what's always informed my approach to things is, I'm not a data hoarder in the way that it seems our entire industry is. For the Last Week in AWS newsletter, the data that I collect and track is pretty freaking small.It's, “You want to sign up for the lastweekinaws.com newsletter. Great, I need your email address.” I don't need your name, I don't need the company you work at. You want to give me a tagged email address? Fine. You want to give me some special address that goes through some anonymizing thing? Terrific. I need to know where I'm sending the newsletter. And then I run a query on that for metrics sometimes, which is this really sophisticated database query called a count. How many subscribers do I have at any given point because that matters to our sponsors. But can we get—you give us any demographic? No, I cannot. I can't. I have people who [unintelligible 00:15:43] follow up surveys sometimes and that's it.Chris: And you're able to make money doing that. You don't have to collect, okay, you know, Chris's zip code is this and Bob's zip code is that and Frank's zip code is the other thing.Corey: Exactly.Chris: Or job titles, or you know, our mother's maiden name or anything else like that.Corey: I talk about what's going on in the world of AWS, so it sort of seems to me that if you're reading this stuff every week, either because of the humor or in spite of the humor, you probably are in a position where services and goods tied to that ecosystem would be well-received by you or one of the other 32,000 people who happen to be reading the newsletter or listening to the podcast or et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. It's an old-timey business model. It's okay, I want to wind up selling, I don't know, expensive wristwatches. Well, maybe I'll advertise in a magazine that caters to people who have an interest in wristwatches, or caters to a demographic that traditionally buys those wristwatches. And okay, we'll run an ad campaign and see if it works.Chris: It's been traditional advertising, not the micro-targeting stuff. And you know, television was the same way back in the broadcast era, you know? You watched a particular show, people of that demographic who watched that particular show had certain advertisers they wanted.Corey: That part of the challenge I've seen too, from sponsors of this show, for example, is they know it works, but they're trying to figure out how to do any form of attribution on this. And my answer—which sounds self-serving, but it's true—is, there's no effective way to do it because every time you try, like, “Enter this coupon code,” yeah, I assure you, some of these things wind up costing millions of dollars to deploy at large companies at scale and they provide value for doing it. No one's going to punch in a coupon code to get 10% off or something like that. Procurement is going to negotiate custom contracts and it's going to be brought up maybe by someone who heard the podcast ad. Maybe it just sits in the back of their mind until they hear something and it just winds of contributing to a growing awareness of these things.You're never going to do attribution that works on things like that. People try sometimes to, “Oh, you'll get $25 in credit,” or, “We'll give you a free t-shirt if you fill out the form.” Yeah, but now you're biasing for people who find that a material motivator. When I'm debating what security suite I'm going to roll out at my enterprise I don't want a free t-shirt for that. In fact, if I get a free t-shirt and I wear that shirt from the vendor around the office while I'm trying to champion bringing that thing in, I look a little compromised.Chris: Yeah. Yeah, I am—[laugh] I got no response to that [laugh].Corey: No, no. I hear you. One thing I do want to talk about is the last time we spoke, you mentioned you were involved in getting fwd:cloudsec—a conference—off the ground. Like all good cloud security conferences, it's named after an email subject line.It is co-located with re:Inforce this year in Anaheim, California. Somewhat ominously enough, I used to live a block-and-a-half away from the venue. But I don't anymore and in fact, because nobody checks the global event list when they schedule these things, I will be on the other side of the world officiating a wedding the same day. So, yet again, I will not be at re:Inforce.Chris: That is a shame because I think you would have made an excellent person to contribute to our call for papers and attend. So yes, fwd:cloudsec is deliberately actually named after a subject line because all of the other Amazon conferences seem to be that way. And we didn't want to be going backwards and thinking, you know, past tense. We were looking forward to our conference. Yeah, so we're effectively a vendor-neutral cloud security conference. We liked the idea of being able to take the talks that Amazon PR would never allow on stage at re:Inforce and run with it.Corey: I would question that. I do want to call that out because I gave a talk at re:Invent one year about a vulnerability I found and reported, with the help of two other people, Scott Piper and Brandon Sherman, to the AWS security team. And we were able to talk about that on stage with Zack Glick, who at the time, was one of basically God's own prototypes, working over in the AWS environment next to Dan [Erson 00:19:56]. Now, Dan remains the salt of the earth, and if he ever leaves basically just short the entire US economy. It's easier. He is amazing. I digress. The point being is that they were very open about talking about an awful lot of stuff that I would never have expected that they would be okay with.Chris: And last year at re:Inforce, they had an excellent, excellent chalk talk—but it was a chalk talk, not recorded—on how ransomware attacks operate. And they actually, like, revealed some internal, very anonymized patterns of how attacks are working. So, they're starting to realize what we've been saying in the cloud security community for a while, which is, we need more legitimate threat intelligence. On the other hand, they don't want to call it threat intelligence because the word threat is threatening, and therefore, you know, we're going to just call it, you know, patterns or whatever. And our conference is, again, also multi-cloud, a concept that until recently, AWS, you know, didn't really want to acknowledge that there were other clouds and that people would use both of them [crosstalk 00:21:01]—Corey: Multi-cloud security is a nightmare. It's just awful.Chris: Yeah, I don't like multi-cloud, but I've come to realize that it is a thing. That you will either start at a company that says, “We're AWS and we're uni-cloud,” and then next thing, you know, either some rogue developer out there has gone and spun up an Azure subscription or your acquire somebody who's in GCP, or heaven forbid, you have to go into some, you know, tinhorn dictator's jurisdiction and they require you to be on-prem or leverage Oracle Cloud or something. And suddenly, congratulations, you're now multi-cloud. So yes, our goal is really to be the things that aren't necessarily onstage or aren't all just, “It's great.” Even your talk was how great the incident response and vulnerability remediation process was.Corey: How great my experience with it was at the time, to be clear. Because I also have gotten to a point where I am very aware that, in many cases when dealing with AWS, my reputation precedes me. So, when I wind up tweeting about a problem or opening a support case, I do not accept as a given that my experience is what everyone is going to experience. But a lot of the things they did made a lot of sense and I was frankly, impressed that they were willing to just talk about anything that they did internally. Because previously that had not been a thing that they did in open forums like that.Chris: But you go back to the Glue incident where somebody found a bug and they literally went and went to every single CloudTrail event going back to the dawn of the service to validate that, okay, the, only two times we ever saw this happen were between the two researcher's accounts who disclosed it. And so, kudos to them for that level of forward communication to their customers because yeah, I think we still haven't heard anything out of Azure for last year's—or a year-and-a-half ago's Wiz findings.Corey: Well, they did do a broad blog post about this that they put out, which I thought, “Okay, that was great. More of this please.” Because until they start talking about security issues and culture and the remediation thereof, I don't give a shit what they have to say about almost anything else because it all comes back to security. The only things I use Azure for, which admittedly has some great stuff; their computer vision API? Brilliant—but the things I use them for are things that I start from a premise of security is not important to that service.The thing I use it for on the soon-to-be-pivoted to Mastodon Twitter thread client that I built, it writes alt-text for images that are about to be put out publicly. Yeah, there's no security issue from that perspective. I am very hard-pressed to imagine a scenario in which that were not true.Chris: I can come up with a couple, but you know—Corey: It feels really contrived. And honestly, that's the thing that concerns me, too: the fact that I finally read, somewhat recently, an AWS white paper talking about—was it a white paper or was it blog post? I forget the exact media that it took. But it was about how they are seeing ransomware attacks on S3, which was huge because before that, I assumed it was something that was being made up by vendors to sell me something.Chris: So, that was the chalk talk.Corey: Yes.Chris: They finally got the chalk talk from re:Inforce, they gave it again at re:Invent because it was so well received and now they have it as a blog post out there, so that, you know, it's not just for people who show up in the room, they can hear it; it's actually now documented out there. And so, kudos to the Amazon security team for really getting that sort of threat intelligence out there to the community.Corey: Now, it's in writing, and that's something that I can cite as opposed to, “Well, I was at re:Invent and I heard—” Yeah, we saw the drink tab. We know what you might have thought you heard or saw at re:Invent. Give us something we can take to the board.Chris: There were a lot of us on that bar tab, so it's not all you.Corey: Exactly. And it was my pleasure to do it, to be clear. But getting back to fwd:cloudsec, I'm going to do you a favor. Whether it's an actual favor or the word favor belongs in quotes, the way that I submit CFPs, or conference talks, is optimized because I don't want to build a talk that is never going to get picked up. Why bother to go through all the work until I have to give it somewhere?So, I start with a catchy title and then three to five sentences. And if people accept it, great, then I get to build the talk. This is a forcing function in some ways because if you get a little delayed, they will not move the conference for you. I've checked. But the title of a talk that I think someone should submit for fwd:cloudsec is, “I Am Smarter Than You, so Cloud Security is Easy.”And the format and the conceit of the talk is present it with sort of a stand-it-up-to-take-it-down level of approach where you are over-confident in the fact that you are smarter than everyone else and best practices don't apply to you and so much of this stuff is just security theater designed as a revenue extraction mechanism as opposed to something you should actually be doing. And talk about why none of these things matter because you use good security and you know, it's good because you came up with it and there's no way that you could come up with something that you couldn't break because you're smart. It says so right in the title and you're on stage and you have a microphone. They don't. Turn that into something. I feel like there's a great way to turn that in a bunch of different directions. I'd love to see someone give that talk.Chris: I think Nickolas Sharp thought that too.Corey: [laugh]. Exactly. In fact, that will be a great way to bring it back around at the end. And it's like, “And that's why I'm better at security than you are. If you have any questions beyond this, you can reach me at whatever correctional institute I go in on Thursday.” Exactly. There's ways to make it fun and engaging. Because from my perspective, talks have to be entertaining or people don't pay attention.Chris: They're either entertaining, or they're so new and advanced. We're definitely an advanced cloud security practice thing. They were 500 levels. Not to brag or anything, but you know, you want the two to 300-level stuff, you can go CCJ up the street. We're hitting and going above and beyond what a lot of the [unintelligible 00:27:18]—Corey: I am not as advanced on that path as you are; I want to be very clear on this. You speak, I listen. You're one of those people when it comes to security. Because again, no one's life is hanging in the balance with respect to what I do. I am confident in our security posture here, but nothing's perfect. Everything is exploitable, on some level.It's also not my core area of focus. It is yours. And if you are not better than I am at this, then I have done something sort of strange, or so of you, in the same way that it is a near certainty—but not absolute—that I am better at optimizing AWS bills than you are. Specialists exist for a reason and to discount that expertise is the peak of hubris. Put that in your talk.Chris: Yeah. So, one talk I really want to see, and I've been threatening to give it for a while, is okay, if there's seventeen ways—or sorry, seventeen times two, soon to be seventeen times three ways to run containers in AWS, there's that many ways to exfiltrate credentials from those containers. What are all of those things? Do we have a holistic way of understanding, this is how credentials can be exfiltrated so that we then as defenders can go figure out, okay, how do we build detections and mitigations for this?Corey: Yeah. I'm a huge fan of Canarytokens myself, for that exact purpose. There are many devices I have where the only credentials in plain text on disk are things that as soon as they get used, I wind up with a bunch of things screaming at me that there's been a problem and telling me where it is. I'm not saying that my posture is impenetrable. Far from it. But you're going to have to work for it a little bit harder than running some random off-the-shelf security scanner against my AWS account and finding, oops, I forgot to turn on a bucket protection.Chris: And the other area that I think is getting really interesting is, all of the things that have credentials into your Cloud account, whether it's something like CircleCI or GitHub. I was having a conversation with somebody just this morning and we were talking about Roles Anywhere, and I was like, “Roles Anywhere is great if you've got a good strong PKI solution and can keep that private certificate or that certificate you need safe.” If you just put it on a disk, like, you would have put your AKIA and secret on a desk, congratulations, you haven't really improved security. You've just gotten rid of the IAM users that are being flagged in your CSPM tool, and congratulations, you have, in fact, achieved security theater.Corey: It's obnoxious, on some level. And part of the problem is cost and security are aligned and that people care about them right after they really should have cared about them. The difference is you can beg, cry, whine, et cetera to AWS for concessions, you can raise another round of funding; there have solutions with money. But security? That ship has already sailed.Chris: Yeah. Once the data is out, the data is out. Now, I will say on the bill, you get reminded of it every month, about three or four days after. It's like, “Oh. Crap, yeah, I should have turned off that EC2 instance. I just burned $100.” Or, “Oh hey, we didn't turn off that application. I just burned $100,000.” That doesn't happen on security. Security events tend to be few and far between; they're just much bigger when they happen.Corey: I really want to thank you for taking the time to chat with me. I'm sure I'll have you back on between now and re:Inforce slash fwd:cloudsec or anything else we come up with that resembles an email subject line. If people want to learn more and follow along with your adventures—as they should—where's the best place for him to find you these days?Chris: So, I am now pretty much living on Mastodon on the InfoSec Exchange. And my website, chrisfarris.com is where you can find the link to that because it's not just at, you know, whatever. You have to give the whole big long URL in Mastodon. It's no longer—Corey: Yeah. It's like a full-on email address with weird domains.Chris: Exactly, yeah. So, find me at http colon slash slash infosec dot exchange slash at jcfarris. Or just hit Chris Farris and follow the links. For fwd:cloudsec, we are conveniently located at fwdcloudsec.org, which is F-W-D cloud sec dot org. No colons because I don't think those are valid in whois.Corey: Excellent choice. And of course, links to that go in the [show notes 00:31:32], so click the button. It's easier. Thanks again for your time. I really appreciate it.Chris: Thank you.Corey: Chris Farris, Cloud Security Nerd at Turbot slash Turbo. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, along with an angry comment that resembles a lawsuit being filed, and then have it processed-served to me because presumably, you work at Ubiquiti.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.

Screaming in the Cloud
Solving for Cloud Security at Scale with Chris Farris

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 24, 2023 35:39


About Chris Chris Farris has been in the IT field since 1994 primarily focused on Linux, networking, and security. For the last 8 years, he has focused on public-cloud and public-cloud security. He has built and evolved multiple cloud security programs for major media companies, focusing on enabling the broader security team's objectives of secure design, incident response and vulnerability management. He has developed cloud security standards and baselines to provide risk-based guidance to development and operations teams. As a practitioner, he's architected and implemented multiple serverless and traditional cloud applications focused on deployment, security, operations, and financial modeling.Chris now does cloud security research for Turbot and evangelizes for the open source tool Steampipe. He is one if the organizers of the fwd:cloudsec conference (https://fwdcloudsec.org) and has given multiple presentations at AWS conferences and BSides events.When not building things with AWS's building blocks, he enjoys building Legos with his kid and figuring out what interesting part of the globe to travel to next. He opines on security and technology on Twitter and his website https://www.chrisfarris.comLinks Referenced: Turbot: https://turbot.com/ fwd:cloudsec: https://fwdcloudsec.org/ Steampipe: https://steampipe.io/ Steampipe block: https://steampipe.io/blog TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Tailscale SSH is a new, and arguably better way to SSH. Once you've enabled Tailscale SSH on your server and user devices, Tailscale takes care of the rest. So you don't need to manage, rotate, or distribute new SSH keys every time someone on your team leaves. Pretty cool, right? Tailscale gives each device in your network a node key to connect to your VPN, and uses that same key for SSH authorization and encryption. So basically you're SSHing the same way that you're already managing your network.So what's the benefit? Well, built-in key rotation, the ability to manage permissions as code, connectivity between any two devices, and reduced latency. You can even ask users to re-authenticate SSH connections for that extra bit of security to keep the compliance folks happy. Try Tailscale now - it's free forever for personal use.Corey: This episode is sponsored by our friends at Logicworks. Getting to the cloud is challenging enough for many places, especially maintaining security, resiliency, cost control, agility, etc, etc, etc. Things break, configurations drift, technology advances, and organizations, frankly, need to evolve. How can you get to the cloud faster and ensure you have the right team in place to maintain success over time? Day 2 matters. Work with a partner who gets it - Logicworks combines the cloud expertise and platform automation to customize solutions to meet your unique requirements. Get started by chatting with a cloud specialist today at snark.cloud/logicworks. That's snark.cloud/logicworksCorey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. My guest today is someone that I have been meaning to invite slash drag onto this show for a number of years. We first met at re:Inforce the first year that they had such a thing, Amazon's security conference for cloud, as is Amazon's tradition, named after an email subject line. Chris Farris is a cloud security nerd at Turbot. He's also one of the organizers for fwd:cloudsec, another security conference named after an email subject line with a lot more self-awareness than any of Amazon's stuff. Chris, thank you for joining me.Chris: Oh, thank you for dragging me on. You can let go of my hair now.Corey: Wonderful, wonderful. That's why we're all having the thinning hair going on. People just use it to drag us to and fro, it seems. So, you've been doing something that I'm only going to describe as weird lately because your background—not that dissimilar from mine—is as a practitioner. You've been heavily involved in the security space for a while and lately, I keep seeing an awful lot of things with your name on them getting sucked up by the giant app surveillance apparatus deployed to the internet, looking for basically any mention of AWS that I wind up using to write my newsletter and feed the content grist mill every year. What are you doing and how'd you get there?Chris: So, what am I doing right now is, I'm in marketing. It's kind of a, you know, “Oops, I'm sorry I did that.”Corey: Oh, the running gag is, you work in DevRel; that means, “Oh, you're in marketing, but they're scared to tell you that.” You're self-aware.Chris: Yeah.Corey: Good for you.Chris: I'm willing to address that I'm in marketing now. And I've been a cloud practitioner since probably 2014, cloud security since about 2017. And then just decided, the problem that we have in the cloud security community is a lot of us are just kind of sitting in a corner in our companies and solving problems for our companies, but we're not solving the problems at scale. So, I wanted a job that would allow me to reach a broader audience and help a broader audience. Where I see cloud security having—you know, or cloud in general falling down is Amazon makes it really hard for you to do your side of shared responsibility, and so we need to be out there helping customers understand what they need to be doing. So, I am now at a company called Turbot and we're really trying to promote cloud security.Corey: One of the first promoted guest episodes of this show was David Boeke, your CTO, and one of the things that I regret is that I've sort of lost track of Turbot over the past few years because, yeah, one or two things might have been going on during that timeline as I look back at having kids in the middle of a pandemic and the deadly plague o'er land. And suddenly, every conversation takes place over Zoom, which is like, “Oh, good, it's like a happy hour only instead, now it's just like a conference call for work.” It's like, ‘Conference Calls: The Drinking Game' is never the great direction to go in. But it seems the world is recovering. We're going to be able to spend some time together at re:Invent by all accounts that I'm actively looking forward to.As of this recording, you're relatively new to Turbot, and I figured out that you were going there because, once again, content hits my filters. You wrote a fascinating blog post that hits on an interest of mine that I don't usually talk about much because it's off-putting to some folk, and these days, I don't want to get yelled at and more than I have to about the experience of traveling, I believe it was to an all-hands on the other side of the world.Chris: Yep. So, my first day on the job at Turbot, I was landing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, having left the United States 24 hours—or was it 48? It's hard to tell when you go to the other side of the planet and the time zones have also shifted—and then having left my prior company day before that. But yeah, so Turbot about traditionally has an annual event where we all get together in person. We're a completely remote company, but once a year, we all get together in person in our integrate event.And so, that was my first day on the job. And then you know, it was basically two weeks of reasonably intense hackathons, building out a lot of stuff that hopefully will show up open-source shortly. And then yeah, meeting all of my coworkers. And that was nice.Corey: You've always had a focus through all the time that I've known you and all the public content that you've put out there that has come across my desk that seems to center around security. It's sort of an area that I give a nod to more often than I would like, on some level, but that tends to be your bread and butter. Your focus seems to be almost overwhelmingly on I would call it AWS security. Is that fair to say or is that a mischaracterization of how you view it slash what you actually do? Because, again, we have these parasocial relationships with voices on the internet. And it's like, “Oh, yeah, I know all about that person.” Yeah, you've met them once and all you know other than that is what they put on Twitter.Chris: You follow me on Twitter. Yeah, I would argue that yes, a lot of what I do is AWS-related security because in the past, a lot of what I've been responsible for is cloud security in AWS. But I've always worked for companies that were multi-cloud; it's just that 90% of everything was Amazon and so therefore 90% of my time, 90% of my problems, 90% of my risk was all in AWS. I've been trying to break out of that. I've been trying to understand the other clouds.One of the nice aspects of this role and working on Steampipe is I am now experimenting with other clouds. The whole goal here is to be able to scale our ability as an industry and as security practitioners to support multiple clouds. Because whether we want to or not, we've got it. And so, even though 90% of my spend, 90% of my resources, 90% of my applications may be in AWS, that 10% that I'm ignoring is probably more than 10% of my risk, and we really do need to understand and support major clouds equally.Corey: One post you had recently that I find myself in wholehearted agreement with is on the adoption of Tailscale in the enterprise. I use it for all of my personal nonsense and it is transformative. I like the idea of what that portends for a multi-cloud, or poly-cloud, or whatever the hell we're calling it this week, sort of architectures were historically one of the biggest problems in getting to clouds two speak to one another and manage them in an intelligent way is the security models are different, the user identity stuff is different as well, and the network stuff has always been nightmarish. Well, with Tailscale, you don't have to worry about that in the same way at all. You can, more or less, ignore it, turn on host-based firewalls for everything and just allow Tailscale. And suddenly, okay, I don't really have to think about this in the same way.Chris: Yeah. And you get the micro-segmentation out of it, too, which is really nice. I will agree that I had not looked at Tailscale until I was asked to look at Tailscale, and then it was just like, “Oh, I am completely redoing my home network on that.” But looking at it, it's going to scare some old-school network engineers, it's going to impact their livelihoods and that is going to make them very defensive. And so, what I wanted to do in that post was kind of address, as a practitioner, if I was looking at this with an enterprise lens, what are the concerns you would have on deploying Tailscale in your environment?A lot of those were, you know, around user management. I think the big one that is—it's a new thing in enterprise security, but kind of this host profiling, which is hey, before I let your laptop on the network, I'm going to go make sure that you have antivirus and some kind of EDR, XDR, blah-DR agents so that you know we have a reasonable thing that you're not going to just go and drop [unintelligible 00:09:01] on the network and next thing you know, we're Maersk. Tailscale, that's going to be their biggest thing that they are going to have to figure out is how do they work with some of these enterprise concerns and things along those lines. But I think it's an excellent technology, it was super easy to set up. And the ability to fine-tune and microsegment is great.Corey: Wildly so. They occasionally sponsor my nonsense. I have no earthly idea whether this episode is one of them because we have an editorial firewall—they're not paying me to set any of this stuff, like, “And this is brought to you by whatever.” Yeah, that's the sponsored ad part. This is just, I'm in love with the product.One of the most annoying things about it to me is that I haven't found a reason to give them money yet because the free tier for my personal stuff is very comfortably sized and I don't have a traditional enterprise network or anything like that people would benefit from over here. For one area in cloud security that I think I have potentially been misunderstood around, so I want to take at least this opportunity to clear the air on it a little bit has been that, by all accounts, I've spent the last, mmm, few months or so just absolutely beating the crap out of Azure. Before I wind up adding a little nuance and context to that, I'd love to get your take on what, by all accounts, has been a pretty disastrous year-and-a-half for Azure security.Chris: I think it's been a disastrous year-and-a-half for Azure security. Um—[laugh].Corey: [laugh]. That was something of a leading question, wasn't it?Chris: Yeah, no, I mean, it is. And if you think, though, back, Microsoft's repeatedly had these the ebb and flow of security disasters. You know, Code Red back in whatever the 2000s, NT 4.0 patching back in the '90s. So, I think we're just hitting one of those peaks again, or hopefully, we're hitting the peak and not [laugh] just starting the uptick. A lot of what Azure has built is stuff that they already had, commercial off-the-shelf software, they wrapped multi-tenancy around it, gave it a new SKU under the Azure name, and called is cloud. So, am I super-surprised that somebody figured out how to leverage a Jupyter notebook to find the back-end credentials to drop the firewall tables to go find the next guy over's Cosmos DB? No, I'm not.Corey: I find their failures to be less egregious on a technical basis because let's face it, let's be very clear here, this stuff is hard. I am not pretending for even a slight second that I'm a better security engineer than the very capable, very competent people who work there. This stuff is incredibly hard. And I'm not—Chris: And very well-funded people.Corey: Oh, absolutely, yeah. They make more than I do, presumably. But it's one of those areas where I'm not sitting here trying to dunk on them, their work, their efforts, et cetera, and I don't do a good enough job of clarifying that. My problem is the complete radio silence coming out of Microsoft on this. If AWS had a series of issues like this, I'm hard-pressed to imagine a scenario where they would not have much more transparent communications, they might very well trot out a number of their execs to go on a tour to wind up talking about these things and what they're doing systemically to change it.Because six of these in, it's like, okay, this is now a cultural problem. It's not one rando engineer wandering around the company screwing things up on a rotational basis. It's, what are you going to do? It's unlikely that firing Steven is going to be your fix for these things. So, that is part of it.And then most recently, they wound up having a blog post on the MSRC, the Microsoft Security Resource Center is I believe that acronym? The [mrsth], whatever; and it sounds like a virus you pick up in a hospital—but the problem that I have with it is that they spent most of that being overly defensive and dunking on SOCRadar, the vulnerability researcher who found this and reported it to them. And they had all kinds of quibbles with how it was done, what they did with it, et cetera, et cetera. It's, “Excuse me, you're the ones that left customer data sitting out there in the Azure equivalent of an S3 bucket and you're calling other people out for basically doing your job for you? Excuse me?”Chris: But it wasn't sensitive customer data. It was only the contract information, so therefore it was okay.Corey: Yeah, if I put my contract information out there and try and claim it's not sensitive information, my clients will laugh and laugh as they sue me into the Stone Age.Chris: Yeah well, clearly, you don't have the same level of clickthrough terms that Microsoft is able to negotiate because, you know, [laugh].Corey: It's awful as well, it doesn't even work because, “Oh, it's okay, I lost some of your data, but that's okay because it wasn't particularly sensitive.” Isn't that kind of up to you?Chris: Yes. And if A, I'm actually, you know, a big AWS shop and then I'm looking at Azure and I've got my negotiations in there and Amazon gets wind that I'm negotiating with Azure, that's not going to do well for me and my business. So no, this kind of material is incredibly sensitive. And that was an incredibly tone-deaf response on their part. But you know, to some extent, it was more of a response than we've seen from some of the other Azure multi-tenancy breakdowns.Corey: Yeah, at least they actually said something. I mean, there is that. It's just—it's wild to me. And again, I say this as an Azure customer myself. Their computer vision API is basically just this side of magic, as best I can tell, and none of the other providers have anything like it.That's what I want. But, you know, it almost feels like that service is under NDA because no one talks about it when they're using this service. I did a whole blog post singing its praises and no one from that team reached out to me to say, “Hey, glad you liked it.” Not that they owe me anything, but at the same time it's incredible. Why am I getting shut out? It's like, does this company just have an entire policy of not saying anything ever to anyone at any time? It seems it.Chris: So, a long time ago, I came to this realization that even if you just look at the terminology of the three providers, Amazon has accounts. Why does Amazon have Amazon—or AWS accounts? Because they're a retail company and that's what you signed up with to buy your underwear. Google has projects because they were, I guess, a developer-first thing and that was how they thought about it is, “Oh, you're going to go build something. Here's your project.”What does Microsoft have? Microsoft Azure Subscriptions. Because they are still about the corporate enterprise IT model of it's really about how much we're charging you, not really about what you're getting. So, given that you're not a big enterprise IT customer, you don't—I presume—do lots and lots of golfing at expensive golf resorts, you're probably not fitting their demographic.Corey: You're absolutely not. And that's wild to me. And yet, here we are.Chris: Now, what's scary is they are doing so many interesting things with artificial intelligence… that if… their multi-tenancy boundaries are as bad as we're starting to see, then what else is out there? And more and more, we is carbon-based life forms are relying on Microsoft and other cloud providers to build AI, that's kind of a scary thing. Go watch Satya's keynote at Microsoft Ignite and he's showing you all sorts of ways that AI is going to start replacing the gig economy. You know, it's not just Tesla and self-driving cars at this point. Dali is going to replace the independent graphics designer.They've got things coming out in their office suite that are going to replace the mom-and-pop marketing shops that are generating menus and doing marketing plans for your local restaurants or whatever. There's a whole slew of things where they're really trying to replace people.Corey: That is a wild thing to me. And part of the problem I have in covering AWS is that I have to differentiate in a bunch of different ways between AWS and its Amazon corporate parent. And they have that problem, too, internally. Part of the challenge they have, in many cases, is that perks you give to employees have to scale to one-and-a-half million people, many of them in fulfillment center warehouse things. And that is a different type of problem that a company, like for example, Google, where most of their employees tend to be in office job-style environments.That's a weird thing and I don't know how to even start conceptualizing things operating at that scale. Everything that they do is definitionally a very hard problem when you have to make it scale to that point. What all of the hyperscale cloud providers do is, from where I sit, complete freaking magic. The fact that it works as well as it does is nothing short of a modern-day miracle.Chris: Yeah, and it is more than just throwing hardware at the problem, which was my on-prem solution to most of the things. “Oh, hey. We need higher availability? Okay, we're going to buy two of everything.” We called it the Noah's Ark model, and we have an A side and a B side.And, “Oh, you know what? Just in case we're going to buy some extra capacity and put it in a different city so that, you know, we can just fail from our primary city to our secondary city.” That doesn't work at the cloud provider scale. And really, we haven't seen a major cloud outage—I mean, like, a bad one—in quite a while.Corey: This episode is sponsored in part by Honeycomb. When production is running slow, it's hard to know where problems originate. Is it your application code, users, or the underlying systems? I've got five bucks on DNS, personally. Why scroll through endless dashboards while dealing with alert floods, going from tool to tool to tool that you employ, guessing at which puzzle pieces matter? Context switching and tool sprawl are slowly killing both your team and your business. You should care more about one of those than the other; which one is up to you. Drop the separate pillars and enter a world of getting one unified understanding of the one thing driving your business: production. With Honeycomb, you guess less and know more. Try it for free at honeycomb.io/screaminginthecloud. Observability: it's more than just hipster monitoring.Corey: The outages are always fascinating, just from the way that they are reported in the mainstream media. And again, this is hard, I get it. I am not here to crap on journalists. They, for some ungodly, unknowable reason, have decided not to spend their entire career focusing on the nuances of one very specific, very deep industry. I don't know why.But as [laugh] a result, they wind up getting a lot of their baseline facts wrong about these things. And that's fair. I'm not here to necessarily act as an Amazon spokesperson when these things happen. They have an awful lot of very well-paid people who can do that. But it is interesting just watching the blowback and the reaction of whatever there's an outage, the conversation is never “Does Amazon or Azure or Google suck?” It's, “Does cloud suck as a whole?”That's part of the reason I care so much about Azure getting their act together. If it were just torpedoing Microsoft's reputation, then well, that's sad, but okay. But it extends far beyond that to a point where it's almost where the enterprise groundhog sees the shadow of a data breach and then we get six more years of data center build-outs instead of moving things to a cloud. I spent too many years working in data centers and I have the scars from the cage nuts and crimping patch cables frantically in the middle of the night to prove it. I am thrilled at the fact that I don't believe I will ever again have to frantically drive across town in the middle of the night to replace a hard drive before the rest of the array degrades. Cloud has solved those problems beautifully. I don't want to go back to the Dark Ages.Chris: Yeah, and I think that there's a general potential that we could start seeing this big push towards going back on-prem for effectively sovereign data reasons, whether it's this country has said, “You cannot store your data about our citizens outside of our borders,” and either they're doing that because they do not trust the US Silicon Valley privacy or whatever, or because if it's outside of our borders, then our secret police agents can come knocking on the door at two in the morning to go find out what some dissidents' viewings habits might have been, I see sovereign cloud as this thing that may be a back step from this ubiquitous thing that we have right now in Amazon, Azure, and Google. And so, as we start getting to the point in the history books where we start seeing maps with lots of flags, I think we're going to start seeing a bifurcation of cloud as just a whole thing. We see it already right now. The AWS China partition is not owned by Amazon, it is not run by Amazon, it is not controlled by Amazon. It is controlled by the communist government of China. And nobody is doing business in Russia right now, but if they had not done what they had done earlier this year, we might very well see somebody spinning up a cloud provider that is completely controlled by and in the Russian government.Corey: Well, yes or no, but I want to challenge that assessment for a second because I've had conversations with a number of folks about this where people say, “Okay, great. Like, is the alt-right, for example, going to have better options now that there might be a cloud provider spinning up there?” Or, “Well, okay, what about a new cloud provider to challenge the dominance of the big three?” And there are all these edge cases, either geopolitically or politically based upo—or folks wanting to wind up approaching it from a particular angle, but if we were hired to build out an MVP of a hyperscale cloud provider, like, the budget for that MVP would look like one 100 billion at this point to get started and just get up to a point of critical mass before you could actually see if this thing has legs. And we'd probably burn through almost all of that before doing a single dime in revenue.Chris: Right. And then you're doing that in small markets. Outside of the China partition, these are not massively large markets. I think Oracle is going down an interesting path with its idea of Dedicated Cloud and Oracle Alloy [unintelligible 00:22:52].Corey: I like a lot of what Oracle's doing, and if younger me heard me say that, I don't know how hard I'd hit myself, but here we are. Their free tier for Oracle Cloud is amazing, their data transfer prices are great, and their entire approach of, “We'll build an entire feature complete region in your facility and charge you what, from what I can tell, is a very reasonable amount of money,” works. And it is feature complete, not, “Well, here are the three services that we're going to put in here and everything else is well… it's just sort of a toehold there so you can start migrating it into our big cloud.” No. They're doing it right from that perspective.The biggest problem they've got is the word Oracle at the front end and their, I would say borderline addiction to big-E enterprise markets. I think the future of cloud looks a lot more like cloud-native companies being founded because those big enterprises are starting to describe themselves in similar terminology. And as we've seen in the developer ecosystem, as go startups, so do big companies a few years later. Walk around any big company that's undergoing a digital transformation, you'll see a lot more Macs on desktops, for example. You'll see CI/CD processes in place as opposed to, “Well, oh, you want something new, it's going to be eight weeks to get a server rack downstairs and accounting is going to have 18 pages of forms for you to fill out.” No, it's “click the button,” or—Chris: Don't forget the six months of just getting the financial CapEx approvals.Corey: Exactly.Chris: You have to go through the finance thing before you even get to start talking to techies about when you get your server. I think Oracle is in an interesting place though because it is embracing the fact that it is number four, and so therefore, it's like we are going to work with AWS, we are going to work with Azure, our database can run in AWS or it can run in our cloud, we can interconnect directly, natively, seamlessly with Azure. If I were building a consumer-based thing and I was moving into one of these markets where one of these governments was demanding something like a sovereign cloud, Oracle is a great place to go and throw—okay, all of our front-end consumer whatever is all going to sit in AWS because that's what we do for all other countries. For this one country, we're just going to go and build this thing in Oracle and we're going to leverage Oracle Alloy or whatever, and now suddenly, okay, their data is in their country and it's subject to their laws but I don't have to re-architect to go into one of these, you know, little countries with tin horn dictators.Corey: It's the way to do multi-cloud right, from my perspective. I'll use a component service in a different cloud, I'm under no illusions, though, in doing that I'm increasing my resiliency. I'm not removing single points of failure; I'm adding them. And I make that trade-off on a case-by-case basis, knowingly. But there is a case for some workloads—probably not yours if you're listening to this; assume not, but when you have more context, maybe so—where, okay, we need to be across multiple providers for a variety of strategic or contextual reasons for this workload.That does not mean everything you build needs to be able to do that. It means you're going to make trade-offs for that workload, and understanding the boundaries of where that starts and where that stops is going to be important. That is not the worst idea in the world for a given appropriate workload, that you can optimize stuff into a container and then can run, more or less, anywhere that can take a container. But that is also not the majority of most people's workloads.Chris: Yeah. And I think what that comes back to from the security practitioner standpoint is you have to support not just your primary cloud, your favorite cloud, the one you know, you have to support any cloud. And whether that's, you know, hey, congratulations. Your developers want to use Tailscale because it bypasses a ton of complexity in getting these remote island VPCs from this recent acquisition integrated into your network or because you're going into a new market and you have to support Oracle Cloud in Saudi Arabia, then you as a practitioner have to kind of support any cloud.And so, one of the reasons that I've joined and I'm working on, and so excited about Steampipe is it kind of does give you that. It is a uniform interface to not just AWS, Azure, and Google, but all sorts of clouds, whether it's GitHub or Oracle, or Tailscale. So, that's kind of the message I have for security practitioners at this point is, I tried, I fought, I screamed and yelled and ranted on Twitter, against, you know, doing multi-cloud, but at the end of the day, we were still multi-cloud.Corey: When I see these things evolving, is that, yeah, as a practitioner, we're increasingly having to work across multiple providers, but not to a stupendous depth that's the intimidating thing that scares the hell out of people. I still remember my first time with the AWS console, being so overwhelmed with a number of services, and there were 12. Now, there are hundreds, and I still feel that same sense of being overwhelmed, but I also have the context now to realize that over half of all customer spend globally is on EC2. That's one service. Yes, you need, like, five more to get it to work, but okay.And once you go through learning that to get started, and there's a lot of moving parts around it, like, “Oh, God, I have to do this for every service?” No, take Route 53—my favorite database, but most people use it as a DNS service—you can go start to finish on basically everything that service does that a human being is going to use in less than four hours, and then you're more or less ready to go. Everything is not the hairy beast that is EC2. And most of those services are not for you, whoever you are, whatever you do, most AWS services are not for you. Full stop.Chris: Yes and no. I mean, as a security practitioner, you need to know what your developers are doing, and I've worked in large organizations with lots of things and I would joke that, oh, yeah, I'm sure we're using every service but the IoT, and then I go and I look at our bill, and I was like, “Oh, why are we dropping that much on IoT?” Oh, because they wanted to use the Managed MQTT service.Corey: Ah, I start with the bill because the bill is the source of truth.Chris: Yes, they wanted to use the Managed MQTT service. Okay, great. So, we're now in IoT. But how many of those things have resource policies, how many of those things can be made public, and how many of those things are your CSPM actually checking for and telling you that, hey, a developer has gone out somewhere and made this SageMaker notebook public, or this MQTT topic public. And so, that's where you know, you need to have that level of depth and then you've got to have that level of depth in each cloud. To some extent, if the cloud is just the core basic VMs, object storage, maybe some networking, and a managed relational database, super simple to understand what all you need to do to build a baseline to secure that. As soon as you start adding in on all of the fancy services that AWS has. I re—Corey: Yeah, migrating your Step Functions workflow to other cloud is going to be a living goddamn nightmare. Migrating something that you stuffed into a container and run on EC2 or Fargate is probably going to be a lot simpler. But there are always nuances.Chris: Yep. But the security profile of a Step Function is significantly different. So, you know, there's not much you can do there wrong, yet.Corey: You say that now, but wait for their next security breach, and then we start calling them Stumble Functions instead.Chris: Yeah. I say that. And the next thing, you know, we're going to have something like Lambda [unintelligible 00:30:31] show up and I'm just going to be able to put my Step Function on the internet unauthenticated. Because, you know, that's what Amazon does: they innovate, but they don't necessarily warn security practitioners ahead of their innovation that, hey, you're we're about to release this thing. You might want to prepare for it and adjust your baselines, or talk to your developers, or here's a service control policy that you can drop in place to, you know, like, suppress it for a little bit. No, it's like, “Hey, these things are there,” and by the time you see the tweets or read the documentation, you've got some developer who's put it in production somewhere. And then it becomes a lot more difficult for you as a security practitioner to put the brakes on it.Corey: I really want to thank you for spending so much time talking to me. If people want to learn more and follow your exploits—as they should—where can they find you?Chris: They can find me at steampipe.io/blog. That is where all of my latest rants, raves, research, and how-tos show up.Corey: And we will, of course, put a link to that in the [show notes 00:31:37]. Thank you so much for being so generous with your time. I appreciate it.Chris: Perfect, thank you. You have a good one.Corey: Chris Farris, cloud security nerd at Turbot. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice along with an angry insulting comment, and be sure to mention exactly which Azure communications team you work on.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.

Screaming in the Cloud
Becoming a Rural Remote Worker with Chris Vermilion

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 19, 2023 33:01


About ChrisChris is a mostly-backend mostly-engineer at Remix Labs, working on visual app development. He has been in software startups for ten years, but his first and unrequited love was particle physics.  Before joining Remix Labs, he wrote numerical simulation and analysis tools for the Large Hadron Collider, then co-founded Roobiq, a clean and powerful mobile client for Salesforce back when the official ones were neither.Links Referenced: Remix Labs: https://remixlabs.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/chrisvermilion TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Tailscale SSH is a new, and arguably better way to SSH. Once you've enabled Tailscale SSH on your server and user devices, Tailscale takes care of the rest. So you don't need to manage, rotate, or distribute new SSH keys every time someone on your team leaves. Pretty cool, right? Tailscale gives each device in your network a node key to connect to your VPN, and uses that same key for SSH authorization and encryption. So basically you're SSHing the same way that you're already managing your network. So what's the benefit? Well, built-in key rotation, the ability to manage permissions as code, connectivity between any two devices, and reduced latency. You can even ask users to re-authenticate SSH connections for that extra bit of security to keep the compliance folks happy. Try Tailscale now - it's free forever for personal use.Corey: This episode is sponsored by our friends at Logicworks. Getting to the cloud is challenging enough for many places, especially maintaining security, resiliency, cost control, agility, etc, etc, etc. Things break, configurations drift, technology advances, and organizations, frankly, need to evolve. How can you get to the cloud faster and ensure you have the right team in place to maintain success over time? Day 2 matters. Work with a partner who gets it - Logicworks combines the cloud expertise and platform automation to customize solutions to meet your unique requirements. Get started by chatting with a cloud specialist today at snark.cloud/logicworks. That's snark.cloud/logicworksCorey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. When I was nine years old, one of the worst tragedies that can ever befall a boy happened to me. That's right, my parents moved me to Maine. And I spent the next ten years desperately trying to get out of the state.Once I succeeded and moved to California, I found myself in a position where almost nothing can drag me back there. One of the exceptions—basically, the only exception—is Monktoberfest, a conference put on every year by the fine folks at RedMonk. It is unquestionably the best conference that I have ever been to, and it continually amazes me every time I go. The last time I was out there, I met today's guest. Chris Vermilion is a Senior Software Developer at Remix Labs. Chris, now that I finished insulting the state that you call home, how are you?Chris: I'm great. I'm happy to be in a state that's not California.Corey: I hear you. It's, uh—I talk a lot of smack about Maine. But to be perfectly direct, my problem with it is that I grew up there and that was a difficult time in my life because I, really I guess, never finished growing up according to most people. And all right, we'll accept it. No one can hate a place in the same way that you can hate it if you grew up there and didn't enjoy the experience.So, it's not Maine that's the problem; it's me. I feel like I should clarify that I'm going to get letters and people in Maine will write those letters and then have to ride their horses to Massachusetts to mail them. But we know how that works.Chris: [laugh].Corey: So, what is Remix Labs? Let's start there. Because Remix sounds like… well, it sounds like a term that is overused. I see it everywhere in the business space. I know there was a Remix thing that recently got sold to I think it was at Shopify or Spotify; I keep getting those two confused. And—Chris: One of the two, yeah.Corey: Yeah, exactly one of them plays music and one of them sells me things except now I think they both do both, and everything has gone wonky and confusing. But what do you folks do over there?Chris: So, we work on visual app development for everybody. So, the goal is to have kind of a spreadsheet-on-steroids-like development environment where you can build interactively, you have live coding, you have a responsive experience in building interactive apps, websites, mobile apps, a little bit of everything, and providing an experience where you can build systems of engagement. So tools, mobile apps, that kind of work with whatever back-end resources you're trying to do, you can collaborate across different people, pass things around, and you can do that all with a nice kind of visual app developer, where you can sort of drop nodes around and wire them together and built in a way that's it's hopefully accessible to non-developers, to project managers, to domain experts, to you know, whatever stakeholders are interested in modifying that final product.Corey: I would say that I count as one of those. I use something similar to build the tool that assembles my newsletter every week, and that was solving a difficult problem for me. I can write back-ends reasonably well, using my primary tool, which is sheer brute force. I am not much of a developer, but it turns out that with enough enthusiasm, you can overcome most limitations. And that's great, but I know nothing about front end; it does not make sense to me, it does not click in the way that other things have clicked.So, I was fourth and inches from just retaining a contractor to build out a barely serviceable internal app. And I discovered, oh, use this low-code tool to drag and drop things and that basically was Visual Basic for internal apps. And that was awesome, but they're still positioned squarely in the space of internal apps only. There's no mobile app story, there's—and it works well enough for what I do, but I have other projects, I want to wind up getting out the door that are not strictly for internal use that would benefit from being able to have a serviceable interface slapped onto. It doesn't need to be gorgeous, it doesn't need to win awards, it just needs to be, “Cool, it can display the output of a table in a variety of different ways. It has a button and when I click a button, it does a thing, generally represented as an API call to something.”And doesn't take much, but being able to have something like that, even for an internal app, has been absolutely transformative just for workflow stuff internally, for making things accessible to people that are not otherwise going to be able to do those sorts of things, by which I mean me.Chris: Yeah. I mean, exactly, I think that is the kind of use case that we are aiming for is making this accessible to everybody, building tools that work for people that aren't necessarily software developers, they don't want to dive into code—although they can if they want, it's extensible in that way—that aren't necessarily front-end developers or designers, although it's accessible to designers and if you want to start from that end, you can do it. And it's amenable to collaboration, so you can have somebody that understands the problem build something that works, you can have somebody that understands design build something that works well and looks nice, and you can have somebody that understands the code or is more of a back-end developer, then go back in and maybe fine-tune the API calls because they realize that you're doing the same thing over and over again and so there's a better way to structure the lower parts of things. But you can pass around that experience between all these different stakeholders and you can construct something that everybody can modify to sort of suit their own needs and desires.Corey: Many years ago, Bill Clinton wound up coining the phrase, ‘The Digital Divide' to talk about people who had basically internet access and who didn't—those who got it or did not—and I feel like we have a modern form of that, the technology haves and have nots. Easy example of this for a different part of my workflow here: this podcast, as anyone listening to it is probably aware by now, is sponsored by awesome folks who wind up wanting to tell you about the exciting services or tools or products that they are building. And sometimes some of those sponsors will say things like, “Okay, here's the URL I want you to read into the microphone during the ad read,” and my response is a polite form of, “Are you serious?” It's seven different subdirectories on the web server, followed by a UTM series of tracking codes that, yeah, I promise, none of you are going to type that in. I'm not even going to wind up reading into the microphone because my attention span trips out a third of the way through.So, I needed a URL shortener. So, I set up snark.cloud for this. For a long time, that was relatively straightforward because I just used an S3 bucket with redirect objects inside of it. But then you have sort of the problem being a victim of your own success, to some extent, and I was at a point where, oh, I can have people control some of these things that aren't me; I don't need to be the person that sets up the link redirection work.Yeah, the challenge is now that you have a business user who is extraordinarily good at what he does, but he's also not someone who has deep experience in writing code, and trying to sit here and explain to him, here's how to set up a redirect object in an S3 bucket, like, why didn't I save time and tell him to go screw himself? It's awful. So, I've looked for a lot of different answers for this, and the one that I found lurking on GitHub—and I've talked about it a couple of times, now—runs on Google Cloud Run, and the front-end for that of the business user—which sounds ridiculous, but it's also kind of clever, is a Google Sheet. Because every business user knows how to work a Google Sheet. There's one column labeled ‘slug' and the other one labeled ‘URL' that it points to.And every time someone visits a snark.cloud slash whatever the hell the slug happens to be, it automatically does a redirect. And it's glorious. But I shouldn't have to go digging into the depths of GitHub to find stuff like that. This feels like a perfect use case for a no-code, low-code tool.Chris: Yeah. No, I agree. I mean, that's a cool use case. And I… as always, our competitor is Google Sheets. I think everybody in software development in enterprise software's only real competitor is the spreadsheet.Corey: Oh, God, yes, I wind up fixing AWS bills for a living and my biggest competitor is always Microsoft Excel. It's, “Yeah, we're going to do it ourselves internally,” is what most people do. It seems like no matter what business line I've worked in, I've companies that did Robo-advising for retirement planning; yeah, some people do it themselves in Microsoft Excel. I worked for an expense reporting company; everyone does that in Microsoft Excel. And so, on and so forth.There are really very few verticals where that's not an option. It's like, but what about a dating site? Oh, there are certain people who absolutely will use Microsoft Excel for that. Personally, I think it's a bad idea to hook up where you VLOOKUP but what do I know?Chris: [laugh]. Right, right.Corey: Before you wound up going into the wide world of low-code development over at Remix, you—well, a lot of people have different backstories when I talk to them on this show. Yours is definitely one of the more esoteric because the common case and most people talk about is oh, “I went to Stanford and then became a software engineer.” “Great. What did you study?” “Computer Science,” or something like it. Alternately, they drop out of school and go do things in their backyard. You have a PhD in particle physics, is it?Chris: That's right. Yeah.Corey: Which first, is wild in his own right, but we'll get back to that. How did you get here from there?Chris: Ah. Well, it's kind of the age-old story of academia. So, I started in electrical engineering and ended up double majoring in physics because that you had to take a lot of physics to be an engineer, and I said, you know, this is more fun. This is interesting. Building things is great, but sitting around reading papers is really where my heart's at.And ended up going to graduate school, which is about the best gig you can ever get. You get paid to sit in an office and read and write papers, and occasionally go out drinking with other grad students, and that's really about it.Corey: I only just now for the first time in my life, realized how much some aspects of my career resemble being a [laugh] grad student. Please, continue.Chris: It doesn't pay very well is the catch, you know? It's very hard to support a lifestyle that exists outside of your office, or, you know, involves a family and children, which is certainly one downside. But it's a lot of fun and it's very low stress, as long as you are, let's say, not trying to get a job afterward. Because where this all breaks down is that, you know, as I recall, the time I was a graduate student, there were roughly as many people graduating as graduate students every year as there were professors total in the field of physics, at least in the United States. That was something like the scale of the relationship.And so, if you do the math, and unfortunately, we were relatively good at doing math, you could see, you know, most of us were not going to go on, you know? This was the path to becoming a professor, but—Corey: You look at number of students and the number of professorships available in the industry, I guess we'll call it, and yeah, it's hmm, basic arithmetic does not seem like something that anyone in that department is not capable of doing.Chris: Exactly. So, you're right, we were all I think, more or less qualified to be an academic professor, certainly at research institutions, where the only qualification, really, is to be good at doing research and you have to tolerate teaching students sometimes. But there tends to be very little training on how to do that, or a meaningful evaluation of whether you're doing it well.Corey: I want to dive into that a bit because I think that's something we see a lot in this industry, where there's no training on how to do a lot of different things. Teaching is one very clear example, another one is interviewing people for jobs, so people are making it up as they go along, despite there being decades and decades of longitudinal studies of people figuring out what works and what doesn't, tech his always loved to just sort of throw it all out and start over. It's odd to me that academia would follow in similar patterns around not having a clear structure for, “Oh, so you're a grad student. You're going to be teaching a class. Here's how to be reasonably effective at it.” Given that higher education was not the place for me, I have very little insight into this. Is that how it plays out?Chris: I don't want to be too unfair to academia as a whole, and actually, I was quite lucky, I was a student at the University of Washington and we had a really great physics education group, so we did actually spend a fair amount of time thinking about effective ways to teach undergraduates and doing this great tutorial system they had there. But my sense was in the field as a whole, for people on the track to become professors at research institutions, there was typically not much in the way of training as a teacher, there was not really a lot of thought about pedagogy or the mechanics of delivering lectures. You know, you're sort of given a box full of chalk and a classroom and said, you know, “You have freshman physics this quarter. The last teacher used this textbook and it seems to be okay,” tended to be the sort of preparation that you would get. You know, and I think it varies institution to institution what kind of support you get, you know, the level of graduate students helping you out, but I think in lots of places in academia, the role of professors as teachers was the second thought, you know, if it was indeed thought at all.And similarly, the role of professors as mentors to graduate students, which, you know, if anything, is sort of their primary job is guiding graduate students through their early career. And again, I mean, much like in software, that was all very ad hoc. You know, and I think there are some similarities in terms of how academics and how tech workers think of themselves as sort of inventing the universe, we're at the forefront, the bleeding edge of human knowledge, and therefore because I'm being innovative in this one particular aspect, I can justify being innovative in all of them. I mean, that's the disruptive thing to do, right?Corey: And it's a shame that you're such a nice person because you would be phenomenal at basically being the most condescending person in all of tech if you wanted to. Because think about this, you have people saying, “Oh, what do you do?” “I'm a full-stack engineer.” And then some of the worst people in the world, of which I admit I used to be one, are, “Oh, full-stack. Really? When's the last time you wrote a device driver?”And you can keep on going at that. You work in particle physics, so you're all, “That's adorable. Hold my tea. When's the last time you created matter from energy?” And yeah, and then it becomes this the—it's very hard to wind up beating you in that particular game of [who'd 00:15:07] wore it better.Chris: Right. One of my fond memories of being a student is back when I got to spend more time thinking about these things and actually still remembered them, you know, in my electoral engineering days and physics days, I really had studied all the way down from the particle physics to semiconductor physics to how to lay out silicon chips and, you know, how to build ALUs and CPUs and whatnot from basic transistor gates. Yeah, and then all the way up to, you know, writing compilers and programming languages. And it really did seem like you could understand all those parts. I couldn't tell you how any of those things work anymore. Sadly, that part of my brain has now taken up with Go's lexical scoping rules and borrow checker fights with Rust. But there was a time when I was a smart person and knew those things.Corey: This episode is sponsored in part by our friends at Strata. Are you struggling to keep up with the demands of managing and securing identity in your distributed enterprise IT environment? You're not alone, but you shouldn't let that hold you back. With Strata's Identity Orchestration Platform, you can secure all your apps on any cloud with any IDP, so your IT teams will never have to refactor for identity again. Imagine modernizing app identity in minutes instead of months, deploying passwordless on any tricky old app, and achieving business resilience with always-on identity, all from one lightweight and flexible platform.Want to see it in action? Share your identity challenge with them on a discovery call and they'll hook you up with a complimentary pair of AirPods Pro. Don't miss out, visit Strata.io/ScreamingCloud. That's Strata dot io slash ScreamingCloud.Corey: I want to go back to what sounded like a throwaway joke at the start of the episode. In seriousness, one of the reasons—at least that I told myself at the time—that I left Maine was that it was pretty clear that there was no significant, lasting opportunity in industry when I was in Maine. In fact, the girl that I was dating at the time in college graduated college, and the paper of record for the state, The Maine Sunday Telegram, which during the week is called The Portland Press Herald, did a front-page story on her about how she went to school on a pulp and paper scholarship, she was valedictorian in her chemical engineering class at the University of Maine and had to leave the state to get a job. And every year they would roll out the governor, whoever that happened to be, to the University of Maine to give a commencement speech that's, “Don't leave Maine, don't leave Maine, don't leave Maine,” but without any real answer to, “Well, for what jobs?”Now, that Covid has been this plague o'er the land that has been devastating society for a while, work-from-home has become much more of a cohesive thing. And an awful lot of companies are fully embracing it. How have you seen Maine change based upon that for one, and for another, how have you found that community has been developed in the local sense because there was none of that in Maine when I was there? Even the brief time where I was visiting for a conference for a week, I saw definite signs of a strong local community in the tech space. What happened? I love it.Chris: It's great. Yeah, so I moved to Maine eight years ago, in 2014. And yeah, I was lucky enough to pretty early on, meet up with a few of the local nerds, and we have a long-running Slack group that I just saw was about to turn nine, so I guess I was there in the early days, called Computers Anonymous. It was a spinoff, I think, from a project somebody else had started in a few other cities. The joke was it was a sort of a confessional group of, you know, we're here to commiserate over our relationships with technology, which all of us have our complaints.Corey: Honestly, tech community is more of a support group than most other areas, I think.Chris: Absolutely. All you have to do is just have name and technology and somebody will pipe up. “Okay, you know, I've a horror story about that one.” But it has over the years turned into, you know, a very active Slack group of people that meet up once a month for beers and chats with each other, and you know, we all know each other's kids. And when the pandemic hit, it was absolutely a lifeline that we were all sort of still talking to each other every day and passing tips of, you know, which restaurants were doing takeout, and you know which ones were doing takeout and takeout booze, and all kinds of local knowledge was being spread around that way.So, it was a lucky thing to have when that hit, we had this community. Because it existed already as this community of, you know, people that were remote workers. And I think over the time that I've been here, I've really seen a growth in people coming here to work somewhere else because it's a lovely place to live, it's a much cheaper place to live than almost anywhere else I've ever been, you know, I think it's pretty attractive to the folks come up from Boston or New York or Connecticut for the summer, and they say, “Ah, you know, this doesn't seem so bad to live.” And then they come here for a winter, and then they think, “Well, okay, maybe I was wrong,” and go back. But I've really enjoyed my time here, and the tools for communicating and working remotely, have really taken off.You know, a decade ago, my first startup—actually, you know, in kind of a similar situation, similar story, we were starting a company in Louisville, Kentucky. It was where we happen to live. We had a tech community there that were asking those same questions. “Why is anybody leaving? Why is everybody leaving?”And we started this company, and we did an accelerator in San Francisco, and every single person we talked to—and this is 2012—said, you have to bring the company to San Francisco. It's the only way you'll ever hire anybody, it's the only way you'll ever raise any money, this is the only place in the world that you could ever possibly run a tech company. And you know, we tried and failed.Corey: Oh, we're one of those innovative industries in the world. We've taken a job that can be done from literally anywhere that has internet access and created a land crunch on eight square miles, located in an earthquake zone.Chris: Exactly. We're going to take a ton of VC money and where to spend 90% of it on rent in the Bay Area. The rent paid back to the LPs of our VC funds, and the circle of life continues.Corey: Oh, yeah. When I started this place as an independent consultant six years ago, I looked around, okay, should I rent space in an office so I have a place where I go and work? And I saw how much it costs to sublet even, like, a closed-door office in an existing tech startup's office space, saw the price tag, laughed myself silly, and nope, nope, nope. Instead installed a door on my home office and got this place set up as a—in my spare room now is transformed into my home office slash recording studio. And yeah, “Well, wasn't it expensive to do that kind of stuff?” Not compared to the first three days of rent in a place like that it wasn't. I feel like that's what's driving a lot of the return to office stories is the sort of, I guess, an expression of the sunk cost fallacy.Chris: Exactly. And it's a variation of nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM, you know? Nobody ever got fired for saying we should work in the office. It's the way we've always done things, people are used to it, and there really are difficulties to collaborating effectively remotely, you know? You do lose something with the lack of day-to-day contact, a lack of in-person contact, people really do get kind of burned out on interacting over screens. But I think there are ways around that and the benefits, in my mind, my experience, you know, working remotely for the last ten years or so, tend to outweigh the costs.Corey: Oh, yeah. If I were 20 years younger, I would absolutely have been much more amenable to staying in the state. There's a lot of things that recommend it. I mean, I don't want people listening to this to think I actually hate Maine. It's become a running joke, but it's also, there was remarkably little opportunity in tech back when I lived there.And now globally, I think we're seeing the rise of opportunity. And that is a line I heard in a talk once that stuck with me that talent is evenly distributed, but opportunity isn't. And there are paths forward now for folks who—I'm told—somehow don't live in that same eight-square miles of the world, where they too can build tech companies and do interesting things and work intelligently with other folks. I mean, the thing that always struck me as so odd before the pandemic was this insistence on, “Oh, we don't allow remote work.” It's, “Well, hang on a minute. Aren't we all telecommuting in from wherever offices happen to be to AWS?” Because I've checked thoroughly, they will not let you work from us-east-1. In fact, they're very strict on that rule.Chris: [laugh]. Yeah. And it's remarkable how long I think the attitude persisted that we can solve any problem except how to work somewhere other than SoMa.Corey: Part of the problem too in the startup space, and one of the things I'm so excited about seeing what you're doing over at Remix Labs, is so many of the tech startups for a long time felt like they were built almost entirely around problems that young, usually single men had in their 20s when they worked in tech and didn't want to deal with the inconveniences of having to take care of themselves. Think food delivery, think laundry services, think dating apps, et cetera, et cetera. It feels like now we're getting into an era where there's a lot of development and focus and funding being aimed at things that are a lot more substantial, like how would we make it possible for someone to build an app internally or externally without making them go to through a trial-by-fire hazing ritual of going to a boot camp for a year first?Chris: Yeah. No, I think that's right. I think there's been an evolution toward building tools for broader problems, for building tools that work for everybody. I think there was a definite startup ouroboros in the, kind of, early days of this past tech boom of so much money being thrown at early-stage startups with a couple of young people building them, and they solved a zillion of their own problems. And there was so much money being thrown at them that they were happy to spend lots of money on the problems that they had, and so it looked like there was this huge market for startups to solve those problems.And I think we'll probably see that dry up a little bit. So, it's nice to get back to what are the problems that the rest of us have. You know, or maybe the rest of you. I can't pretend that I'm not one of those startup people that wants on-demand laundry. But.Corey: Yet you wake up one day and realize, oh, yeah. That does change things a bit. Honestly, one of the weirdest things for me about moving to California from Maine was just the sheer level of convenience in different areas.Chris: Yes.Corey: And part of it is city living, true, but Maine is one those places where if you're traveling somewhere, you're taking a car, full stop. And living in a number of cities like San Francisco, it's, oh great, if I want to order food, there's not, “The restaurant that delivers,” it's, I can have basically anything that I want showing up here within the hour. Just that alone was a weird, transformative moment. I know, I still feel like 20 years in, that I'm “Country Boy Discovers City for the First Time; Loses Goddamn Mind.” Like, that is where I still am. It's still magic. I became an urban creature just by not being one for my formative years.Chris: Yeah. No, I mean, absolutely. I grew up in Ann Arbor, which is sort of a smallish college town, and certainly more urban than the areas around it, but visiting the big city of Detroit or Lansing, it was exciting. And, you know, I got older, I really sort of thought of myself as a city person. And I lived in San Francisco for a while and loved it, and Seattle for a while and loved it.Portland has been a great balance of, there's city; it's a five minute drive from my house that has amazing restaurants and concerts and a great art scene and places to eat and roughly 8000 microbreweries, but it's still a relatively small community. I know a lot of the people here. I sort of drive across town from one end to the other in 20 minutes, pick up my kids from school pretty easily. So, it makes for a nice balance here.Corey: I am very enthused on, well, the idea of growing community in localized places. One thing that I think we did lose a bit during the pandemic was, every conference became online, so therefore, every conference becomes the same and it's all the same crappy Zoom-esque experience. It's oh, it's like work with a slightly different topic, and for once the people on this call can't fire me… directly. So, it's one of those areas of just there's not enough differentiation.I didn't realize until I went back to Monktoberfest a month or so ago at the time at this call recording just how much I'd missed that sense of local community.Chris: Yeah.Corey: Because before that, the only conferences I'd been to since the pandemic hit were big corporate affairs, and yeah, you find community there, but it also is very different element to it, it has a different feeling. It's impossible to describe unless you've been to some of these community conferences, I think.Chris: Yeah. I mean, I think a smallish conference like that where you see a lot of the same people every year—credit to Steven, the whole RedMonk team for Monktoberfest—that they put on such a great show that every year, you see lots and lots of faces that you've seen the last several because everybody knows it's such a great conference, they come right back. And so, it becomes kind of a community. As I've gotten older a year between meetings doesn't seem like that long time anymore, so these are the friends I see from time to time, and you know, we have a Slack who chat from time to time. So, finding those ways to sort of cultivate small groups that are in regular contact and have that kind of specific environment and culture to them within the broader industry, I think has been super valuable, I think. To me, certainly.Corey: I really enjoyed so much of what has come out of the pandemic in some ways, which sounds like a weird thing to say, but I'm trying to find the silver linings where I can. I recently met someone who'd worked here with me for a year-and-a-half that I'd never met in person. Other people that I'd spoken to at length for the last few years in various capacity, I finally meet them in person and, “Huh. Somehow it never came up in conversation that they're six foot eight.” Like, “Yeah, okay/ that definitely is one of those things that you notice about them in person.” Ah, but here we are.I really want to thank you for spending as much time as you have to talk about what you're up to, what your experiences have been like. If people want to learn more, where's the best place for them to find you? And please don't say Maine.Chris: [laugh]. Well, as of this recording, you can find me on Twitter at @chrisvermilion, V-E-R-M-I-L-I-O-N. That's probably easiest.Corey: And we will, of course, put links to that in the [show notes 00:28:53]. Thank you so much for being so generous with your time. I appreciate it.Chris: No, thanks for having me on. This was fun.Corey: Chris Vermilion, Senior Software Developer at Remix Labs. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice along with an angry comment, and since you're presumably from Maine when writing that comment, be sure to ask a grown-up to help you with the more difficult spellings of some of the words.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.

Sinocism
Sinocism Podcast #5: 20th Party Congress and US-China Relations with Chris Johnson

Sinocism

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 4, 2022 59:34


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

The Bike Shed
359: Serializers

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 25, 2022 44:10


Chris Toomey is back! (For an episode.) He talks about what he's been up to since handing off the reins to Joël. He's been playing around with something at Sagewell that he enjoys. At the core of it? Serializers. Primalize gem (https://github.com/jgaskins/primalize) Derek's talk on code review (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJjmw9TRB7s) Inertia.js (https://inertiajs.com/) Phantom types (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/modeling-currency-in-elm-using-phantom-types) io-ts (https://gcanti.github.io/io-ts/) dry-rb (https://dry-rb.org/) parse don't validate (https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2019/11/05/parse-don-t-validate/) value objects (http://wiki.c2.com/?ValueObject) broader perspective on parsing (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/a-broader-take-on-parsing) Enumerable#tally (https://medium.com/@baweaver/ruby-2-7-enumerable-tally-a706a5fb11ea) RubyConf mini (https://www.rubyconfmini.com/) where.missing (https://boringrails.com/tips/activerecord-where-missing-associations) Transcript: JOËL: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Joël Quenneville. And today, I'm joined by a very special guest, former host Chris Toomey. CHRIS: Hi, Joël. Thanks for having me. JOËL: And together, we're here to share a little bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: Being on this podcast is new in my world, or everything old is new again, or something along those lines. But, yeah, thank you so much for having me back. It's a pleasure. Although it's very odd, it feels somehow so different and yet very familiar. But yeah, more generally, what's new in my world? I think this was probably in development as I was winding down my time as a host here on The Bike Shed, but I don't know that I ever got a chance to talk about it. There has been a fun sort of deep-in-the-weeds technical thing that we've been playing around with at Sagewell that I've really enjoyed. So at the core of it, we have serializers. So we take some data structures in our Ruby on Rails code base, and we need to serialize them to JSON to send them to the front end. In our case, we're using Inertia, so it's not quite a JSON API, but it's fine to think about it in that way for the context of this discussion. And what we were finding is our front end has TypeScript. So we're writing Svelte, which is using TypeScript. And so we're stating or asserting that the types like, hey, we're going to get this data in from the back end, and it's going to have this shape to it. And we found that it was really hard to keep those in sync to keep, like, what does the user mean on the front end? What's the data that we're going to get? It's going to have a full name, which is a string, except sometimes that might be null. So how do we make sure that those are keeping up to date? And then we had a growing number of serializers on the back end and determining which serializer we were actually using, and it was just...it was a mess, to put it lightly. And so we had explored a couple of different options around it, and eventually, we found a library called Primalize. So Primalize is a Ruby library. It is for writing JSON serializers. But what's really interesting about it is it has a typing layer. It's like a type system sort of thing at play. So when you define a serializer in Primalize, instead of just saying, here are the fields; there is an ID, a name, et cetera, you say, there is an ID, and it is a string. There is a name, and it is a string, or an optional string, which is the even more interesting bit. You can say array. You can say object. You can say an enum of a couple of different values. And so we looked at that, and we said, ooh, this is very interesting. Astute listeners will know that this is probably useless in a Ruby system, which doesn't have types or a compilation step or anything like that. But what's really cool about this is when you use a Primalize serializer, as you're serializing an object, if there is ever a type mismatch, so the observed type at runtime and the authored type if those ever mismatch, then you can have some sort of notification happen. So in our case, we configured it to send a warning to Sentry to say, "Hey, you said the types were this, but we're actually seeing this other thing." Most often, it will be like an Optional, a null sneaking through, a nil sneaking through on the Ruby side. But what was really interesting is as we were squinting at this, we're like, huh, so now we're going to write all this type information. What if we could somehow get that type information down to the front end? So I had a long weekend, one weekend, and I went away, and I wrote a bunch of code that took all of those serializers, ran through them, and generated the associated TypeScript interfaces. And so now we have a build step that will essentially run that and assert that we're getting the same thing in CI as we have committed to the codebase. But now we have the generated serializer types on the front end that match to the used serializer on the back end, as well as the observed run-time types. So it's a combination of a true compilation step type system on the front end and a run-time type system on the back end, which has been very, very interesting. JOËL: I have a lot of thoughts here. CHRIS: I figured you would. [laughs] JOËL: But the first thing that came to mind is, as a consultant, there's a scenario with especially smaller startups that generally concerns me, and that is the CTO goes away for a weekend and writes a lot of code... CHRIS: [laughs] JOËL: And brings in a new system on Monday, which is exactly what you're describing here. How do you feel about the fact that you've done that? CHRIS: I wasn't ready to go this deep this early on in this episode. JOËL: [laughs] CHRIS: But honestly, that is a fantastic question. It's a thing that I have been truly not struggling with but really thinking about. We're going to go on a slight aside here, but I am finding it really difficult to engage with the actual day-to-day coding work that we're doing and to still stay close to the codebase and not be in the way. There's a pattern that I've seen happen a number of times now where I pick up a piece of work that is, you know, one of the tickets at the top of the backlog. I start to work on it. I get pulled into a meeting, then another meeting, then three more meetings. And suddenly, it's three days later. I haven't completed this piece of work that was defined to be the next most important piece of work. And suddenly, I'm blocking the team. JOËL: Hmmm. CHRIS: So I actually made a rule that I'm not allowed to own critical path work, which feels weird because it's like, I want to be engaged with that work. So the counterpoint to that is I'm now trying to schedule pairing sessions with each of the developers on the team once a week. And in that time, I can work on that sort of stuff with them, and they'll then own it and run with it. So it makes sure that I'm not blocking on those sorts of things, but I'm still connected to the core work that we're doing. But the other thing that you're describing of the CTO goes away for the weekend and then comes back with a new harebrained scheme; I'm very sensitive to that, having worked on; frankly, I think the same project. I can think of a project that you and I worked on where we experienced this. JOËL: I think we're thinking of the same project. CHRIS: So yes. Like, I'm scarred by that and, frankly, a handful of experiences of that nature. So we actually, I think, have a really healthy system in place at Sagewell for capturing, documenting, prioritizing this sort of other work, this developer-centric work. So this is the feature and bug work that gets prioritized and one list over here that is owned by our product manager. Separately, the dev team gets to say, here are the pain points. Here's the stuff that keeps breaking. Here are the things that I wish was better. Here is the observability hard-to-understand bits. And so we have a couple of different systems at play and recurring meetings and sort of unique ceremonies around that, and so this work was very much a fallout of that. It was actually a recurring topic that we kept trying a couple of different stabs at, and we never quite landed it. And then I showed up this one Monday morning, and I was like, "I found a thing; what do we think?" And then, critically, from there, I made sure I paired with other folks on the team as we pushed on the implementation. And then, actually, I mentioned Primalize, the library that we're using. We have now since deprecated Primalize within the app because we kept just adding to it so much that eventually, we're like, at this point, should we own this stuff? So we ended up rewriting the core bits of Primalize to better fit our use cases. And now we've actually removed Primalize, wonderful library. I highly recommend it to anyone who has that particular use case but then the additional type generation for the front end. Plus, we have some custom types within our app, Money being the most interesting one. We decided to model Money as our first-class consideration rather than just letting JavaScript have the sole idea of a number. But yes, in a very long-winded way, yes, I'm very sensitive to the thing you described. And I hope, in this case, I did not fall prey to the CTO goes away for the weekend and made a thing. JOËL: I think what I'm hearing is the key difference here is that you got buy-in from the team around this idea before you went out and implemented it. So you're not off doing your own things disconnected from the team and then imposing it from on high. The team already agreed this is the thing we want to do, and then you just did it for them. CHRIS: Largely, yes. Although I will say there are times that each developer on the team, myself included, have sort of gone away, come back with something, and said, "Hey, here's a WIP PR exploring an area." And there was actually...I'm forgetting what the context was, but there was one that happened recently that I introduced. I was like; I had to do this. And the team talked me out of it, and I ended up closing that PR. Someone else actually made a different PR that was an alternative implementation. I was like, no, that's better; we should absolutely do that. And I think that's really healthy. That's a hard thing to maintain but making sure that everyone feels like they've got a strong voice and that we're considering all of the different ways in which we might consider the work. Most critically, you know, how does this impact users at the end of the day? That's always the primary consideration. How do we make sure we build a robust, maintainable, observable system, all those sorts of things? And primarily, this work should go in that other direction, but I also don't want to stifle that creative spark of I got this thing in my head, and I had to explore it. Like, we shouldn't then need to never mind, throw away the work, put it into a ticket. Like, for as long as we can, that more organic, intuitive process if we can retain that, I like that. Critically, with the ability for everyone to tell me, "No, this is a bad idea. Stop it. What are you doing?" And that has happened recently. I mean, they were kinder about it, but they did talk me out of a bad idea. So here we are. JOËL: So you showed up on Monday morning, not with telling everyone, "Hey, I merged this thing over the weekend." You're showing up with a work-in-progress PR. CHRIS: Yes, definitely. I mean, everything goes through a PR, and everything has discussion and conversation around it. That's a strong, strong like Derek Prior's wonderful talk Building a Culture of Code Review. I forget the exact name of it. But it's one of my favorite talks in talking about the utility of code review as a way to share ideas and all of those wonderful things. So everything goes through code review, and particularly anything that is of that more exploratory architectural space. Often we'll say any one review from anyone on the team is sufficient to merge most things but something like that, I would want to say, "Hey, can everybody take a look at this? And if anyone has any reservations, then let's talk about it more." But if I or anyone else on the team for this sort of work gets everybody approving it, then cool, we're good to go. But yeah, code review critical, critical part of the process. JOËL: I'm curious about Primalize, the gem that you mentioned. It sounds like it's some kind of validation layer between some Ruby data structure and your serializers. CHRIS: It is the serializer, but in the process of serializing, it does run-time type validation, essentially. So as it's accessing, you know, you say first name. You have a user object. You pass it in, and you say, "Serializer, there's a first name, and it's a string." It will call the first name method on that user object. And then, it will check that it has the expected type, and if it doesn't, then, in our case, it sends to Sentry. We have configured it...it's actually interesting. In development and test mode, it will raise for a type mismatch, and in production mode, it will alert Sentry so you can configure that differently. But that ends up being really nice because these type mismatches end up being very loud early on. And it's surprisingly easy to maintain and ends up telling us a lot of truths about our system because, really, what we're doing is connecting data from many different systems and flowing it in and out. And all of the inputs and outputs from our system feel very meaningful to lock down in this way. But yeah, it's been an adventure. JOËL: It seems to me there could almost be two sets of types here, the inputs coming into Primalize from your Ruby data structures and then the outputs that are the actual serialized values. And so you might expect, let's say, an integer on the Ruby side, but maybe at the serialization level, you're serializing it to a string. Do you have that sort of conversion step as part of your serializers sometimes, or is the idea that everything's already the right type on the Ruby side, and then we just, like, to JSON it at the end? CHRIS: Yep. Primalize, I think, probably works a little closer to what you're describing. They have the idea of coercions. So within Primalize, there is the concept of a timestamp; that is one of the types that is available. But a timestamp is sort of the union of a date, a time, or I think they might let through a string; I'm not sure if there is as well. But frankly, for us, that was more ambiguity than we wanted or more blurring across the lines. And in the implementation that we've now built, date and time are distinct. And critically, a string is not a valid date or time; it is a string, that's another thing. And so there's a bunch of plumbing within the way you define the serializers. There are override methods so that you can locally within the serializer say, like, oh, we need to coerce from the shape of data into this other shape of data, even little like in-line proc, so we can do it quickly. But the idea is that the data, once it has been passed to the serializer, should be up the right shape. And so when we get to the type assertion part of the library, we expect that things are in the asserted type and will warn if not. We get surprisingly few warnings, which is interesting now. This whole process has made us pay a little more intention, and it's been less arduous simultaneously than I would have expected because like this is kind of a lot of work that I'm describing. And yet it ends up being very natural when you're the developer in context, like, oh, I've been reading these docs for days. I know the shape of this JSON that I'm working with inside and out, and now I'll just write it down in the serializer. It's very easy to do in that moment, and then it captures it and enforces it in such a useful way. As an aside, as I've been looking at this, I'm like, this is just GraphQL, but inside out, I'm pretty sure. But that is a choice that we have made. We didn't want to adopt the whole GraphQL thing. But just for anyone out there who is listening and is thinking, isn't this just GraphQL but inside out? Kind of. Yes. JOËL: I think my favorite part of GraphQL is the schema, which is not really the selling point for GraphQL, you know, like the idea that you can traverse the graph and get any subset of data that you want and all that. I think I would be more than happy with a REST API that has some kind of schema built around it. And someone told me that maybe what I really just want is SOAP, and I don't know how to feel about that comment. CHRIS: You just got to have some XML, and some WSDLs, and other fun things. I've heard people say good things about SOAP. SOAP seems like a fine idea. If anything, I think a critical part of this is we don't have a JSON API. We have a very tightly coupled front end and back end, and a singular front end, frankly. And so that I think naturally...that makes the thing that I'm describing here a much more comfortable fit. If we had multiple different downstream clients that we're trying to consume from the same back end, then I think a GraphQL API or some other structured JSON schema, whatever it is type of API, and associated documentation and typing layer would be probably a better fit. But as I've said many a time on this here, Bike Shed, Inertia is one of my favorite libraries or frameworks (They're probably more of a framework.) one of my favorite technological approaches that I have ever found. And particularly in buildings Sagewell, it has allowed us to move so rapidly the idea that changes are, you know, one fell swoop changes everything within the codebase. We don't have to think about syncing deploys for the back end and the front end and how to coordinate across them. Our app is so much easier to understand by virtue of that architecture that Inertia implies. JOËL: So, if I understand correctly, you don't serialize to JSON as part of the serializers. You're serializing directly to JavaScript. CHRIS: We do serialize to JSON. At the end of the day, Inertia takes care of this on both the Rails side and the client side. There is a JSON API. Like, if you look at the network inspector, you will see XHR requests happening. But critically, we're not doing that. We're not the ones in charge of it. We're not hitting a specific endpoint. It feels as an application coder much closer to a traditional Rails app. It just happens to be that we're writing our view layer. Instead of an ERB, we're writing them in Svelte files. But otherwise, it feels almost identical to a normal traditional Rails app with controllers and the normal routing and all that kind of stuff. JOËL: One thing that's really interesting about JSON as an interchange format is that it is very restrictive. The primitives it has are even narrower than, say, the primitives that Ruby has. So you'd mentioned sending a date through. There is no JSON date. You have to serialize it to some other type, potentially an integer, potentially a string that has a format that the other side knows how it's going to interpret. And I feel like it's those sorts of richer types when we need to pass them through JSON that serialization and deserialization or parsing on the other end become really interesting. CHRIS: Yeah, I definitely agree with that. It was a struggling point for a while until we found this new approach that we're doing with the serializers in the type system. But so far, the only thing that we've done this with is Money. But on the front end, a while ago, we introduced a specific TypeScript type. So it's a phantom type, and I believe I'm getting this correct. It's a phantom type called Cents, C-E-N-T-S. So it represents...I'm going to say an integer. I know that JavaScript doesn't have integers, but logically, it represents an integer amount of cents. And critically, it is not a number, like, the lowercase number in the type system. We cannot add them together. We can't -- JOËL: I thought you were going to say, NaN. CHRIS: [laughs] It is not a number. I saw a n/a for not applicable somewhere in the application the other day. I was like, oh my God, we have a NaN? It happened? But it wasn't, it was just n/a, and I was fine. But yeah, so we have this idea of Cents within the application. We have a money input, which is a special input designed exactly for this. So to a user, it is formatted to look like you're entering dollars and cents. But under the hood, we are bidirectionally converting that to the integer amount of cents that we need. And we strictly, within the type system, those are cents. And you can't do math on Cents unless you use a special set of helper functions. You cannot generate Cents on the fly unless you use a special set of helper functions, the constructor functions. So we've been really restrictive about that, which was kind of annoying because a lot of the data coming from the server is just, you know, numbers. But now, with this type system that we've introduced on the Ruby side, we can assert and enforce that these are money.new on the Ruby side, so using the Money gem. And they come down to the front end as capital C Cents in the type system on the TypeScript side. So we're able to actually bind that together and then enforce proper usage sort of on both sides. The next step that we plan to do after that is dates and times. And those are actually almost weirder because they end up...we just have to sort of say what they are, and they will be ISO 8601 date and time strings, respectively. But we'll have functions that know this is a date string; that's a thing. It is, again, a phantom type implemented within our TypeScript type system. But we will have custom functions that deal with that and really constrain...lock ourselves down to only working with them correctly. And critically, saying that is the only date and time format that we work with; there is no other. We don't have arbitrary dates. Is this a JSON date or something else? I don't know; there are too many date syntaxes. JOËL: I like the idea of what you're doing in that it sounds like you're very much narrowing that sort of window of where in the stack the data exists in the sort of unstructured, free-floating primitives that could be misinterpreted. And so, at this point, it's almost narrowed to the point where it can't be touched by any user or developer-written code because you've pushed the boundaries on the Rails side down and then on the JavaScript side up to the point where the translation here you define translations on one side or, I guess, a parser on one side and a serializer on the other. And they guarantee that everything is good up until that point. CHRIS: Yep, with the added fun of the runtime reflection on the Ruby side. So it's an interesting thing. Like, TypeScript actually has similar things. You can say what the type is all day long, and your code will consistently conform to that asserted type. But at the end of the day, if your JSON API gets in some different data...unless you're using a library like io-ts, is one that I've looked at, which actually does parsing and returns a result object of did we parse to the thing that you wanted or did we get an error in that data structure? So we could get to that level on the client side as well. We haven't done that yet largely because we've essentially pushed that concern up to the Ruby layer. So where we're authoring the data, because we own that, we're going to do it at that level. There are a bunch of benefits of defining it there and then sort of reflecting it down. But yeah, TypeScript, you can absolutely lie to yourself, whereas Elm, a language that I know you love dearly, you cannot lie to yourself in Elm. You've got to tell the truth. It's the only option. You've got to prove it. Whereas in TypeScript, you can just kind of suggest, and TypeScript will be like, all right, cool, I'll make sure you stay honest on that, but I'm not going to make you prove it, which is an interesting sort of set of related trade-offs there. But I think we found a very comfortable resting spot for right now. Although now, we're starting to look at the edges of the Ruby system where data is coming in. So we have lots of webhooks and other external partners that we're integrating with, and they're sending us data. And that data is of varying shapes. Some will send us a payload with the word amount, and it refers to an integer amount of cents because, of course, it does. Some will send us the word amount in their payload, and it will be a floating amount of dollars. And I get a little sad on those days. But critically, our job is to make sure all of those are the same and that we never pass dollars as cents or cents as dollars because that's where things go sad. That is job number one at Sagewell in the engineering team is never get the decimal place wrong in money. JOËL: That would be a pretty terrible mistake to make. CHRIS: It would. I mean, it happens. In fintech, that problem comes up a lot. And again, the fact that...I'm honestly surprised to see situations out there where we're getting in floating point dollars. That is a surprise to me because I thought we had all agreed sort of as a community that it was integer cents but especially in a language that has integers. JavaScript, it's kind of making it up the whole time. But Ruby has integers. JSON, I guess, doesn't have integers, so I'm sort of mixing concerns here, but you get the idea. JOËL: Despite Ruby not having a static type system, I've found that generally, when I'm integrating with a third-party API, I get to the point where I want something that approximates like Elm's JSON decoders or io-ts or something like that. Because JSON is just a big blob of data that could be of any shape, and I don't really trust it because it's third-party data, and you should not trust third parties. And I find that I end up maybe cobbling something together commonly with like a bunch of usage of hash.fetch, things like that. But I feel like Ruby doesn't have a great approach to parsing and composing these validators for external data. CHRIS: Ruby as a language certainly doesn't, and the ecosystem, I would say, is rather limited in terms of the options here. We have looked a bit at the dry-rb stack of gems, so dry-validation and dry-schema, in particular, both offer potentially useful aspects. We've actually done a little bit of spiking internally around that sort of thing of, like, let's parse this incoming data instead of just coercing to hash and saying that it's got probably the shape that we want. And then similarly, I will fetch all day instead of digging because I want to be quite loud when we get it wrong. But we're already using dry-monads. So we have the idea of result types within the system. We can either succeed or fail at certain operations. And I think it's just a little further down the stack. But probably something that we will implement soon is at those external boundaries where data is coming in doing some form of parsing and validation to make sure that it conforms to unknown data structure. And then, within the app, we can do things more cleanly. That also would allow us to, like, let's push the idea that this is floating point dollars all the way out to the edge. And the minute it hits our system, we convert it into a money.new, which means that cents are properly handled. It's the same type of money or dollar, same type of currency handling as everywhere else in the app. And so pushing that to the very edges of our application is a very interesting idea. And so that could happen in the library or sort of a parsing client, I guess, is probably the best way to think about it. So I'm excited to do that at some point. JOËL: Have you read the article, Parse, Don't Validate? CHRIS: I actually posted that in some code review the other day to one of the developers on the team, and they replied, "You're just going to quietly drop one of my favorite articles of all time in code review?" [laughs] So yes, I've read it; I love it. It's a wonderful idea, definitely something that I'm intrigued by. And sort of bringing dry-monads into Ruby, on the one hand, feels like a forced fit and yet has also been one of the other, I think strongest sort of architectural decisions that we've made within the application. There's so much imperative work that we ended up having to do. Send this off to this external API, then tell this other one, then tell this other one. Put the whole thing in a transaction so that our local data properly handles it. And having dry-monads do notation, in particular, to allow us to make that manageable but fail in all the ways it needs to fail, very expressive in its failure modes, that's been great. And then parse, don't validate we don't quite do it yet. But that's one of the dreams of, like, our codebase really should do that thing. We believe in that. So let's get there soon. JOËL: And the core idea behind parse, don't validate is that instead of just having some data that you don't trust, running a check on it and passing that blob of now checked but still untrusted data down to the next person who might also want to check it. Generally, you want to pass it through some sort of filter that will, one, validate that it's correct but then actually typically convert it into some other trusted shape. In Ruby, that might be something like taking an amorphous blob of JSON and turning it into some kind of value object or something like that. And then anybody downstream that receives, let's say, money object can trust that they're dealing with a well-formed money value as opposed to an arbitrary blob of JSON, which hopefully somebody else has validated, but who knows? So I'm going to validate it again. CHRIS: You can tell that I've been out of the podcasting game for a while because I just started responding to yes; I love that blog post without describing the core premise of it. So kudos to you, Joël; you are a fantastic podcast host over there. I will say one of the things you just described is an interesting...it's been a bit of a struggle for us. We keep sort of talking through what's the architecture. How do we want to build this application? What do we care about? What are the things that really matter within this codebase, and then what is all the other stuff? And we've been good at determining the things that really matter, thinking collectively as a group, and I think coming up with some novel, useful, elegant...I'm saying too many positive adjectives for what we're doing. But I've been very happy with sort of the thing that we decide. And then there's the long-tail work of actually propagating that change throughout the rest of the application. We're, like, okay, here's how it works. Every incoming webhook, we now parse and yield a value object. That sentence that you just said a minute ago is exactly what I want. That's like a bunch of work. It's particularly a bunch of work to convert an existing codebase. It's easy to say, okay, from here forward, any new webhooks, payloads that are coming in, we're going to do in this way. But we have a lot of things in our app now that exist in this half-converted way. There was a brief period where we had three different serializer technologies at play. Just this week, I did the work of killing off the middle ground one, the Primalized-based thing, and we now have only our new hotness and then the very old. We were using Blueprinter as the serializer as the initial sort of stub. And so that still exists within the codebase in some places. But trying to figure out how to prioritize that work, the finishing out those maintenance-type conversions is a tricky one. It's never the priority. But it is really nice to have consistency in a codebase. So it's...yeah, do you have any thoughts on that? JOËL: I think going back to the article and what the meaning of parsing is, I used to always think of parsing as taking strings and turning them into something else, and I think this really broadened my perspective on the idea of parsing. And now, I think of it more as converting from a broader type to a narrower type with failures. So, for example, you could go from a string to an integer, and not all strings are valid integers. So you're narrowing the type. And if you have the string hello world, it will fail, and it will give you an error of some type. But you can have multiple layers of that. So maybe you have a string that you parse into an integer, but then, later on, you might want to parse that integer into something else that requires an integer in a range. Let's say it's a percentage. So you have a value object that is a percentage, but it's encoded in the JSON as a string. So that first pass, you parse it from a string into an integer, and then you parse that integer into a percentage object. But if it's outside the range of valid percentage numbers, then maybe you get an error there as well. So it's a thing that can happen at multiple layers. And I've now really connected it with the primitive obsession smell in code. So oftentimes, when you decide, wait, I don't want a primitive here; I want a richer type, commonly, there's going to be a parsing step that should exist to go from that primitive into the richer type. CHRIS: I like that. That was a classic Joël wildly concise summary of a deeply complex technical topic right there. JOËL: It's like I'm going to connect some ideas from functional programming and a classic object-oriented code smell and, yeah, just kind of mash it all together with a popular article. CHRIS: If only you had a diagram. Podcast is not the best medium for diagrams, but I think you could do it. You could speak one out loud, and everyone would be able to see it in their mind's eye. JOËL: So I will tell you what my diagram is for this because I've actually created it already. I imagine this as a sort of like pyramid with different layers that keep getting smaller and smaller. So the size of type is sort of the width of a layer. And so your strings are a very wide layer. Then on top of that, you have a narrower layer that might be, you know, it could be an integer, or you could even if you're parsing JSON, you first start with a string, then you parse that into a Ruby hash, not all strings are valid hashes. So that's going to be narrower. Then you might extract some values out of that hash. But if the keys aren't right, that might also fail. You're trying to pull the user out of it. And so each layer it gets a richer type, but that richer type, by virtue of being richer, is narrower. And as you're trying to move up that pyramid at every step, there is a possibility for a failure. CHRIS: Have you written a blog post about this with said diagram in it? And is that why you have that so readily at hand? [laughs] JOËL: Yes, that is the case. CHRIS: Okay. Yeah, that made sense to me. [laughs] JOËL: We'll make sure to link to it in the show notes. CHRIS: Now you have to link to Joël blog posts, whereas I used to have to link to them [chuckles] in almost every episode of The Bike Shed that I recorded. JOËL: Another thing I've been thinking about in terms of this parsing is that parsing and serializing are, in a sense, almost opposites of each other. Typically, when you're parsing, you're going from a broad type to a narrow one. And when you're serializing, you're going from a narrow type to a broader one. So you might go from a user into a hash into a string. So you're sort of going down that pyramid rather than going up. CHRIS: It is an interesting observation and one that immediately my brain is like, okay, cool. So can we reuse our serializers but just run them in reverse or? And then I try and talk myself out of that because that's a classic don't repeat yourself sort of failure mode of, like, actually, it's fine. You can repeat a little bit. So long as you can repeat and constrain, that's a fine version. But yeah, feels true, though, at the core. JOËL: I think, in some ways, if you want a single source of truth, what you want is a schema, and then you can derive serializers and parsers from that schema. CHRIS: It's interesting because you used the word derive. That has been an interesting evolution at Sagewell. The engineering team seems to be very collected around the idea of explicitness, almost the Zen of Python; explicit is better than implicit. And we are willing to write a lot of words down a lot of times and be happy with that. I think we actually made the explicit choice at one point that we will not implement an automatic camel case conversion in our serializer, even though we could; this is a knowable piece of code. But what we want is the grepability from the front end to the back end to say, like, where's this data coming from? And being able to say, like, it is this data, which is from this serializer, which comes from this object method, and being able to trace that very literally and very explicitly in the code, even though that is definitely the sort of thing that we could derive or automatically infer or have Ruby do that translation for us. And our codebase is more verbose and a little noisier. But I think overall, I've been very happy with it, and I think the team has been very happy. But it is an interesting one because I've seen plenty of teams where it is the exact opposite. Any repeated characters must be destroyed. We must write code to write the code for us. And so it's fun to be working with a team where we seem to be aligned around an approach on that front. JOËL: That example that you gave is really interesting because I feel like a common thing that happens in a serialization layer is also a form of normalization. And so, for example, you might downcase all strings as part of the serialization, definitely, like dates always get written in ISO 8601 format whenever that happens. And so, regardless of how you might have it stored on the Ruby side, by the time it gets to the JSON, it's always in a standard format. And it sounds like you're not necessarily doing that with capitalization. CHRIS: I think the distinction would be the keys and the values, so we are definitely doing normalization on the values side. So ISO 8601 date and time strings, respectively that, is the direction that we plan to go for the value. But then for the key that's associated with that, what is the name for this data, those we're choosing to be explicit and somewhat repetitive, or not even necessarily repetitive, but the idea of, like, it's first_name on the Ruby side, and it's first capital N name camel case, or it's...I forget the name. It's not quite camel case; it's a different one but lower camel, maybe. But whatever JavaScript uses, we try to bias towards that when we're going to the front end. It does get a little tricky coming back into the Ruby side. So our controllers have a bunch of places where they need to know about what I think is called lower camel case, and so we're not perfect there. But that critical distinction between sort of the names for things, and the values for things, transformations, and normalizations on the values, I'm good with that. But we've chosen to go with a much more explicit version for the names of things or the keys in JSON objects specifically. JOËL: One thing that can be interesting if you have a normalization phase in your serializer is that that can mean that your serializer and parsers are not necessarily symmetric. So you might accept malformed data into your parser and parse it correctly. But then you can't guarantee that the data that gets serialized out is going to identically match the data that got parsed in. CHRIS: Yeah, that is interesting. I'm not quite sure of the ramifications, although I feel like there are some. It almost feels like formatting Prettier and things like that where they need to hold on to whitespace in some cases and throw out in others. I'm thinking about how ASTs work. And, I don't know, there's interesting stuff, but, again, not sure of the ramifications. But actually, to flip the tables just a little bit, and that's an aggressive terminology, but we're going to roll with it. To flip the script, let's go with that, Joël; what's been up in your world? You've been hosting this wonderful show. I've listened in to a number of episodes. You're doing a fantastic job. I want to hear a little bit more of what's new in your world, Joël. JOËL: So I've been working on a project that has a lot of flaky tests, and we're trying to figure out the source of that flakiness. It's easy to just dive into, oh, I saw a flaky Test. Let me try to fix it. But we have so much flakiness that I want to go about it a little bit more systematically. And so my first step has actually been gathering data. So I've actually been able to make API requests to our CI server. And the way we figure out flakiness is looking at the commit hash that a particular test suite run has executed on. And if there's more than one CI build for a given commit hash, we know that's probably some kind of flakiness. It could be a legitimate failure that somebody assumed was flakiness, and so they just re-run CI. But the symptom that we are trying to address is the fact that we have a very high level of people re-verifying their code. And so to do that or to figure out some stats, I made a request to the API grouped by commit hash and then was able to get the stats of how many re-verifications there are and even the distribution. The classic way that you would do that is in Ruby; you would use the GroupBy function from enumerable. And then, you would transform values instead of having, like, say; each commit hash then points to all the builds, an array of builds that match that commit hash. You would then thumb those. So now you have commit hashes that point to counts of how many builds there were for that commit hash. Newer versions of Ruby introduced the tally method, which I love, which allows you to basically do all of that in one step. One thing that I found really interesting, though, is that that will then give me a hash of commit hashes that point to the number of builds that are there. If I want to get the distribution for the whole project over the course of, say, the last week, and I want to say, "How many times do people run only one CI run versus running twice in the same commit versus running three times, or four times, or five or six times?" I want to see that distribution of how many times people are rerunning their build. You're effectively doing that tally process twice. So once you have a list of all the builds, you group by hash. You count, and so you end up with that. You have the Ruby hash of commit SHAs pointing to number of times the build was run on that. And then, you again group by the number of builds for each commit SHA. And so now what you have is you'll have something like one, and then that points to an array of SHA one, SHA two, SHA three, SHA four like all the builds. And then you tally that again, or you transform values, or however, you end up doing it. And what you end up with is saying for running only once, I now have 200 builds that ran only once. For running twice in the same commit SHA, there are 15. For running three times, there are two. For running four times, there is one. And now I've got my distribution broken down by how many times it was run. It took me a while to work through all of that. But now the shortcut in my head is going to be you double tally to get distribution. CHRIS: As an aside, the whole everything you're talking about is interesting and getting to that distribution. I feel like I've tried to solve that problem on data recently and struggled with it. But particularly tally, I just want to spend a minute because tally is such a fantastic addition to the Ruby standard library. I used to have in sort of like loose muscle memory transform value is grouped by ampersand itself, transform values count, sort, reverse to H. That whole string of nonsense gets replaced by tally, and, oof, what a beautiful example of Ruby, and enumerable, and all of the wonder that you can encapsulate there. JOËL: Enumerable is one of the best parts of Ruby. I love it so much. It was one of the first things that just blew my mind about Ruby when I started. I came from a PHP, C++ background and was used to writing for loops for everything and not the nice for each loops that a lot of languages have these days. You're writing like a legit for or while loop, and you're managing the indexes yourself. And there's so much room for things to go wrong. And being introduced to each blew my mind. And I was like, this is so beautiful. I'm not dealing with indexes. I'm not dealing with the raw implementation of the array. I can just say do a thing for each element. This is amazing. And that is when I truly fell in love with Ruby. CHRIS: I want to say I came from Python, most recently before Ruby. And Python has pretty nice list comprehensions and, in fact, in some ways, features that enumerable doesn't have. But, still, coming to Ruby, I was like, oh, this enumerable; this is cool. This is something. And it's only gotten better. It still keeps growing, and the idea of custom enumerables. And yeah, there's some real neat stuff in there. JOËL: I'm going to be speaking at RubyConf Mini this fall in November, and my talk is all about Enumerators and ranges in enumerable and ways you can use those to make the APIs of the objects that you create delightful for other people to use. CHRIS: That sounds like a classic Joël talk right there that I will be happy to listen to when it comes out. A very quick related, a semi-related aside, so, tally, beautiful addition to the Ruby language. On the Rails side, there was one that I used recently, which is where.missing. Have you seen where.missing? JOËL: I have not heard of this. CHRIS: So where.missing is fantastic. Let's assume you've got two related objects, so you've got like a has many blah, so like a user has many posts. I think you can...if I'm remembering it correctly, it's User.where.missing(:posts). So it's where dot missing and then parentheses the symbol posts. And under the hood, Rails will do the whole LEFT OUTER JOIN where the count is null, et cetera. It turns into this wildly complex SQL query or understandably complex, but there's a lot going on there. And yet it compresses down so elegantly into this nice, little ActiveRecord bit. So where.missing is my new favorite addition into the Rails landscape to complement tally on the Ruby side, which I think tally is Ruby 2.7, I want to say. So it's been around for a while. And where.missing might be a Ruby 7 feature. It might be a six-something, but still, wonderful features, ever-evolving these tool sets that we use. JOËL: One of the really nice things about enumerable and family is the fact that they build on a very small amount of primitives, and so as long as you basically understand blocks, you can use enumerable and anything in there. It's not special syntax that you have to memorize. It's just regular functions and blocks. Well, Chris, thank you so much for coming back for a visit. It's been a pleasure. And it's always good to have you share the cool things that you're doing at Sagewell. CHRIS: Well, thank you so much, Joël. It's been an absolute pleasure getting to come back to this whole Bike Shed. And, again, just to add a note here, you're doing a really fantastic job with the show. It's been interesting transitioning back into listener mode for the show. Weirdly, I wasn't listening when I was a host. But now I've regained the ability to listen to The Bike Shed and really enjoy the episodes that you've been doing and the wonderful spectrum of guests that you've had on and variety of topics. So, yeah, thank you for hosting this whole Bike Shed. It's been great. JOËL: And with that, let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes. It really helps other folks find the show. If you have any feedback, you can reach us at @_bikeshed, or reach me at @joelquen on Twitter, or at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. Thank you so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. Byeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Law Firm Marketing Catalyst
Episode 105: How Your Firm's Address Affects Your Online Rankings with Chris Dreyer CEO and Founder of Rankings.io

Law Firm Marketing Catalyst

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 19, 2022 41:40


What you'll learn in this episode: How your location affects SEO, and why firms in major metros need to market differently than rural or suburban firms How traditional advertising and brand building can complement SEO What end-to-end SEO is, and why Chris' company does nothing but SEO How long you can expect to work with an SEO firm before seeing results Why it's better to not do SEO at all than do it halfheartedly About Chris Dreyer Chris Dreyer is the CEO and Founder of Rankings.io, an SEO agency that helps elite personal injury law firms land serious injury and auto accident cases through Google's organic search results. His company has the distinction of making the Inc. 5000 list four years in a row. Chris's journey in legal marketing has been a saga, to say the least. A world-ranked collectible card game player in his youth, Chris began his “grown up” career with a History Education degree and landed a job out of college as a detention room supervisor. The surplus of free time in that job allowed him to develop a side hustle in affiliate marketing, where (at his apex) he managed over 100 affiliate sites simultaneously, allowing him to turn his side gig into a full-time one. When his time in affiliate marketing came to an end, he segued into SEO for attorneys, while also having time to become a top-ranked online poker player. Today, Chris is the CEO and founder of Rankings.io, an SEO agency specializing in elite personal injury law firms and 4x consecutive member of the Inc. 5000. In addition to owning and operating Rankings, Chris is a real estate investor and podcast host, as well as a member of the Forbes Agency Council, the Rolling Stone Culture Council, Business Journals Leadership Trust, Fast Company Executive Board, and Newsweek Expert Forum. Chris's first book, Niching Up: The Narrower the Market, the Bigger the Prize, is slated for release in late 2022. Additional Resources Chris Dreyer LinkedIn Rankings.io Twitter Rankings.io Facebook Rankings.io Instagram Transcript: SEO is a complicated beast. If you want to conquer it, you have to go in ready to swing, according to Chris Dreyer. As CEO of Rankings.io, Chris specializes in working with personal injury lawyers and law firms to get them on the first page of Google in competitive markets. He joined the Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast to talk about how the “proximity factor” affects Google rankings; why your content is the first area to target if you want to improve your rankings; and how SEO, digital marketing and traditional advertising all work together to build your brand. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Welcome to The Law Firm Marketing Catalyst Podcast. Today, my guest is Chris Dreyer, CEO of Rankings.io. His firm specializes in working with elite personal injury firms, helping them to generate auto accident and other cases involving serious personal injury. He does this through Google's organic keyword search rankings which, to me, is quite a challenge. This is a very competitive market, and it's one that requires a very healthy budget if you're going to be successful. Today, Chris is going to tell us about his journey and some of what he's learned along the way. Chris, welcome to the program. Chris: Sharon, thanks so much for having me. Sharon: Great to have you. Tell us about your career path. You weren't five years old saying this is what you wanted to do. Chris: I've always been an entrepreneur. I saw my uncle. My uncle's a very successful business CEO for many organizations. He's had a really interesting career path. I told my parents before I went to college that no matter what I got a degree in, I was going to start and own my business at one point, and they were on the same page. I ended up getting a history education degree. I was a teacher, and I was working in a detention room when I typed in “how to make money online,” probably the worst query you could possibly type in. But I found a basic course that taught me the fundamentals of digital marketing and I pursued that. By the end of my second year teaching, I was making about four times the amount from that than I got from teaching. So, I went all in and did some affiliate marketing. I had some ups and downs with that. Then I went and worked for another agency and rose to their lead consultant. Then I had an epiphany and thought, “I think I can do this myself. I think I can do it better,” and that's what I did. That's when I started. At the time, it was attorney rankings. Sharon: Wow! Had you played around with attorney rankings before, when you were a teacher and just typing away? Chris: When I worked for this digital agency that's no longer in business, they were a generalist agency, but they worked with many law firms and attorneys. I was their lead account manager. I just enjoyed working with them. I enjoyed the competition and the satisfaction I would get from ranking a site in a more competitive vertical. That's how I chose legal. I wanted to look for something that had a longstanding business. I didn't want to jump into something fast or tech-related that could be changing all the time; I wanted something with a little bit more longevity. Sharon: Did you ever want to be a lawyer yourself? Chris: I ask that to myself all the time. I think about it now, mainly because of all the relationships I have, how easy it could be for a referral practice. We have our own agency and I know how to generate leads now. So, I ask myself that a lot. That's a 2½ to 3-year commitment. You never know; I may end up getting my degree. Sharon: There are a lot of history majors who went into law and then probably decided they wanted to do something else, so that's a great combination you have. It's Rankings.io. What's the .io? Chris: There are these new top-level domain extensions. There are .org, .net, .com. Now you see stuff like .lawyer or .red. There are all kinds of different categories of those domains. Tech companies frequently use .io, standing for “input” and “output.”  How I look at it, or how I make the justification for it, is that if you invest in us, you get cases—input/output. Sharon: Can you make up your own top level or is there a list somewhere? Chris: There's a big list. GoDaddy and NameSheet.com have many of them. In legal specifically, there's .law, there's . attorney, there's .lawyer, I believe even .legal. Most industries have their own top-level domain extension now. Sharon: I've seen .io, but I never knew what it stood for. You don't see it that often. I happened to be Googling somebody in Ireland the other day. Most of the places were using .com, but this was using .ie, and I thought, “What is .ie?” but it turns out it was Ireland. Tell us a little about your business. What kinds of clients do you have? Is there seasonality? Chris: We help personal injury attorneys. We primarily work with personal injury law firms that are midsize to large. Typically not solo practitioners and new firms, but more established firms trying to break into major markets in metropolitan areas, your Chicagos, your Philadelphias, your bigger cities that have a lot of competition. We've been around since 2013. We don't work with a high volume of clients because our investments are higher, because to rank in these big cities takes a lot of quantitative actions, a lot of production. We currently work with around 45 to 50 firms, and that's what we do. We do search engine optimization for personal injury law firms. Sharon: Search engine optimization for personal injury law firms. To me, that seems like a lot. It's great. Are these typically smaller firms that are in—I don't know—Podunk, Iowa, and they say, “I want to go to the big city”? Is that what happens? Chris: Typically, it's one of two things. It's either a TV, radio, traditional advertiser that wants to focus more on digital that has a larger investment. They have more capital to invest. Or, it's someone that wants to get creative and focus on digital to try to take market share away from the big TV advertisers. Most of the time it's individuals in big cities because there are tons of personal injury attorneys. Right now, I'm in Marion, Illinois. There's a handful of attorneys. Most of them aren't focused on marketing. Just by the nature of having a practice, they typically show up in the Map Pack. That's not the case in Chicago. You actually have to aggressively market to show up on the first page of Google. Sharon: If somebody's already spending a lot of money on TV or radio or billboards in Chicago, are your clients people who have turned around and said, “I can do better if I put this money all into digital and rankings.” Does that happen? Chris: I personally am not an “or.” I'm an “and.” You did TV? Well, let's also do SEO. Let's also do pay-per-click. I like the omnichannel approach. I think there are two types of marketing. There is lead generation and direct response. That's your pay-per-click, your SEO, things like that. Then there's demand generation and brand building. The thing about demand generation and brand building is they actually complement direct response, and you can get lower cost per acquisition. To give you an example, if you're a big TV advertiser and have an established brand, and someone types something into Google, you may capture that click because they recognize your company as opposed to someone that isn't as known. I think they all work together. Of course, we're always playing the attention arbitrage game. We want to go to the locations where our money can carry the most weight to get us the most attention. For example, right now, individuals are going to TikTok and Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts because there isn't the same amount of competition there. That's where a lot of tension and competition are occurring. It's a constant game, and it's something to be apprised of and aware of what's going on. Sharon: Is that something you also do in terms of rankings? Do you do TikTok or Instagram or anything like that, or Google My Business? Is it all of those? Chris: We use that ourselves to market our business because we're omnichannel, but for our clients, we focus solely on design and SEO. That's simply because we have intense focus and expertise in those areas. We want to be the best in the world and really dialed in to all the fundamental changes that occur. But knowing that limitation, knowing that there is more effort and sacrifice if someone wants to come to us because we don't do everything, we like to be aware of who is providing services in those other areas. Who's the best at pay-per-click, who's the best at social media. We try to make it as easy as possible to get our clients help in those areas too. Sharon: How do you keep up with everything? There are so many different things. Chris: Obsession. I think of it as a game. I always tell people that running a digital agency is like a game that pays me. I truly believe that, because I enjoy what I do. I don't love the quote that if you love what you do, you never work a day in your life. I don't believe that's completely true, but I don't have the same stressors and I enjoy what I do. So, that's an obsession. Sharon: So that's dinner-table talk. Chris: Oh, yeah. Sharon: What keeps you attracted to attorneys? A lot of people say, “O.K., I've had it.” What keeps you attracted? Chris: I think they're providing a good service to the common individual and fighting against big insurance companies. Generally, they get a bad rap, particularly personal injury attorneys. They're referred to as ambulance chasers. Sometimes individuals get creative, and they refer to me and our agency as an ambulance-chaser chaser. But in general, they're the plaintiffs; they're trying to help individuals that have been injured. I think where they get a bad rap is sometimes people are banging down their doors and soliciting them right after they're injured or in the hospital bed. Other times, you'll see these big billboards where it's like, “How could you possibly put that up on a billboard?” There's a complete lack of EQ or empathy. It's like, “Congratulations. You just lost a leg. Contact us,” or “Congratulations. Someone's seriously hurt.” It's just the wrong messaging. That's where they get a bad rap, but the overwhelming majority are truly trying to provide value and help these injured victims. Sharon: Do you ever work with defense firms or law firms that aren't personal injury? Chris: That's a good question. Our focus and expertise is personal injury, and what I tell other businesses and my peers is that it gives us optionality. If I think we can help a law firm and we can serve them and continue to provide extreme value, we will selectively take those opportunities. Right now we have about 45 clients, and I think three of them aren't personal injury law firms. It just happened to be the perfect prospect for us. They were in competitive markets. They had these clearly defined goals and brands, and we wanted to help them. Sharon: How about other legal services, like—I forget; I think it's Legal Voice or something like that. If it's a graphics firm that does graphics for trials, do you work with that kind of firm? Chris: We've worked with some. I can't think of any specifically. I would say our business is more focused on the front end, the marketing and awareness side, and less on the sales intake or operations side. Operations would be your trials and customer service and things like that. At this point in time, we're focused solely on lead generation, and that's an issue upon itself. Our job is to overwhelm the sales department. Intake is a whole different ballgame. Sometimes intake has to be addressed, but it's not us. We have referrals that we give for that. Sharon: Do you work with only lawyers, or do you work with marketing directors at these firms? Who are you typically working with? Chris: Most of the time it's the lead attorney. There are some firms that have a CMO or a marketing manager, but I would say that's the minority. When they get a CMO, typically it's at your higher eight-figure or nine-figure firms, and they will start to bring these services in-house. So, most of the time it's still the lead attorney. Sharon: You used a term I hadn't heard before, end-to-end SEO. What does that mean? Chris: It's a great question. A lot of digital agencies that are full-service, they'll offer design and social and PPC. They have a very narrow span of control, meaning you get assigned a SEO specialist, and that SEO specialist is supposed to be able to write content, optimize your site, do your local SEO, do your link building. Look, I don't believe in unicorns. I don't think people have the skillset to do all of those. So, when I say end-to-end, we have a dedicated content department with writers; we have a dedicated, on-site SEO and technical department to optimize your site; we have a dedicated local department that only works with local maps and helps you on the Map Pack; we have a dedicated link-building department. It's the full spectrum of SEO as opposed to getting these generalists, where maybe they're good at one thing and not good at the other things. Sharon: Do you think your market understands the term end-to-end SEO? Chris: Probably not. I probably should work on the copyrighting a little bit, but I do like to make that distinction. Even though we're specialists and do only SEO, you can take it a step farther. If you look at how we staff, everybody's a SEO specialist, as opposed to it being an add-on or backend service. Sharon: The Map Pack, is that where you have the top three local firms on a map near you, when you search “Starbucks near me” or “Personal injury firm near me”? I say Starbucks because we did that last weekend. I know things are always changing, but if it's a one- or two-person personal injury firm and they don't have the budget you're talking about, can they do anything themselves? What do you recommend? Chris: That's a good question. If you don't have a budget, try to scrape your budget together and get a website made the easiest way you can, whether it's a WordPress site or a template. That's your main conversion point. Try to get your practice area pages and your sales pages created as an outlet for conversions. If you don't have a big budget and you're in a metropolitan area, I would encourage you to look at other opportunities to generate business, potentially on-the-ground, grassroots business development practices where you're making relationships with other attorneys. That can carry a lot of weight and get you started. SEO is a zero-sum game. Either you rank in the top positions or you don't, and if you don't, you're not going to get the clicks. If you're on the second page of Google, you might as well be on the 90th page. No one goes to page two. So, if you're going to do SEO, you can't just dip your toe into it. You've got to go in ready to swing and ready to do the quantitative actions to get results. Otherwise, you might as well not do it at all. You might as well choose a different channel. Sharon: That's interesting. So, if you Google your firm and find you're on the second page, should you just give it up and say, “O.K., I'm not going to do anything in this area”? Chris: If you're working with an SEO agency and you're on the second page of Google, I would tell you to—well, first of all, depending upon the length of time you've been with them, if you've given them sufficient time, then I would say you probably need a different SEO agency. If you are on the second page of Google and you're not doing SEO, that's O.K. You could still rank for your brand, your firm name, particularly some of the attorney names, the name of their company. There are probably not going to be many of those. You're probably going to rank for that. I would find a different way to generate leads. It may even mean working for someone else to generate revenue before you go in and start your own practice. Sharon: So, being a lawyer in a law firm first and getting your feet wet that way. You mentioned something about the length of time. How long should you give a firm before you say, “O.K., thanks”? Chris: I'm going to give the lawyer answer here. It depends. If you've been doing SEO for a long time and you have a tremendous amount of links and content, it could be a technical SEO coding issue, maybe a site architecture issue. Maybe you need as little as 90 days to truly make a huge impact. We just took on a client in Florida that had a tremendous amount of links, a tremendous amount of content. We literally just unclogged the sink, so to speak, and they're skyrocketing in a short amount of time. If you're in a major market and you just got your website built and you don't have links, it's going to take some time. All of these SEO specialists will say it takes six months. That's completely untrue. It's based upon the gap. What are you benchmarking against? What does the data show? It could be nine months; it could be 14 months based upon the quantitative actions you're taking. If you don't take the correct quantitative actions, you could be treading water, too. So, it really depends. You can see results quickly. It just depends on where you're at in your state for your firm. Sharon: Since you work with attorneys, I'm sure more than once you've heard, “Chris, I've waited three months. What's going on? How long do I have to wait? We're pouring money into this.” What's your response? Chris: That's a great question. We try to set those expectations on the front end before we even sign them as a client, but occasionally those situations will slip through. Maybe we didn't have those conversations enough or they weren't clear enough. We have a series in our onboarding called “Teach Our Clients Not to Be Crazy.” I'm being really transparent here. Clients become crazy when expectations were not set. If they're set in the front end when we sign them and it's part of our onboarding processes, we say, “This is how long it's going to take to get results.” We're not three months down the road getting that, because we already told them on the front end this is how long it will take. The same for your operation processes like content or reporting. You report our meeting cadences, your communication preferences, all these things. We do that in our “Teach Our Clients Not to Be Crazy.” That's the biggest issue. Most individuals don't have those expectations set well enough on the front end. Sharon: So, you basically say, “It depends. I don't know. We'll have to see. We have to look at your website.” Do you start usually by looking at the site architecture? Do you change—I forget what you call it—the headings at the top of the page, things that are searchable? Chris: We have a very thorough diagnostic that uses a lot of data from different APIs, Ahrefs, and other tools that help us with benchmarking and setting these goals and KPIs. We look at three primary pillars. We'll look at their content to see if it's targeting keywords properly, if it's well-written, if they're missing content. We'll look at their architecture, like you said, to see if the information is easily accessible, if they can Google the website and the consumer can find the information they're looking for, if it loads quickly. Then we will look at their backlink profile to see if they have enough endorsements. If you're trying to win an election, you want to get as many votes as possible. If you're trying to win the first page of Google, you want to get as many high-quality links as possible. So, we'll take a look at that too. There are a lot of subcategories to those, but those are the big, top-level things we look at. Sharon: Of course, we're a PR firm and we do a lot of PR, a lot of article writing for the media. We've had SEO companies say, “I want to see the article before you post it. I want to pump it up, add words, delete words.” Do you do things like that, or is that more on the PR side? Chris: I'll be transparent. I don't love it because it hurts things from a throughput perspective and getting it to the end. It's a bottleneck. It delays things. We do heavy, up-front analysis of the content to try to identify voice and their style. We go through a style guide and try to identify their taglines. It's very cumbersome up front. Then we try to get their permission to not do the approval process. Not everyone will allow us to do that, but we like to say it delays us. If we're an SEO agency and we write 40 articles a month, and if the client takes a month to approve them, we don't have any content to market. So, we try to avoid that when we can. Sharon: Yeah, lawyers didn't go to law school for SEO; they went to be lawyers. Chris: And I think there's this perception where they think everybody in the world is going to see the content. We can publish the content then make edits post-production. I know that's a bit different from what you do, Sharon, with PR, but for us, we can control and make changes. You see something you don't like, we'll just change it. Sharon: How important is money? You emphasize that in your own marketing. There's always a debate with personal injury firms. Do people care about warm fuzzies, or do they care about your wins? What do you look at? Chris:   That's a deep question. I'm a big fan of Naval Ravikant, and he talks about— Sharon: I'm sorry, who? Chris: Naval Ravikant. He talks about people's motivations based upon status or wealth. Status is a zero-sum game; there's a winner and a loser. A lot of attorneys love trial because there's a winner and a loser. Sports is a zero-sum game. So, there's status orientation. Then there's wealth. Wealth is not a zero-sum game. Many individuals can be wealthy. So, it depends on their demeanor. I think some of them are more status-oriented and want to be the heavy-hitting trial attorneys and peacock and be the man, but then there are others that don't care. They'll let the other individuals shine and they're more wealth oriented. You see this a lot in society. Individuals will choose to go against common things, but they're doing it because it's a status play. It brings them status to be against the big billionaires or whoever. That's a whole different conversation we'll probably want to avoid, but that's the way I see it. Sharon: Do you basically stick with the marketing they have? If they call you in to do SEO and you look at their website and messaging, do you stick with that or do you recommend a change? Chris: We absolutely will make recommendations if we see an opportunity to help them. Ultimately, if they're signing more cases, it helps us; we have more opportunities to do different SEO for different locations, for retention, for security. Individuals that are living and dying by each lead are the ones that are emailing you every single day, “Where are my leads? Where are my leads?” We just try to do the best. If we think we have excellent rankings, and maybe they don't have the correct copywriting or positioning conversion points, we'll absolutely make recommendations for branding or anything that can help them. Sharon: Have you ever let a client go because they were too anxious or they wouldn't listen to you, or you thought, “This is not going to work”? Chris: Yeah, I wouldn't say very frequently, but absolutely. We've done it a couple of times this year under different circumstances. At the end of the day, your team has to feel welcome and hungry and motivated to work on your client. I want to have a culture where people enjoy their work. Sometimes we've had individuals that weren't respectful or the best from the culture perspective. Look, at the end of the day, it's not worth it. I know our employees really appreciate that we have their back when those situations occur. When you take care of your employees, they're going to take care of your clients. Sharon: Another question, one that's important to me. I'm not sure I understand it, but how can you work with a client in more than one market? Can you only work with one law firm that wants auto cases in Philadelphia? If client B comes and says, “I want auto cases in Philadelphia,” can you do that? What do you do? Chris: That's a great question that has been debated on and on in the SEO community. What I'll tell you is that radio and TV own the distribution rights. They already own the distribution. For SEO, it's determined based upon proximity. I'll give you an example, and then I'm going to circle this around. If you go on vacation to St. Louis and you type “best restaurants near me” in your phone, you're going to see restaurants nearest your proximity. You're not going to see them 10 miles away or 20 miles away. In some situations, if you have a big market, let's say Houston, you could, in theory, have multiple clients in Houston. You could have one downtown, one in the northeast, and there will not be a true conflict because of the proximity factor. Having said that, I personally have given up on trying to educate our clients on this because, at the end of the day, it's what they feel. So, we only take one per market now. In the past, I was very resistant to it because of the proximity. We've done our own data studies, but the SEO industry itself, it's perceived as a snake oil salesman. Any time I would try to educate about proximity, it's like they have earmuffs, and they're like, “Oh, another snake oil salesman.” So, I've basically given up. It's what they want; it's their perception, so we just take one per market. Sharon: Let me make sure I understand. Are you saying you think it could be done, but your client doesn't want that? Chris: Yes, that was what I was circling around to. Because the Map Pack, which is the best virtual real estate we talk about, after about one mile, your rankings start to deplete based upon your physical location. One of the biggest things I see attorneys do wrong is they'll have an office in Orlando or Houston, and they'll think about going to an entirely different city. They don't understand there's a big portion of their market that's not covered just because of the location where their office is. It may be better to actually open a second office in the same city than to go to an entirely new city based upon proximity. Sharon: Physical offices may not be the same today as it was a few years ago, but the law firms that advertise will advertise 20 different locations. What location do you use? The main location? Chris: First, I'll say all attorney listings are supposed to follow Google's guidelines. Google's guidelines state that the office has to have staff during your regularly stated hours. That's the big one that most don't do. It has to have signage. It has to be an actual brick-and-mortar with an office space. It can't be a shared office. You'll see a lot of fake satellite offices. Technically, they're violating Google's guidelines. So, when we say they should expand, we tell them to follow the book. Get a lease. Make sure it's staffed. Have proof of that. Have signage. Have business cards so if there's any question, here's the proof. That's the way to do it by the book. There are many firms that do not do it by the book, but again, we can educate them as to the best ways to do things. Then it's their choice on how they proceed. Sharon: I can see them saying, “That's nice, Chris. O.K., thanks.” There are people listening today who are going to get off the phone and go look at their website and say, “What am I doing right? What am I doing wrong?” What are the things they should look at right away, the top three things to evaluate whether this is going to work for SEO? Chris: I would say read your content first. Does the content answer consumer intent? Do you think it would answer your customer's pains? Is it well-written? Is it formatted well? Can they find the information they're looking for? That's where I would start. Looking at things like links, you need to use diagnostic tools. You need third-party assistance or someone that really understands that. So, I would pay close attention to your website, to your content. Read it and make sure everything's covered thoroughly. That's where I would start. Sharon: Can you set SEO and then leave it for a few months? If you get things up and running, can you just— Chris: In major metros, typically, you cannot. In most of the major metros, all SEO agencies are an in-house team that is constantly foot on the pedal, doing more content, more links, more Google reviews, or eventually you'll lose market share. In smaller markets, you may be able to create a big enough gap where you don't have to touch it as frequently. Maybe there are only a few firms. You can get a big runway ahead of them. But in most markets, it's a constant game. It's not set and forget it. Sharon: Do people ask you, “Should I add YouTube?” or “Should I link my YouTube? Should I link my podcast or blog?” I know you have a blog. Should those all be linked, and does that help? Chris: Yes and no. I'm trying not to get too confusing for the audience. In general, I would tell the audience to create a link if it can serve the consumer, if you're trying to transition or build brand awareness. I know you're aware of this, Sharon, because of what you do for PR. A lot of times, the links are not followed, and they won't contribute or pass equity. A lot of press release sites, a lot of media news sites, don't pass authority back to your site. Is it still a good reason to include a link? Yes, because you could transition a consumer to your website. It could still convert. Is it going to help SEO? Maybe. The traffic might help, but will the link pass authority? Maybe not. Should you link your social assets and directories and things like this? Absolutely. Are they going help improve your rankings? Maybe. Maybe they will; maybe they won't. Sharon: Is your team constantly Googling your clients? Is it constantly evaluating them? When you say diagnostics, what are you looking for? Are they doing Google Analytics? I don't know exactly what it is. Chris: Yeah, we do. We have several tools that track rankings. Rankings are one of those leading indicators. Just because you have great rankings doesn't mean it's going to generate cases. It's more predictive. So, we look at leading indicators. There's one we look at as an agency. I'm not aware of another agency that does. It's referred to as Ahrefs traffic value, and basically this number shows the amount of money you'd have to spend on pay-per-click to get the same amount for organic. We measure that on a weekly basis. If we see it increase, great. Our rankings and visibility are improving. If we see a decrease, them something happened. It allows us to take action more quickly on a weekly basis than by looking at your Google Analytics traffic or goals and conversions on a monthly basis, which is more a lagging indicator. We look at a lot of KPIs. We look at leading end lagging. Sharon: You mentioned pay-per-click and social before. You don't do social. Do you do pay-per-click? Do you incorporate that, or is that totally separate? Chris: That would be a situation where we have a few strategic partners we can highly recommend. We work very well with them from a communications standpoint. We feel we're the best in the world of SEO. We try to find the best in the world of pay-per-click and these other services and let our clients work with those individuals. Sharon: That's interesting to me, because I always think of pay-per-click as part of SEO in a sense. There are so many perspectives on SEO. Should you focus on this? Should you focus on linking everything? Should you focus on YouTube? That's why it's always changing. What are your thoughts about something like that? Chris: Again, I'm a big omnichannel person, so I think there are a lot of different places where individuals congregate and hang out. They could hang out on Facebook; now that audience is depleted, so let's go to Instagram. Now that audience is depleted and it's going to TikTok or YouTube. I think you need to do it all. The difference between pay-per-click and SEO in my eyes is with pay-per-click, you're leasing visibility. The moment you quit bidding, you're gone. It's great. You can get that visibility immediately. With SEO, you're creating a library so people can pull these books from the shelves when they have a certain query. The more content and queries and keywords you target, the bigger your library is, the more opportunities there are for consumers to find you. I look at it more as an asset as opposed to a leasing situation or a liability perspective. That's the way I look at it for SEO. It just gets better with time. Still today, even though there are all these different mediums, it's still one of the best costs per conversion, costs per acquisition. With pay-per-click, the amount per click has exponentially increased. Now, we're looking at $300, $600 per click. Facebook ads have gotten more expensive, and you're not seeing yourself on the organic feed as much as you used to. It's more pay to play, but we still see a lot of value in SEO. Sharon: I would think it would be foundational in the long term. No matter what else is coming, you are still going to need that. Do you work with your clients on the intake process? What if you're generating these leads and they're blowing it when somebody calls? Chris: We secret shop them. We secret shop our clients. We listen to calls. There's nothing worse than when we generate leads and the phone's not answered or calls aren't returned. It's our job to overwhelm the sales department. The moment we get any insights to where sales could be improved, we make those recommendations because it impacts us. We can generate a thousand leads, but if they're not getting assigned, we're going to get fired because they're not making money. Sharon: How are you tracking that? Do you work with people inside for that to work? Chris: Yes. There are certain CRMs we recommend. There are a few consultants we recommend. There are even outsourced intake services we recommend for all those scenarios. It depends based upon the type of firm. There are some firms that are settlement firms, so they don't do a lot of litigation. They're really high-volume. Then there are litigating firms, where maybe their case criteria are super high and they don't do volume. The way you staff those sales teams is different, so it depends based upon our recommendations. Sharon: Going to back to what you were saying before about working only with personal injury firms, I would think they're not scared off by big marketing budgets or the big numbers you might be throwing around. When you read the Wall Street Journal, they're spending millions of dollars on stuff like this. I don't know if you find that. Chris: They're not afraid to spend money; I'll say that. It is definitely increasing in most major markets. You're not going to do TV in most markets for less than $50,000 a month. Pay-per-click, you're not doing that for less than $10,000 typically. There's big money in personal injury because there's a lot of opportunity. There are a lot of different insurances and big insurance companies. It's a behemoth that takes advantage of a lot of consumers, so they definitely invest a lot. Sharon: Chris, I really appreciate your being here today because this is, to me, foundational. It's not going away no matter what comes. Thank you so much for sharing all your expertise with us. If things ever change with SEO, we'll have you back. Thank you so much. Chris: Awesome. Sharon, thanks so much for having me.

Screaming in the Cloud
Kubernetes and OpenGitOps with Chris Short

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 14, 2022 39:01


About ChrisChris Short has been a proponent of open source solutions throughout his over two decades in various IT disciplines, including systems, security, networks, DevOps management, and cloud native advocacy across the public and private sectors. He currently works on the Kubernetes team at Amazon Web Services and is an active Kubernetes contributor and Co-chair of OpenGitOps. Chris is a disabled US Air Force veteran living with his wife and son in Greater Metro Detroit. Chris writes about Cloud Native, DevOps, and other topics at ChrisShort.net. He also runs the Cloud Native, DevOps, GitOps, Open Source, industry news, and culture focused newsletter DevOps'ish.Links Referenced: DevOps'ish: https://devopsish.com/ EKS News: https://eks.news/ Containers from the Couch: https://containersfromthecouch.com opengitops.dev: https://opengitops.dev ChrisShort.net: https://chrisshort.net Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisShort TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. Coming back to us since episode two—it's always nice to go back and see the where are they now type of approach—I am joined by Senior Developer Advocate at AWS Chris Short. Chris, been a few years. How has it been?Chris: Ha. Corey, we have talked outside of the podcast. But it's been good. For those that have been listening, I think when we recorded I wasn't even—like, when was season two, what year was that? [laugh].Corey: Episode two was first pre-pandemic and the rest. I believe—Chris: Oh. So, yeah. I was at Red Hat, maybe, when I—yeah.Corey: Yeah. You were doing Red Hat stuff, back when you got to work on open-source stuff, as opposed to now, where you're not within 1000 miles of that stuff, right?Chris: Actually well, no. So, to be clear, I'm on the EKS team, the Kubernetes team here at AWS. So, when I joined AWS in October, they were like, “Hey, you do open-source stuff. We like that. Do more.” And I was like, “Oh, wait, do more?” And they were like, “Yes, do more.” “Okay.”So, since joining AWS, I've probably done more open-source work than the three years at Red Hat that I did. So, that's kind of—you know, like, it's an interesting point when I talk to people about it because the first couple months are, like—you know, my friends are like, “So, are you liking it? Are you enjoying it? What's going on?” And—Corey: Do they beat you with reeds? Like, all the questions people have about companies? Because—Chris: Right. Like, I get a lot of random questions about Amazon and AWS that I don't know the answer to.Corey: Oh, when I started telling people, I fixed Amazon bills, I had to quickly pivot that to AWS bills because people started asking me, “Well, can you save me money on underpants?” It's I—Chris: Yeah.Corey: How do you—fine. Get the prime credit card. It docks 5% off the bill, so there you go. But other than that, no, I can't.Chris: No.Corey: It's—Chris: Like, I had to call my bank this morning about a transaction that I didn't recognize, and it was from Amazon. And I was like, that's weird. Why would that—Corey: Money just flows one direction, and that's the wrong direction from my employer.Chris: Yeah. Like, what is going on here? It shouldn't have been on that card kind of thing. And I had to explain to the person on the phone that I do work at Amazon but under the Web Services team. And he was like, “Oh, so you're in IT?”And I'm like, “No.” [laugh]. “It's actually this big company. That—it's a cloud company.” And they're like, “Oh, okay, okay. Yeah. The cloud. Got it.” [laugh]. So, it's interesting talking to people about, “I work at Amazon.” “Oh, my son works at Amazon distribution center,” blah, blah, blah. It's like, cool. “I know about that, but very little. I do this.”Corey: Your son works in Amazon distribution center. Is he a robot? Is normally my next question on that? Yeah. That's neither here nor there.So, you and I started talking a while back. We both write newsletters that go to a somewhat similar audience. You write DevOps'ish. I write Last Week in AWS. And recently, you also have started EKS News because, yeah, the one thing I look at when I'm doing these newsletters every week is, you know what I want to do? That's right. Write more newsletters.Chris: [laugh].Corey: So, you are just a glutton for punishment? And, yeah, welcome to the addiction, I suppose. How's it been going for you?Chris: It's actually been pretty interesting, right? Like, we haven't pushed it very hard. We're now starting to include it in things. Like we did Container Day; we made sure that EKS news was on the landing page for Container Day at KubeCon EU. And you know, it's kind of just grown organically since then.But it was one of those things where it's like, internally—this happened at Red Hat, right—when I started live streaming at Red Hat, the ultimate goal was to do our product management—like, here's what's new in the next version thing—do those live so anybody can see that at any point in time anywhere on Earth, the second it's available. Similar situation to here. This newsletter actually is generated as part of a report my boss puts together to brief our other DAs—or developer advocates—you know, our solutions architects, the whole nine yards about new EKS features. So, I was like, why can't we just flip that into a weekly newsletter, you know? Like, I can pull from the same sources you can.And what's interesting is, he only does the meeting bi-weekly. So, there's some weeks where it's just all me doing it and he ends up just kind of copying and pasting the newsletter into his document, [laugh] and then adds on for the week. But that report meeting for that team is now getting disseminated to essentially anyone that subscribes to eks.news. Just go to the site, there's a subscribe thing right there. And we've gotten 20 issues in and it's gotten rave reviews, right?Corey: I have been a subscriber for a while. I will say that it has less Chris Short personality—Chris: Mm-hm.Corey: —to it than DevOps'ish does, which I have to assume is by design. A lot of The Duckbill Group's marketing these days is no longer in my voice, rather intentionally, because it turns out that being a sarcastic jackass and doing half-billion dollar AWS contracts can not to be the most congruent thing in the world. So okay, we're slowly ameliorating that. It's professional voice versus snarky voice.Chris: Well, and here's the thing, right? Like, I realized this year with DevOps'ish that, like, if I want to take a week off, I have to do, like, what you did when your child was born. You hired folks to like, do the newsletter for you, or I actually don't do the newsletter, right? It's binary: hire someone else to do it, or don't do it. So, the way I structured this newsletter was that any developer advocate on my team could jump in and take over the newsletter so that, you know, if I'm off that week, or whatever may be happening, I, Chris Short, am not the voice. It is now the entire developer advocate team.Corey: I will challenge you on that a bit. Because it's not Chris Short voice, that's for sure, but it's also not official AWS brand voice either.Chris: No.Corey: It is clearly written by a human being who is used to communicating with the audience for whom it is written. And that is no small thing. Normally, when oh, there's a corporate newsletter; that's just a lot of words to say it's bad. This one is good. I want to be very clear on that.Chris: Yeah, I mean, we have just, like, DevOps'ish, we have sections, just like your newsletter, there's certain sections, so any new, what's new announcements, those go in automatically. So, like, that can get delivered to your inbox every Friday. Same thing with new blog posts about anything containers related to EKS, those will be in there, then Containers from the Couch, our streaming platform, essentially, for all things Kubernetes. Those videos go in.And then there's some ecosystem news as well that I collect and put in the newsletter to give people a broader sense of what's going on out there in Kubernetes-land because let's face it, there's upstream and then there's downstream, and sometimes those aren't in sync, and that's normal. That's how Kubernetes kind of works sometimes. If you're running upstream Kubernetes, you are awesome. I appreciate you, but I feel like that would cause more problems and it's worse sometimes.Corey: Thank you for being the trailblazers. The rest of us can learn from your misfortune.Chris: [laugh]. Yeah, exactly. Right? Like, please file your bugs accordingly. [laugh].Corey: EKS is interesting to me because I don't see a lot of it, which is, probably, going to get a whole lot of, “Wait, what?” Moments because wait, don't you deal with very large AWS bills? And I do. But what I mean by that is that EKS, until you're using its Fargate expression, charges for the control plane, which rounds to no money, and the rest is running on EC2 instances running in a company's account. From the billing perspective, there is no difference between, “We're running massive fleets of EKS nodes.” And, “We're managing a whole bunch of EC2 instances by hand.”And that feels like an interesting allegory for how Kubernetes winds up expressing itself to cloud providers. Because from a billing perspective, it just looks like one big single-tenant application that has some really strange behaviors internally. It gets very chatty across AZs when there's no reason to, and whatnot. And it becomes a very interesting study in how to expose aspects of what's going on inside of those containers and inside of the Kubernetes environment to the cloud provider in a way that becomes actionable. There are no good answers for this yet, but it's something I've been seeing a lot of. Like, “Oh, I thought you'd be running Kubernetes. Oh, wait, you are and I just keep forgetting what I'm looking at sometimes.”Chris: So, that's an interesting point. The billing is kind of like, yeah, it's just compute, right? So—Corey: And my insight into AWS and the way I start thinking about it is always from a billing perspective. That's great. It's because that means the more expensive the services, the more I know about it. It's like, “IAM. What is that?” Like, “Oh, I have no idea. It's free. How important could it be?” Professional advice: do not take that philosophy, ever.Chris: [laugh]. No. Ever. No.Corey: Security: it matters. Oh, my God. It's like you're all stars. Your IAM policy should not be. I digress.Chris: Right. Yeah. Anyways, so two points I want to make real quick on that is, one, we've recently released an open-source project called Carpenter, which is really cool in my purview because it looks at your Kubernetes file and says, “Oh, you want this to run on ARM instance.” And you can even go so far as to say, right, here's my limits, and it'll find an instance that fits those limits and add that to your cluster automatically. Run your pod on that compute as long as it needs to run and then if it's done, it'll downsize—eventually, kind of thing—your cluster.So, you can basically just throw a bunch of workloads at it, and it'll auto-detect what kind of compute you will need and then provision it for you, run it, and then be done. So, that is one-way folks are probably starting to save money running EKS is to adopt Carpenter as your autoscaler as opposed to the inbuilt Kubernetes autoscaler. Because this is instance-aware, essentially, so it can say, like, “Oh, your massive ARM application can run here,” because you know, thank you, Graviton. We have those processors in-house. And you know, you can run your ARM64 instances, you can run all the Intel workloads you want, and it'll right size the compute for your workloads.And I'll look at one container or all your containers, however you want to configure it. Secondly, the good folks over at Kubecost have opencost, which is the open-source version of Kubecost, basically. So, they have a service that you can run in your clusters that will help you say, “Hey, maybe this one notes too heavy; maybe this one notes too light,” and you know, give you some insights into Kubernetes spend that are a little bit more granular as far as usage and things like that go. So, those two projects right there, I feel like, will give folks an optimal savings experience when it comes to Kubernetes. But to your point, it's just compute, right? And that's really how we treat it, kind of, here internally is that it's a way to run… compute, Kubernetes, or ECS, or any of those tools.Corey: A fairly expensive one because ignoring entirely for a second the actual raw cost of compute, you also have the other side of it, which is in every environment, unless you are doing something very strange or pre-funding as a one-person startup in your spare time, your payroll costs will it—should—exceed your AWS bill by a fairly healthy amount. And engineering time is always more expensive than services time. So, for example, looking at EKS, I would absolutely recommend people use that rather than rolling their own because—Chris: Rolling their own? Yeah.Corey: —get out of that engineering space where your time is free. I assure you from a business context, it is not. So, there's always that question of what you can do to make things easier for people and do more of the heavy lifting.Chris: Yeah, and to your rather cheeky point that there's 17 ways to run a container on AWS, it is answering that question, right? Like those 17 ways, like, how much of this do you want to run yourself, you could run EKS distro on EC2 instances if you want full control over your environment.Corey: And then run IoT Greengrass core on top within that cluster—Chris: Right.Corey: So, I can run my own Lambda function runtime, so I'm not locked in. Also, DynamoDB local so I'm not locked into AWS. At which point I have gone so far around the bend, no one can help me.Chris: Well—Corey: Pro tip, don't do that. Just don't do that.Chris: But to your point, we have all these options for compute, and specifically containers because there's a lot of people that want to granularly say, “This is where my engineering team gets involved. Everything else you handle.” If I want EKS on Spot Instances only, you can do that. If you want EKS to use Carpenter and say only run ARM workloads, you can do that. If you want to say Fargate and not have anything to manage other than the container file, you can do that.It's how much does your team want to manage? That's the customer obsession part of AWS coming through when it comes to containers is because there's so many different ways to run those workloads, but there's so many different ways to make sure that your team is right-sized, based off the services you're using.Corey: I do want to change gears a bit here because you are mostly known for a couple of things: the DevOps'ish newsletter because that is the oldest and longest thing you've been doing the time that I've known you; EKS, obviously. But when prepping for this show, I discovered you are now co-chair of the OpenGitOps project.Chris: Yes.Corey: So, I have heard of GitOps in the context of, “Oh, it's just basically your CI/CD stuff is triggered by Git events and whatnot.” And I'm sitting here going, “Okay, so from where you're sitting, the two best user interfaces in the world that you have discovered are YAML and Git.” And I just have to start with the question, “Who hurt you?”Chris: [laugh]. Yeah, I share your sentiment when it comes to Git. Not so much with YAML, but I think it's because I'm so used to it. Maybe it's Stockholm Syndrome, maybe the whole YAML thing. I don't know.Corey: Well, it's no XML. We'll put it that way.Chris: Thankfully, yes because if it was, I would have way more, like, just template files laying around to build things. But the—Corey: And rage. Don't forget rage.Chris: And rage, yeah. So, GitOps is a little bit more than just Git in IaC—infrastructure as Code. It's more like Justin Garrison, who's also on my team, he calls it infrastructure software because there's four main principles to GitOps, and if you go to opengitops.dev, you can see them. It's version one.So, we put them on the website, right there on the page. You have to have a declared state and that state has to live somewhere. Now, it's called GitOps because Git is probably the most full-featured thing to put your state in, but you could use an S3 bucket and just version it, for example. And make it private so no one else can get to it.Corey: Or you could use local files: copy-of-copy-of-this-thing-restored-parentheses-use-this-one-dot-final-dot-doc-dot-zip. You know, my preferred naming convention.Chris: Ah, yeah. Wow. Okay. [laugh]. Yeah.Corey: Everything I touch is terrifying.Chris: Yes. Geez, I'm sorry. So first, it's declarative. You declare your state. You store it somewhere. It's versioned and immutable, like I said. And then pulled automatically—don't focus so much on pull—but basically, software agents are applying the desired state from source. So, what does that mean? When it's—you know, the fourth principle is implemented, continuously reconciled. That means those software agents that are checking your desired state are actually putting it back into the desired state if it's out of whack, right? So—Corey: You're talking about agents running it persistently on instances, validating—Chris: Yes.Corey: —a checkpoint on a cron. How is this meaningfully different than a Puppet agent running in years past? Having spent I learned to speak publicly by being a traveling trainer for Puppet; same type of model, and in fact, when I was at Pinterest, we wound up having a fair bit—like, that was their entire model, where they would have—the Puppet's code would live in an S3 bucket that was then copied down, I believe, via Git, and then applied to the instance on a schedule. Like, that sounds like this was sort of a early days GitOps.Chris: Yeah, exactly. Right? Like so it's, I like to think of that as a component of GitOps, right? DevOps, when you talk about DevOps in general, there's a lot of stuff out there. There's a lot of things labeled DevOps that maybe are, or maybe aren't sticking to some of those DevOps core things that make you great.Like the stuff that Nicole Forsgren writes about in books, you know? Accelerate is on my desk for a reason because there's things that good, well-managed DevOps practices do. I see GitOps as an actual implementation of DevOps in an open-source manner because all the tooling for GitOps these days is open-source and it all started as open-source. Now, you can get, like, Flux or Argo—Argo, specifically—there's managed services out there for it, you can have Flux and not maintain it, through an add-on, on EKS for example, and it will reconcile that state for you automatically. And the other thing I like to say about GitOps, specifically, is that it moves at the speed of the Kubernetes Audit Log.If you've ever looked at a Kubernetes audit log, you know it's rather noisy with all these groups and versions and kinds getting thrown out there. So, GitOps will say, “Oh, there's an event for said thing that I'm supposed to be watching. Do I need to change anything? Yes or no? Yes? Okay, go.”And the change gets applied, or, “Hey, there's a new Git thing. Pull it in. A change has happened inGit I need to update it.” You can set it to reconcile on events on time. It's like a cron or it's like an event-driven architecture, but it's combined.Corey: How does it survive the stake through the heart of configuration management? Because before I was doing all this, I wasn't even a T-shaped engineer: you're broad across a bunch of things, but deep in one or two areas, and one of mine was configuration management. I wrote part of SaltStack, once upon a time—Chris: Oh.Corey: —due to a bunch of very strange coincidences all hitting it once, like, I taught people how to use Puppet. But containers ultimately arose and the idea of immutable infrastructure became a thing. And these days when we were doing full-on serverless, well, great, I just wind up deploying a new code bundle to the Lambdas function that I wind up caring about, and that is a immutable version replacement. There is no drift because there is no way to log in and change those things other than through a clear deployment of this as the new version that goes out there. Where does GitOps fit into that imagined pattern?Chris: So, configuration management becomes part of your approval process, right? So, you now are generating an audit log, essentially, of all changes to your system through the approval process that you set up as part of your, how you get things into source and then promote that out to production. That's kind of the beauty of it, right? Like, that's why we suggest using Git because it has functions, like, requests and issues and things like that you can say, “Hey, yes, I approve this,” or, “Hey, no, I don't approve that. We need changes.” So, that's kind of natively happening with Git and, you know, GitLab, GitHub, whatever implementation of Git. There's always, kind of—Corey: Uh, JIF-ub is, I believe, the pronunciation.Chris: JIF-ub? Oh.Corey: Yeah. That's what I'm—Chris: Today, I learned. Okay.Corey: Exactly. And that's one of the things that I do for my lasttweetinaws.com Twitter client that I build—because I needed it, and if other people want to use it, that's great—that is now deployed to 20 different AWS commercial regions, simultaneously. And that is done via—because it turns out that that's a very long to execute for loop if you start down that path—Chris: Well, yeah.Corey: I wound up building out a GitHub Actions matrix—sorry a JIF-ub—actions matrix job that winds up instantiating 20 parallel builds of the CDK deploy that goes out to each region as expected. And because that gets really expensive with native GitHub Actions runners for, like, 36 cents per deploy, and I don't know how to test my own code, so every time I have a typo, that's another quarter in the jar. Cool, but that was annoying for me so I built my own custom runner system that uses Lambda functions as runners running containers pulled from ECR that, oh, it just runs in parallel, less than three minutes. Every time I commit something between I press the push button and it is out and running in the wild across all regions. Which is awesome and also terrifying because, as previously mentioned, I don't know how to test my code.Chris: Yeah. So, you don't know what you're deploying to 20 regions sometime, right?Corey: But it also means I have a pristine, re-composable build environment because I can—Chris: Right.Corey: Just automatically have that go out and the fact that I am making a—either merging a pull request or doing a direct push because I consider main to be my feature branch as whenever something hits that, all the automation kicks off. That was something that I found to be transformative as far as a way of thinking about this because I was very tired of having to tweak my local laptop environment to, “Oh, you didn't assume the proper role and everything failed again and you broke it. Good job.” It wound up being something where I could start developing on more and more disparate platforms. And it finally is what got me away from my old development model of everything I build is on an EC2 instance, and that means that my editor of choice was Vim. I use the VS Code now for these things, and I'm pretty happy with it.Chris: Yeah. So, you know, I'm glad you brought up CDK. CDK gives you a lot of the capabilities to implement GitOps in a way that you could say, like, “Hey, use CDK to declare I need four Amazon EKS clusters with this size, shape, and configuration. Go.” Or even further, connect to these EKS clusters to RDS instances and load balancers and everything else.But you put that state into Git and then you have something that deploys that automatically upon changes. That is infrastructure as code. Now, when you say, “Okay, main is your feature branch,” you know, things happen on main, if this were running in Kubernetes across a fleet of clusters or the globe-wide in 20 regions, something like Flux or Argo would kick in and say, “There's been a change to source, main, and we need to roll this out.” And it'll start applying those changes. Now, what do you get with GitOps that you don't get with your configuration?I mean, can you rollback if you ever have, like, a bad commit that's just awful? I mean, that's really part of the process with GitOps is to make sure that you can, A, roll back to the previous good state, B, roll forward to a known good state, or C, promote that state up through various environments. And then having that all done declaratively, automatically, and immutably, and versioned with an audit log, that I think is the real power of GitOps in the sense that, like, oh, so-and-so approve this change to security policy XYZ on this date at this time. And that to an auditor, you just hand them a log file on, like, “Here's everything we've ever done to our system. Done.” Right?Like, you could get to that state, if you want to, which I think is kind of the idea of DevOps, which says, “Take all these disparate tools and processes and procedures and culture changes”—culture being the hardest part to adopt in DevOps; GitOps kind of forces a culture change where, like, you can't do a CAB with GitOps. Like, those two things don't fly. You don't have a configuration management database unless you absolutely—Corey: Oh, you CAB now but they're all the comments of the pull request.Chris: Right. Exactly. Like, don't push this change out until Thursday after this other thing has happened, kind of thing. Yeah, like, that all happens in GitHub. But it's very democratizing in the sense that people don't have to waste time in an hour-long meeting to get their five minutes in, right?Corey: DoorDash had a problem. As their cloud-native environment scaled and developers delivered new features, their monitoring system kept breaking down. In an organization where data is used to make better decisions about technology and about the business, losing observability means the entire company loses their competitive edge. With Chronosphere, DoorDash is no longer losing visibility into their applications suite. The key? Chronosphere is an open-source compatible, scalable, and reliable observability solution that gives the observability lead at DoorDash business, confidence, and peace of mind. Read the full success story at snark.cloud/chronosphere. That's snark.cloud slash C-H-R-O-N-O-S-P-H-E-R-E.Corey: So, would it be overwhelmingly cynical to suggest that GitOps is the means to implement what we've all been pretending to have implemented for the last decade when giving talks at conferences?Chris: Ehh, I wouldn't go that far. I would say that GitOps is an excellent way to implement the things you've been talking about at all these conferences for all these years. But keep in mind, the technology has changed a lot in the, what 11, 12 years of the existence of DevOps, now. I mean, we've gone from, let's try to manage whole servers immutably to, “Oh, now we just need to maintain an orchestration platform and run containers.” That whole compute interface, you go from SSH to a Docker file, that's a big leap, right?Like, you don't have bespoke sysadmins; you have, like, a platform team. You don't have DevOps engineers; they're part of that platform team, or DevOps teams, right? Like, which was kind of antithetical to the whole idea of DevOps to have a DevOps team. You know, everybody's kind of in the same boat now, where we see skill sets kind of changing. And GitOps and Kubernetes-land is, like, a platform team that manages the cluster, and its state, and health and, you know, production essentially.And then you have your developers deploying what they want to deploy in when whatever namespace they've been given access to and whatever rights they have. So, now you have the potential for one set of people—the platform team—to use one set of GitOps tooling, and your applications teams might not like that, and that's fine. They can have their own namespaces with their own tooling in it. Like, Argo, for example, is preferred by a lot of developers because it has a nice UI with green and red dots and they can show people and it looks nice, Flux, it's command line based. And there are some projects out there that kind of take the UI of Argo and try to run Flux underneath that, and those are cool kind of projects, I think, in my mind, but in general, right, I think GitOps gives you the choice that we missed somewhat in DevOps implementations of the past because it was, “Oh, we need to go get cloud.” “Well, you can only use this cloud.” “Oh, we need to go get this thing.” “Well, you can only use this thing in-house.”And you know, there's a lot of restrictions sometimes placed on what you can use in your environment. Well, if your environment is Kubernetes, how do you restrict what you can run, right? Like you can't have an easily configured say, no open-source policy if you're running Kubernetes. [laugh] so it becomes, you know—Corey: Well, that doesn't stop some companies from trying.Chris: Yeah, that's true. But the idea of, like, enabling your developers to deploy at will and then promote their changes as they see fit is really the dream of DevOps, right? Like, same with production and platform teams, right? I want to push my changes out to a larger system that is across the globe. How do I do that? How do I manage that? How do I make sure everything's consistent?GitOps gives you those ways, with Kubernetes native things like customizations, to make consistent environments that are robust and actually going to be reconciled automatically if someone breaks the glass and says, “Oh, I need to run this container immediately.” Well, that's going to create problems because it's deviated from state and it's just that one region, so we'll put it back into state.Corey: It'll be dueling banjos, at some point. You'll try and doing something manually, it gets reverted automatically. I love that pattern. You'll get bored before the computer does, always.Chris: Yeah. And GitOps is very new, right? When you think about the lifetime of GitOps, I think it was coined in, like, 2018. So, it's only four years old, right? When—Corey: I prefer it to ChatOps, at least, as far as—Chris: Well, I mean—Corey: —implementation and expression of the thing.Chris: —ChatOps was a way to do DevOps. I think GitOps—Corey: Well, ChatOps is also a way to wind up giving whoever gets access to your Slack workspace root in production.Chris: Mmm.Corey: But that's neither here nor there.Chris: Mm-hm.Corey: It's yeah, we all like to pretend that's not a giant security issue in our industry, but that's a topic for another time.Chris: Yeah. And that's why, like, GitOps also depends upon you having good security, you know, and good authorization and approval processes. It enforces that upon—Corey: Yeah, who doesn't have one of those?Chris: Yeah. If it's a sole operation kind of deal, like in your setup, your case, I think you kind of got it doing right, right? Like, as far as GitOps goes—Corey: Oh, to be clear, we are 11 people and we do have dueling pull requests and all the rest.Chris: Right, right, right.Corey: But most of the stuff I talk about publicly is not our production stuff, so it really is just me. Just as a point of clarity there. I've n—the 11 people here do not all—the rest of you don't just sit there and clap as I do all the work.Chris: Right.Corey: Most days.Chris: No, I'm sure they don't. I'm almost certain they don't clap… for you. I mean, they would—Corey: No. No, they try and talk me out of it in almost every case.Chris: Yeah, exactly. So, the setup that you, Corey Quinn, have implemented to deploy these 20 regions is kind of very GitOps-y, in the sense that when main changes, it gets updated. Where it's not GitOps-y is what if the endpoint changes? Does it get reconciled? That's the piece you're probably missing is that continuous reconciliation component, where it's constantly checking and saying, “This thing out there is deployed in the way I want it. You know, the way I declared it to be in my source of truth.”Corey: Yeah, when you start having other people getting involved, there can—yeah, that's where regressions enter. And it's like, “Well, I know where things are so why would I change the endpoint?” Yeah, it turns out, not everyone has the state of the entire application in their head. Ideally it should live in—Chris: Yeah. Right. And, you know—Corey: —you know, Git or S3.Chris: —when I—yeah, exactly. When I think about interactions of the past coming out as a new DevOps engineer to work with developers, it's always been, will developers have access to prod or they don't? And if you're in that environment with—you're trying to run a multi-billion dollar operation, and your devs have direct—or one Dev has direct access to prod because prod is in his brain, that's where it's like, well, now wait a minute. Prod doesn't have to be only in your brain. You can put that in the codebase and now we know what is in your brain, right?Like, you can almost do—if you document your code, well, you can have your full lifecycle right there in one place, including documentation, which I think is the best part, too. So, you know, it encourages approval processes and automation over this one person has an entire state of the system in their head; they have to go in and fix it. And what if they're not on call, or in Jamaica, or on a cruise ship somewhere kind of thing? Things get difficult. Like, for example, I just got back from vacation. We were so far off the grid, we had satellite internet. And let me tell you, it was hard to write an email newsletter where I usually open 50 to 100 tabs.Corey: There's a little bit of internet out Californ-ie way.Chris: [laugh].Corey: Yeah it's… it's always weird going from, like, especially after pandemic; I have gigabit symmetric here and going even to re:Invent where I'm trying to upload a bunch of video and whatnot.Chris: Yeah. Oh wow.Corey: And the conference WiFi was doing its thing, and well, Verizon 5G was there but spotty. And well, yeah. Usual stuff.Chris: Yeah. It's amazing to me how connectivity has become so ubiquitous.Corey: To the point where when it's not there anymore, it's what do I do with myself? Same story about people pushing back against remote development of, “Oh, I'm just going to do it all on my laptop because what happens if I'm on a plane?” It's, yeah, the year before the pandemic, I flew 140,000 miles domestically and I was almost never hamstrung by my ability to do work. And my only local computer is an iPad for those things. So, it turns out that is less of a real world concern for most folks.Chris: Yeah I actually ordered the components to upgrade an old Nook that I have here and turn it into my, like, this is my remote code server, that's going to be all attached to GitHub and everything else. That's where I want to be: have Tailscale and just VPN into this box.Corey: Tailscale is transformative.Chris: Yes. Tailscale will change your life. That's just my personal opinion.Corey: Yep.Chris: That's not an AWS opinion or anything. But yeah, when you start thinking about your network as it could be anywhere, that's where Tailscale, like, really shines. So—Corey: Tailscale makes the internet work like we all wanted to believe that it worked.Chris: Yeah. And Wireguard is an excellent open-source project. And Tailscale consumes that and puts an amazingly easy-to-use UI, and troubleshooting tools, and routing, and all kinds of forwarding capabilities, and makes it kind of easy, which is really, really, really kind of awesome. And Tailscale and Kubernetes—Corey: Yeah, ‘network' and ‘easy' don't belong in the same sentence, but in this case, they do.Chris: Yeah. And trust me, the Kubernetes story in Tailscale, there is a lot of there. I understand you might want to not open ports in your VPC, maybe, but if you use Tailscale, that node is just another thing on your network. You can connect to that and see what's going on. Your management cluster is just another thing on the network where you can watch the state.But it's all—you're connected to it continuously through Tailscale. Or, you know, it's a much lighter weight, kind of meshy VPN, I would say, if I had to sum it up in one sentence. That was not on our agenda to talk about at all. Anyways. [laugh]Corey: No, no. I love how many different topics we talk about on these things. We'll have to have you back soon to talk again. I really want to thank you for being so generous with your time. If people want to learn more about what you're up to and how you view these things, where can they find you?Chris: Go to ChrisShort.net. So, Chris Short—I'm six-four so remember, it's Short—dot net, and you will find all the places that I write, you can go to devopsish.com to subscribe to my newsletter, which goes out every week. This year. Next year, there'll be breaks. And then finally, if you want to follow me on Twitter, Chris Short: at @ChrisShort on Twitter. All one word so you see two s's. Like, it's okay, there's two s's there.Corey: Links to all of that will of course be in the show notes. It's easier for people to do the clicky-clicky thing as a general rule.Chris: Clicky things are easier than the wordy things, yes.Corey: Says the Kubernetes guy.Chris: Yeah. Says the Kubernetes guy. Yeah, you like that, huh? Like I said, Argo gives you a UI. [laugh].Corey: Thank you [laugh] so much for your time. I really do appreciate it.Chris: Thank you. This has been fun. If folks have questions, feel free to reach out. Like, I am not one of those people that hides behind a screen all day and doesn't respond. I will respond to you eventually.Corey: I'm right here, Chris. Come on, come on. You're calling me out in front of myself. My God.Chris: Egh. It might take a day or two, but I will respond. I promise.Corey: Thanks again for your time. This has been Chris Short, senior developer advocate at AWS. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice and if it's YouTube, click the thumbs-up button. Whereas if you've hated this podcast, same thing, smash the buttons five-star review and leave an insulting comment that is written in syntactically correct YAML because it's just so easy to do.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.

The Bike Shed
342: Sky Icing

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 14, 2022 43:42


Another toaster strudel debate?! Plus, the results are in for the most listened-to podcast in the RoR community! :: drum roll :: Steph has a "Dear Gerrit" message to share. Chris has a follow-up on mobile app strategy. The Bike Shed: 328: Terrible Simplicity (https://www.bikeshed.fm/328) When To Fetch: Remixing React Router - Ryan Florence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95B8mnhzoCM) Virtual Event - Save Time & Money with Discovery Sprints (https://thoughtbot.com/events/save-time-money-with-discovery) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: STEPH: thoughtbot's next virtual event "Save Time & Money with Discovery Sprints" is coming up on June 17th, from 2 - 3 PM Eastern. It's a discussion with team members from product management, design and development. From a developer perspective, topics will include how to plan a product's architecture, both the MVP and future version, how to lead a tech spikes into integrations and conduct a build vs buy reviews of third party providers. Head to thoughtbot.com/events to register, the event is June 17th 2 - 3 PM ET. Even if you can't make it, registering will get you on the list for the recording. CHRIS: We're the second-best. We're the second-best. Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: I'm very happy to report that I picked up a treat from the store recently. So while I was in Boston and we were hanging out in person, we talked about Pop-Tarts because that always comes up as a debate, as it should. And then also Toaster Strudels came up, so I now have a package of Toaster Strudels, and those are legit. Pop-Tart or Toaster Strudel, I am team Toaster Strudel, which I know you're going to ask me about icing and if I put it on there, so go ahead. I'm going to pause. [laughs] CHRIS: It sounds like I don't even need to say anything. But yes, inquiring minds want to know. STEPH: I think that's also my very defensive response because yes, I put icing on my Toaster Strudel. CHRIS: How interesting. [laughs] STEPH: But it feels like a whole different class of pastry. So I'm very defensive about my stance on Pop-Tarts with no icing put Strudel with icing. CHRIS: A whole different class of pastry. Got it. Noted. Understood. So did you travel? Like, were these in your luggage that you flew back with? STEPH: [laughs] Oh no. They would be all gooey and melty. No, we bought them when we got back to North Carolina. Oh, that'd be a pro move; just pack little individual Strudels as your airplane snack. Ooh, I might start doing that now. That sounds like a great airplane snack. CHRIS: You got to be careful though if the icing, you know, if it's pressurized from ground level and then you get up there, and it explodes. And you gotta be careful. Or is it the reverse? It's lower pressure up in the plane. So it might explode. STEPH: [laughs] Either way, it might explode. CHRIS: Well, yeah. If you somehow buy a packet of icing that is sky icing that is at that pressure, and you bring it down, then...but if you take it up and down, I think it's fine. If you open it at the top, you might be in danger. If you open icing under the ocean, I think nothing's going to happen. So these are the ranges that we're playing with. STEPH: I will be very careful sky icing and probably pack two so that way I have a backup just in case. So if one explodes, we'll be like, all right, now I know what I'm working with and be more prepared for the next one. CHRIS: That's just smart. STEPH: I try to make smart travel decisions, Toaster Strudels on the go. Aside from travel treats and sky icing, I have some news regarding Planet Argon, who is a Ruby on Rails consultancy regarding their latest published this year's Ruby on Rails community survey results. And so they list a lot of fabulous different topics in there. And one of them includes a learning section that highlights most listened to podcasts in the Ruby on Rails community as well as blogs and some other resources. And Bike Shed is listed as the second most listened to podcast in the Ruby on Rails community, so whoo, golf clap. CHRIS: Fantastic. STEPH: And in addition to that, the thoughtbot blog got a really nice shout-out. So the thoughtbot blog is in the number two spot for the most visited blogs in the community. In the first spot is Ruby Weekly, which is like, you know, okay, that feels fair, that feels good. So it's really exciting for the thoughtbot blog because a lot of people work really hard on curating and creating that content. So that's wonderful that so many people are enjoying it. And then I should also highlight that for the podcast in first place is Remote Ruby, so congrats to Chris, Jason, and Andrew for grabbing that number one spot. And Brittany Martin, host of the Ruby on Rails Podcast, along with Brian Mariani, Jemma Issroff, and Nick Schwaderer, are in the number three spot. And some people say that Ruby is losing steam but look at all that content and all those highly ranked podcasts. I mean, we like Ruby so much we're spending time recording ourselves talking about it. So I say long live Ruby, long live Rails. CHRIS: Yes. Long live Ruby indeed. And yeah, it's definitely an honor to be on the list and to be amongst such other wonderful shows. Certainly big fans of the work of those other podcasts. We even did a joint adventure with them at one point, and that was a really wonderful experience, so yeah, honored to be on the list alongside them. And to have folks out there in the world listening to our tech talk and nonsense always nice to hear. STEPH: Yeah. You and I show up and say lots of silly things and technical things into the podcast. The true heroes are the ones that went and voted. So thank you to everybody who voted. That's greatly appreciated. It's really nice feedback. Because we get listener responses and questions, and those are wonderful because it lets us know that people are listening. But I have to say that having the survey results is also really nice. It lets us know people like the show. Oh, but I did go back and look at some of the previous stats because then I was like, huh, so I'm paying attention. I looked at this year's, and I was like, I wonder what last year's was or the year before that. And I think this survey comes out every two years because I didn't see one for 2021. But I did find the survey results for 2020, which we were in the number one spot for 2020, and Remote Ruby was in the second spot. So I feel like now we've got a really nice, healthy podcasting war situation going on to see who can grab the first spot. We've got two years, everybody, to see who [laughs] grabs the number one spot. That's a lot of prep time for a competition. CHRIS: Yeah, I feel like we should be like, I don't know, planning elaborate pranks on them or something like that now. Is that where this is at? It's something like that, I think. STEPH: I think so. I think this is where you put like sky frosting inside someone's suitcase, and that's the type of prank that you play. [laughs] CHRIS: The best of pranks. STEPH: We'll definitely put together a little task force. And we'll start thinking of pranks that we all need to start playing on each other for the podcasting wars that we're entering for the next few years. But anywho, what's going on in your world? CHRIS: Let's see, what's going on in my world? A fun thing happened recently. I had a chance to reflect back on some architectural choices that we've made in the Sagewell platform. And one of those specific choices is how we've approached building our native mobile apps. We made what some listeners may remember is an interesting set of choices. In particular, in Episode 328, which we'll include a link to in the show notes, I shared with you the approach that we're doing, which is basically like, Inertia is great, web user great. We like the web as a platform. What if we were to wrap it in a native shell and find this interesting and somewhat unique hybrid trade-off point? And so, at that point, we were building it. We had most of it built out, and things were going quite well. I think we maybe had the iOS app in the store and the Android app approaching the store or something like that. At this point, both apps have been released to the store, so they are live. Production users are signing in. It's wonderful. But I had a moment in the past couple of weeks to reassess or look at that set of choices and evaluate it. And thankfully, I'm happy with the choices that we've made. So that's good. But to get into the specifics, there were two things that happened that really, really framed the choice that we made, so one was we introduced a major new feature. We basically overhauled the first-run experience, the onboarding that users experience, and added a new, pretty fundamental facet to the platform. It's a bunch of new screens, and flows, and error states, and all of this complexity. And in the process, we iterated on it a bunch. Like, first, it looked like this, and then we changed the order of the screens and switched out the error messages, and et cetera, et cetera. And I'll be honest, we never even thought about the mobile apps. It just wasn't even a consideration. And interestingly, we did as a final check before going fully live and releasing this out to the full production audience; we did spot check it in the mobile apps, and it didn't work. But it didn't work for a very specific, boring, technical reason that we were able to resolve. It has to do with iframes and WebViews and embedded something, something. And we had to set a flag. Thankfully, it was solvable without a deploy of the native mobile apps. And otherwise, we never thought about the native apps. Specifically, we were able to add this fundamental set of features to our platform. And they just worked in native mobile. And they were the same as they roughly are if you're on a mobile WebView or if you're on a desktop web, you know, slightly different in terms of form factor. But the functionality was all the same. And critically, the error states and the edge cases and the flow, there's so much to think about when you're adding a nontrivial feature to an app. And the fact that we didn't have to consider it really spoke to the choice that we made here. And again, to name it, the choice that we made is we're basically just reusing the same WebViews, the same Rails controllers, and the same what are Svelte components under the hood but the same essentially view layer as well. And we are wrapping that in a native iOS. It's a Swift application shell, and on Android, it's a Kotlin application shell. But under the hood, it's the same web stuff. And that was really great. We just got these new features. And you know what? If we have to rip that whole set of functionality out, again, we won't need to deploy. We won't need to rethink it. Or, if we want to subtly tweak it, we can do that. If we want to think about feature flags or analytics, or error states or error reporting, all of this just naturally falls out of the approach that we took. And that was really wonderful. STEPH: That's super nice. I also love this saga of like, you made a choice, and then you're coming back to revisit and share how it's going. So as someone who's never done this before, in regards of wrapping an application in the manner that you have and then publishing it and distributing it that way, what does that process look like? Is this one of those like you run a command, and literally, it's going to wrap the application and then make it hostable on the different mobile app stores? Or what's that? Am I oversimplifying the process? What does that look like? CHRIS: I think there are a lot of platforms or frameworks I think would probably be the better word like Capacitor is something that comes to mind or Ionic or Expo. There are a handful of them that are a little more fully featured in what they provide. So you just point us at your React Views and whatnot, and we'll wrap that up, and it'll be great. But those are for, I may be overgeneralizing here, but my understanding is those are for more heavy client-side bundles that are talking to a common API. And so you're basically taking your same rich client-side application and bundling that up for reuse on the native app, the native app platforms. And so I think those do have some release to the store sort of thing. In our case, we went a little bit further with that integration wrapper thing that we built. So that is a thing that we maintain. We have a Sagewell iOS repo and a Sagewell Android repo. There's a bunch of Swift and Kotlin code, respectively, in each of them, and we deploy to the stores manually. We're doing that whole process. But critically, the code that is in each of those repositories is just the bridge glue code that says, oh, when this Inertia navigation event happens, I'm going to push a WebView to the navigation stack. And that's what that is. I'm going to render the tab bar of buttons at the bottom with the navigation elements that I get from the server. But it's very much server-driven UI, is the way that I would describe it. And it's wrapping WebViews versus actually having the whole client bundle wrapped up in the thing. It's unfortunately subtle to try and talk through on the radio, but yeah. [laughs] STEPH: You're doing great; this is helping. So if there's a change that you want to make, you go to the Rails application, and you make that change. And then do you need to update anything on that iOS repo? It sounds like you don't, which then you don't have to push a new update to the store. CHRIS: Correct. For the vast majority of things, we do not need to make any changes. It's very rare for us to deploy the iOS or the Android app is a different way to put it or to push new releases to the store. It happens we may want to add a new feature to the sort of bridge layer that we built, but increasingly, those are rare. And now it's basically like, yeah, we're just wrapping those WebViews, and it's going great. And again, to name it, it's a trade-off. It's an intentional trade-off that we've made. We're never going to have the richest, most deep platform integration, smooth experience. We are making a small trade-off on that front. But given where we're at as an organization, given how early we are, how much iteration and change, we chose an architecture that optimizes for that change. And so again, like what you just said, yeah, I can...you know how it's really nice to be able to deploy six times a day on a web app, and that's a very straightforward thing to do? It is not so straightforward in the native mobile world. And so, we now have afforded ourselves the ability to do that. But critically, and this is the fun part in my mind, have the trade-offs in the controls. So if we were just like, it's just a WebView, and that's it, and we put it in the stores, and we're done, that is too far of an extreme in my mind. I think the performance trade-offs, the experience trade-offs, it wouldn't feel like a native app like in a deep way, in a problematic way. And so as an example, we have a navigation bar at the top of our app, particularly on iOS, that is native iOS navigation. And we have a tab bar at the bottom, which is native tab UI element. I forget actually what it's called, but it's those elements. And we hide the web application navigation when we're in the mobile context. So we actually swap those out and say, like, let's actually promote these to formal native functionality. We also, within our UI on the web, have a persistent button in the top right corner of your screen that says, "Need help? Reach out to your retirement advocate." who is the person that you get to work with. You can send questions, et cetera, et cetera. It's this little help sidebar drawer thing that pops out. And we have that as a persistent HTML button in the top corner of the web frame. But when we're on native, we push that up as a distinct element in the native UI section. And then again, the bridge that I'm talking about allows for bi-directional communication between the JavaScript side and the native side or the native side and the JavaScript side. And so it's those sorts of pieces that have now afforded us all of the freedom to tinker, and we don't need to re-release where we're like, oh, we want to add a new weird button that does a thing in the WebView when you click on a button outside the WebView. We now just have that built-in. STEPH: Yeah, I really like the flexibility that you're describing. When you promoted those elements to be more native-friendly so, like the navigation or the footer or the little get help chat, is that something that then your team implemented in like the iOS or the Kotlin repo? Okay, I see you nodding, but other people can't see that, so...[laughs] CHRIS: Yeah. I was going to also say the words, but yes, those are now implemented as native parts. So the thing that we built isn't purely agnostic decoupled. It is Sagewell-specific; a lot of it is low-level. Like, let's say we want to wrap an Inertia app in a native mobile wrapper. Like, 90% of the code in it is that, but then there are little bits that are like, and put a button up there. And that button is the Sagewell button. And so it's not entirely decoupled from us. But it mostly is this agnostic bridge to connect things together. STEPH: Yeah, the way you're describing it sounds really nice in terms of you're able to get out the app quickly and have a mobile app quickly that works on both platforms, and then you're still able to deploy changes without having to push that. That was always my biggest mental, or emotional hurdle with the idea of mobile development was the concept of that you really had to batch everything together and then submit it for review and approval and then get it released. And then you got to hope people then upgrade and get the newest version. And it just felt like such a process, not that I ever did much of it. This was all just even watching like the mobile team and all the work that they had to do. And I had sympathy pains for them. But the fact that this approach allows you to avoid a lot of that but still have some nice, customized, more native elements. Yeah, I'm basically just recapping everything you said because I like all of it. CHRIS: Well, thank you, friend. Like I said, I've really enjoyed it, and similar to you, I'm addicted to the feedback loop of the web. It's beautiful. I can deploy ten times or however many I want. Anytime I want, I can push out a new version. And that ability to iterate, to test, to explore, to tweak, to not have to do as much formal testing upfront because I'm terrified that if a bug sneaks out, then, it'll take me two weeks to address it; it just is so, so freeing. And so to give that up moving into a native context. Perhaps I'm fighting too hard to hold on to my dream of the ability to rapidly iterate. But I really do believe in that and especially for where we're at as an organization right now. But, and a critical but here, again, it's a trade-off like anything else. And recently, I happened to be out about in the town, and I decided, oh, you know what? Let me open up the app. Let me see what it's like. And I wasn't on great internet. And so I open the app, and it loads because, you know, it's a native app, so it pops up. But then the thing that actually happened is a loading spinner in the middle of the screen and sort of a gray nothing for a little while until the server request to fetch the necessary UI elements to render the login screen appeared. And that experience was not great. In particular, that experience is core to the experience of using the app every single time. Every time you use it, you're going to have a bad time because we're re-downloading that UI element. And there's caching, and there's things that could happen there to help with that. But fundamentally, that experience is going to be a pretty common one. It's the first thing that you experience when you're opening the app. And so I noticed that and I chatted with the team, and I was like, hey, I feel like this is actually something that fixing this I think would really fundamentally move us along that spectrum of like, we've definitely made some trade-offs here. But overall, it feels snappy and like a native app. And so, we opted to prioritize work on a native login screen for both platforms. This also allows us to more deeply integrate. So particularly, we're going to get biometric logins like fingerprints or face scans, or whatever it is. But critically, it's that experience of like, I open the Sagewell native app on my iOS phone, and then it loads immediately. And then I show it my face like we do these days, and then it opens up and shows me everything that I want to see inside of it. And it's that first-run experience that feels worth the extra effort and the constraints. Because now that it's native mobile, that means in order to change it, we have to do a deploy, not a deploy, release; that's what they call it in the native world. [laughs] You can tell I'm well-versed in this ecosystem. But yeah, we're now choosing that trade-off. And what I really liked about this sort of set of things like the feature that we were able to just accidentally get for free on native because that's how this thing is built. And then likewise, the choice to opt into a fully native login screen like having that lever, having that control over I'm going to optimize for iteration generally, but where it's important, we want to optimize for performance and experience. And now we have this little slider that we can go back and forth. And frankly, we could choose to screen by screen just slowly replace everything in the app with true native WebViews backed by APIs. And we could Ship of Theseus style replace every element of the app with true native mobile things until none of the old bridge code exists. And our users, in theory, would never know. Having that flexibility is really nice given the trade-off and the choice that we've made. STEPH: You said a word there that I missed. You said ship something style. CHRIS: Ship of Theseus. STEPH: What is that? CHRIS: It's like an old biblical story, I want to say, but it's basically the idea of, like, you have the ship. And then some boards start to rot out, so replace those boards. And then the mast breaks, you replace the mast. And slowly, you've replaced every element on the ship. Is it still the same ship at that point? And so it's sort of a philosophical question. So if we replace every single view in this app with a native view, is it still the same map? Philosophers will philosophize about it forever, but whatever. As long as we get to keep iterating and shipping software, then I'm happy. STEPH: [laughs] Y'all philosophize. That's that word, right? CHRIS: Yeah. STEPH: And do your philosopher thing. We'll just keep building and shipping. CHRIS: I don't know if I pronounced it right. It's like either Theseus or Theseus, and I'm sure I said the wrong one. And now that I've said the other, I'm sure both of them are wrong somehow. It's like a USB where there's up and down, and yet somehow it takes three tries. So anyway, I may have mispronounced it, and I may be misattributing it, but that's the idea I was going for. STEPH: Well, given I wasn't even familiar with the word until just now, I'm going to give both pronunciations a thumbs up. I also really like how you decided that for the login screen, that's the area that you don't want people to wait because I agree if you're opening an application or opening...maybe it's the first time, maybe it's the 100th time. Who knows? But that feels important. Like, that needs to be snappy. I need to know it's responsive. And it builds trust from the minute that I clicked on that application. And if it takes a long time, I just immediately I'm like, what are y'all doing? Are y'all real? Do you know what you're doing over there? So I like how you focused on that experience. But then once I log in, like if something is slow to log me in, I will make up excuses for the application all day where I'm like, well, you know, maybe it's my connection. It's fine. I can wait for the next screen to load. That feels more reasonable. And it doesn't undermine my trust nearly as much as when I first click on the app. So that feels like a really nice trade-off as well, or at least a nice area that you've improved while still having those other trade-offs and benefits that you mentioned. CHRIS: To highlight it, you used a phrase there which I really liked. Like, it's building trust. If something's a little bit off in that first run experience every single time, then it kind of puts a question in the back of your head, maybe not even consciously. But you're just kind of looking at it, and you're like, what are you doing there? What are you up to, friend? Humans say to the apps they use on their phone. That's normal, right? When you talk... But to name it, we've also done a round of performance work throughout the app. And so there are a couple of layers to it. But it was work that we had planned for a while, but we kept deferring. But now that we're seeing more usage of the native apps, the native apps experience the same surface area of performance stuff but all the more so because they may be on degraded network connections, et cetera. And so this is another example where this whole thing kind of pays off. The performance work that we did affects everything. It affects the web. It's the same under the hood. It's let's reduce the network requests that we're making in the payloads that we're sending, particularly the network requests to upstream things, so like the banking partner that we're using and those APIs, like, collating all the data to then render the screen. Because of Inertia, we only have a single sort of back and forth conversation via the API as opposed to I think it's pretty common to have like seven different APIs and four different spinners on the screen. We're not doing that, none of that on my watch. [chuckles] But we minimize the background calls to the other parties that we're integrating with. And then, we reduce the payload of data that we're sending on each request. And each of those were like, we had to think about things and tweak and poke, but again it's uniform. So mobile web has that now, desktop web has that now. Android, iOS, they all just inherited it sort of that just happened one day without a deploy or release, without a release of either of the native mobile apps. We did deploy to the web to make that happen, but that's easy. I can do that a bunch of times a day. One last thing I want to share as we're on this topic of trade-offs and levers, there was a really great conference talk that I watched recently, which was Ryan Florence of remix.run also React Router fame if you're familiar with him from that. But he was talking about the most recent version of Remix, which is their meta framework on top of React. But they've done some really interesting stuff around processing data, fetching data, when and how to sequence that. And again, that thing that I talked about of nine different loading spinners on the screen, Remix is taking a very different approach but is targeting that same thing of like, that's not great for user experience. Cumulative layout shift being the actual number that you can monitor for this. But in that talk, there are features that they've added to Remix as a framework where you can just decide, like, do we wait for this or do we not? Do we make sure we have all of the data, or do we say, you know what? Actually, this is going to be below the fold. So it's okay to defer loading this until after we send down the first payload. And then we'll kick in, and we'll do it from the client-side. But it's this wonderful feature of the framework that they're adding in where there's basically just a keyword that you can add to sort of toggle that behavior. And again, it's this idea of like trade-offs. Are we okay with more layout shift, or are we okay with more waiting? Which is it that we're going to optimize for? And I really love that idea of putting that power very simply in the hands of the developers to make those trade-off decisions and optimize over time for what's important. So we'll share a link to that talk in the show notes as well. But it was very much in the same space of like, how do I have the power to decide and to change my mind over time? That's what I want. But yeah, with that, I think that's enough of me updating on the mobile app. I'll continue to share as new things happen. But again, I'm at this point very happy with where we're at. So yeah, it's been fun. But yeah, what else is up in your world? STEPH: I have a dear Gerrit message that I wrote earlier, so I want to share that with you. Gerrit is the system that we're using for when we push up code changes that then manages very similar in the competitive space of like GitHub and GitLab, and Bitbucket. And so the team that I'm working with we are using Gerrit. And Gerrit and I, you know, we get along for the most part. We've managed to have a working relationship. [chuckles] But this week, I wrote my dear Gerrit letter is that I really miss being able to tell a story with my commit messages. That is the biggest pain that I'm feeling right now. So for anyone that's less familiar or if you already are familiar with Gerrit, each change that Gerrit shows represents a single commit that's under review. And each change is identified by a Change-Id. So the basic concept of Gerrit is that you only have one commit per review. So if you were to translate that to GitHub terminology, every pull request is only going to have one commit, and so you really can't push up multiple. And so, where that has been causing me the most pain is I miss being able to tell a story. So like even simple stories that are like, hey, I removed something that's not used. I love separating that type of stuff into its own commit just so then people can see that as they're going through review. Now, before I merge, I'm likely to squash, and that doesn't feel important that it needs to be its own commit. That's really just for the reviewer so they can follow along for the changes. But the other one, I can slowly get over that one. Because essentially, the way I get around that is then when I do push up my code for review, is I then go through my change request, and then I just add comments. So I will highlight that line and say, "Hey, I'm removing this because it's not in use." And so, I found a workaround for that one. But the one I haven't found a workaround for is that I don't push up my local work very often because I love having lots of local, tiny, green commits so that way I can know the progress that I'm at. I know where I'm headed. Also, I have a safe space to roll back to, but then that means that I may have five or six commits that I have locally, but I haven't pushed up somewhere. And that is bothering me more and more hour by hour the more I think about it that I can't push stuff up because it makes me nervous. Because, I mean, usually, at least by the end of the day, I push everything up, so it's stored somewhere. And I don't have to worry about that work disappearing. Now I am working on a dev machine. So there is that aspect of it's technically...it's not even on my local machine. It is stored somewhere that I should still be able to access. CHRIS: What's a dev machine? The way you're saying it, it sounds like it's a virtual machine, not like a laptop. But what's a dev machine? STEPH: Good question. So the dev machine is a remote server or remote machine that then I am accessing, and then that's where I'm performing. That's where I'm writing all of my work. And then that's also kind of the benefit is everything is not local; it's controlled by the team. So then that also means that other teams, other individuals can help set up these environments for future developers. So then you have that consistency across everyone's working with the same Rails version, or gems, or has access to the same tools. So in that sense, my work isn't just on my laptop because then that would really worry me because then I've got nowhere...it's not backed up anywhere. So at least it is somewhere it's being stored that then could be accessed by someone. So actually, now, as I'm talking this through, that does help alleviate my concern about this a bit. [laughs] But I still miss it; I still miss being able to just push up my work and then have multiple commits. And I looked into it because I was like, well, maybe I'm misunderstanding something about Gerrit, and there's a way around this. And that's still always a chance. But from the research that I've done, it doesn't seem to be. And there are actually two very fiery takes that I saw that I have to share because they made me laugh. When I was Googling, the question of like, "Can I push up multiple commits to one single Gerrit CR? Or is there just a way to, like, can I have this concept of like a branch and then I have many commits, but then I turn it into one CR? Whatever the world would give me. What do they have? [laughs] I'm laughing just looking at this now. One of the responses was, have you tried squashing your commits into one commit? And I was like, [laughs] "Yeah, that's not what I had in mind, but sure." And then the other one, this is the more fiery take. They were very defensive about Gerrit, and they wrote that "People who don't like Gerrit usually just hack shit together. They cut corners and love squashing commits or throwing away history. And those people hate Gerrit. Developers who care love it. It's definitely possible and easy to produce agile software." And I just...that made me laugh. I was like, cool, I'm a developer that cuts corners and loves squashing commits. [laughs] CHRIS: So you don't care is what that take says. STEPH: I'm a developer who does not care. CHRIS: You know, Steph, I've worked with you for a while. And I've been looking for the opportunity to have this hard conversation with you. But I just wish you cared a little more about the software that you're writing, about the people that you're working with, about the commits that you're authoring. I just see it in every facet of your work. You just don't care. To be very clear for anyone listening at home, that is the deepest of sarcasm that I can make. Steph cares so very much. It's one of the things that I really enjoy about you. STEPH: I mean, we had the episode about toxic traits. This would have been the perfect time to confront me about my lack of caring about software and the processes that we have. So winding down on that saga, it seems to be the answer is no, friend; I cannot push up multiple commits. Oh, I tried to hack it. I am someone that tries to hack shit together because I tried to get around it just to see what would happen. [laughs] Because the docs had suggested that each change is identified by a Change-Id. And I was like, hmm, so what if there were two commits that had the same Change-Id, would Gerrit treat those as patch sets? Because right now, when you push up a change, you can see all the different patch sets, so that's nice. So that's a nice feature of Gerrit as you can see the history of, like, someone pushed up this change. They took in some feedback. They pushed up a new change. And so that history is there for each push that someone has provided. And I wondered maybe if they had the same Change-Id that then the patch sets would show the first commit and then the second commit. And so I manually altered the commits two of them to reference the same Change-Id. And I have to say, Gerrit was on to me because they gave me a very nice error message that said, "Same Change-Id and multiple changes. Squash the commits with the same Change-Ids or ensure Change-Ids are unique for each commit. And I thought, dang, Gerrit, you saw me coming. [laughs] So that didn't work either. I'm still in a world of where I now wait. I wait until I'm ready for someone to review stuff, and I have to squash everything, and then I go comment on my CRs to help out reviewers. CHRIS: I really like the emotional backdrop that you provided here where you're spending a minute; you're like, you know what? Maybe it's me. And there's the classic Seymour Skinner principle from The Simpsons. Am I out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong. [laughs] And I liked that you took us on a whole tour of that. You're like, maybe it's me. I'll maybe read up. Nope, nope. So yeah, that's rough. There's a really interesting thing of tools constraining you. And then sometimes being like, I'm just going to yield control and back away and accept this thing that doesn't feel right to me. Like, Prettier does a bunch of stuff that I really don't like. It shapes code in a way, and I'm just like, no, that's not...nope, you know what? I've chosen to never care about this again. And there's so much utility in that choice. And so I've had that work out really well. Like with Prettier, that's a great example whereby yielding control over to this tool and just saying, you know what? Whatever you produce, that is our format; I don't care. And we're not going to talk about it, and that's that. That's been really useful for myself and for the teams that I'm on to just all kind of adopt that mindset and be like, yeah, no, it may not be what I would choose but whatever. And then we have nice formatted code; it's great. It happens automatically, love it. But then there are those times where I'm like; I tried to do that because I've had success with that mindset of being like, I know my natural thing is to try and micromanage and control every little bit of this code. But remember that time where it worked out really well for me to be like, I don't care, I'm just going to not care about this thing? And I try to not care about some stuff, which it sounds like that's what you're doing right here. [laughs] And you're like, I tried to not care, but I care. I care so much. And now you're in that [chuckles] complicated space. So I feel for you, Steph. I'm sorry you're in that complicated space of caring so much and not being able to turn that off [laughs] nor configure the software to do the thing you want. STEPH: I appreciate it. I should also share that the team that I'm working with they also don't love this. Like, they don't love Gerrit. So when I shared in the Slack channel my dear Gerrit message, they're both like, "Yeah, we feel you. [laughs] Like, we're in the same spot," which was also helpful because I just wanted to validate like, this is the pain I'm feeling. Is someone else doing something clever or different that I just don't know about? And so that was very helpful for them to say, "Nope, we feel you. We're in the same spot. And this is just the state that we're in." I think they have started transitioning some other repos over to GitLab and have several repos in Gitlab, but this one is still currently using Gerrit. So they very much commiserate with some of the things that I'm feeling and understand. And this does feel like one of those areas where I do care deeply. And frankly, this is one of those spaces that I do care about, but it's also like, I can work around it. There are some reasonable things that I can do, and it's fine as we just talked through. Like, the fact that my commits are not just locally on my machine already makes me feel better now that I've really processed that. So there are lower risks. It is more of just like a workflow. It's just, you know, it's crushing my work vibe. CHRIS: Harshing your buzz. STEPH: In the great words of Queen Elsa, I gotta let it go. This is the thing I'm letting go. So that's kind of what's going on in my world. What else is going on in your world? CHRIS: Well, first and foremost, fantastic reference and segue. I really liked that. But yeah, let's see, [laughs] what else is going on in my world? We had an interesting thing happen last week. So we had an outage on the platform last week. And then we had an incident review today, so a formal sort of post-mortem incident review. There are a couple of different names that folks have given to these. But this is a practice that we want to build within our engineering culture is when stuff goes wrong, we want to make sure that we have meaningful conversations around to try to address the root causes. Ideally, blameless is a word that gets used often in this context. And I've heard folks sort of take either side of that. Like, it's critical that it's blameless so that it doesn't feel like it's an attack. But also, like, I don't know, if one person did something, we should say that. So finding that gentle middle ground of having honest, real conversations but in a context of safety. Like, we're all going to make mistakes. We're all going to ship bugs; let's be clear about that. And so it's okay to sort of...anyway, that's about the process. We had an outage. The specific outage was that we have introduced a new process. This is a Sidekiq process to work off a specific queue. So we wanted that to have discrete treatment. That had been running, and then it stopped running; we still don't know why. So we never got to the root-root cause. Well, we know what the mechanism was, which was the dyno count for that process was at zero. And so, eventually, we found a bunch of jobs backed up in the Sidekiq admin. We're like, that's weird. And then, we went over to Heroku's configuration dashboard. And we saw, huh, that's weird. There are zero dynos processing this. That wasn't true yesterday. But unfortunately, Heroku doesn't log or have an audit trail around changes to those process counts. It's just not available. So that's unfortunate. And then the actual question of like, how did this happen? It probably had to be someone on the team. So there is like, someone did a thing. But that is almost immaterial because, again, people are going to do things, bugs will get shipped, et cetera. So the conversation very quickly turned to observability and understanding. I think we've done a pretty good job of instrumenting error reporting and being quite responsive to that, making sure the signal-to-noise ratio is very actionable. So if we see a bug or a Sentry alert come through, we're able to triage that pretty quickly, act on it where it is a real bug, understand where it's a bit of noise in the system, that sort of thing. But in this case, there were no errors. There was no Sentry. There was nothing; there was the absence of something. And so it was this really interesting case of that's where observability, I think, can really come in and help. So the idea of what can we do here? Well, we can monitor the count of jobs backed up in Sidekiq queue. That's one option. We could do some threshold alerting around the throughput of processed events coming from this other backend. There are a bunch of different ways, but it basically pushed us in the direction of doubling down and reinforcing the foundation of our observability within the platform. So we're just kicking that mini-project off now, but it is something we're like, yeah, we feel like we could add some here. In particular, we recently added Datadog to the stack. So we now have Datadog to aggregate our logs and ideally do some metric analysis, those sort of things, build some dashboards, et cetera. I haven't explored Datadog much thus far. But my sense is they've got the whiz-bang things that we need here. But yeah, it was an interesting outage. That wasn't fun. The incident conversation was actually a good conversation as a team. And then the outcome of like, how do we double down on observability? I'm actually quite excited for. STEPH: This is a fun moment for me because I have either joined teams that didn't have Datadog or have any of that sort of observability built into their system or that sort of dashboard that people go to. Or I've joined teams, and they already have it, and then nobody or people rarely look at it. And so I'm always intrigued between like what's that catalyst that then sparked a team to then go ahead and add this? And so I'm excited to hear you're in that moment of like, we need more observability. How do we go about this? And as soon as you said Datadog, I was like, yeah, that sounds nice because then it sounds like a place that you can check on to make sure that everything is still running. But then there's still also that manual process where I'm presuming unless there's something else you have in mind. There's still that manual process of someone has to check the dashboard; someone then has to understand if there's no count, no squiggly lines, that's a bad thing and to raise a concern. So I'm intrigued with my own initial reaction of, like, yeah, that sounds great. But now I'm also thinking about it still adds a lot of...the responsibility is still on a human to think of this thing and to go check it. Versus if there's something that gets sent to someone to alert you and say like, "Hey, this queue hasn't been processed in 48 hours. There may be a concern that actually feels nicer." It feels safer. CHRIS: Oh yeah, definitely. I think observability is this category of tools and workflows and whatnot. But I think what you're describing of proactive alerting that's the ideal. And so it would be wonderful if I never had to look at any of these tools ever. And I just knew if I got, let's say, it's PagerDuty connected up whatever, and I got a push notification from PagerDuty saying, "Hey, go look at this thing." That's all I ever need to think about. It's like, well, I haven't gotten a PagerDuty in a while, so everything must be fine, and having a deep trust in that. Similar to like, if we have a great test suite and it's green, I feel confident deploying the sort of absence of an alert being the thing that I can trust. But right now, we're early enough in this journey that I think what we need to do is stand up a bunch of these different graphs and charts and metric analysis and aggregations and whatnot, and then start to squint at it for a while and be like, which of these would I be really concerned if it started to wibble? And then you can figure the alerting around said wibble rate. And that's the dream. That's where we want to get to, but I think we've got to crawl, walk, run on this. So it'll be an adventure. This is very much the like; we're starting a thing. I'll tell you about it more when we've done it. But what you're describing is exactly what we want to get to. STEPH: I love wibble rate. That's my new measurement I'm going to start using for everything. It's funny, as you're bringing this up, it's making me think about the past week that Joël Quenneville and I have had with our client work. Because a somewhat similar situation came up in regards where something happened, and something was broken. And it seemed it was hard to define exactly what moment caused that to break and what was going on. But it had a big impact on the team because it essentially meant none of the bills were going through. And so that's a big situation when you got 100-plus people that are pushing up code and expecting some of the build processes to run. But it was one of those that the more we dug into it, the more it seemed very rare that it would happen. So, in this case, as a sort of a juxtaposition to your scenario, we actually took the opposite approach of where we're like; this is rare. But we did load up a lot of contexts. Actually, I was thinking back to the advice that you gave me in a previous episode where I was talking about at what point do you dig in versus try to stay at surface level? And this was one of those, like, we've spent a couple of days on getting context for this and understanding. So it felt really important and worthwhile to then invest a little bit more time to then document it. But then we still went with the simplest approach of like, this is weird. It shouldn't happen again. We think we understand it but then let's add a little bit of documentation or wiki page around like, hey, if you do run into this, here are some steps that will fix everything. And then, if you need to use this, let somebody know because this is so odd it shouldn't happen. So we took that approach in this case where we didn't increase the observability. It was more like we provided a fire extinguisher very close to the location in case it happens. And so that way, it's there should the need arise, but we're hoping it just never gets used. We're also in the process of changing how a lot of that logic works. So we didn't really want to optimize for observability into a system that is actively being changed because it should look very different in upcoming months. But overall, I love the conversations that you bring about observability, and I'm excited to hear about what wibble rates you decide to add to your Datadog dashboard. CHRIS: There's a delicate art and science to the selection of the wibble rates. So I will certainly report back as we get into that work. But with that, shall we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeeee!!!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
339: What About Pictures?

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later May 24, 2022 45:03


Steph has a baby update and thoughts on movies, plus a question for Chris related to migrating Test Unit tests to RSpec. Chris watched a video from Google I/O where Chrome devs talked about a new feature called Page Transitions. He's also been working with a tool called Customer.io, an omnichannel communication whiz-bang adventure! Page transitions Overview (https://youtu.be/JCJUPJ_zDQ4) Using yield_self for composable ActiveRecord relations (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/using-yieldself-for-composable-activerecord-relations) A Case for Query Objects in Rails (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/a-case-for-query-objects-in-rails) Customer.io (https://customer.io/) Turning the database inside-out with Apache Samza | Confluent (https://www.confluent.io/blog/turning-the-database-inside-out-with-apache-samza/) Datomic (https://www.datomic.com/) About CRDTs • Conflict-free Replicated Data Types (https://crdt.tech/) Apache Kafka (https://kafka.apache.org/) Resilient Management | A book for new managers in tech (https://resilient-management.com/) Mixpanel: Product Analytics for Mobile, Web, & More (https://mixpanel.com/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: Golden roads are golden. Okay, everybody's got golden roads. You have golden roads, yes? That is what we're -- STEPH: Oh, I have golden roads, yes. [laughter] CHRIS: You might should inform that you've got golden roads, yeah. STEPH: Yeah, I don't know if I say might should as much but might could. I have been called out for that one a lot; I might could do that. CHRIS: [laughs] STEPH: That one just feels so natural to me than normal. Anytime someone calls it out, I'm like, yeah, what about it? [laughter] CHRIS: Do you want to fight? STEPH: Yeah, are we going to fight? CHRIS: I might could fight you. STEPH: I might could. I might should. [laughter] CHRIS: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. I have a couple of fun updates. I have a baby Viccari update, so little baby weighs about two pounds now, two pounds. I'm 25 weeks along. So not that I actually know the exact weight, I'm using all those apps that estimate based on how far along you are, so around two pounds, which is novel. Oh, and then the other thing I'm excited to tell you about...I'm not sure how I should feel that I just got more excited about this other thing. I'm very excited about baby Viccari. But the other thing is there's a new Jurassic Park movie coming out, and I'm very excited. I think it's June 10th is when it comes out. And given how much we have sung that theme song to each other and make references to what a clever girl, I needed to share that with you. Maybe you already know, maybe you're already in the loop, but if you don't, it's coming. CHRIS: Yeah, the internet likes to yell things like that. Have you watched all of the most recent ones? There are like two, and I think this will be the third in the revisiting or whatever, the Jurassic World version or something like that. But have you watched the others? STEPH: I haven't seen all of them. So I've, of course, seen the first one. I saw the one that Chris Pratt was in, and now he's in the latest one. But I think I've missed...maybe there's like two in the middle there. I have not watched those. CHRIS: There are three in the original trilogy, and then there are three now in the new trilogy, which now it's ending, and they got everybody. STEPH: Oh, I'm behind. CHRIS: They got people from the first one, and they got the people from the second trilogy. They just got everybody, and that's exciting. You know, it's that thing where they tap into nostalgia, and they take advantage of us via it. But I'm fine. I'm here for it. STEPH: I'm here for it, especially for Jurassic Park. But then there's also a new Top Gun movie coming out, which, I'll be honest, I'm totally going to watch. But I really didn't remember the first one. I don't know that I've really ever watched the first Top Gun. So Tim, my partner, and I watched that recently, and it's such a bad movie. I'm going to say it; [laughs] it's a bad movie. CHRIS: I mean, I don't want to disagree, but the volleyball scene, come on, come on, the volleyball scene. [laughter] STEPH: I mean, I totally had a good time watching the movie. But the one part that I finally kept complaining about is because every time they showed the lead female character, I can't think of her character name or the actress's name, but they kept playing that song, Take My Breath Away. And I was like, can we just get past the song? [laughs] Because if you go back and watch that movie, I swear they play it like six different times. It was a lot. It was too much. So I moved it into bad movie category but bad movie totally worth watching, whatever category that is. CHRIS: Now I kind of want to revisit it. I feel like the drinking game writes itself. But at a minimum, anytime Take My Breath Away plays, yeah. Well, all right, good to know. [laughs] STEPH: Well, if you do that, let me know how many shots or beers you drink because I think it will be a fair amount. I think it will be more than five. CHRIS: Yeah, it involves a delicate calibration to get that right. I don't think it's the sort of thing you just freehand. It writes itself but also, you want someone who's tried it before you so that you're not like, oh no, it's every time they show a jet. That was too many. You can't drink that much while watching this movie. STEPH: Yeah, that would be death by Top Gun. CHRIS: But not the normal way, the different, indirect death by Top Gun. STEPH: I don't know what the normal way is. [laughs] CHRIS: Like getting shot down by a Top Gun pilot. [laughter] STEPH: Yeah, that makes sense. [laughs] CHRIS: You know, the dogfighting in the plane. STEPH: The actual, yeah, going to war away. Just sitting on your couch and you drink too much poison away, yeah, that one. All right, that got weird. Moving on, [laughs] there's a new Jurassic Park movie. We're going to land on that note. And in the more technical world, I've got a couple of things on my mind. One of them is I have a question for you. I'm very excited to run this by you because I could use a friend in helping me decide what to do. So I am still on that journey where I am migrating Test::Unit test over to RSpec. And as I'm going through, it's going pretty well, but it's a little complicated because some of the Test::Unit tests have different setup than, say, the RSpec do. They might run different scripts beforehand where they're loading data. That's perhaps a different topic, but that's happening. And so that has changed a few things. But then overall, I've just been really just porting everything over, like, hey, if it exists in the Test::Unit, let's just bring it to RSpec, and then I'm going to change these asserts to expects and really not make any changes from there. But as I'm doing that, I'm seeing areas that I want to improve and things that I want to clear up, even if it's just extracting a variable name. Or, as I'm moving some of these over in Test::Unit, it's not clear to me exactly what the test is about. Like, it looks more like a method name in the way that the test is being described, but the actual behavior isn't clear to me as if I were writing this in RSpec, I think it would have more of a clear description. Maybe that's not specific to the actual testing framework. That might just be how these tests are set up. But I'm at that point where I'm questioning should I keep going in terms of where I am just copying everything over from Test::Unit and then moving it over to RSpec? Because ultimately, that is the goal, to migrate over. Or should I also include some time to then go back and clean up and try to add some clarity, maybe extract some variable names, see if I can reduce some lets, maybe even reduce some of the test helpers that I'm bringing over? How much cleanup should be involved, zero, lots? I don't know. I don't know what that...[laughs] I'm sure there's a middle ground in there somewhere. But I'm having trouble discerning for myself what's the right amount because this feels like one of those areas where if I don't do any cleanup, I'm not coming back to it, like, that's just the truth. So it's either now, or I have no idea when and maybe never. CHRIS: I'll be honest, the first thing that came to mind in this most recent time that you mentioned this is, did we consider just deleting these tests entirely? Is that on...like, there are very few of them, right? Like, are they even providing enough value? So that was question one, which let me pause to see what your thoughts there were. [chuckles] STEPH: I don't know if we specifically talked about that on the mic, but yes, that has been considered. And the team that owns those tests has said, "No, please don't delete them. We do get value from them." So we can port them over to RSpec, but we don't have time to port them over to RSpec. So we just need to keep letting them go on. But yet, not porting them conflicts with my goal of then trying to speed up CI. And so it'd be nice to collapse these Test::Unit tests over to RSpec because then that would bring our CI build down by several meaningful minutes. And also, it would reduce some of the complexity in the CI setup. CHRIS: Gotcha. Okay, so now, having set that aside, I always ask the first question of like, can you just put Derek Prior's phone number on the webpage and call it an app? Is that the MVP of this app? No? Okay, all right, we have to build more. But yeah, I think to answer it and in a general way of trying to answer a broader set of questions here... I think this falls into a category of like if you find yourself having to move around some code, if that code is just comfortably running and the main thing you need to do is just to get it ported over to RSpec, I would probably do as little other work as possible. With the one consideration that if you find yourself needing to deeply load up the context of these tests like actually understand them in order to do the porting, then I would probably take advantage of that context because it's hard to get your head into a given piece of code, test or otherwise. And so if you're in there and you're like, well, now that I'm here, I can definitely see that we could rearrange some stuff and just definitively make it better, if you get to that place, I would consider it. But if this ends up being mostly a pretty rote transformation like you said, asserts become expects, and lets get switched around, you know, that sort of stuff, if it's a very mechanical process of getting done, I would probably say very minimal. But again, if there is that, like, you know what? I had to understand the test in order to port them anyway, so while I'm here, let me take advantage of that, that's probably the thing that I would consider. But if not that, then I would say even though it's messy and whatnot and your inclination would be to clean it, I would say leave it roughly as is. That's my guess or how I would approach it. STEPH: Yeah, I love that. I love how you pointed out, like, did you build up the context? Because you're right, in a lot of these test cases, I'm not, or I'm trying really hard to not build up context. I'm trying very hard to just move them over and, if I have to, mainly to find test descriptions. That's the main area I'm struggling to...how can I more explicitly state what this test does so the next person reading this will have more comprehension than I do? But otherwise, I'm trying hard to not have any real context around it. And that's such a good point because that's often...when someone else is in the middle of something, and they're deciding whether to include that cleanup or refactor or improvement, one of my suggestions is like, hey, we've got the context now. Let's go with it. But if you've built up very little context, then that's not a really good catalyst or reason to then dig in deeper and apply that cleanup. That's super helpful. Thank you. That will help reinforce what I'm going to do, which is exactly let's migrate RSpec and not worry about cleanup, which feels terrible; I'm just going to say that into the world. But it also feels like the right thing to do. CHRIS: Well, I'm happy to have helped. And I share the like, and it feels terrible. I want to do the right thing, but sometimes you got to pick a battle sort of thing. STEPH: Cool. Well, that's a huge help to me. What's going on in your world? CHRIS: What's going on in my world? I watched a great video the other day from the Google I/O. I think it's an event; I'm not actually sure, conference or something like that. But it was some Google Chrome developers talking about a new feature that's coming to the platform called Page Transitions. And I've kept an eye on this for a while, but it seems like it's more real. Like, I think they put out an RFC or an initial sort of set of ideas a while back. And the web community was like, "Oh, that's not going to work out so well." So they went back to the drawing board, revisited. I've actually implemented in Chrome Canary a version of the API. And then, in the video that I watched, which we'll include a show notes link to, they demoed the functionality of the Page Transitions API and showed what you can do. And it's super cool. It allows for the sort of animations that you see in a lot of native mobile apps where you're looking at a ListView, you click on one of the items, and it grows to fill the whole screen. And now you're on the detail screen for that item that you were looking at. But there was this very continuous animated transition that allows you to keep context in your head and all of those sorts of nice things. And this just really helps to bridge that gap between, like, the web often lags behind the native mobile platforms in terms of the experiences that we can build. So it was really interesting to see what they've been able to pull off. The demo is a pretty short video, but it shows a couple of different variations of what you can build with it. And I was like, yeah, these look like cool native app transitions, really nifty. One thing that's very interesting is the actual implementation of this. So it's like you have one version of the page, and then you transition to a new version of the page, and in doing so, you want to animate between them. And the way that they do it is they have the first version of the page. They take a screenshot of it like the browser engine takes a screenshot of it. And then they put that picture on top of the actual browser page. Then they do the same thing with the next version of the page that they're going to transition to. And then they crossfade, like, change the opacity and size and whatnot between the two different images, and then you're there. And in the back of my mind, I'm like, I'm sorry, what now? You did which? I'm like, is this the genius solution that actually makes this work and is performant? And I wonder if there are trade-offs. Like, do you lose interactivity between those because you've got some images that are just on the screen? And what is that like? But as they were going through it, I was just like, wait, I'm sorry, you did what? This is either the best idea I've ever heard, or I'm not so sure about this. STEPH: That's fascinating. You had me with the first part in terms of they take a screenshot of the page that you're leaving. I'm like, yeah, that's a great idea. And then talking about taking a picture of the other page because then you have to load it but not show it to the user that it's loaded. And then take a picture of it, and then show them the picture of the loaded page. But then actually, like you said, then crossfade and then bring in the real functionality. I am...what am I? [laughter] CHRIS: What am I actually? STEPH: [laughs] What am I? I'm shocked. I'm surprised that that is so performant. Because yeah, I also wouldn't have thought of that, or I would have immediately have thought like, there's no way that's going to be performant enough. But that's fascinating. CHRIS: For me, performance seems more manageable, but it's the like, what are you trading off for that? Because that sounds like a hack. That sounds like the sort of thing I would recommend if we need to get an MVP out next week. And I'm like, what if we just tried this? Listen, it's got some trade-offs. So I'm really interested to see are those trade-offs present? Because it's the browser engine. It's, you know, the low-level platform that's actually managing this. And there are some nice hooks that allow you to control it. And at a CSS level, you can manage it and use keyframe animations to control the transition more directly. There's a JavaScript API to instrument the sequencing of things. And so it's giving you the right primitives and the right hooks. And the fact that the implementation happens to use pictures or screenshots, to use a slightly different word, it's like, okey dokey, that's what we're doing. Sounds fun. So I'm super interested because the functionality is deeply, deeply interesting to me. Svelte actually has a version of this, the crossfade utility, but you have to still really think about how do you sequence between the two pages and how do you do the connective tissue there? And then Svelte will manage it for you if you do all the right stuff. But the wiring up is somewhat complicated. So having this in the browser engine is really interesting to me. But yeah, pictures. STEPH: This is one of those ideas where I can't decide if this was someone who is very new to the team and new to the idea and was like, "Have we considered screenshots? Have we considered pictures?" Or if this is like the uber senior person on the team that was like, "Yeah, this will totally work with screenshots." I can't decide where in that range this idea falls, which I think makes me love it even more. Because it's very straightforward of like, hey, what if we just tried this? And it's working, so cool, cool, cool. CHRIS: There's a fantastic meme that's been making the rounds where it's a bell curve, and it's like, early in your career, middle of your career, late in your career. And so early in your career, you're like, everything in one file, all lines of code that's just where they go. And then in the middle of your career, you're like, no, no, no, we need different concerns, and files, and organizational structures. And then end of your career...and this was coming up in reference to the TypeScript team seems to have just thrown everything into one file. And it's the thing that they've migrated to over time. And so they have this many, many line file that is basically the TypeScript engine all in one file. And so it was a joke of like, they definitely know what they're doing with programming. They're not just starting last week sort of thing. And so it's this funny arc that certain things can go through. So I think that's an excellent summary there [laughs] of like, I think it was folks who have thought about this really hard. But I kind of hope it was someone who was just like, "I'm new here. But have we thought about pictures? What about pictures?" I also am a little worried that I just deeply misunderstood [laughs] the representation but glossed over it in the video, and I'm like, that sounds interesting. So hopefully, I'm not just wildly off base here. [laughs] But nonetheless, the functionality looks very interesting. STEPH: That would be a hilarious tweet. You know, I've been waiting for that moment where I've said something that I understood into the mic and someone on Twitter just being like, well, good try, but... [laughs] CHRIS: We had a couple of minutes where we tried to figure out what the opposite of ranting was, and we came up with pranting and made up a word instead of going with praising or raving. No, that's what it is, raving. [laughs] STEPH: No, raving. I will never forget now, raving. [laughs] CHRIS: So, I mean, we've done this before. STEPH: That's true. Although they were nice, I don't think they tweeted. I think they sent in an email. They were like, "Hey, friends." [laughter] CHRIS: Actually, we got a handful of emails on that. [laughter] STEPH: Did you know the English language? CHRIS: Thank you, kind Bikeshed audience, for not shaming us in public. I mean, feel free if you feel like it. [laughs] But one other thing that came up in this video, though, is the speaker was describing single-page apps are very common, and you want to have animated transitions and this and that. And I was like, single-page app, okay, fine. I don't like the terminology but whatever. I would like us to call it the client-side app or client-side routing or something else. But the fact that it's a single page is just a technical consideration that no user would call it that. Users are like; I go to the web app. I like that it has URLs. Those seem different to me. Anyway, this is my hill. I'm going to die on it. But then the speaker in the video, in contrast to single-page app referenced multi-page app, and I was like, oh, come on, come on. I get it. Like, yes, there are just balls of JavaScript that you can download on the internet and have a dynamic graphics editor. But I think almost all good things on the web should have URLs, and that's what I would call the multiple pages. But again, that's just me griping about some stuff. And to name it, I don't think I'm just griping for griping sake. Like, again, I like to think about things from the user perspective, and the URL being so important. And having worked with plenty of apps that are implemented in JavaScript and don't take the URL or the idea that we can have different routable resources seriously and everything is just one URL, that's a failure mode in my mind. We missed an opportunity here. So I think I'm saying a useful thing here and not just complaining on the internet. But with that, I will stop complaining on the internet and send it back over to you. What else is new in your world, Steph? STEPH: I do remember the first time that you griped about it, and you were griping about URLs. And there was a part of me that was like, what is he talking about? [laughter] And then over time, I was like, oh, I get it now as I started actually working more in that world. But it took me a little bit to really appreciate that gripe and where you're coming from. And I agree; I think you're coming from a reasonable place, not that I'm biased at all as your co-host, but you know. CHRIS: I really like the honest summary that you're giving of, like, honestly, the first time you said this, I let you go for a while, but I did not know what you were talking about. [laughs] And I was like, okay, good data point. I'm going to store that one away and think about it a bunch. But that's fine. I'm glad you're now hanging out with me still. [laughter] STEPH: Don't do that. Don't think about it a bunch. [laughs] Let's see, oh, something else that's going on in my world. I had a really fun pairing session with another thoughtboter where we were digging into query objects and essentially extracting some logic out of an ActiveRecord model and then giving that behavior its own space and elevated namespace in a query object. And one of the questions or one of the things that came up that we needed to incorporate was optional filters. So say if you are searching for a pizza place that's nearby and you provide a city, but you don't provide what's the optional zip code, then we want to make sure that we don't apply the zip code in the where clause because then you would return all the pizza places that have a nil zip code, and that's just not what you want. So we need to respect the fact that not all the filters need to be applied. And there are a couple of ways to go about it. And it was a fun journey to see the different ways that we could structure it. So one of the really good starting points is captured in a blog post by Derek Prior, which we'll include a link to in the show notes, and it's using yield_self for composable ActiveRecord relations. But essentially, it starts out with an example where it shows that you're assigning a value to then the result of an if statement. So it's like, hey, if the zip code is present, then let's filter by zip code; if not, then just give us back the original relation. And then you can just keep building on it from there. And then there's a really nice implementation that Derek built on that then uses yield_self to pass the relation through, which then provides a really nice readability for as you are then stepping through each filter and which one should and shouldn't be applied. And now there's another blog post, and this one's written by Thiago Silva, A Case for Query Objects in Rails. And this one highlighted an approach that I haven't used before. And I initially had some mixed feelings about it. But this approach uses the extending method, which is a method that's on ActiveRecord query methods. And it's used to extend the scope with additional methods. You can either do this by providing the name of a module or by providing a block. It's only going to apply to that instance or to that specific scope when you're using it. So it's not going to be like you're running an include or something like that where all instances are going to now have access to these methods. So by using that method, extending, then you can create a module that says, "Hey, I want to create this by zip code filter that will then check if we have a zip code, let's apply it, if not, return the relation. And it also creates a really pretty chaining experience of like, here's my original class name. Let's extend with these specific scopes, and then we can say by zip code, by pizza topping, whatever else it is that we're looking to filter by. And I was initially...I saw the extending, and it made me nervous because I was like, oh, what all does this apply to? And is it going to impact anything outside of this class? But the more I've looked at it, the more I really like it. So I think you've seen this blog post too. And I'm curious, what are your thoughts about this? CHRIS: I did see this blog post come through. I follow that thoughtbot blog real close because it turns out some of the best writing on the internet is on there. But I saw this...also, as an aside, I like that we've got two Derek Prior references in one episode. Let's see if we can go for three before the end. But one thing that did stand out to me in it is I have historically avoided scopes using scope like ActiveRecord macro thing. It's a class method, but like, it's magic. It does magic. And a while ago, class methods and scopes became roughly equivalent, not exactly equivalent, but close enough. And for me, I want to use methods because I know stuff about methods. I know about default arguments. And I know about all of these different subtleties because they're just methods at the end of the day, whereas scopes are special; they have certain behavior. And I've never really known of the behavior beyond the fact that they get implemented in a different way. And so I was never really sold on them. And they're different enough from methods, and I know methods well. So I'm like, let's use the normal stuff where we can. The one thing that's really interesting, though, is the returning nil that was mentioned in this blog post. If you return nil in a scope, it will handle that for you. Whereas all of my query objects have a like, well, if this thing applies, then scope dot or relation dot where blah, blah, blah, else return relation unchanged. And the fact that that natively exists within scope is interesting enough to make me reconsider my stance on scopes versus class methods. I think I'm still doing class method. But it is an interesting consideration that I was unaware of before. STEPH: Yeah, it's an interesting point. I hadn't really considered as much whether I'm defining a class-level method versus a scope in this particular case. And I also didn't realize that scopes handle that nil case for you. That was one of the other things that I learned by reading through this blog post. I was like, oh, that is a nicety. Like, that is something that I get for free. So I agree. I think this is one of those things that I like enough that I'd really like to try it out more and then see how it goes and start to incorporate it into my process. Because this feels like one of those common areas of where I get to it, and I'm like, how do I do this again? And yield_self was just complicated enough in terms of then using the fancy method method to then be able to call the method that I want that I was like, I don't remember how to do this. I had to look it up each time. But including this module with extending and then being able to use scopes that way feels like something that would be intuitive for me that then I could just pick up and run with each time. CHRIS: If it helps, you can use then instead of yield_self because we did upgrade our Ruby a while back to have that change. But I don't think that actually solves the thing that you're describing. I'd have liked the ampersand method and then simple method name magic incantation that is part of the thing that Derek wrote up. I do use it when I write query objects, but I have to think about it or look it up each time and be like, how do I do that? All right, that's how I do that. STEPH: Yeah, that's one of the things that I really appreciate is how often folks will go back and update blog posts, or they will add an addition to them to say, "Hey, there's something new that came out that then is still relevant to this topic." So then you can read through it and see the latest and the greatest. It's a really nice touch to a number of our blog posts. But yeah, that's what was on my mind regarding query objects. What else is going on in your world? CHRIS: I have this growing feeling that I don't quite know what to do with. I think I've talked about it across some of our conversations in the world of observability. But broadly, I'm starting to like...I feel like my brain has shifted, and I now see the world slightly differently, and I can't go back. But I also don't know how to stick the landing and complete this transition in my brain. So it's basically everything's an event stream; this feels true. That's life. The arrow of time goes in one direction as far as I understand it. And I'm now starting to see it manifest in the code that we're writing. Like, we have code to log things, and we have places where we want to log more intentionally. Then occasionally, we send stuff off to Sentry. And Sentry tells us when there are errors, that's great. But in a lot of places, we have both. Like, we will warn about something happening, and we'll send that to the logs because we want to have that in the logs, which is basically the whole history of what's happened. But we also have it in Sentry, but Sentry's version is just this expanded version that has a bunch more data about the user, and things, and the browser that they were in. But they're two variations on the same event. And then similarly, analytics is this, like, third leg of well, this thing happened, and we want to know about it in the context. And what's been really interesting is we're working with a tool called Customer.io, which is an omnichannel communication whiz-bang adventure. For us, it does email, SMS, and push notifications. And it's integrated into our segment pipeline, so events flow in, events and users essentially. So we have those two different primitives within it. And then within it, we can say like, when a user does X, then send them an email with this copy. As an aside, Customer.io is a fantastic platform. I'm super-duper impressed. We went through a search for a tool like it, and we ended up on a lot of sales demos with folks that were like, hey, so yeah, starting point is $25,000 per year. And, you know, we can talk about it, but it's only going to go up from there when we talk about it, just to be clear. And it's a year minimum contract, and you're going to love it. And we're like, you do have impressive platforms, but okay, that's a bunch. And then, we found Customer.io, and it's month-by-month pricing. And it had a surprisingly complete feature set. So overall, I've been super impressed with Customer.io and everything that they've afforded. But now that I'm seeing it, I kind of want to move everything into that world where like, Customer.io allows non-engineer team members to interact with that event stream and then make things happen. And that's what we're doing all the time. But I'm at that point where I think I see the thing that I want, but I have no idea how to get there. And it might not even be tractable either. There's the wonderful Turning the Database Inside Out talk, which describes how everything is an event stream. And what if we actually were to structure things that way and do materialized views on top of it? And the actual UI that you're looking at is a materialized view on top of the database, which is a materialized view on top of that event stream. So I'm mostly in this, like, I want to figure this out. I want to start to unify all this stuff. And analytics pipes to one tool that gets a version of this event stream, and our logs are just another, and our error system is another variation on it. But they're all sort of sampling from that one event stream. But I have no idea how to do that. And then when you have a database, then you're like, well, that's also just a static representation of a point in time, which is the opposite of an event stream. So what do you do there? So there are folks out there that are doing good thinking on this. So I'm going to keep my ear to the ground and try and see what's everybody thinking on this front? But I can't shake the feeling that there's something here that I'm missing that I want to stitch together. STEPH: I'm intrigued on how to take this further because everything you're saying resonates in terms of having these event streams that you're working with. But yet, I can't mentally replace that with the existing model that I have in my mind of where there are still certain ideas of records or things that exist in the world. And I want to encapsulate the data and store that in the database. And maybe I look it up based on when it happens; maybe I don't. Maybe I'm looking it up by something completely different. So yeah, I'm also intrigued by your thoughts, but I'm also not sure where to take it. Who are some of the folks that are doing some of the thinking in this area that you're interested in, or where might you look next? CHRIS: There's the Kafka world of we have an event log, and then we're processing on top of that, and we're building stream processing engines as the core. They seem to be closest to the Turning the Database Inside Out talk that I was thinking or that I mentioned earlier. There's also the idea of CRDTs, which are Conflict-free Replicated Data Types, which are really interesting. I see them used particularly in real-time application. So it's this other tool, but they are basically event logs. And then you can communicate them well and have two different people working on something collaboratively. And these event logs then have a natural way to come together and produce a common version of the document on either end. That's at least my loose understanding of it, but it seems like a variation on this theme. So I've been looking at that a little bit. But again, I can't see how to map that to like, but I know how to make a Rails app with a Postgres database. And I think I'm reasonably capable at it, or at least I've been able to produce things that are useful to humans using it. And so it feels like there is this pretty large gap. Because what makes sense in my head is if you follow this all the way, it fundamentally re-architects everything. And so that's A, scary, and B; I have no idea how to get there, but I am intrigued. Like, I feel like there's something there. There's also Datomic is the other thing that comes to mind, which is a database engine in the Clojure world that stores the versions of things over time; that idea of the user is active. It's like, well, yeah, but when were they not? That's an event. That transition is an event that Postgres does not maintain at this point. And so, all I know is that the user is active. Maybe I store a timestamp because I'm thinking proactively about this. But Datomic is like no, no, fundamentally, as a primitive in this database; that's how we organize and think about stuff. And I know I've talked about Datomic on here before. So I've circled around these ideas before. And I'm pretty sure I'm just going to spend a couple of minutes circling and then stop because I have no idea how to connect the dots. [laughs] But I want to figure this out. STEPH: I have not worked with Kafka. But one of the main benefits I understand with Kafka is that by storing everything as a stream, you're never going to lose like a message. So if you are sending a message to another system and then that message gets lost in transit, you don't actually know if it got acknowledged or what happened with it, and replaying is really hard. Where do you pick up again? While using something like Kafka, you know exactly what you sent last, and then you're not going to have that uncertainty as to what messages went through and which ones didn't. And then the ability to replay is so important. I'm curious, as you continue to explore this, do you have a particular pain point in mind that you'd like to see improve? Or is it more just like, this seems like a really cool, novel idea; how can I incorporate more of this into my world? CHRIS: I think it's the latter. But I think the thing that I keep feeling is we keep going back and re-instrumenting versions of this. We're adding more logging or more analytics events over the wire or other things. But then, as I send these analytics events over the wire, we have Mixpanel downstream as an analytics visualization and workflow tool or Customer.io. At this point, those applications, I think, have a richer understanding of our users than our core Rails app. And something about that feels wrong to me. We're also streaming everything that goes through segment to S3 because I had a realization of this a while back. I'm like, that event stream is very interesting. I don't want to lose it. I'm going to put it somewhere that I get to keep it. So even if we move off of either Mixpanel or Customer.io or any of those other platforms, we still have our data. That's our data, and we're going to hold on to it. But interestingly, Customer.io, when it sends a message, will push an event back into segments. So it's like doubly connected to segment, which is managing this sort of event bus of data. And so Mixpanel then gets an even richer set there, and the Rails app is like, I'm cool. I'm still hanging out, and I'm doing stuff; it's fine. But the fact that the Rails app is fundamentally less aware of the things that have happened is really interesting to me. And I am not running into issues with it, but I do feel odd about it. STEPH: That touched on a theme that is interesting to me, the idea that I hadn't really considered it in those terms. But yeah, our application provides the tool in which people can interact with. But then we outsource the behavior analysis of our users and understanding what that flow is and what they're going through. I hadn't really thought about those concrete terms and where someone else owns the behavior of our users, but yet we own all the interaction points. And then we really need both to then make decisions about features and things that we're building next. But that also feels like building a whole new product, that behavior analysis portion of it, so it's interesting. My consulting brain is going wild at the moment between like, yeah, it would be great to own that. But that the other time if there's this other service that has already built that product and they're doing it super well, then let's keep letting them manage that portion of our business until we really need to bring it in-house. Because then we need to incorporate it more into our application itself so then we can surface things to the user. That's the part where then I get really interested, or that's the pain point that I could see is if we wanted more of that behavior analysis, that then we want to surface that in the app, then always having to go to a third-party would start to feel tedious or could feel more brittle. CHRIS: Yeah, I'm definitely 100% on not rebuilding Mixpanel in our app and being okay with the fact that we're sending that. Again, the thing that I did to make myself feel better about this is stream the data to S3 so that I have a version of it. And if we want to rebuild the data warehouse down the road to build some sort of machine learning data pipeline thing, we've got some raw data to work with. But I'm noticing lots of places where we're transforming a side effect, a behavior that we have in the system to dispatching an event. And so right now, we have a bunch of stuff that we pipe over to Slack to inform our admin team, hey, this thing happened. You should probably intervene. But I'm looking at that, and we're doing it directly because we can control the message in Slack a little bit better. But I had this thought in the back of my mind; it's like, could we just send that as an event, and then some downstream tool can configure messages and alerts into Slack? Because then the admin team could actually instrument this themselves. And they could be like; we are no longer interested in this event. Users seem fine on that front. But we do care about this new event. And all we need to do as the engineering team is properly instrument all of that event stream tapping. Every event just needs to get piped over. And then lots of powerful tools downstream from that that can allow different consumers of that data to do things, and broadly, that dispatch events, consume them on the other side, do fun stuff. That's the story. That's the dream. But I don't know; I can't connect all the dots. It's probably going to take me a couple of weeks to connect all these dots, or maybe years, or maybe my entire career, something like that. But, I don't know, I'm going to keep trying. STEPH: This feels like a fun startup narrative, though, where you start by building the thing that people can interact with. As more people start to interact with it, how do we start giving more of our team the ability to then manage the product that then all of these users are interacting with? And then that's the part that you start optimizing for. So there are always different interesting bits when you talk about the different stages of Sagewell, and like, what's the thing you're optimizing for? And I'm sure it's still heavily users. But now there's also this addition of we are also optimizing for our team to now manage the product. CHRIS: Yes, you're 100%. You're spot on there. We have definitely joked internally about spinning out a small company to build this analytics alerting tool [laughs] but obviously not going to do that because that's a distraction. And it is interesting, like, we want to build for the users the best thing that we can and where the admin team fits within that. To me, they're very much customers of engineering. Our job is to build the thing for the users but also, to be honest, we have to build a thing for the admins to support the users and exactly where that falls. Like, you and I have talked a handful of times about maybe the admin isn't as polished in design as other things. But it's definitely tested because that's a critical part of how this application works. Maybe not directly for a user but one step removed for a user, so it matters. Absolutely we're writing tests to cover that behavior. And so yeah, those trade-offs are always interesting to me and exploring that space. But 100%: our admin team are core customers of the work that we're doing in engineering. And we try and stay very close and very friendly with them. STEPH: Yeah, I really appreciate how you're framing that. And I very much agree and believe with you that our admin users are incredibly important. CHRIS: Well, thank you. Yeah, we're trying over here. But yeah, I think I can wrap up that segment of me rambling about ideas that are half-formed in my mind but hopefully are directionally important. Anyway, what else is up with you? STEPH: So, not that long ago, I asked you a question around how the heck to manage themes that I have going on. So we've talked about lots of fun productivity things around managing to-dos, and emails, and all that stuff. And my latest one is thinking about, like, I have a theme that I want to focus on, maybe it's this week, maybe it's for a couple of months. And how do I capture that and surface it to myself and see that I'm making progress on that? And I don't have an answer to that. But I do have a theme that I wanted to share. And the one that I'm currently focused on is building up management skills and team lead skills. That is something that I'm focused on at the moment and partially because I was inspired to read the book Resilient Management written by Lara Hogan. And so I think that is what has really set the idea. But as I picked up the book, I was like, this is a really great book, and I'd really like to share some of this. And then so that grew into like, well, let's just go ahead and make this a theme where I'm learning this, and I'm sharing this with everyone else. So along that note, I figured I would share that here. So we use Basecamp at thoughtbot. And so, I've been sharing some Basecamp posts around what I'm learning in each chapter. But to bring some of that knowledge here as well, some of the cool stuff that I have learned so far...and this is just still very early on in the book. There are a couple of different topics that Laura covers in the first chapter, and one of them is humans' core needs at work. And then there's also the concept of meeting your team, some really good questions that you can ask during your first one-on-one to get to know the person that then you're going to be managing. The part that really resonated with me and something that I would like to then coach myself to try is helping the team get to know you. So as a manager, not only are you going out of your way to really get to know that person, but how are you then helping them get to know you as well? Because then that's really going to help set that relationship in regards of they know what kind of things that you're optimizing for. Maybe you're optimizing for a deadline, or for business goals, or maybe it's for transparency, or maybe it would be helpful to communicate to someone that you're managing to say, "Hey, I'm trying some new management techniques. Let me know how this goes." [chuckles] So there's a healthier relationship of not only are you learning them, but they're also learning you. So some of the questions that Laura includes as examples as something that you can share with your team is what do you optimize for in your role? So is it that you're optimizing for specific financial goals or building up teammates? Or maybe it's collaboration, so you're really looking for opportunities for people to pair together. What do you want your teammates to lean on you for? I really liked that question. Like, what are some of the areas that bring you joy or something that you feel really skilled in that then you want people to come to you for? Because that's something that before I was a manager...but it's just as you are growing as a developer, that's such a great question of like, what do you want to be known for? What do you want to be that thing that when people think of, they're like, oh, you should go see Chris about this, or you should go see Steph about this? And two other good questions include what are your work styles and preferences? And what management skills are you currently working on learning or improving? So I really like this concept of how can I share more of myself? And the great thing about this book that I'm learning too is while it is geared towards people that are managers, I think it's so wonderful for people who are non-managers or aspiring managers to read this as well because then it can help you manage whoever's managing you. So then that way, you can have some upward management. So we had recent conversations around when you are new to a team and getting used to a manager, or maybe if you're a junior, you have to take a lot of self-advocacy into your role to make sure things are going well. And I think this book does a really good job for people that are looking to not only manage others but also manage themselves and manage upward. So that's some of the journeys from the first chapter. I'll keep you posted on the other chapters as I'm learning more. And yeah, if anybody hasn't read this book or if you're interested, I highly recommend it. I'll make sure to include a link in the show notes. CHRIS: That was just the first chapter? STEPH: Yeah, that was just the first chapter. CHRIS: My goodness. STEPH: And I shortened it drastically. [laughs] CHRIS: Okay. All right, off to the races. But I think the summary that you gave there, particularly these are true when you're managing folks but also to manage yourself and to manage up, like, this is relevant to everyone in some capacity in some shape or form. And so that feels very true. STEPH: I will include one more fun aspect from the book, and that's circling back to the humans' core needs at work. And she references Paloma Medina, a coach, and trainer who came up with this acronym. The acronym is BICEPS, and it stands for belonging, improvement, choice, equality, predictability, and significance. And then details how each of those are important to us in our work and how when one of those feels threatened, then that can lead to some problems at work or just even in our personal life. But the fun example that she gave was not when there's a huge restructuring of the organization and things like that are going on as being the most concerning in terms of how many of these needs are going to be threatened or become vulnerable. But changing where someone sits at work can actually hit all of these, and it can threaten each of these needs. And it made me think, oh, cool, plus-one for being remote because we can sit wherever we want. [laughs] But that was a really fun example of how someone's needs at work, I mean, just moving their desk, which resonates, too, because I've heard that from other people. Some of the friends that I have that work in more of a People Ops role talk about when they had to shift people around how that caused so much grief. And they were just shocked that it caused so much grief. And this explains why that can be such a big deal. So that was a fun example to read through. CHRIS: I'm now having flashbacks to times where I was like, oh, I love my spot in the office. I love the people I'm sitting with. And then there was that day, and I had to move. Yeah, no, those were days. This is true. STEPH: It triggered all the core BICEPS, all the things that you need to work. It threatened all of them. Or it could have improved them; who knows? CHRIS: There were definitely those as well, yeah. Although I think it's harder to know that it's going to be great on the way in, so it's mostly negative. I think it has that weird bias because you're like, this was a thing, I knew it. I at least understood it. And then you're in a new space, and you're like, I don't know, is this going to be terrible or great? I mean, hopefully, it's only great because you work with great people, and it's a great office. [laughs] But, like, the unknown, you're moving into the unknown, and so I think it has an inherent at least questioning bias to it. STEPH: Agreed. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeee!!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Mission-Driven
Chris Mann '00

Mission-Driven

Play Episode Listen Later May 4, 2022 80:58


Welcome to Season 3!  New episodes will be released througout the spring and summer of 2022. The first episode of season 3 features a conversation with Chris Mann '00.  Chris has built his career around making a difference in the lives of others.  He's joined in conversation with JP Cunningham '23.  They discuss Chris' time at Holy Cross and how he has carried the HC mission to serve others throughout his life and career. Interview originally recorded in November 2021. -- Chris: And so, I think you're seeing companies really say, "This is about our values and being clear on what our values are." Because our most important stakeholders, our people are saying that that's what matters to them and that's what they care about. And so, I think we just think about business differently. Maura: Welcome to Mission-Driven, where we speak with alumni who are leveraging their Holy Cross education to make a meaningful difference in the world around them. I'm your host Maura Sweeney from the class of 2007, Director of Alumni Career Development at Holy Cross. I'm delighted to welcome you to today's show. This episode features Chris Mann from the class of 2000. Maura: Chris's career has spanned roles that have one thing in common, making a positive impact on people and communities. He graduated from Holy Cross with a psychology major and art history minor. With this foundation, he joined the Dana-Farber and Jimmy Fund team, and his career flourished. Skilled at fundraising, event planning, marketing, and communications, Chris flexed his talents and roles at New Balance, Cone Communications, Reebok, and City Year. Maura: At the time this podcast was recorded, Chris worked as the Senior Vice President of Development for City Year. At the time this podcast is aired, Chris will have assumed a new role at Bain Capital as the first Vice President of Community Affairs, leading their philanthropy, employee volunteerism, events, and sponsorship. Chris is joined in conversation by JP Cunningham from the class of 2023. Maura: Their conversation is far-reaching but starts with the transformative years that Chris spent at Holy Cross, his time on the track and field team, and serving as senior class president, as well as his experiences during immersion programs and running summer orientation helped shape who he is today. Better yet, he can count the ways that the Holy Cross Alumni Network has supported him through each step in his career. A proud alumnus, Chris exemplifies the impact that one person can make by committing their talents to mission-driven work. JP: Hello, everyone. Thank you all for listening. I'm JP Cunningham. I'm a junior here at Holy Cross. And I'm joined by Chris Mann. Chris, how are you doing today? Chris: Hey, JP. I'm good. Good to be here with you today. JP: Thank you. So, yeah, I guess with that, we'll get right into it. I wanted to start with a little bit before your time at Holy Cross. So, my first question is, during your college search, what were some of the factors that drew you to the college? And was it your top choice? Yeah, if you can touch on that. Chris: Yeah, absolutely. So, like most high school students, I was looking at a lot of different schools. I didn't quite know what I wanted. I was the first and oldest child in my family, so I hadn't any brothers or sisters go through the college application process before. And at the time, this was in the mid-'90s, there wasn't as much information. It was kind of the glossy books you got in the mail and things like that, and word of mouth. But I knew a couple of things. Chris: I knew living in Andover, Massachusetts and growing up there, I wanted to be close enough to home that I could get back and forth. So, that kind of kept me looking at New England colleges for the most part. And as I started exploring, I knew about Holy Cross's reputation from an academic standpoint, but also had a couple of people at my high school, Andover High School, that I remember really respecting and looking up to in some ways that had gone to Holy Cross a couple of years before me. Chris: So, Chris Sintros, who was a class of '98, and Christine Anderson, class of '99. And I think it just piqued my interest to say, "Hey, those are people that I think I want to be like, and they chose this school." I actually got really fortunate to end up at Holy Cross. It was one of, I think, five schools I applied to, and I was waitlisted. So, I actually didn't know that I was going to get in until right to the end, and was really relieved and excited when I got in off the waitlist. Chris: And it ended up being a great scenario because I came on campus as the only person from my high school going to Holy Cross in that class. And I was matched up with three roommates in a quad in my freshman year. And it really helped me build some relationships and a network right away in a new place, new environment. JP: Awesome. That's really cool. Yeah, I can kind of relate to that, too, because both my dad and my sister went here, and then a lot of just friends and older classmates at my high school went to Holy Cross. And they're all just role models. And I felt the same way like, wow, this seems like a good place to be and that's what drew me there, too. So, it's great. Chris: Yeah. And I would say too, in visiting the school and seeing it, I mean, I certainly fell in love with the classic New England brick college, IV and setting, and it's a beautiful campus, as you know. And so, that, I was really excited about. And I started to get more and more of a field just as I came to visit a couple of different times. Chris: And as you started to read in and hear about the college's mission, and talking about being men and women for and with others, that all started to really resonate for me and felt a little different compared to some of the other schools that I had been visiting, and I loved that. I also really thought that the size was right for me. I was somewhat of a shy kid. I think I was trying to figure out where my place was. Chris: And I liked the idea of being in a school that felt a little smaller and where I wasn't going to get lost in the shuffle. And I think that ended up being a really big thing for me over the course of the four years, too. JP: Yeah, I couldn't agree more. I feel like people might say it's cliche, but I feel like at Holy Cross, the sense of community, just being on campus that first time, at least for me too, visiting that first time, there's something about it that really draws you and makes you feel like, "Hey, this is the place for me." Yes. I guess moving into the next question, after you became a student here, what were some of the things you were involved in during your time on the Hill? And was there one that you were most passionate about? Chris: I got to do a lot of different things, which was to our earlier point, the benefit of going to a smaller school with a lot of opportunities. Off the bat, athletics ended up being a big thing for me, which wasn't something I had planned. I had done sports in high school all three seasons. Really, I was passionate about basketball and track and field, but hadn't expected to be able to do that in college. Chris: And I showed up on campus and I remember, I think it was probably the first week of school, I got a phone call from Larry Napolitano who was the captain of the track team just saying, "Hey, we saw you did track and field in high school. Would you be interested in coming out and joining the team?" And I said, "Yes", and it was one of the great experiences of my time on the Hill being able to be part of that team. Chris: I certainly wasn't a phenomenal athlete or setting any records, but being part of that team environment, getting a chance to get into the daily routine that athletes do I think really benefited me. The structure was really helpful. I think it prepared me for life after college and having a busy schedule of going from weightlifting, to workouts, to classes, to other things. Chris: And just the relationships you build with teammates and coaches and the life lessons of athletics were really valuable and it helps cement a lifelong practice of fitness and health that exists to this day. So, that was foundational. That was a big one. And then, later in my time at Holy Cross, my senior year, I ended up getting encouraged to run for student government. And I ended up being elected president of the senior class of 2000. Chris: And that was a really powerful experience for me, too, so having a broader role in leading fellow students and thinking about our voice on campus. And to be honest, putting myself out there more publicly to run and be elected was not something I was very comfortable with or used to. So, building up that courage and having people believe in me to do that was also really important. And I think it started to show me that maybe I could do some things that I hadn't previously been confident enough to do or thought I could do. Chris: So, that was another big experience. And same thing, balancing those commitments with academics, with athletics really prepared me for life after college and the working world. JP: That's great. Yeah. I feel like balancing all those activities, being a full-time student athlete while being the president of your class can only help you in the long run and having that structure to your schedule and balancing different activities. Because I don't play any sports, but just balancing activities week by week with the schoolwork and all that, it definitely... I feel like it can only help you for after you graduate. JP: So, yeah, going off that, I guess a little more shifting towards the academics. One of the great things about Holy Cross in liberal arts education in general is that you really have the opportunity to major in anything that piques your interest, and then go out and succeed in business or whatever field you choose. So, I know you're a psychology and art history major. Were there any specific skills that you developed from your course of study that have helped you in your professional career? Chris: Yeah, it's interesting. It was another case of I didn't know what I wanted to study. When I came to Holy Cross, I started taking a few different classes in different areas to try and understand what resonated with me and that was what attracted... the liberal arts education attracted me to Holy Cross as well because I didn't know what I wanted to do. Chris: And I found myself really intrigued in the early psychology classes that I took, whether it was Intro to Psychology, or we had some ones later, behavioral psychology and other things, that just fascinated me between the... both the science and the depth of that field, but then also the ways in which humans interact and the way in which our environment influences us just fascinated me. And I really found myself loving that. Chris: And then, on the flip side, I ended up getting a minor in art history, similarly, because I just found myself interested and passionate in the subject matter and human experience behind that. I wouldn't have thought at the time that either of those would translate into a career path or job. I wasn't going to be a psychologist. I certainly wasn't an artist, but I have found over time that I think there are some lessons in the specifics of that. Chris: And in my current job in previous iterations where I'm a fundraiser, and in essence, I sell people on City Year's mission and investing in City Year's mission, some of the experiences and the lessons from psychology come out there, and understanding how you engage and connect with and influence people. So, that is certainly there. Chris: But more broadly, I just think the liberal arts' approach and specifically Holy Cross and the rigor of the academics forced me to really get tight and concise with my thinking, with how to make an argument, with how to take in information, synthesize that and consolidate it and communicate in a really effective, clear way, both verbally, written, visually, et cetera. Those are things I lean on on a daily basis. And I don't think I appreciated it at the time. Chris: But in talking with friends and colleagues and others whose college experiences were very different, either giant lecture halls or other things, the time, the attention, the rigor of the academics was really valuable. And I don't think I realized it until much later. JP: Yeah, I agree. I feel like everyone... and that's also one of the things that drew me to the liberal arts education is the fact that people say, obviously, you study what's interesting to you, but then being able to develop those skills like critical thinking, communication, and just being able to use those skills effectively go a long way in the professional world. So, you touched on some of the activities you were involved in when you are here at Holy Cross. JP: And since you graduated, there have been a number of new programs, activities. For example, the Ciocca Center for Business, Ethics, and Society was established in 2006. Are there any programs or activities happening now that you've become aware of at Holy Cross that stand out to you or you wish were around when you were a student? Chris: I think the Ciocca Center would have been something I would have really enjoyed getting a chance to participate in. I think this idea of business and ethics and where those intersect, and how companies can have an impact on society has been the centerpiece of my career and the different jobs that I've had. So, I think I would have really enjoyed going deeper there in a more formal way, for sure. Chris: I also really appreciate what the college has done in the last few years as we think about diversity at Holy Cross and how is the Holy Cross experience accessible to all. That is, I think, one takeaway from my time. Certainly, we had some level of diversity when I was at Holy Cross, but it was not nearly what it needs to be and what it should be going forward. And I think particularly for fellow classmates that were of color or came from different backgrounds and the majority of students, I think it was a really challenging thing for them and continues to be. Chris: And so, I think the idea of having a college community that does have more representation, does have more diversity across all levels and spectrums of how diversity shows up is valuable because I think, to be honest, it creates a better learning environment, it creates better dialogue, it creates better understanding. And I think that was a challenge, to be honest, during my time at Holy Cross. Many of the students were just like me coming from the same families, communities, et cetera. Chris: And so, that's something that I've been very encouraged to see over the last few years. JP: Yeah, absolutely. I feel like as a student for me and talking to alumni like yourself and just other people I've spoken to, people just say it's awesome to see the way the college is changing for the better, both academically and socially, like you just touched on. Moving a little away from strictly Holy Cross, can you maybe run through your career or professional path starting after you graduated from the college? Chris: Yeah. So, I was really lucky, and this is an area where I talk to current students or students that are considering Holy Cross, and the network of alumni really stepped up and helped me start my career and pursue the opportunities I've had. And I've been really fortunate to come across Holy Cross graduates at every role, every organization that I've been in, which speaks to the power of even the network of a small school overall. Chris: So, I was trying to decide what I wanted to do after graduation. As we mentioned, I had done activities in track and field. I was big into sports, so I was thinking sports marketing and those areas. I also got a chance, while I was on campus, to do a couple of spring break trips via Habitat for Humanity and build some houses down in Tallahassee, Florida for two spring breaks in a row. Chris: That and an internship at the Special Olympics while I was a student started to spark my interest in having a job where I can actually give back and support causes I cared about, and earn beyond a paycheck feel like I was having an impact on a daily basis in my work. So, that was interesting to me. And we had also run and started summer orientations program, the Gateway Summer Orientation Program. Chris: I was fortunate to be part of that first summer orientation program as a leader and then later, one of the co-leads of it. And I found myself really liking and being attracted by events and the planning that would go into preparing for an orientation program or some other event, and then seeing that come together and seeing people have a great time interacting and being part of that event. So, I was looking at sports marketing. I was looking at event management. I was thinking about nonprofits and exploring different things. Chris: And I was talking with John Hayes, who's class of '91. And he was the director of Holy Cross Fund at the time. He was our advisor for our Senior Class Gift. And John said, "Hey, you should really go talk to my friend Cynthia Carton O'Brien now, a class of '93, who was working at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Jimmy Fund." And so, he connected me to Cindy via informational interview. I went and learn more about Dana-Farber and the Jimmy Fund, and just loved the idea of it. Chris: It was a cancer hospital, obviously in Boston, doing amazing work for patients and their families, but also had this deep connection in history to the Red Sox. So, as a sports fan, I was excited about that. And I ended up applying for a couple of different jobs there coming out of school. And on the fundraising side, one was potentially to work in plan giving, so helping people think about their giving benefiting those beyond their lifetimes and resourcing the organization for the future. Chris: And then, the other one was going to be a rotational role, which was going to work on different areas of fundraising, the Boston Marathon Jimmy Fund Walk, donor advance and stewardship events, and then also cause marketing, which at the time was a fairly new thing that companies were starting to do. And so, I ended up getting that second job on the rotation. And it was just a phenomenal opportunity experience to get to learn different parts of fundraising and to work with some really, really great team. Chris: So, when I think about advice for people coming out of school and what to think about, I think finding a job where you can learn as much as possible and get exposed to as many different things as you can certainly really worked out for me. And it gave me a chance to understand what parts of fundraising and events that I really liked and what worked well for me. And I was also really lucky to work with just some amazing people. Chris: In particular, my first boss and my first teams on the Jimmy Fund Walk, which later included a couple of Holy Cross grads in the years after me that we hired as well, was just a perfect first start into the working world, for sure. JP: Definitely. So, you may have just answered this next question, but I'll still pose it to you. I know you talked about your experience with the Gateway's orientation. So, would you say that was something that from your time at Holy Cross that greatly influenced your post-grad experience and career? Or were there few other things? Chris: Gateways did influence me mostly in that I realized that I really enjoyed working in a team environment and it was with a lot of students from across different grades that I hadn't met or didn't know before. And I think that idea of working in a team that had some diversity in their experiences, et cetera, is definitely something that's resonated longer term and I've realized leads to a great work environment and a great end product in that Gateway's orientation. Chris: I definitely love the event planning piece of it. And so, I think that steered me towards my first job, for sure. As I got older, I realized I didn't love the always on and the stress of the event planning and so I've since moved to other areas. But I think the idea of that camaraderie and coming together to build something bigger than yourselves was really valuable for me. And I also loved being able to share my experiences with others and with other students. Chris: And so, getting a chance to really talk to people and help share my experience was something that I valued. I think it was probably an early stage mentorship. I don't think I realized it at the time, but I think that's what drew me to it was being able to work with students who were coming into a Holy Cross environment, nervous about it, not sure what to do, and really saying, "Hey, this is going to be a great experience for you. And here's all the reasons why or here are some things to look at." Chris: I realized I think later that that idea of being a mentor and having that mentoring relationship is something that I really value and enjoying doing. But again, I don't think I realized it at the time. But I think it was one of those foundational things, for sure, at least in the early jobs. JP: Absolutely. Yeah, that's awesome. I feel like it's cool to think back on the different ways certain events or activities that you took or spend so much time participating in can go such a long way in your life and the decisions you made, and things like that. Chris: I think so. I think other experiences, too, that I had probably more steered in that direction of what I wanted to do for career, I think having the opportunity to do an internship during my junior year with the Special Olympics of Massachusetts and help to do the marketing and recruitment for a Polar Plunge event that they did sparked an interest in, "Oh, you can do marketing, and you can do these types of business things that I want to do that have an impact for our cause." Chris: And Special Olympics was near and dear to my heart because my mom was a special education teacher. And so, I saw firsthand the power that that can have when you have inclusive opportunities for all young people, and give them a chance to participate in athletics and have those same experiences and lessons that I did from it was really valuable. So, I think the idea and the spark of having a job that can have an impact started there. Chris: And then, I had a summer experience in between my junior and senior years at Holy Cross, where I worked in an educational camp for kids called Super Camp and spent a few weeks on a college campus working with students that were struggling academically. And what we learned in the process when you get to meet these kids and work with them is that, in most cases, it wasn't because they didn't have the ability to learn or to do those that work. Chris: It was because there were other things going on in their lives that were either being a distraction or creating additional challenges that made it hard for them to show up in the education environment or in school in the way that they could or they should. And I think that in hindsight really is why I find myself loving the work that we do at City Year right now. And it's come full circle in that way because we see that talent is absolutely equally distributed and it's everywhere, but access and opportunity are not equally distributed. Chris: So, that's part of what we get to do at City Years is to say, "How can we make sure that every student gets the opportunities that they deserve to really tap into their talent and see success in their futures?" And I think that experience at Super Camp really gave me the first understanding of what education can look like when it works for everyone. JP: Yeah, absolutely. So, while we're looking in hindsight and reflecting on your experience post-Holy Cross, I know there's a lot to say about the strength of Holy Cross's Alumni Network. Could you tell a little bit about how that network has influenced your professional career? Chris: Yeah, it's influenced my professional career because I've been lucky to work with Holy Cross grads in every step of the way in every job almost that I can think of. So, at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Jimmy Fund, we hired Joe Robertson, who was a track and field classmate of mine, class of '02, Rebecca Manikian in the year before, '01. So, I got to work with both of them on the Boston Marathon Jimmy Fund Walk and had a community and a shared experience with the two of them. Chris: Worked with Kristina Coppola Timmins at Cone Communications. And Rebecca and Joe also were ended up being Cone alumni at different points. And then, now, a huge number of Holy Cross grads, past and present, that I have worked through, including my current boss, AnnMaura Connolly, class of '86. So, I think at every step, I've seen Holy Cross alumni show up both in the work environment and help in the broader network. Chris: There's not a question that I would have or a connection I'd be trying to make that I couldn't reach out to somebody at Holy Cross and just say, "Hey, we share this background. Can you help?" And there's been countless times where I've had Holy Cross grads that I either know or don't know be willing to offer advice or make a connection, no questions asked and right away all the time. And I think that's fairly rare, at least in my experience. Chris: And it always surprises me how we'll be having a conversation and somebody will say, "Oh, they went to Holy Cross." It's amazing I think how people show up, particularly in the space that I'm in where you're working in the nonprofit field or in other jobs that are trying to have an impact on society. I think that's where the Jesuit teachings I think resonate for folks. And they really internalized that learning and those values, and I think it shows up in their career choices, and it certainly did for me. JP: Definitely. Yeah. Even for me as a student, I feel like something everyone can agree on is the strength of the Holy Cross alumni network. And something I always think about, even before I became a student here, just like walking around, wearing either a Holy Cross hat or that purple shirt, I was surprised and people would be surprised based on how many times you would get stopped, like, "Oh, you went to Holy Cross. I was a grad from this class." And I think that's something really special about that network. Chris: Happens all the time. And you see it in families, too. I mean, you're seeing it in your own with your sister being a grad. And I'm hopeful that my kids will end up being graduates as well. But I think you see that legacy in a lot of ways among families, among communities, where that becomes more than just an individual experience. It's a shared family experience, which is a pretty special thing. JP: Yeah, definitely. And even the fact that, like you mentioned, even just being a student, the fact that any alumni you either reach out to or you meet, they're just so willing to sit down and talk for as long as you need and give you advice or whatever the purpose is for that phone call or that meeting. They really just sit down and are willing to help in any way possible. So, I think that's something that's awesome about the college. JP: So, moving along, I think one of the great things about this podcast is that it highlights and showcases the different ways that Holy Cross mission of men and women for others can play into so many different careers and stories of different alumni. So, I guess just to start, what mission or values fuel your professional work today? Chris: Yeah. It's interesting, I think I've been fortunate to work at this intersection of companies and causes coming together to drive better business and greater good. And it's happened throughout my career and gone full circle starting on the nonprofit side at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Jimmy Fund and moving over to the corporate side at New Balance Athletic Shoe and later Reebok, and then now in my current role at City Year. Chris: Seeing how companies can work with nonprofits and advising some of them on how to do that, when I was at Cone Communications and advising clients on those pieces, it's just always fascinated me that you can have a social impact. And it doesn't have to just be about charity, it doesn't have to be just about volunteerism or working in a nonprofit that there's all kinds of ways in which everybody can do that individually and collectively. Chris: Companies have a tremendous opportunity and tremendous power to be able to do that. And so, for me, I realized early on through those internships, experiences that I knew I was motivated by doing something kind of more than earning a paycheck, that I wanted to see that impact. Personally, I want to have a job that at the end of the day, I could feel like we were doing something bigger. And I think that was always a core value. Chris: I think, for me, that came from my parents. I think my example was seeing my mom be a special education teacher and work with students to give them that opportunity and to address some of that inequity and make sure that education was tailored to their needs and their situation, paired with my dad who was an executive in an enterprise rent a car for his whole career, high powered, highly growing business, and getting to see that side of it. Chris: And I think those two sensibilities really steered what I was looking for and seeing it as an example. I wanted to dig into business problems. I love the how do you think deeply about that? How do you try and solve those? How do you get somebody to buy your product or support your company or do something? So, the marketing and advertising and those pieces of it were fascinating to me intellectually, but I wanted to see an impact at the same time. Chris: And so, I think I was searching for that through each role of saying, "How do we combine those two things? And how does that show up?" In my time at the Jimmy Fund, it was really good for two things. I think my first job there was working a lot with families that were participating in the Boston Marathon Jimmy Fund Walk. And what I realized really quickly was, it was such a huge crash course in empathy and in building relationships and in listening. Chris: Because in most cases, I was just helping people that were participating in the event get registered, get their team organized and set up, get the T-shirts for the event, help them with their fundraising, things like that. But in most cases, I was talking with people that were either in the midst of the worst experience of their life because they were having somebody in their family facing cancer, or they were remembering the worst experience of their life and having lost somebody to cancer. Chris: And so, I think what I found is, you'd have a lot of conversations where people would get frustrated or they'd be angry or emotional, all rightfully so because they were dealing with really hard things. And I think I learned to be able to pick up on that and to connect with them and to try and find ways to encourage and support. And I think it was just a hugely valuable early experience in saying, "How do you connect with people and how do you build relationships?" Chris: "And how do you not take for granted both your own health and good fortune, but also how you'd be there when somebody else is struggling and understand what they're dealing with? And can you lift that load in some small way?" And I certainly was not doing anything significant in that regard and in that role, but I could make their day a little bit easier or solve a problem for them, et cetera. I started to really get excited about the ability to do that. And I found that was really motivating for me. Chris: So, the idea of having a purpose and being able to help somebody in a process during that day was, I think, started to become foundational. I think it also gave me a lot of perspective. You could be having a rough day in your job or something else going on. You could walk down the hall to the Jimmy Fund clinic and see the kids there that are coming in for treatment. It puts it in perspective pretty quick on your challenges and what's tough in your life when you're seeing that with a kid. Chris: So, for me, I think it helped build an immense sense of both opportunity to have an impact but then also an immense sense of gratitude for how fortunate I was. And I think those were two foundational pieces of that experience. And then, later, the second big lesson that I learned and this sparked the longer term career path was, I started to work more with the companies that were participating in the Jimmy Fund Walk, either that were sponsoring the event in different ways or they were getting their employees actively walking and fundraising. Chris: And that gave me a different side of it. It gave me exposure to stuff that I hadn't thought of, which was why would businesses do these types of things? Why would businesses want to have some sort of impact socially, which at the time was still relatively, I wouldn't say uncommon, but it wasn't as clear and upfront as it is today. Philanthropy was something that companies did on the side. It was nice to do because they wanted to be good citizens. But it wasn't a business strategy. Chris: It wasn't something that people were asking them about on a daily basis. It wasn't something that they thought about as part of their broader work as an organization and in their community. And so, that just fascinated me was like, why would companies want to do this outside of a classic kind of capitalist structure where they just have to add value for shareholders in the old Adam Smith lessons and things like that? Chris: And what I realized was, there was so much potential and so many resources that companies could bring to bear to help solve social issues. They had incredible skill and knowledge and power behind what they were doing in a lot of cases, really sophisticated ways to do things as businesses. Two, they had amazing people that they can deploy to have an impact in different ways, whether that was volunteering their time or giving access to their customers, things like that. Chris: And then, three, they can really tell a powerful story. Many companies can reach huge numbers of people and customers in a way that nonprofits can't and don't have the dollars or the access to be able to do. So, they could raise awareness and shine a light on different issues and get people to engage and support in a way that no nonprofit could ever hope to do. And I just became fascinated by that, on what a company could potentially do to have an impact in their community. Chris: And so, I think that job gave me two foundational experiences that I think have started to show up in each of the subsequent jobs that I started to have and really got me on that path. So, I think that's where the kind of being men and women for others started to show up for me was it was like a light went on, like, "Oh, this is how I can do that. This is where I can kind of have that be part of my daily life." JP: Yeah, that's amazing. I think what stuck out to me there was the perspective that you gained and you're sharing with us today is going back to at work or at school, you could be having a really bad day and that's that. I mean, obviously, no one enjoys having a bad day and it happens. But being able to just realize that oftentimes it could be way worse, and there's people, there are children and other people struggling, and they may be having a way worse day than you, I think that's a really important perspective for people to develop and take with them day by day. Chris: Yeah, I think so. Now, we have to acknowledge that that's easy for me to do as a white male, heterosexual, affluent, man of privilege in every possible dimension you can probably think of. I've had every advantage I could possibly have. And so, I think it's easy to say, "Have gratitude and appreciate those things when your life is what my life has been." And that doesn't mean we haven't had challenges and I haven't face things that have been tough, but I think it does give you a bit of a perspective. Chris: And I think gratitude and appreciation for those advantages and those experiences I've had is something that's driven a lot of the work for me and the why. But I would say within that, it's not uncommon, people come to try to have a social impact in many ways because of either guilt or a feeling of charity, like, "This is something I should pay it back. I should give back," and I certainly did. I think that was my perspective. I've been given a lot of opportunity. Chris: I owe it to others to give back in that way. I think when you start to do the work and you start to get proximate and really work on different issues, whatever it is, whether it's education or hunger or any way in which racism shows up in all of our systems, you start to realize that you move on the scale from charity to social justice, and really saying, "This isn't about me giving back or appreciating the opportunities I've had. This is about changing a system that is not just." Chris: "And it's my responsibility to play a deeper role there and to do what I can with the resources I have to drive some change there." So, I think you move from charity to social justice as you start to get proximate and more exposed to issues. And I think Holy Cross planted the ideas behind it and the early experiences, whether it was Habitat or other areas where I could start to see and get exposed to that. Chris: But I think later in my career and particularly at City Year, I started to see that more clearly and I think that's why my career has moved more in that direction. JP: Definitely. Yeah. So, I think you also, with those remarks you made, answered the next question I had, but I wanted to just emphasize. Is there something specific that drives you to work hard each and every day? And my takeaway from all you've just said is, I feel like the common theme of impact and purpose. That's what I picked up on, just whether it's you impacting someone or something, or the company you're working for, or just being able to realize the impact that someone else is having or that greater company is having on a specific cause. JP: That was my takeaway. And I think that's awesome just from a professional standpoint, being able to live by those themes of purpose and impact. That's really great. Chris: I think that's right. I think purpose and impact is the right way to frame it. I do think about that, hopefully, every day. Am I having a purpose and am I having an impact? In the day to day, I think you don't probably get up and get out of bed and think about that immediately. But I do think, as I thought about how I want to work and what jobs I want to take and what organizations I want to be at, I think in those times of reflection, certainly grounding back into purpose and impact has absolutely been the question I asked myself. Chris: Where can I feel connected and closest to a purpose? And where can I have the greatest impact in either my experience or in an organization that's working on a really hard problem? So, certainly, when I thought about coming to City Year and in my most recent role, that's absolutely what I was thinking about is, I had missed being close to the impact in a way that I had at Dana-Farber. Chris: And even at New Balance where I was on the corporate side but working closely with a lot of our nonprofit partners, I got to see that impact on a daily basis. When I moved into Cone Communications and advising nonprofit clients and business clients on their programs and their impact, I loved it. It was mentally fascinating and rigorous and an amazing training ground on all kinds of things around strategy and marketing and communications. Chris: Really tremendous skills and experience. But I found myself too far away from the people that we were serving, and I missed that. I wanted to get closer and back to that. And I think that's what drew me back to the nonprofit side at City Year was a chance to really work among people that were having that level of idealism and impact on a daily basis. Chris: And I also felt like it was a chance to take experiences and skills that I gained from other jobs and put them to really good use in helping, so you think about how we work with companies. Yeah. And I think the working hard piece to our earlier conversation, I think the rigor of Holy Cross academically and then all the other things that I got to be involved in really built that work habit in to where you show up and you do the work every day. Chris: And I think good things happen if you consistently spend the time and put in the effort. And again, I would say I had great examples, whether it's my parents or whether it's coaches and others, that really ingrain that work ethic and constantly trying to move forward for something bigger, whether it was a team that you were part of or whether it was the organization and the issue you were trying to support. JP: Definitely. Yeah. So, I guess to shift gears a little bit here, I wanted to talk about the Boston Marathon. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you ran the Boston Marathon not once, not twice, but three times. Is that- Chris: Four actually. JP: Four, okay. So, the Boston Marathon, four times. At least in my opinion, being able to run the marathon one time is one heck of an achievement. So, could you tell me a little bit about what drove you to do that again and again and again and again? Chris: Yeah, yeah. It was working at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute really was the big thing in our first event. And that I got to work on the Boston Marathon Jimmy Fund Walk. I got exposed to the course because there was a fundraising walk along the route of the Boston Marathon. And we'd have thousands of people walk and fundraise for Dana-Farber along the route. So, I got to know the marathon course, its history. Chris: I got a really good opportunity to work with people like Dave McGillivray, the director of the Boston Marathon, and get to know him and his amazing team and learn from them. And just started to fall in love with that event. I would volunteer at the marathon and see it. And as a former track and field athlete, I wasn't a distance runner by any means, but I started to get it into my head that it would be a really challenging athletic experience. And so, that was interesting. Chris: To be honest, it was my wife that steered me in that direction. She ran the marathon first a couple of times for Dana-Farber and fundraise for them. And so, I got to see her experience doing that. And I'm kind of a competitive guy, so I decided that I wanted to do it myself. And I couldn't just let her have all the fun. So, I did, I signed up and ran for Dana-Farber. I actually got a chance to run that first marathon with my wife who, God bless her, waited for me and dragged me along those last few miles because I was struggling, and she was kind and carried me along. Chris: And then, I had a chance to do it a couple more times, which was great, including when I didn't finish, which was a huge disappointment and a physical struggle. But I got to come back in another year and completed, and it's some of my greatest memories and experiences of participating in that event and being part of fundraising for Dana-Farber, for City Year as part of that. The marathon is a really special event for Boston. Chris: And I think what you learn in that event is that people are always surprised and super like you were complimentary about being able to run that marathon. I fully believe that most people can run a marathon, and I've seen it firsthand on the course. I think what it gets to is our earlier conversation about how do you go pursue your goals and do those things. And anybody that's run a marathon can tell you that the race day is the reward. Chris: It's the thing at the end, it's the countless hours, the 16 weeks before where you're going and you're running three, four, five, six, depending on what your training schedule is, days a week. And putting in countless miles in good weather, bad weather, darkness, snow, rain, cold, your ability to get up and do that each day and keep consistently growing the mileage and keeping the training, that's what leads to the marathon and the success at the end. Chris: So, it's really about, can you do that work on a daily basis? And can you progress over time by sticking with it through the ups and the downs? And then, I was really lucky to train with great groups of people each time. And I think that's another lesson of it is, it's pretty hard thing to go train by yourself and go run a marathon by yourself. Most people that do it have done their training with a group of friends and other people that are running that helped motivate them, support them, and inspire them. Chris: And then, day off, all the people that are out there are cheering you on, supporting you, helping you get to that day. It's truly a team effort. So, I just got to get the rewards of doing it four times. JP: Yeah, that's an awesome achievement. And I have a ton of respect for you and anyone who does that. In fact, one of my buddies here at Holy Cross, Colman Benson, he's a sophomore, and he ran this past marathon. And just seeing him go through that training earlier in the fall, I'd be like, "Oh, what are you doing tomorrow?" He's like, "Oh, I'm running 12 miles in the morning, then I'm going to class." And I just think that's very impressive and definitely an awesome achievement. Chris: Yeah, it's not too late, JP. You can start training, too. JP: Yeah. So, I read in a previous interview that one of your most memorable achievements is your support of Susan G. Komen for the Cure while you're with New Balance. Can you speak a little to that? Chris: Yeah. So, after my first couple jobs at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Jimmy Fund, I mentioned I found myself just becoming so fascinated by what companies could do. And I realized that I really wanted to experience it from a company's perspective. I wanted to get over to that side of the work. Around that time, I also decided that I wanted to go deeper into business. I was working with companies. Chris: I was asking them to support us, but I didn't really understand business in a deep way. And so, I ended up going back to graduate school at night to get my MBA while I was working at Dana-Farber. And I ended up making the switch over to New Balance and taking a job there really that was the opposite or the flip side of what I had been doing at the Jimmy Fund. Chris: So, instead of asking companies to support us and asking them to sponsor and have their employees participate in our events, and have an impact in that way, I was helping to guide New Balance's investment in different nonprofits in the community and thinking about how we showed up with our dollars, with our products, with our people to support those efforts. And so, the job was to manage what New Balance called their cause marketing work at the time. Chris: I sat in the marketing department at New Balance. I was measured in the same ways that other marketers were on driving awareness of New Balance's brand, consideration of our product and trying on footwear and apparel and things like that, and then ultimately sales of that product, which was great. And I loved it because I got a chance to really get into the marketing and science of that, which was fascinating, and do it at a brand and in a field of athletic footwear and apparel that I was personally passionate about as a runner and as an athlete. Chris: So, best of both worlds there. And it was just a great opportunity to take what I knew from the nonprofit side and bring that sensibility into the corporate environment into how we showed up and work with our nonprofit partners, whether it was Susan G. Komen for the Cure or Girls on the Run, which was our other major partner. And I just loved it. And I think that really crystallized, this is the career path for me. Chris: I can work with cool products and in areas that I really liked, but I can have an impact in that way. And it just opened my eyes to what was possible for companies. New Balance was such a special place because it was a privately held, family-owned company, had a tremendous number of people that I worked there for years. It really felt like a community of people in ways that the Jimmy Fund and Holy Cross actually felt very similar to me, and that's what I loved about being there at the time. Chris: And we got to do some really cool things, whether it was working on all the different Komen events. I had a chance to meet Joe Biden, President Biden, when he was vice president at the time at an event for Komen and New Balance, which was amazing. We got to do great things, marketing our products, and attending different events, and meeting celebrities. I went on The Ellen Show to give away million dollars for breast cancer research and got to have the big chat out there and hand that to Ellen. Chris: So, amazing, unique experiences that I wouldn't have other ever anticipated getting a chance to do as a result of that job. It's a really special company. And later, I got a chance to really go deep and work with Girls on the Run after my time at New Balance. After I left New Balance, I had a chance to join the board of Girls on the Run and serve on their board and chair their board for a few years. Chris: And to get to work with that amazing nonprofit that focuses on women's leadership development and girls empowerment through a running curriculum and really social-emotional skill building curriculum was just an amazing experience to, again, work for another world-class nonprofit and get a chance to see it grow. So, another really fortunate opportunity for me. JP: Yeah, that's incredible. That seems like such an overall special, I guess, group of things that you got, meeting the president and going on The Ellen Show. That's awesome. So, I guess, it seems like it's hard to top those experiences. But has anything changed in terms of your most memorable milestone since then in your career? Chris: I think you start to look at what are the skills and experiences and most importantly, the relationships you build over your career. And each of those are really cool memories and experiences. But I think what matters is the relationships that you start to have and build over time. So, when I think about those different jobs, it's more about the people that I got a chance to work with and get to learn from. Chris: And I think City Year as my current job and organization now for the last eight years, that's what I start to think about and focus on is how have I gotten the chance to work with and learn from really great people, and continued. I think, even in this kind of midway through my career and later in my career, I feel like I'm still learning and growing on a daily basis, and getting better both at what I do tangibly functionally in my work. Chris: But also as a manager, as a boss, as a co-worker, as a parent, I think you start to pick up those lessons. And I think for City Year in particular, it's by far the most powerful place that I've ever seen as far as helping people really build connection to one another and to help us really explore who we are and how do we show up as our full selves at work on a daily basis. And how do we do that for other people, whether it's our co-workers or whether it's the students we work with in the schools we serve in. Chris: I think that's the amazing lesson and opportunity of City Year. So, I would say I hope I haven't hit the highlights of the careers. I got a lot of work left to do. And I think we've got a lot more to accomplish and learn. So, I'm excited about that. JP: Definitely. The best is yet to come. All right. So, now, to shift over, I know earlier, you talked about the idea of cause marketing and how that plays into your career. And I know that's been around for quite some time now and is becoming increasingly popular and being leveraged by businesses and nonprofits. So, for those who are listening who might not know a lot about it, could you speak a little about cause marketing and what that means to your career, past, present and future? Chris: Yes. It's interesting, you've seen a real change over the decades in how companies think about their responsibility and impact to society. And early on, it was very much about volunteerism and employees coming out doing different things. Or it might be about the company writing a check and the CEO handing it over to an organization. There wasn't really a business strategy. It was, "Hey, we recognize we're part of this community. We want to support our community and we find ways to do that." Chris: And then, what you started to see late into the '90s, early 2000s is companies started to read realize this could actually have a deeper business impact. People want to support companies that are doing good things in their communities. And we can tell that story via our marketing, our public relations efforts, via sponsorships and other things, kind of classic marketing and sales approaches. And so, they started to integrate cause into that. Chris: And so, you start to see opportunities like buy this product, we'll donate XYZ. And then, you started to see buy one, give one like TOMS and other new models of cause marketing come in. But in the early days, it was still very much kind of a business strategy using cause to drive it. So, it was, "We know people care about this cause. And if we talk about being associated with it, it would get them to buy our product or get them to take this action." Chris: And what we've seen over the last decade plus is that's really evolving and going deeper. I think what we started to see, particularly when I was working at Cone Communications and advising clients, we started to say, "What's unique about your company and the work that you do, the industry that you're in, the expertise that you have? And how could you connect your philanthropy to an issue that is aligned with your business?" Chris: "So, if you're in the pharmaceutical industry or other areas, how do you align with health and determinants of health? If you're working in other areas, like cable and telephone and others, how do you think about connectivity and digital connectivity being something that you can provide and connect to?" And so, how do you align the strategy and the impact you can have with your business so that those two things are working in harmony in reinforcing one another? Chris: And so, I think there was an understanding that it can actually drive business. And it's not just a nice thing to do that's over on the side, it's an important strategy to drive business. And so, during my time at New Balance and Cone and later at Reebok, I think we were more in that era of saying, "How do we integrate it into the business? And how do we really see it as a unique business driving strategy?" Chris: Now, I think you're in an even different environment, both with young people like yourselves coming into work and into the environment and being aware of social issues in a way that is deeper and more common than I think it was maybe of my generation and earlier, really wanting to have a purpose at work, and looking at your companies and saying, "How are you helping me do that?" And I only want to be here if I'm having a chance to put my passion and my values front and center in a way that was different than I think previous generations thought about work. Chris: And then, two, I think we're realizing, particularly over the last two years with the pandemic, with the murder of George Floyd, certainly the cracks in our system and how it is not equitable, how racism really shows up across all kinds of dimensions to prevent others from having opportunity that they should, and saying, "That's not okay." And people are saying, "We expect to both individually have an opportunity to affect that." Chris: "And we expect companies to be vocal and to step up and to show what their values are. And if you're not, then that's not going to be a company that I'm going to invest my time in personally as an employee. Or I'm not going to invest my dollars in as a customer." And I think you're seeing a whole new era of companies leading and being vocal in a lot of ways around social issues and taking a stand. Chris: And if they're not, people kind of questioning what's going on and why not. So, I think it's been really impressive and powerful to see. There's a lot that still needs to be done, right? There's a tremendous amount of inequity even within companies. And we see examples every day of bad behavior or other things that companies need to do better and need to do differently. Chris: But I will say, in working with many different Fortune 100 companies on a daily basis, the understanding of issues, the way they talk about social issues, the way they talk about their own diversity, equity, and inclusion and belonging efforts within the company is a huge sea change compared to what I saw even five, 10 years ago, which gives me a lot of hope for where we're going. I think we're realizing that capitalism is an amazing system of value creation. It's done tremendous things to grow and build our company. Chris: And the kind of American dream did a tremendous number of things, certainly for my family and many others, but that that's no longer the case for everyone and it probably never was, to be honest. And so, how do we own that and how do we address that? And I think companies are wrestling with that in a more authentic way. And I hope they continue to do that. It's part of what I think my life's work is, is to try and help companies do that. JP: Yeah, definitely. I feel like that, in my opinion, that idea of cause marketing is something that's... I feel like that's got to be something that's just going to become, I guess, take over in terms of marketing. And just seeing it present today, I guess I've been seeing it firsthand with the new Worcester Red Sox at Polar Park in terms of sports marketing. Their whole thing is... I think the program is like In Debt to a Vet. JP: So, they're marketing that product of going to the game and all. And then, every strike out at home, they donate X amount of money to veterans. And then, they also have just other organizations like fighting food insecurity and things like that. So, I feel like I've just been learning more and more about that. And I feel like that's got to be something like revolutionary in terms of marketing and business today. Chris: Yeah. And do you find yourself deciding who to buy from and who to work with as a result of that? Do you see it show up in the decisions you make? JP: Yeah. Definitely, I feel like these days, I see, even buying clothing and things like that, some... off the top of my head, I can't think of any. And shoes too, especially I've been seeing. They advertise the materials they make their shoes out of and stuff like that. And X percent of the money they take in goes to this cause or that cause. So, yeah, I've definitely been seeing it become more and more present today. Chris: I think it's true. I think as a marketer, and I don't even like the term cause marketing anymore because it feels so transactional, and we're well beyond that. I mean, it is a strategy that is useful and valuable, and company should still do. But I think what you've seen is now that you interact with a company and their products and a brand all the time, whether it's in social media or online or in other places, it used to be such a tightly controlled thing. Chris: You kind of created a marketing message, you put it out there in a campaign. You spent weeks developing it and controlling the advertising message and putting it out there. That's just not how we market and how customers engage anymore. It's year round, minute to minute brand building and engagement. It's a very different thing. And so, what you've seen is companies have to evolve to respond to that and say, "Okay, we need to be talking about not just cause marketing, but it's about what are our values." Chris: "And how do those show up in every action that we do, because it's not just the messaging that we put out from a marketing or an advertising standpoint. It's how somebody experienced us in the store, or an interaction they had with an employee, or something our CEO said, or some way they experienced our product." And it's 24-7-365. And so, I think you're seeing companies really say, "This is about our values, and being clear on what our values are." Chris: Because our most important stakeholders, our people are saying that that's what matters to them and that's what they care about. And so, I think we just think about business differently. JP: Absolutely, yeah. And actually, even aside from just that marketing aspect, the whole idea of impact investing and companies just needing to evolve now based on ESG and sustainability and things like that, it's just becoming more and more just the norm. And I feel like more and more businesses have no choice but to evolve and match what other businesses are doing because that's such a pressing topic in today's time as well. Chris: A hundred percent. And you have to, to compete, to succeed. And all the data tells you that companies that invest and do deep things and are high performing when it comes to the environmental, social, and governance measures outperform other companies and succeed. So, it's not just a nice thing to do, an important thing to do for the planet, a good thing to do. It's an imperative. If you want to continue to build a business and have it thrive, you have to lean in those areas. JP: Definitely. So, could you speak about the back and forth relationship you've seen between business and nonprofits throughout the span of your professional career? Chris: Absolutely. That's a great question. I think to our earlier conversation, early on, I think it was more transactional. It was kind of checkbook philanthropy. And we developed some relationships, and hopefully we get some money. And what we've seen, certainly in my time at City Year and why I was excited to come to City Year and work on it, is that changed. And companies were increasingly looking at a much deeper and holistic way to support issues. Chris: And so, they wanted certainly the branding and the visibility, and being able to talk about themselves as being good citizens, and for nonprofits to help validate and help them have opportunities to do that. They wanted to have employees actively volunteering and spending time, whether that was doing different kind of done-in-a-day volunteer projects or weeks of service, days of service, things like that. Chris: Or deeper ongoing skills-based volunteerism where I can share my expertise in marketing or somebody can share their expertise in web design or other things with the nonprofit and help that nonprofit build its capabilities or its skills. And really being able to set ambitious goals, which is what we're seeing a lot of companies do now, and to say, "This is what we care about from a social impact standpoint. Here's how we're going to try and have some impact. And here's some ways we're going to hold ourselves accountable and measure against it." Chris: And so, now, nonprofits are more partners in that process. And certainly, there's a dynamic of where the dollars come. And we certainly are trying to raise money from companies and have contractual pieces of what we do. But in many ways, we're sitting at the table with our corporate partners, and they view us as experts in the space that help them, at least for City Year, understand education, understand urban education, understand racial issues and how those show up in the education space, and are looking for our help and our guidance on how they can have a deeper impact. Chris: And we often think collaboratively and advise and coach them on some of the things they're thinking about. And in many cases, they can offer tremendous support to help us do different things. We've been fortunate to work with Deloitte Consulting as an example at City Year for decades now, and have benefited from having pro bono case teams and others really come and think about how do we grow City Year as an organization. Chris: So, I would say it's much less of a transactional thing and much more of a collaborative partnership, which has been amazing to see. And I think that's the part that I've been fortunate to have worked on the nonprofit side, the corporate side, the agency side, and seeing that from all angles that I think it hopefully helps me be a better partner to our colleagues. But I think there's such a willingness to say, "These are huge social issues that cannot be solved by any individual nonprofit, any individual organization." Chris: And we have to come together and figure out how we work collectively on them to change them. So, I think the level of expertise sharing, information sharing, and collaboration is greater than it's ever been. So, I'm excited about that. JP: Cool, yeah. Thank yo

The Bike Shed
335: Start Messy

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 26, 2022 35:38


Steph has a question for Chris: When you have no idea how you're going to implement a feature, how do you write your first test? Chris has thoughts about hybrid teams (remote/in-person) and masked inputs. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Preemptive Pluralization is (Probably) Not Evil (https://www.swyx.io/preemptive-pluralization) iMask (https://imask.js.org/) Mitch Hedberg - Escalator Joke (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHopAo_Ohy0) This episode is brought to you by Studio 3T (https://studio3t.com/free). Try Studio 3T's full suite of features for 30 days, no payment details needed. Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: STEPH: I am recording in a new room because we're in Pennsylvania, and so I'm recording at this little vanity desk which is something. [laughs] But there's a mirror right in front of me, so I feel very vain because it's just like, [laughs] I'm just looking at myself while I'm recording with you. It's something. CHRIS: [laughs] That is something. STEPH: [laughs] So, you know. CHRIS: Fun times. STEPH: Pro podcast tip, you know, just stare at yourself while you chat, while you record. CHRIS: I mean, if that works for you, you know, plenty of people in the gym have the mirrors up, so podcasting is like exercising in a way, and I think it makes sense. STEPH: I appreciate the generosity. [laughs] CHRIS: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. So I have a funny/emotional story that [laughs] I'm going to share with you first because I feel like it kind of encapsulates how life is going at the moment. So we've officially moved from South Carolina to North Carolina. I feel like I've been talking about that for several episodes now. But this is it: we have finally vacated all of our stuff out of South Carolina house and relocated to North Carolina. And once we got to North Carolina, we immediately had to then leave town for a couple of days. And normally, Utah, our dog, stays with an individual in South Carolina, someone that we found, trust, and love. And he has a great time, and I just know he's happy. But we didn't have that this time. So I had to find just a boarding facility that had really high reviews that I felt like I could trust him with. I didn't even have time to take him for a day to test it out. It was one of those like, I got to show up and just drop him off and hope this goes well, so I did. And everything looks wonderful. Like, the facility is very clean. I had a list of things to look for to make sure it was a good place. But it's the first time leaving him somewhere where he's going to spend significant time in a kennel that has indoor-outdoor access. And as I walked away from him, I started to cry. And I just thought, oh no, this is embarrassing. I'm that dog mom who's going to start crying in this boarding facility as she's leaving her dog for the first time. So I put on my shades, and I managed to make it through the checkout process. But then I went to my truck and just sat there and cried for 15 minutes and called my husband and was like, "I'm doing the right thing, right? Like, tell me this is okay because I'm having a moment." And I finally got through that moment. But then I even called you because you and I were scheduled to chat. And I was like, I am not in a place that I can chat right now. I think I told you when you answered the phone. I was like, "Everything is fine, but I sound like the world's ending, or I sound like a mess." [laughs] And yeah, so I had like two hours of where I just couldn't stop crying. I partially blame pregnancy hormones. I'm going to go with that as my escape rope for now. So I feel like that's been life lately. Life's been a little overwhelming, and that felt like the cherry on top. And that was the moment that I broke. Update: he's doing great. I've gotten pictures of Utah. He's having a wonderful time at camp, it seems. [laughs] It was just me, his mom, who is having trouble. CHRIS: Well, you know, reasonable to worry, and life's dialed up to 11 and all of that. But yeah, I will say even though you lead the conversation with everything's fine, your tone of voice did not imply that everything was fine. So when I eventually came to understand what we were talking about, I hope I was kind in the moment. But I was like, oh, okay, this is fine. We're fine. I'm so sorry you're feeling terrible right now. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: But okay, we're fine. For me, there was a palpable moment of like, okay, my stress is now back down a little bit. But I'm glad that things are going well and that Utah is having a fun vacation. STEPH: Yep, he seems to be doing fine. I've calmed down. You know, as you said, life's been dialed up lately. On a less emotional note and something that's a little bit more technical, I had a really great conversation with another thoughtboter where we were talking about testing. And the idea of when you learn testing, it's often very focused on like, you have this object, and it has a method. And so, you're going to write a unit test for this particular method. And it's very isolated, very specific as to the thing that you're looking to test. Versus in reality, when you pick up tickets, you don't have that scope, and like, it is so broad. You have to figure out what feature you're implementing, figure out how to test it. And it feels like this mismatch between how a lot of people learn to test and learn TDD versus then how we actually practice it in the wild. And so we had a phone conversation around when you are presented with a ticket like that, and you have no idea how you're going to implement a feature, how do you get started with testing, and when do you write your first test? Do you TDD? Do you BDD? Or do you PDD? That last one I made up, it stands for Panic-driven development. But it's what's your approach to how do you actually then get to the point where you can write a test? And I have a couple of thoughts. But I'm really curious, how does that flow work for you? What have you learned throughout the years to then help yourself write that first test? Or where do you start? CHRIS: Well, this is an interesting question. I like this one. I think it varies. And I think there's a lot of dogma around TDD as a practice. And I think it is super useful to break that apart and hear different individual stories of it. I know there are plenty of folks who are like, TDD is just not a thing and whatnot, and I'm certainly not in that camp. But I also don't TDD 100% of the time because sometimes I'm not super clear on what I'm doing, or I'm in more of an exploratory phase. That said, I think there's a...I want to answer the question somewhat indirectly, which is I know how to test most of the code that I work on now as a web developer in a Rails application because I've done most of the things a bunch of times. And the specifics may be different, but the like, to integrate with this external system, and I have to build an API client or whatever, I know how to do that. And there is a public API of some class that I will be exercising against and so I can write tests against that. Or I know that the user is going to click a button, and then something needs to happen. And so I can write that test, and it fails, and then it starts to push me towards the implementation. There are also times where it's actually quite hard to get the test to lead you in the right direction, and you have to know what hop to make, and so sometimes I just do that. But yeah, rolling back a little bit, I think there is a certain amount of experience that is necessary. And I think one of the critical things that I want to share with folks that are potentially newer to testing overall is that it is actually quite hard. You have to understand your system and how you're going to approach it, you know, one step removed, or it's like a game of chess where you're thinking a couple of moves ahead. You have to understand it in a deeper way. And so, if testing is difficult, that might just be totally reasonable at this point. And as you come to see the patterns within a Rails application or whatever type of application you're working on over and over, it becomes easier to test. But if testing is hard, that may not mean...like, how do I phrase this? There's like an impostor syndrome story in here of like, if you're struggling with testing, it may not be that something is fundamentally broken. You just may need a couple more chances to see that sort of thing play out. And so, for me, in most cases, I tend to know where to start or when not to. Like, I feel fine not testing when I don't test most of the time. I will eventually get things under test coverage such that I feel confident in that. And whenever I have one of those moments, I will stop and look at it and say, "Why didn't I know how to test this from the front, like, from the start?" But it's rare at this point for things to be truly exploratory. There's always some outer layer that I can wrap around. But like, I know X needs to happen when Y occurs. So how do I instrument the system in that way? But yeah, those are some thoughts. What are your thoughts? Does what I said sound reasonable here? STEPH: Yeah, I really like how you highlighted that pausing for reflection. That was something that I didn't initially think of, but I really liked that, to then go back to be like, okay, revisiting myself a couple of days or however earlier when I first started this. Now I can see where I've ended up. How could I have made that connection sooner as to where I was versus the tests I ended up with? Or perhaps recognizing that I couldn't have gotten there sooner, that I needed that journey to help me get there. So I really like the idea of pausing for reflection because then it helps cement any of those learnings that you have made during that time. Also, the other part where you mentioned the user clicks a button, and something happens, that's where I immediately went with this. I also liked that you highlighted that TDD has that bit of dogma, and I don't always TDD. I do what I can, and it helps me. But it has to be a tool versus something that I just do 100% of the time. But with more of that BDD approach or that very high-level user-level integration test of where if I need to pull data from an API and then show it to the user, okay, I know I can at least start with a high-level test of I want the user to then see some data on a page. And that will lead me down some path of errors. It might help me implement a route and a controller and then a show action, so it will at least help me get started. Or even if it doesn't give me helpful enough errors, it at least serves as my guideline of like, this is my North Star. This is where I'm headed. So then, if I need to revisit, okay, what's the thing that I'm focused on at the moment? I can go back and be like, okay, I'm focused on achieving this. What's the next smallest step I can take to get there? The other thing that I've learned over time is I've given myself the chance to be messy because I got so excited about the idea of unit testing and writing small, fast test that I would often try to start with small objects and then work my way backwards into like, okay, I have this one object that does this thing and one object that like...let's use a concrete example. So one object that knows how to communicate with API and one object that knows how to then parse and format the data I want and then something else that's then going to present that data to the user. But I found when I started with small objects, I would get a little lost, and I wasn't always great at bringing them together. So I've taken the opposite approach of where if I'm really not sure where I'm headed and I'm in that more exploratory phase or even just that first initial parse of a feature, I will just start messy. So if I am pulling data from an API and need to show it to a user on a screen, I'll just dump it in the controller if I need to. I'll put it all there together. And then once I actually have something that is parsing, or I have something appearing on the page, then I will start to say, "Okay, now that I can see what I need and I can see the pieces that I've written, how can I then start to extract this into smaller objects?” And now, I can start writing unit tests for that data. So that is something that has helped me is just start high, keep it high, be messy, and until you start to see some of the smaller objects that you can pull out. CHRIS: Yeah, I think there's something that you were just saying there that clicked for me of we didn't start with the why of TDD. And I don't think we've talked about why we believe in TDD in a while. So this feels like a thing we're saying. It's not good just because it's good, or we don't believe it's good just because that's what we say. For me, it is because it anchors us outside of the code sort of it starts to think of it from the user perspective or some outer layer. So even if you're unit testing some deeply nested class within your application, there's still an outer layer. There's still a user of that class. And so, thinking about the public API, I think is really useful. And then the further out you get, the better that is, and I believe strongly in thinking from the outside in on these sort of things. And then the other thing you said of allowing for refactoring. And if we have tests, then it's so much easier to sort of...I totally 100% agree with like; I start messy. I start very messy. I wanted to pretend that I was going to be like, oh, I'm so...Steph, I can't believe this. But no, of course, I start messy. Why would you start trying to do the hard thing first? No, get something that works. But then having the test coverage around that makes it so much easier to go through those sequential refactoring steps. Versus if you have to write the code correctly upfront and then add test coverage around that, it sort of inverts that whole thing. And so, although it may take a little bit longer to write the tests upfront, I do exactly what you're describing of like, I write the tests that tell some truth about the system and constrain the system to do that thing. And then I can have a messy implementation that I can iteratively refactor over and over, and I can extract things from. And then, I can tell a more concise testing story about those. And so it really is both the higher-level perspective I think is super useful and then the ability to refactor under that test coverage is also very useful. And it makes my job easier because I can start messy. I love starting messy. It's so much better. STEPH: Yeah, and I think former me had the idea that for me to do TDD properly meant that I had these small, encapsulated objects that I wrote unit tests for. And yes, that is the goal. I do want that, but that doesn't mean I have to start there. That is something that then I can work my way towards. That also falls in line with the adage from Sandi Metz that the wrong abstraction is more costly than no abstraction. And so I'd rather start with no abstractions and then start to consider, okay, how can I actually move this out into smaller objects and then test it from there? There's also something that I heard that I haven't done as often, but I really liked the idea; it feels very freeing, is that when you do get started and if you write your first test, if you write a test and it helps you make some progress but then you come back to it later and you're like, you know, the test doesn't really add value, or it's not helping me anymore, just thank it and delete it and move on. Just because you wrote it doesn't mean it needs to stay. So if it provided some benefit to you and helped you through that journey of adding the feature, then that's wonderful. But don't be timid about deleting it or changing it so that it does serve you because otherwise, it's just going to be this toxic test that gets merged into the main branch, and it's going to be untrustworthy. Or maybe it's fussy and hard to please, or it's just really not the supportive test that you're looking for. And so then you can turn it into more of a supportive test and make it fit your goals instead of just clinging to every test that we've written. CHRIS: I like the framing of tests as scaffolding to help you build up the structure. But then, at the end, some of the scaffolding gets ripped away and thrown out. And I do think, again, testing ends up in this weird place. The dogmatic thing that we were talking about earlier feels very true. And I've noticed, particularly on larger teams, folks being very hesitant to delete tests like, that feels like sacrilege. Of course, you can't delete tests; the tests are how we know it's true, which is true, but you can interrogate that. You can see like, how true is it? And every test has a cost and maintenance burden, runtime, et cetera. You probably know well, Steph, about having test suites that take a bunch of time to run and then maybe wanting to spend a little bit of time trying to reduce that overall time. And so there's always going to be a trade-off there. Actually, someone reminded me of an anecdote recently. I joined a project, and most of the test suite or all of the test suite was commented out because it was flaky or intermittent. And I was like, "Oh, I'm going to delete that." And people were like, "You're what?" I'm like; it's commented out. We're not using it. Let's tell the truth. Git will have it. We can go back and get it. But let's tell the truth with what we're like...this commented-out test suite is almost worse in my mind than having nothing there. The nothing feels painful, right? Let's experience that. Whereas the commented out stuff is like, well, we have a test suite; it's just commented out. It's like, no, you don't have a test suite at all. That's not what's going on here. But there were other thoughtboters on the project that poked a good amount of fun at me when they were like, "The first thing you did on this project was delete the test suite?" As I was like, "Yeah, I don't know, I was feeling spicy that day or something." But I think the test suite needs to serve the work that we're doing in the same way that everything else does. And so occasionally, yeah, deleting tests is absolutely the right thing and then probably add back some more. STEPH: It's funny how that reaction exists. And I've done it before myself where like, if you see commented out code and you put up a PR to remove it, I feel like most people are going to be like, yeah, yeah, that's great. Let's get rid of this. It's clearly not news. It's commented out. But then removing a skipped test then has people like, "Well, but that test looks like it could be valuable, and we're going to fix it." And it's like...all I can go back to is that silly example of like, you've got your skinny jeans, one day I'm going to fit into those skinny jeans. And so one day, I'm going to fix this test, and it's going to serve the purpose. And it's going to be the me I want to be. [laughs] And it is funny how we do that. With code, we're like, sure, we can get rid of it. But with tests, we feel this clinginess to them where we want to hold on to it and make it pass. And I think that sometimes has to do with the descriptions. There are test descriptions commented out that I've seen are like, user can log in, or if given a user without permission, they can't access. And it's like, oh, that sounds important. I'm now nervous to delete you versus fix you, but you're still not actually running and providing value. And so then I have to negotiate with myself as to where do we actually go from here? But I do love the idea of deleting tests that are skipped because we should just let them go. We either have to dedicate time to fix them or let them go and make that hard decision. CHRIS: The critical idea of future me will have more time, future me will be calm and will work through all the other bugs and future discounting; as far as I understand it as a formalization of the term, yeah, it's never true. I've only gotten busier over time, just broadly speaking. And that seems to be a truism in software projects as well. It's like, oh, we just have to write a bunch of features, and then it'll be calm. I don't even think I'd want that. But future me will not have more time. And so choosing the things that we do invest in versus not is tricky, but the idea of that future me will have a lot of time or future us probably not true. STEPH: Well, I think the story that I just shared at the beginning of our chat highlights that future me won't always be calm. [laughs] So let's work with what I've got. Let's not bank on that. Future Stephanie might be very emotional about dropping her dog off at boarding for a couple of days. [laughs] Future me might be very emotional about fixing this test. All right, well, thanks for going on that journey with me. That's really helpful. I knew you'd have some great insights there. Mid-roll Ad: Hi, friends, and now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is an application performance monitoring tool that's designed to help developers find and fix performance issues quickly. With an intuitive user interface, Scout will tie bottlenecks to source code so you can quickly pinpoint and resolve performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, and memory bloat. Scout also recently implemented external service monitoring, adding even more granularity when it comes to HTTP requests and API calls. So give Scout a try today with a free 14-day trial and experience first-hand why developers worldwide call Scout their best friend. And as an added bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. To learn more, visit scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. CHRIS: What's going on in my world? Last week we had our first ever Sagewell all-hands get-together in person. Many of us have met in person before, but not everyone. And so this was a combination celebration for our seed fundraising round, which had happened actually sometime right at the end of last year. But due to COVID in the world and complexity, it was difficult to get everybody together. So that finally happened. And then we sort of grafted on to that celebration, that party that we were having. Like, let's just extend a day in either direction and do some in-person working and all of that. And that was really great. I'm trying to find that ideal middle ground between we are a remote team, but there is definitely value in occasionally being in person, particularly getting to know people but also just having some higher bandwidth conversations, planning, things like that. They just feel different in person. And so, how do we balance that? And how do we be most productive and all that? But it was really great to meet the team more so than I had on the internet and get to spend some time in person and do some whiteboarding. I drew on a whiteboard with a team. We were all looking at the same whiteboard. We're in the same room. And I drew on a whiteboard some entity relationship diagrams. It was awesome. [laughs] It was super fun. It was one of those cases where we had built an assumption deeply into our codebase, and suddenly instead of having one of a thing, we may now have multiple of a thing. There's a wonderful blog post by Shawn Wang called Preemptive Pluralization which I think is based on an episode of Ben Orenstein's podcast, The Art of Product, where Ben basically framed the idea of like, I've never regretted pluralizing something earlier. A user has one account; they have multiple accounts. They just happen to have one at this time, et cetera. So we're in one of those. And it was a great thing to be able to be in a room and whiteboard. I knew at the time when I did it way back when that I was making the wrong decision. But I didn't know exactly how and the shape. And so now we have to do that fun refactoring so glad that we have a giant test suite that will help us with said refactoring. But yeah, so that was really great to be able to do in person. STEPH: I think there can be so much value in getting together and getting to see your team and, like you said, have those high-level conversations and then just also getting to hang out. So it's really nice to hear that reinforced since you experienced that same positivity from that experience. Do you think that's something that y'all will have going forward? Do you think you're going to try to get together like once a year, once a quarter? Maybe it hasn't even been talked about. But I'm hearing that it was great and that maybe there will be some repeats. CHRIS: Yes, yeah. I think I'm inclined to quarterly at a minimum and maybe even slightly more than that. Some of us are centered around Boston, and so it's a little bit easier for us to pop in and work at a WeWork, that sort of thing. But I think broadly, getting the team together and having that be intentional. And personally, I'm inclined to that being more social time than productive time because I think that's the thing that is most useful in person is building relationship and rapport and understanding folks better. I remember so pointedly when thoughtbot would have the annual Summer Summit, and leading up to that; there was a certain amount of conversation. But there were also location-specific rooms, and a lot of the conversation happened like in the Boston channel or whatnot. And then, without fail, every year after the Summer Summit, suddenly, there was a spike in cross-team chatter. Like, the Ruby room now had a bunch of people from San Francisco talking to Boston, talking to New York, et cetera. And it was just this incredibly clear...I think we could actually, like, I think at one point someone plotted the data, and there's just this stepwise jump that would happen every time. And so that sort of connecting folks is really what I believe in there. And the more we're leaning into the remote thing, then the more I think this is important. So I think quarterly is probably the lowest end that I would think of, but it might be more. And it's also a question of like, what shape does this take? Is it just us going and hanging out somewhere? Or are we productively trying to get together with a whiteboard? I think we'll figure that out as we go on. But it's definitely something that I'm glad we've done now, set the precedent for, and we'll hopefully do more of moving on. STEPH: Yeah, I always really love the thoughtbot Summits. In fact, we have one coming up. It's coming up in May, and this one's taking place in UK. But there have been some interesting conversations around Summit because before, it was the idea that everybody traveled. But typically, they were in Boston, so for me, it was particularly easy because it was already where I lived. So then showing up for Summit was no biggie. But with this one happening in UK and COVID and travel still being a concern, there's been more conversations around; okay, this is awesome. People who want to get together can. There are these events going on. But there are people who don't want to travel, don't feel up to travel. They have family obligations that then make it very difficult for them to leave one partner at home with the kids. And I myself I'm in that space where I thought really hard about whether I was going to travel or not. And I've decided not to just for personal reasons. But then it brings up the question of okay, well, if we have a number of people that are going to be in person together, then what about the people who are remote? And the idea of running something that's hybrid is not something that we've really figured out. But those that are remote, we're going to get together and figure out what we want to do and maybe what's our version of our remote summit since we're not going to be traveling. But I feel like that's definitely a direction that needs to be considered as teams are getting in person because if you do have people that can't make it, how can you still bring them in so it's an inclusive event but respect to the fact that they can't necessarily travel? I don't know if that's a concern that every team needs to have, but it's one that I've been thinking about with our team. And then I know others at thoughtbot we've been considering just because we do have such a disparate team. And we want to make everybody comfortable and feel included. CHRIS: Yeah, as with everything in this world, there's always complexities and subtlety. Thankfully, for our first get-together, we were able to get everyone into the same space. But I do wonder, especially as the team grows, even just scheduling, the logistics of it become really complicated. So then does the engineering team have get-togethers that are slightly different, and then there's like once yearly a big get-together of the whole team? Or how do you manage that and dealing with family situations and all that? It is very much a complicated thing that thankfully was very straightforward for us this first time, but I fully expect that we'll have to be all the more intentional with it moving forward. And, you know, that's just the game. But switching gears ever so slightly, we did have a fun thing that we've worked on a little bit over the past few weeks. We've finally landed it in the app. But we were swapping out our masked input library that we were using, so this is for someone entering their birthday, or a phone number, or social security number, or dates. I guess I already said dates. Passwords I think we also use here. But we have a bunch of different inputs in the app that behave specially. And my goodness, is this one of those things that falls into the category of, oh yeah, I assume this is a solved problem, right? We just have a library out there that does it. And each library is like, oh no, all of the other libraries are bad. I will come along, and I will write the one library to solve all of the problems, and then we'll be good. And it is just such a surprisingly complicated space. It feels like it should be more straightforward. And as I think about it, it's not; it's dealing with imperative interactions between a user and this input. And you need to transform it from what happens when you hit the delete key? What do you want to happen? What's the most discoverable for every user? How do we make sure they're accessible? But my goodness, was it complicated. I think we're happy with where we landed, but it was an adventure. STEPH: I'll be honest, that's something that I haven't given as much thought to. But I guess that's also I just haven't worked with that lately in terms of a particular library that then masks those inputs. So I'm curious, which library were using before, and then which one did you switch to? CHRIS: That's a critical piece of information that I have left off here. So for the previous one, we were using one called svelte-input-mask, which, again, part of the fun here is you want to have bindings into whatever framework that you're using. So svelte-input-mask is what we were using before. We have now moved on to using iMask, which is not like the thing you wear on your face, but it is the letter I so like igloo, Mike, et cetera, I-M-A-S-K, iMask. And so that is a lower-level library. There are bindings to other things. But for TypeScript and other reasons, we ended up implementing our own bindings in Svelte, which was actually relatively straightforward. Again, big fan of Svelte; it's a wonderful little framework. But that is what we're using now, and it is excellent. It's got a lot of features. We ended up using it in a slightly more simple version or implementation. It's got a lot of bells and whistles and configurations. We went up the middle with it. But yeah, we're on iMask, which also led to a very entertaining moment where it was interacting with our test suite in an interesting way. And so, one of the developers on the team searched for Capybara iMask. [laughs] And I forget exactly how it happened, but if you Google search that, for some reason, the internet thinks an iMask is a thing that goes over your mouth. And so it's a Capybara, like the animal, facemask. It's very confusing, but this got dropped into our Slack at one point, someone being like, "I searched for Capybara iMask, and it got weird, everybody." So yeah, that was a fun, little side quest that we got to go on. STEPH: [laughs] I just Googled it as you told me to, and it's adorable. Yeah, it's a face mask, and it has a little capybara cartoon on the front of it. Yeah, there are many of these. [laughs] CHRIS: When I think of an iMask, though, it's the thing that you put over your eyes to block the light if you want to sleep. But they're like, an iMask like, a mask that still keeps her eyes outside of it. I don't understand the internet. It's a weird place. STEPH: I think that was just Google saying Capybara iMask. Nope, don't know I, so let's put together Capybara mask, and that's what you got back. [laughs] CHRIS: I guess, yeah. It's just a Capybara mask. And I'm projecting the ‘I' because I phonetically heard that for a while. Anyway, yes. But yeah, masked inputs so complicated. STEPH: This is adorable. I feel like there should be swag for when people move. Like when people find things like this, this is the type of thing that then I stash and then wait for their anniversary at the company, and then I send it to them to remind them of this time that we had together. [laughs] There was also a moment where you said, ‘I.' You were explaining I as in in the letter I, not E-Y-E for eyemask. And you said igloo, and my brain definitely short-circuited for a minute to be like, did he just say igloo? Why did he say igloo? And it took me a minute to, oh, he's helping phonetically say that this is for the letter I. CHRIS: Yep. The NATO phonetic alphabet that if you don't explain that that's what you're doing, now I'm just naming random other objects in the world. Sorry. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And that's why I cut myself off halfway through. I'm like, now you're just naming stuff. This isn't helping. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Yes, the letter I, the letter M. [laughs] STEPH: All of that was a delightful journey for me, and I was curious. I'm glad you brought the test because I was curious if y'all are testing if things are getting obscured, but it sounds like y'all are, which is what helped give you confidence as you were switching over to the new library. CHRIS: Yeah, although to name it, we're not testing at a terribly low level. This is a great example of where I believe in feature specs. Like, within our Capybara feature spec, we are saying, and then as a user, I type in this value into the input. And critically, although this input needs to have special formatting and presentational behavior, it should functionally be identical. And so it was a very good litmus test of does this just work? And then, actually, our feature specs ended up in a race condition, which is just an annoying situation where Capybara moves so quickly that it represented a user. But as we were having that conversation, I was like, wait a minute; I know that users are slower than a computer. But is this actually an edge case that's real that we need to think about? And I think we did end up slightly changing our implementation. So our feature specs did, in a way, highlight that. But mostly, our feature specs did not need to change to adapt to and then fill in the formatted input. It was just fill in the input with the value. And that did not change at all, but it did put a tiny bit of pressure on our implementation to say, oh, there is a weird, tiny, little race condition here. Let's fix that. And so we did race conditions, no fun at all. STEPH: Interesting. Okay, so y'all aren't actually testing. Like, there's no test that says, "Hey, that when someone types into this field, that then there should be this different UI that's present because then we are obscuring the text that they're putting into this field." It was, as you mentioned, we're just testing that we changed over libraries, and everything still works. So then do you just go through that manual test of, then you go to staging, and then you test it that way? CHRIS: Yeah, that's a great question, yes, although as you say it, it's interesting. I guess there's a failure mode here or that our test suite does not enforce that the formatting masking behavior is happening. But it does test that the value goes through this input, gets submitted to the server, turns into the right type of value in the back end, all of that. And so I guess this is an example of how I think about testing, like, that's the critical bit, and then it's a nicety. It's an enhancement that we have this masking behavior. But if that broke, as long as the actual flow of data is still working, that can't break in a way that a user can't use. It sort of reminds me of the Mitch Hedberg joke, an escalator can never break, and it can only become stairs. And so I'm in that mindset here where a masked input that you have proper feature spec coverage around can never quote, unquote, "break." It can just become a plain text input. STEPH: I love how much that resonates with me. And I now know that when I'm writing tests, I'm going to think back to Mitch Hedberg and be like, oh, but is it broken-broken, or is it just now stairs? Because that's often how I will think of feature specs and how low level I will get with them. And this is on that boundary of like, yes, it's important that we want to obscure that data that someone's typing in, but it's not broken if it's not obscured. So there's that balance of I don't really want to test it. Someone will alert us. Like if that breaks, someone will alert us, and it's not the end of the world. It's just unfortunate. But if they can't sign in or they can't actually submit the form, that's a big problem. So yes, I love this comparison now of is it actually broken, or is it just stairs? [laughs] As a guideline for, how much should we test at this feature level or test in general? What should we care about? CHRIS: I feel like this is a deep truth that I believed for a long time. And I think I probably, somewhere in the back of my head, connected it to this joke. But I feel really good that I formally made that connection now because I feel like it helps me categorize this whole thing. Sorry for the convenience as a joke. And so yeah, that's where we're at. STEPH: For anyone that's not familiar with the comedian Mitch Hedberg, we'll be sure to include a link to that particular joke because it's delightful. And now it's connected to tech, which makes it just even more delightful. CHRIS: I only understand anything by analogy, especially humorous analogy. So this is just critical to my progression as a developer and technologist. STEPH: Yeah, I've learned over the years that there are two ways that I retain knowledge: it either caused me pain, or it made me laugh. Otherwise, it's mundane, and it gets filtered out. Laughter is, of course, my favorite. I mean, pain sticks with me as well. But if it's something that made me laugh, I just know I'm far more likely to retain it, and it's going to stick with me. Mid-Roll AD: And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Studio 3T. When you're developing applications, it can often be a chore to work with your underlying data. Studio 3T equips you with a complete set of tools to work with MongoDB data. From building queries with drag and drop, to creating complex aggregation pipelines, Studio 3T makes it easy. And now, there's Studio 3T Free, a free edition of Studio 3T, which delivers an essential core of tools. This means you can get started, for free, with Studio 3T Free, and when you're ready, you can upgrade and enjoy even more features through Studio 3T Pro and Studio 3T Ultimate. The different editions unlock more tools and additional integrations with MongoDB, SQL, Oracle, and Sybase. You can start today by downloading Studio 3T Free, which also includes a 30-day free trial of all the features of Studio 3T Ultimate, so you can try out some of the enterprise features as well. No credit card required. To start your trial, head to studio3t.com/free. That's studio3t.com/free. CHRIS: On that wonderful framing there, I think we should wrap up. What do you think? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeee!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
325: Pranting

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 8, 2022 35:12


Steph is super excited about changing her schedule to dedicate a full day to focus on being a great team lead. Chris talks about his continued adventures in the world of hiring. Together they answer a listener question about what they consider a “large” table in a database and how they review schema changes. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Services down? New Relic (https://newrelic.com/bikeshed) offers full stack visibility with 16 different monitoring products in a single platform. ClickHouse (https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse) Timescale (https://www.timescale.com/) InfluxDB (https://www.influxdata.com/) ddl-partitioning (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-partitioning.html) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: STEPH: I just feel like every time I listen to Celine Dion, there are lots of dramatic hand gestures that have to go with it. CHRIS: Yep, definitely that. I'm strong team Power of Love. STEPH: Ooh, yeah, yeah, that's a good one. CHRIS: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. Oh, I have some exciting news. I am changing up my schedule. It is going to start next week, where as a team lead at thoughtbot, we have been working on finding ways that we can have more time to invest into the team and team-specific initiatives. And most of us spend four days billing on client work, and then we have investment day, which is delightful. But we're finding as team leads, that's really not enough time to then have the impact that we want in terms of supporting our team and then also having time for mentorship and all the other things that go along with being a team lead and one on ones. So we have been incrementally working towards reducing billing. So team leads only bill three days a week, and then they have an additional day to really focus on being a great team lead. And I start that new schedule, that new-new schedule next week, and I couldn't be more excited. I think it's going to be wonderful. I do think there are some challenges that go with it in terms of really balancing, at least this is from the others who have gone before me where they then find it a bit harder in terms of client expectations of saying, "Well, I was billing four days, and I had a larger impact on the codebase and the team. Now I'm dropping to three days. I still need to stay within that constraint. And I want to keep the client team happy." So that seems to be a thing. But I will find out next week how it goes. CHRIS: Well, I'm very excited for you. That sounds wonderful, frankly. The balancing of the client expectations and then there's sort of now three slices to your work, which there always were, but now you have it delineated in an interesting way. Do you have specific plans for the team lead? So let's say now, nominally, there's one day a week that is dedicated to team lead time. Do you have ideas of what that looks like? Are you planning to pair with your team? Is it longer one on ones? I don't want to seed the question too much with potential answers. So what are you thinking about there? STEPH: [laughs] Ideas are great. And yes, so I think number one is structure. So right now, one on ones and any support that I need to provide others is more ad hoc, or at least the one on ones those are not ad hoc; they are structured. But they are spread out throughout the week, and then I just context switch between client work and then checking in with others. Now I can stagger everything on a Thursday or whichever day is going to be my really focused team lead day. So that way, I have all the one on ones on that day. And then yes, I can have more time to pair. So I can say, hey, let's just schedule every other week where you and I hang out, and we pair for an hour, and it can be on their client work. It can be on anything that they'd like to work on. Or, if there's a particular topic they'd like to talk about, we can pair on consulting issues or discussions. But yes, ultimately, I'd love to do more pairing and then structure one on ones to a specific day and essentially, just really protect that time. Because right now, it feels that client initiatives and work always come first, and then team lead comes second. And I'm excited to balance that more so they have equal priority. CHRIS: Yeah, that sounds great. I'm super intrigued to see what specific structures fall out of it and how you're experiencing it. I'll be interested to hear how investment time changes for you as a result of this because I remember when I started in the management role, four days a week billing, and then one day a week of investment time. But the investment time then basically went to one on ones and other things like that. And when I switched to a three-day week, I was able to reclaim some amount of investment time. And it was interesting having that open back up and have that be a consideration. Because definitely one on ones and things like that I think firmly fit within the idea of investment time or investing in the organization and whatnot. But still, there's the like; I'm going to go explore a new framework or something like that that also certainly fits within investment time. So I'll be interested to hear if you find that changes in sort of a specific way. STEPH: Yeah, I'm really interested in that as well. Because right now, as you mentioned, my investment activities are really focused more around the team and other folks and then Bike Shed. Bike Shed is a really big investment time activity. So I've noticed since becoming a co-host for the show, I talk a lot about code, but I don't necessarily contribute to open-source projects or other internal projects at the rate that I used to. It's now more focused about here and being a co-host and talking about all the things, and that requires some prep for me. So I'm also interested to see if this will shift my investment time a bit where I do find a little more time to code and then explore just things that I'm interested in. But in the experiment of doing something new, it's always important to then have a way to measure is this a good change? Is this a bad change? So we have been checking in with team leads to say, "Hey, we've changed your schedule to where you're billing one day less. How's that going for you?" Because there's the assumption that this will be great, but you really have to check in with folks to find out. So Edward Loveall has been sending out a helpful survey and checking in to say, "Hey, how are you feeling about your client work? How are you feeling about your team lead responsibilities? How are you feeling about investment time?" So then you can track your own growth and see is this really helping me? Is this really going in the right direction, or am I just more stressed about everything now? So that's helpful that we are also just looking back to make sure that this is supporting the initiatives that we said it would support. But that's some of the newness in my world. What's going on in your world? CHRIS: What's going on in my world? Continued adventures in the world of hiring. So we've got a couple of people in the pipeline now. We've got some folks in the technical interview phase, which we're structuring our technical interview very much inspired by the thoughtbot interview. So it's a pairing session as well as some code review, which is great because I think it's really representative of the actual work that we do. I believe strongly in not having an interview that is trivia or anything of that sort of thing. I want to see folks at their best as opposed to finding the rough edges. Because I think it's critical to have an interview that really represents the work that we're doing and then also gives candidates an opportunity to show themselves at their best as opposed to trying to hunt out gaps in knowledge or things like that because I think it's easier to shore up a gap of knowledge. But I really want to know what is this person like when they're firing on all cylinders? So, so far, that's going great. But hiring is a complicated long game. So it will probably be a thing that I'm talking about for some weeks to come. And if anyone out there is listening and is potentially interested in a new adventure, I would love to chat with you. Sagewell Financial is hiring. And it's a wonderful Rails codebase and lots of new opportunities, et cetera, et cetera. STEPH: As someone that has worked with you, I can absolutely vouch that you are amazing to work with. And I can only imagine the codebase must be...everything we've talked about is really interesting and stellar. So yeah, I love that you're talking about this. I think it's awesome and a great opportunity for folks to get to join Sagewell. CHRIS: Oh, thanks, Steph. That's very kind of you. But in other unrelated to hiring news, one of the things that I talked about in last week's episode was my search for a new to-do list or a new application to use. And I listed some of the ones that I've been exploring. We got more feedback about that particular segment than any other by like 2X. And there's something to be said there. Maybe the show is just living up to its name. But so many people are reaching out like, "Oh, have you looked at this one?" And to be clear, I very much appreciate all of the feedback that folks have given. And actually, it has given me a few new things to look at or ways to think about this question. But mostly, I find it very funny that even though we've dabbled in topics like agile, and is it good or bad? Or other contentious ideas [laughs] like that, somehow this idea of what to-do list application should I use by far the most engagement we've seen with our audience. STEPH: I think it makes sense. Everybody has an opinion. Like you said, we're living up to our name, which is great. Was that great? I don't know. [laughter] CHRIS: It's something, I'll say that. STEPH: It's something. But yeah, everybody has felt this pain. They get it. It resonated. But since we do have some people that shared their strategies and their thoughts, did that sway you at all? Are you still going to keep with what you have, or are you going to explore new things? CHRIS: I consider this project open. I have a project in Things, which is the current to-do list application that I'm using to explore the landscape. But it's basically like, I want to timebox it, find a version that works for me. And right now, I moved to Things, and it's fine. I'm more intrigued by the jobs to be done aspect of it. So as opposed to a particular piece of software and the features that it has or doesn't have, I really want to think about the habits and workflows that I want to make easier and more repeatable. So particularly, each day, I want to wrap up by cleaning everything up. I like my inbox zero, as you probably know, so doing a little bit of that, and then planning the next day. So I want to have a tool that supports that idea of I want to queue up what I'm going to do in the morning so that tomorrow morning when I start back up, I have a very clear list of things to do. And I can just dive in with what I find to be some of my best thinking time early in the morning. Similarly, I want to be able to review on a regular basis and know if things are getting stale or overdue. So there are a couple of different workflows that I'm really focusing on. And it's unfortunate because then I look at each piece of software, and I'm like, well, you kind of support this but not totally. So I'm more in a collecting phase right now. I'm thinking about the workflows that I want to have and then finding the different tools and comparing them across those. But the one thing that I have done at this point is I wrote a little Siri shortcut I think is the name for it. They're called Shortcuts is the name of the application, but if I try and Google that, Google doesn't really know what I'm talking about. They think I'm talking about my phone, but I'm not talking about my phone. I'm talking about my actual computer, but it's little workflow automation stuff on OS X. And so I have a shortcut now that prompts me for the amount of time, and it defaults to 45 minutes. And then, it will turn on Do Not Disturb for 45 minutes, minimize Slack, because I can't be trusted, and turn on a particular Spotify playlist. And then there's a little menu bar application that...I wrote a tiny bit of AppleScript; I found it on the internet and actually read it, that finds the top task in my to-do list and puts it in the menu bar. And so now I have all of that. I push a magic button, and I say, "Yes, so I would like to work for 45 minutes on the thing that is at the top of my to-do list.” And then all of the noise of the world goes away for 45 minutes or however long I say. STEPH: I think you just created the next new hot to-do app. [laughs] This sounds like something that I need and love, especially when you're like, it autoplays a playlist for you and shuts down the world and then has you focus. Yeah, I like this. I think this also rings a bell. I feel like Momentum, or something also has similar prompts. But this sounds delightful. CHRIS: If we're being honest, it's an absolute hodgepodge of a kludge. You have some weird shell scripts and some AppleScripts. And I had to install a weird command-line utility for Spotify to make it happen. But it was one of those like; I'm spent at the end of the day. I just want to tweak on some piece of code. And this was a perfect, productive distraction, is how I would describe it. And when I've used that, I've been very happy. I know the days that I actually lean into that mode of working are better days. The days where I allow myself to be distracted by Slack throughout the day, although I'm responsive to certain questions, things are not moving as well as they should. And so, I'm trying to be really intentional with having more of these Do Not Disturb sessions throughout the day. I feel bad saying that. I shouldn't because we all should be in agreement that this is the way that we work. But even saying that, I'm like, I'm not that special. I should be reachable, right? [laughs] But I should take even just a short 45-minute break to focus on the work that I actually need to do. It's a struggle. STEPH: I have struggled with that where I used to always feel such an urgent need that I had to respond to someone as soon as they messaged me. But over time, I've learned that one, things typically aren't as urgent as I will feel that they are. And then two, if you have that type of environment where people aren't expected to just immediately reply to stuff, then you learn to write things in a way that says, "Hey, when you see this, and here's context, and here are the things that I'm looking for. And here's an easy way for you to give feedback." It just improves the overall communication. I could go on a rant about this. I think we've actually ranted about this before in a very positive way. [laughs] Yes, I think that's great that you are fighting the good fight and turning off the world for 45 minutes to focus on a task. CHRIS: What's a positive rant? I feel like there's got to be a word for that. [laughs] But I'm trying to try and come up with that. A celebration isn't...is this one of those gaps in language where we don't have a word for a positive rant? STEPH: Oh, this is going to bother me. [laughs] There's got to be something for a positive rant. CHRIS: Well, I'm sure German has...some Scandinavian language or German has a more specific version of when one goes off on a rant for many hours about things that they love and are joyous about in the world or something like that. But maybe English is just lacking this, or maybe this is a market opportunity. And we can coin the word, and then it's ours. STEPH: I think it's just praise or accolades, although that doesn't feel strong enough. Rant feels like such an emotional word that I agree praise doesn't feel strong enough. CHRIS: It's also spacious. You don't just rant, and it's one word. It's not just like one swear that you yell in the word. No, it's this long rambling thing, and I want that but positive. Maybe it's just called The Bike Shed [laughter] because I think that might be what we do. STEPH: I love that. I'm trying to smash it together, and all that I can come up with is prant, so that leads with a P. CHRIS: Yeah, I went there real quick. [laughter] Portmanteau is where I spend most of my time. But prant is just not enough. Okay, we're going to take this offline. I think we should come up with a word. This is our market opportunity. I don't know that we'll make a lot off of this, but we'll have a word then. STEPH: It's okay. Free things are good. Oh my goodness, this is going to be so trivial and silly. But I've been playing Wordle as the rest of the world has. If you're not playing Wordle, check it out. [laughs] It's delightful. And it's free. But I started playing without really researching who created it and didn't have all of the details behind it. And then it was earlier this week I found out that the creator of Wordle is Josh Wardle. And that just blew my mind and made me so happy that it just had that alliteration and similarity. And I just hadn't put it together until that moment. And it was just this wonderful, happy bubble of a moment where I was like, oh, that's delightful. [laughs] And I'm pretty sure I texted some people who were like, "Yeah, yeah, we know that." [laughs] CHRIS: Yes, that was a wonderful positive rant or prant as it were there. And Wordle really is just such a delightful phenomenon that popped out of nowhere and is given away for free by the kindness of Josh Wardle. So yeah, wonderful things on the internet. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. CHRIS: We have a listener question this week. Once again, just as a reminder, everyone, we love getting these listener questions. Feel free to send them into hosts@bikeshed.fm or ping Steph or I on Twitter or any number of different ways. There's, I think, a form that you can go to the website, lots of different ways to ask us your questions. But again, we really love them. They let us have more pointed topics to talk about, such as today's topic, which is "What do you consider a quote, unquote, "large table" in a database?" Which is an interesting question, I think. And so, let me read the question here. "Hey, Steph and Chris, I've listened to you (and most of your predecessors) for a while now. I've really been enjoying the conversational style about your actual development struggles." Thank you so much. This comes from Matt, by the way. "Anyway, something Chris said in Episode 301 triggered a thought for me around large tables and databases and handling them for development tasks. What do you consider a quote, "large table" in a database? What questions/considerations come to mind when you're doing PR work that has a database interaction in it? We recently needed to delete a lot of rows out of a large table, and the team has a lot of discussion around how to handle it without impacting our production users. Curious on your thoughts. Thanks." So, Steph, what do you think? What's a large database table in your mind? STEPH: So I don't have a scientific answer for that, but I can give you my gut instinct. So typically, if there's a table that has a million or more records, I'll refer to that table as a large table. And then, if a table has around half a million records, then I start to be more cautious about data changes and how I'm rolling out schema changes. So that's my very loose; this is my feeling of when we're getting into large territory. How about you? Do you have more of a concrete answer? CHRIS: I don't. And I think it would actually, in a lot of cases, be defined based on the database system that we're working with and, frankly, the RAM available on that system. There are two different sides of it; one is on the right side, like, how quickly are we inserting data into this table? And how quickly is it growing? Is probably a better question. Maybe there's a ton of data in it, but it's not growing that quickly. And so, we don't need to worry about any runaway characteristics. The other side of it is how easily can we read from it? And that is the one that's going to be RAM-constrained. Where can we maintain an index efficiently? Can we query effectively and use RAM and whatnot? So a million starts to become an interesting number, probably. But I've worked on plenty of databases where hundreds of millions of rows existed, and we've got efficient indices in place and enough RAM that the database just happily works with that, and there are no problems. So really, it's a question of like, if we start thinking about having to need to delete data, then that's a large table. If we have one table that is wildly larger than the others in the system, then that is something that I'll keep an eye on. I want to make sure, like, how's that table doing? How's the special table doing? And often, there is one or two special tables similar to the idea of god objects within a system where these are the one or two classes that have just method after method after method after method. Similarly, there are one or two database tables that often have the lion's share of the data within the system. And so those are the ones that I'm really focused on. And especially as we get closer to the RAM limit, there's this drop-off that I've seen happen where a system is like, it's fine. We got 250 gigs of RAM; there's no problem. And our database is only 100 gigs. And then a couple of weeks later, suddenly, had a bunch of new users sign up, and suddenly, your data and your indices no longer fit in memory. And now we're paging to disk, and suddenly the performance characteristics of your system just tank. And so it's that sort of thing. Watching growth rates is perhaps more important than the absolute size of any individual table. So yeah, those are some loose thoughts. STEPH: I like how you used the word interesting. I think that's a nice replacement for the word large. When we get around a million records, things start getting more interesting in how we're rolling out schema changes. And then there's also you touched on usage, which aligns well with I often don't think so much about how many records that we have in a table. But what's the usage of that table? How many queries or transactions are being executed against that table? Is this a very popular table like the users table? And will running a migration that renders that table inaccessible for a couple of seconds will that be problematic, or is this a table that we write to a lot, but we don't read from very often? And even if it runs a couple of seconds, it's not likely to have an impact on people using the application. So that's one area I tend to think about first is what's the popularity of this table? And how cautious do I need to be in making sure that we don't block other people from accessing this data? I also really like how Matt asked the question about what considerations come to mind when you're doing PR work that has a database interaction? That's one of those areas that, honestly, I lean pretty heavily on Strong Migrations to remind me how I can rewrite a migration to avoid or to transfer a blocking operation to a non-blocking operation. So a really good example is setting a NOT NULL constraint on an existing column. I know that it can be very blocking if you try to do that by default when you first run it, and I will look it up every time. I will check Strong Migrations and say, "Hey, I know you've got some really great docs that will walk me through about adding a check constraint instead," and then making sure that I can then add this new column. So going forward, for inserts and updates will apply the default, but it doesn't validate all the existing data. It's also a really good reminder, that particular example, is start with stricter constraints because it's a lot easier to remove a constraint than to add one later. So that's one consideration that comes to mind. I also think the fail fast and fail loudly applies nicely here. So if I'm looking at a PR that is making a schema change, then I want to validate that the application has low timeout values so that way if a migration does take more than 30 seconds to run, then the migration will timeout. And then that will alert the developer to say, "Hey, do you need to think of a new approach or see if there's a way to improve this?" Versus if that migration didn't timeout, then that timeout is going to become user-facing as they start to experience problems with the site. And then also looking for more performant methods so using findnbatches, update all, delete all, just checking for the more performant ways that we can update large sets of data. Those are, I think, the top things that I really look for. How about you? CHRIS: Yeah, I think very similar to everything you just said. And broadly, there's a point in time that happens frankly pretty early on in the growth of an application and the data set behind it where you need to start behaving differently with regard to migrations. There's a small period of time where I can just get away with anything. I actually really love the part before we have any actual users where I'm like, oh, we need to change this fundamentally. I'm just going to drop the table and rebuild it because it's easier than trying to think about how to migrate this data. But so quickly, you get into a place where it's like, nope, sorry, can't do that have to treat this as realistic. So a bunch of the strategies that you're describing, like indexes concurrently, is one of the things that I'll reach for often because that allows me to decouple the timing there and not...again, the migration timeout that you're talking about is absolutely something that I want to have. Migration should go through quickly, and if they can't, then we need a different approach. Maybe we need to introduce the new column right to that one in parallel to the existing column, and then eventually do a switchover. It's definitely more work and involves a couple of deploys to get that done, but that's the unfortunate reality that we have to move to. I will say one of the things we talked about is like, if we hit that timeout, then we're going to stop that migration. This is a critical feature that I rely on deeply at Postgres, which is that schema migrations or DDL transformations; if I'm saying that correctly, I'm not sure I am, but throwing an acronym out there, it'll be fun. This is actually one feature of Postgres that I really rely on. My understanding is that Postgres has this; MySQL does not, but I may be off. I know that Postgres has transactional DDL transformation, so schema migration sort of things. I'm adding a column; I'm removing a column, et cetera. Those inherently happen within a transaction, and that's wonderful because if they do timeout, we want to be in a consistent state. The worst thing I can possibly imagine is being like, we got halfway through, but then we failed, or we lost connection, and so it's half migrated. It's like, oh God, I want to trust my database deeply. That's sort of one of the fundamental things that I have. And I've, over time, pushed more and more into the database and saying let's have check constraints. Let's have null true and all of these sorts of things so that the data in my database can be deeply trustworthy. The idea that a schema migration could go awry, and suddenly we've got like, well, half of the rows have these extra columns. What does that even mean? How do you live in that world? So I love this feature of Postgres. I really rely on it. I feel very bad whenever I have to disable it. I think there are some enum-related things that require disabling DDL transactions. And whenever I type that in a migration, I'm like, I don't like this. I'm not happy about this, but it's the world we live in for now. STEPH: If we're sharing our truths, yeah, adding an index concurrently also you have to remove that DDL transaction and disable it. For a previous project that I was working on, we often ran into that timeout where we'd run a migration, and then it would timeout. And we would then just specify and be like, "Hey, for this migration, I'm going to bump you up to a minute. I'm just going to make it longer." And that felt questionable at times, but I at least appreciate the explicitness of it where you're making that decision to say, nope, I think this is fine. It's not going to impact anybody, or we're going to run it in off-hours. I do want to extend this to a minute, and then make sure you do reset it, so it doesn't affect it globally from there on out. But that's something that you can do, and I have done before, which I feel is important. You still want to know some of your outs in case you do need something like that just to fix things in a moment but then at least be intentional for when you're using it and then communicate to the team like, "Hey, I'm doing this and let me know if you have concerns about it." For this specific scenario that Matt provided about we recently needed to delete a lot of old rows out of a large table, and the team had a lot of discussion about how to handle this without impacting production users; I happened to have a really nice conversation with Steve Polito, a fellow thoughtboter, about this particular question. And he had a very thoughtful response that I hadn't considered where he suggested starting with deleting the data for a small set of records. So, for example, if you're working with a users table, you could scope the data deletion to only inactive users and then use a feature flag to disable any interactions that would be affected by that data loss, run that change to delete the data for those inactive users, and then check for unexpected errors or side effects. So then that way, you have this moment to pause to say, "Hey, did we forget something? Is there something about this application that's still relying on that data that we forgot about? We've only done it for a small amount of users, so we're in a safer space." So then, at that point, you can either repeat those steps for another batch of records or use that feedback to then drop the column with confidence. And that was an approach that I hadn't considered, but I really liked that idea. CHRIS: Yeah, it's a nice, I'd say methodical approach to what can be a very complex and difficult to wrangle task. I will say I haven't actually explored this too much, but I've always had in the back of my mind, like, if we're deleting data from the application, ideally, we're saying this data is no longer needed. But I wonder if using table partitioning is an alternative that can be useful in these cases. What if we're able to figure out the correct partitioning? It's often time series sort of stuff. What if we're able to lean into that and say, "Let's partition this by year." And then yeah, we don't use the old data anymore, but it lives in a separate partition. And therefore, I think Postgres is able to do reasonable things with that. And again, like disk space, we can have a lot more storage on disk, but RAM is really going to be the constraining factor of how much of the index fits in memory. And again, I haven't pushed on this. But I think that's an alternative approach that can be really interesting. But if we do have time-series data, in particular, Postgres is wonderful. But it's not necessarily honed exactly to that use case. And so, there are a couple of tools that I've kept an eye on right now: ClickHouse, Timescale, and InfluxDB being the three of them. And I think most if not all of them are based on Postgres, but then they build on top of it. And they add some deeper understandings of time series data and how to optimize querying and storing, and all of that. And so, is that an alternative that allows us to still stay in this world but then have a different approach and alleviate some of the burdens that might come with this heavy data that we have? STEPH: Yeah, all those sound interesting. I haven't heard of some of those. This is why I love chatting with you. You always bring interesting perspectives that I had not considered before, like the partitioning. Just to clarify, partitioning the data is a way of keeping that data, but then it's not indexed. So that way, your system isn't spending as much time making sure that data is easily readable. But then that way, you don't actually delete it, so then it's there should you wish to be like, oh, I wish I hadn't gotten rid of that data. CHRIS: I think so. I'll be honest; I don't deeply understand it. But I think you basically can say given a giant projects table within your system; we actually may have that logically grouped by user sort of thing. And so we can shard and partition and say, there are ten different buckets of these. And if we optimize it well such that all of the things that are logically together actually live together on disk, then it allows Postgres to be much more efficient. Similarly, with time-series data, then you can say, use this sort of windowing where it's each month, we get a new bucket. And then it's much easier to query across just that bucket because it's already sort of partitioned down in that way. But I'll be honest; I'm now speaking well past my actual knowledge. I've never actually worked with it. But it's one of those things that I have in the back of my mind. Like if all of my other tools fail me and if I cannot solve these performance problems in a Postgres system with indexes, and tuning, and other things like that, then I will look to partitioning. So I look forward to that day when the data problems are so massive that I need to table partition. STEPH: Got it. Like they say, it's a good problem to have. While adding to the list of tools, there's one that I discovered recently; it's called Safe PG Migrations. And it's very similar to Strong Migrations, where Strong Migrations will warn you and say, "Hey, this is not safe. There are other ways to write this migration." Safe PG Migrations take some more aggressive approach and will rewrite your migration to be a safer version. And I don't know how I feel about it. I love it, and I hate it. [laughs] It's one of those the magic is there, and that could be phenomenal. But I get squeamish when things want to rewrite something as important as my migrations. But on the other hand, it is like a really nice default for the team because it's more than a warning. So that way, if you're trying to put something more strict in place for people to follow, then this would be a good way to do that. CHRIS: I'm very intrigued by that as a tool because if it were obvious, then Postgres would do it. The team behind Postgres does absolutely amazing work. And so if I tell them, "This is the change I want to make to the system," and they're like, "Cool, we're going to do that super inefficiently," and someone else is like, "No, no, no, I can trick it." Postgres is good at tricking itself, is my stance. So I'd be intrigued as to what secret knowledge they have or what are their caveats where Postgres has to handle every possible edge case. And therefore, it's slower because of pessimistic concerns that it has. But this tool says, "No, no, as long as you're not doing this very terrible thing, you're fine. And we'll rewrite it to a safer, faster version." But I'm just kind of intrigued, like, why do you think you're better than Postgres? STEPH: [laughs] Why do you think you're better? Well, I do you have an example I can provide. It's one that they have on their README. And this one highlights that if you're adding a column to an existing table and that you're adding a default value and no constraint, then they show you how it's rewritten where they set explicitly the lock timeout, and then they will add the column. And then they will set the default value but not in a way that it's going to do a table scan where it's going to add it for all the existing records; it's going to be for new records. And then they, let's see, they also update the users in batches to then set a default value, and then they will reset the statement timeout because it looks like they are...yeah, because initially, they change it, so they're resetting it to an original value. And then, they set the column Null constraint. I know I just said a lot of things reading from their README. But they have a good example here that kind of highlights that this is how they rewrite it. So I do find that more reassuring as long as I can then see how it was rewritten, and then I can validate it and confirm it with what I think is appropriate. Then I still have full control. Then it's more of a hey, we rewrote this thing for you. Feel free to review it and then change it as you see fit. As long as I have that final authority, then that makes me feel better about this. CHRIS: Got it. That makes sense. And the thing that you're describing, I think, is a semantically different thing than the first migration where it's like, do this thing. And they're like, well, okay, you could. But if instead, you did X, Y, and Z, then it would go way faster and be way easier. That makes a lot of sense. And it feels like shared knowledge wrapped up into a tool which I'm always a fan of that. STEPH: Yeah, in general, when I think about general strategies for schema changes, there are really three areas that come to mind or three strategies that come to mind. The first one is that we take incremental steps to avoid blocking reads and writes to the table, which then allows you to deploy during business hours or off business hours. That often means just more manual steps that you have to take to make sure that it's safe. And then the other one is scheduling downtime to run a migration. That is a very real option, something that you can do. Or have a fancy setup that utilizes followers for seamless migrations and upgrades. I feel like that's like the three big buckets that you can fit your strategy within. And it just depends on the needs of your application and users as to which one of those you're ready for or which strategy you need to use. What do you think? Are there any other big buckets that I left out of that list? CHRIS: No, I think we covered a bunch there. Hopefully, that was useful. Hopefully, it, I don't know, maybe introduced folks to some new ideas or ways to think about this sort of work. And yeah, with that, shall we wrap up? STEPH: Yeah, I've still got my Wordle to play for the day. So let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeeeeeee!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
322: Toxic Traits

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 18, 2022 35:21


Happy New Year (for real)! Chris and Steph both took some end-of-year time off to rest and recharge. Steph talks about some books she enjoyed, recipes she tried, and trail-walking adventures with her dog, Utah. Chris' company is now in a good position to actually start hiring within the engineering team. He's excited about that and will probably delve into more around the hiring process in the coming weeks. Since they aren't really big on New Year's Eve resolutions, Steph and Chris answer a listener question regarding toxic traits inspired by the listener question related to large pull requests and reflect on their own. The Midnight Library by Matt Haig (http://www.matthaig.com/books/midnight-library/) Tim Urban on Twitter (https://twitter.com/waitbutwhy/status/1367871165319049221) How to Stop Time by Matt Haig (http://www.matthaig.com/how-to-stop-time/) Do the Next Right Thing (https://daverupert.com/2020/09/do-the-next-right-thing/) Debugging Why Your Specs Have Slowed Down (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/debugging-why-your-specs-have-slowed-down) test-prof (https://github.com/test-prof/test-prof) Tests Oddly Slow Might Be Bcrypt (https://collectiveidea.com/blog/archives/2012/11/12/tests-oddly-slow-might-be-bcrypt) Transcript: STEPH: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: What's new in my world? Well, spoiler, we actually may have lied in a previous episode when we said, "Hey, happy New Year," because, for us, it was not actually the new year. But this, in fact, is the first episode of the new year that we're recording, that you're hearing. Anyway, this is enough breaking the fourth wall. Sorry, listener. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Inside baseball, yadda, yadda. I'm doing great. First week back. I took some amount of vacation over the holidays, which was great, recharging, all those sorts of things. But now we're hitting the ground running. And I'm actually really enjoying just getting back into the flow of things and, frankly, trying to ramp everything up, which we can probably talk about more in a moment. But how about you? How's your new year kicking off? STEPH: I like how much we plan the episodes around when it's going to release, and we're very thoughtful about this is going to be released for the new year or around Christmas time, and happy holidays to everybody. And then we get back, and we're like, yeah, yeah, yeah, we can totally drop the facade. [laughs] We're finally back from vacation. And this is us, and this is real. CHRIS: Date math is so hard. It just drains me entirely to even try and figure out when episodes are going to actually land. And then when we get here, also, you know, I want to talk about the fact that there was vacation and things, and the realities of the work, and the ebb and flow of life. So here we are. STEPH: Same. Yeah, I love it. Because I'm in a similar spot where I took two weeks off, which was phenomenal. That's actually sticking to one of the things we talked about, for one of the things I'm looking to do is where I take just more time off. And so having the two weeks was wonderful. It was also really helpful because the client team that I'm working with also shut down around the end of the year. So they took ten days off as well. So I was like, well, that's a really good sign of encouragement that I should also just shut down since I can. So it's been delightful. And I have very little tech stuff to share because I've just been doing lots of other fun things and reading fiction, and catching up with friends and family, and trying out new recipes. That's been pretty much my last two weeks. Oh, and walks with Utah. His training is going so well where we're starting to walk off-leash on trails. And that's been awesome. CHRIS: Wow, that's a big upgrade right there. STEPH: Yeah, we're still working on that moving perimeter so he knows how far he can go. Before then, he needs to stop and check on me. But he's getting pretty good where he'll bolt ahead, but then he'll stop, and he'll look at me, and then he'll wait till I catch up. And then he'll bolt ahead again. It's really fun. CHRIS: I like that that's the version of it that we're going for. This is not like you're going to walk alongside me on the trail; it's you're obviously going to run some distance out. As long as you check back in once every 20 feet, we're good; that's fine. Any particularly good books, or recipes, or talks with friends to go with that category? But that one's probably a little more specific to you. STEPH: [laughs] Yes. There are two really good books that I read over the holidays. They're both by the same author. So I get a lot of books from my mom. She'll often pick up a book, and once she's done with it, she'll drop it off to me or vice versa. So the one that she shared with me is called The Midnight Library. It's written by Matt Haig, H-A-I-G. And it's a very interesting story. It's a bit sad where it's about a woman who decides that she no longer wants to live. And then, when she moves in that direction to go ahead and end her life, she ends up in this library. And in the library, every time she has made a different decision or made a decision in life, then there is a new book written about what that life is like. So then she has an opportunity to go explore all of these lives and see if there's a better life out there for her. It is really interesting. I highly recommend it. CHRIS: Wow. I mean, that started with, I'm going to be honest, a very heavy premise. But then the idea that's super interesting. I would, actually...I think I might read that. I tend to just read sci-fi. This is broadly in the space, but that is super interesting. There's an image that comes to mind actually as you described that. It's from Tim Urban, who's also known as Wait But Why. I think he posts under that both on Twitter, and then I think he has a blog or something to that effect. But the image is basically like, all of the timelines that you could have followed in your life. And everybody thinks about like, from this moment today. Man, I think about all of the different versions of me that could exist today. But we don't think about the same thing moving forward in time. Like, what are all the possibilities in front of me? And what you're describing of this person walking around in a library and each book represents a different fork in the road from moving forward is such an interesting idea. And I think a positive reframing of any form of regret or looking back and being like, what if I had gone the other way? It's like, yeah, but forward in time, though. I'm very intrigued by this book. STEPH: Yeah, it's really good. It definitely has a strong It's a Wonderful Life vibe. Have you ever watched that movie? CHRIS: Yes, I have. STEPH: So there's a lot of that idea of regret. And what if I had lived differently and then getting to explore? But in it's A Wonderful Life, he just explores the one version. And in the book, she's exploring many versions. So it's really neat to be like, well, what if I'd pursued this when I was younger, had done this differently? Or what if I got coffee instead of tea? There are even small, little choices that then might impact you being a different person at a point in time. The other book that I read is by the same author because I enjoyed Midnight Library so much that I happened to see one of his other books. So I picked it up. And it's called How to Stop Time. And it's about an individual who essentially lives a very long time. And there are several people in the world that are like this, but he lives for centuries. But he doesn't age, or he ages incredibly slowly, at a rate that where say that he's 100 years old, but he'll still look 16 years old. And it's very good. It's very interesting. It's a bit more sad and melancholy than I typically like to read. So that one's good. But I will add that even though I described the first one, it has a sad premise; I found The Midnight Library a little more interesting and uplifting versus the other one I found a bit more sad. CHRIS: All right. Excellent additional notes in the reading list here. So you can opt like, do you want a little bit more somber, or do you want to go a little more uplifting? Yeah, It's a Wonderful Life path being like, starts in a complicated place but don't worry, we'll get you there in the end. STEPH: But I've learned I have to be careful with the books that I pick up because I will absorb the emotions that are going on in that book. And it will legit affect me through the week or as I'm reading that book. So I have to be careful of the books that I'm reading. [laughs] Is that weird? Do you have the same thing happen for when you're reading books? CHRIS: It's interesting. I don't think of it with books as much. But I do think of it with TV shows. And so my wife and I have been very intentional when we've watched certain television shows to be like, we're going to need something to cut the intensity of this show. And the most pointed example we had was we were watching Breaking Bad, which is one of the greatest television shows of all time but also just incredibly heavy and dark at times, kind of throughout. And so we would watch an episode of Breaking Bad. And then, as a palate cleanser, we would watch an episode of Malcolm in the Middle. And so we saw the same actor but in very different facets of his performance arc and just really softened things and allowed us to, frankly, go to bed after that be able to sleep and whatnot but less so with reading. So I find it interesting that I have that distinction there. STEPH: Yeah, that is interesting. Although I definitely feel that with movies and shows as well. Or if I watch something heavy, I'm like, great, what's on Disney? [laughs] I need to wash away some of that so I can watch something happy and go to sleep. You also asked about recipes because I mentioned that's something I've been doing as well. There's a lot of plant-based books that I've picked up because that's really my favorite type of thing to make. So that's been a lot of fun. So yeah, a lot of cooking, a lot of reading. How about you? What else is going on in your world? CHRIS: Well, actually, it's a super exciting time for Sagewell Financial, the company that I've joined. We are closing our seed financing round, which the whole world of venture capital is a novel thing that I'm still not super involved in that part of the process. But it has been really interesting to watch it progress, and evolve, and take shape. But at this point, we are closing our seed round. Things have gone really well. And so we're in a position to actually start hiring, which is a whole thing to do, in particular, within the engineering group. We're hiring, I think, throughout the company, but my focus now will be bringing a few folks into the engineering team. And yeah, just trying to do that and do that well, do that intentionally, especially for the size of the team that we have now, the sort of work that we're doing, et cetera, et cetera. But if anyone out there is listening, we are looking for great folks to join the team. We are Ruby on Rails, Inertia, TypeScript. If you've listened to the show anytime recently, you've heard me talk about the tech stack plenty. But I think we're trying to do something very meaningful and help seniors manage finance, which is a complicated and, frankly, very underserved space. So it's work that I deeply believe in, and I think we're doing a good job at it. And I hope to do even a better job over time. So if that's at all interesting, definitely reach out to me. But probably in the coming weeks, you'll hear me talk more and more about hiring and technical interviews and all of those sorts of things. I got to ramp myself back up on that entire world, which is really one of those things that you should always be doing is the thought that I have in my head. Now that I'm in a position to be hiring, I wish I'd been half-hiring for the past three months, but I'll figure it out. It'll be fine. STEPH: That's such a big undertaking. Everything you're saying resonates, but also, it's like that's a lot of hard work. So if you're not in that state of really being ramped up for hiring, I understand why that would be on the backburner. And yeah, I'm excited to hear more. I've gotten to hear some more of the product details about Sagewell, but I don't think we've really talked about those features here on the show. So I would love it if we brought some more of the feature work and talked about specifically what the application does. I am intrigued speaking of how much energy goes into hiring. Where are you at in terms of how much...like, are there any particular job boards that you're going for? Or what's your current approach to hiring? CHRIS: Oh, that's a great question. I have tweeted once into the world. I have a draft of a LinkedIn post. This is very much I'm figuring out as I go. It's sort of the nature of a startup as we have so many different things to do. And frankly, even finding the time to start thinking about hiring means I'm taking time away from building features and growing out other aspects. So it's definitely a necessary thing that we're doing at this point in time. But basically, everything we're doing is just in time compiling and figuring out what are the things that are semi-urgent right now? And to be honest, I like that energy overall. I've always had in the back of my mind that I like this sort of work and this space, especially if you can do it intentionally. It shouldn't feel like everything's on fire all the time, but it should feel like a lot of constraints that force you to make decisions quickly, which, if we're being honest, I think that's something that is not my strongest suit. So it's something that I'm excited to grow that muscle as part of this work. But so, with that in mind, at this point, my goal is to just start getting the word out there into the world that we are looking to hire and get people interested and then, from there, build out what's the interview process going to look like? I will let you know when we get there; I will. I will figure that out. But it's not something that I've...I haven't actually very intentionally thought about all of this. Because if I were to do that, it would delay the amount of time until I actually say into the world, "Hey, we're hiring." So I very purposely was like, I just need to say this into the world and then continue doing the next steps in that process. I'm prone to the perfect is the enemy of the good just trying to like, I want to have a complete plan and a 27-step checklist, and a Gantt chart, and a burndown. And before I take any first action and really trying to push back, I'm going to be like, no, no, just do something, just take a step in the right direction. There's actually a blog post that comes to mind, which is by Dave Rupert, who is a former guest on this podcast. It was wonderful getting to interview him. But he wrote a blog post. The title of it is Do the Next Right, which is a line from a song in the movie Frozen 2, I believe. He is like, all right, stick with me here. And I know this is a movie for kids, maybe. But also, this is a very meaningful song. And he framed it in a way that actually was surprisingly impactful to me. And it's that idea that I'm holding on to of you can't do it all, and you can't do it perfectly. Just do the next right thing. That's what you're going to do. So we'll link to that blog post in the show notes. But that's kind of where I'm at. STEPH: I love that. I'm looking forward to reading that because that has been huge for me. I used to be held back by that idea of perfection. But then I realized other people were getting more work done more quickly. And so I was like, huh, maybe there's something to this just doing the next thing versus waiting for perfection that is really the right path. So, how do folks reach out to you? Should they reach out to you on Twitter or email? What's best for you? CHRIS: Oh yeah, Twitter. This is all probably going to be said at the end of the show as well. But Twitter @christoomey. ctoomey.com is my blog. I'm on GitHub. I make it very easy to contact me because I haven't regretted that up to this point in my life. So basically, anywhere you find me on the internet, you will be able to email me or DM me or any of the things. I'm going to see how long I can hold on to that. I want to hold on to that forever. I want just a very open-door policy. So that's where I'm at right now, but any of those starting points. And bikeshed.fm website will somehow link to me in any of the various forums, and they're all kind of linked to each other, so any of those are fine. I will happily take inquiries via any of the channels. STEPH: Cool. Well, I'm excited to hear about how it goes. CHRIS: Me too, frankly. But in a very small bit of little tech news or tech happenings from my holiday time, this was actually just before I started to go on break for the holidays. I had noticed that the test suite was getting very slow, like very, very slow but on my machine. It was getting a little bit slow on CI, but the normal amount where we just keep adding new things. And we're adding a lot of feature specs because we want to have that holistic coverage over the whole application, and we can, so for now, we're doing that. But our spec suite had gotten up to six-ish minutes on CI and had a couple of other things. We have some linting and some TypeScript and things like that. But on my machine, it was very slow. So I hadn't run the full spec suite in a long time. But I knew that running any individual spec took surprising amounts of time. And in the back of my head, I was like; I guess I hadn't configured Spring. That seems weird. I probably would have done that, but whatever. And I'd never pushed on it more until one day I ran the specs. I ran one model spec, and it took 30 seconds or something like that. And I was like, well, that's absurd. And so I started to look into it. I did some scanning around the internet. There was a wonderful post on the Giant Robots blog about how to look through things from Mike Wenger, a wonderful former thoughtboter. Unfortunately, none of the tips in there were anything meaningful for me. Everything was as I expected it to be. So I set it down. And there were a couple of times that this happened to me where I'd be like, this is frustrating. I need to look into this a little bit more, but it was never worth investing more time. But I mentioned it in passing to one of the other developers on the team. And as a holiday gift to me, this person discovered the solution. So let me describe a little bit more of what we've got working on here. On CI, which in theory is less powerful than my new, fancy M1 MacBook, on CI, we take about six minutes for the test suite. On my computer, it was taking 28 minutes and 30 seconds. So that's what we're working with. The factories are all doing normal things. We're not creating way too many database records or anything like that. So any thoughts, anything that you would inspect here? STEPH: Ooh, you've already listed a number of good things that I would check. CHRIS: Yeah, I took all the easy ones off the list. So this is a hard question at this point. To be clear, I had no ideas. STEPH: Could you tell if there's a difference if it's like the boot-up time versus the actual test running? CHRIS: Did that check; it is not the boot-up time. It is something that is happening in the process of running an individual spec. STEPH: No, I'm drawing a blank. I can't think of what else I would check from there. CHRIS: It's basically where I was at. Let me give you one additional piece of data, see if it does anything for you. I noticed that it happened basically whenever executing any factory. So I'd watch the logs. And if I create this record, it would do roughly what I expect it to. It would create the record and maybe one or two associated records because that's how Factory Bot works. But it wasn't creating a giant cascade or waterfall of records under the hood. If we create a product, the product should have an associated user. So we'll see a product and a user insert. But for some reason, that line create whatever database record was very, very slow. STEPH: Yeah, it's a good point, looking at factories because that's something I've noticed in triaging other tests is that I will often check to see how many records are created at a certain point because I've noticed there's a test where I think only one record is created, but I'll see 20. And that's an interesting artifact. But you're not running into that. But it sounds like there's more either some callback or transaction or something that's getting hung up and causing things to be slow. CHRIS: I love those ideas. I didn't even know those were sort of ideas in the back of my head. I didn't know how to even try and chase that down. There was nothing in the logs. I couldn't see anything. And again, I just kept giving up. But again, this other developer on the team found the answer. But at this point, I'll just share the answer because I think we've run out of the good bits of the trivia. It turns out bcrypt was the answer. So password-hashing was incredibly slow on my machine. What was interesting is I mentioned this to the other developer because they also have an M1. But there are three of us working on the project. The third developer does not have the M1 architecture. So that was an interesting thing. I was like, I feel like this maybe is a thing because we're both experiencing this, but the other developer isn't. So it turns out bcrypt is wildly slow on the M1 architecture, which is sort of interesting as an artifact of like, what is password hashing, and how does it work? And in normal setups, I think the way it works is Devise will say by default, "We're going to do 12 runs of bcrypt." So like take the password, put it into the hashing algorithm, take the output, put it back into the hashing algorithm, and do that loop 12 times or whatever. In test mode, it often will configure it to just run once, but it will still use the password hashing. Turns out even that was too slow for us. So we in test mode enabled it so that the password hashing algorithm was just the password. Don't do anything. Just return it directly. Turn off bcrypt; it's too painful for us. But it was very interesting to see that that was the case. STEPH: Yeah, I don't like that answer. [laughs] I'm not a fan. That is interesting and tricky. And I feel like the only way I would have found that...I'm curious how they found it because I feel like at that point, I would have started outputting something to figure out, okay, where is the slow process? What's the thing that's taking so long to return? And if I can't see tailing the test logs, then I would start just using a PUT statement to figure out what's taking a long time? And start trying to troubleshoot from there. So I'm curious, do you know how they identified that was the core issue? CHRIS: Yes, actually. I'm looking back at the pull requests right now. And I'm mentioning that this was related to the M1 architecture, but I don't think that's actually true because the blog post that they're linking to is Collective Idea blog post: Tests Oddly Slow? Might be bcrypt. And then there's a related Rails issue. They used TestProf, which is a process that you can run that will examine, I think the stack trace and say where are we spending the most time? And from that, they were able to see it looks like it's at the point where we're doing bcrypt. And so that's the answer. As an aside, my test suite went from 28 minutes and 30 seconds to 1 minute and 30 seconds with this magical speed up. STEPH: Nice. That's a great idea, TestProf. I don't know if I've used that tool. It rings a bell. But that's an awesome sales pitch for using TestProf. CHRIS: Similarly, I don't think I'd ever use it before. But it truly was this wonderful holiday gift. Because the minute I switched over to this branch, I was like, oh my God, the tests are so fast. I have one of those fancy, new fast computers, [laughs] and now they're so fast. STEPH: Wait, you had to switch to a branch? I figured it was something that you had to do special on your machine. So I'm intrigued how they fixed it for you, and then you switched to a branch and saw the speed increase. CHRIS: So they opened a pull request. And that pull request had the change in the code. So it was a code-level configuration to say, "Hey, Devise, when you do the password hashing thing, maybe just don't, maybe be easy for a moment," [laughter] but only in the test configuration. So all I had to do was check out the branch, and then that configuration was part of the Rails helper setup, and then we were good to go from there. I added an extra let me be terrified about this because the idea of not hashing passwords in production is terrifying. So let me raise...I put a couple of different guards against like, this should only ever run in test. I know it's in the spec support directory, so it shouldn't. Let me just add some other guards here just to superduper make sure we still hash passwords in production. STEPH: Devise has a bcrypt chill mode. Good to know. [laughs] And I like all the guards you put in place too. CHRIS: Yeah, it was really frankly such a relief to get that back to normal, is how I would describe it. But yeah, that's a fun little testing, and password hashing, and little adventure that I get to go on. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: So I have something that I've been wanting to ask you, and it's not tech-related. But we can make this personal and work however we want to tackle it. But there is a previous episode where we read a listener question from Brian about their self-diagnosed toxic trait being large pull requests. And Brian was being playful with the use of the term toxic trait. But it got me thinking, it's like, well, what is my toxic trait? And it seems like a fun twist on you, and I aren't really big on New Year's Eve resolutions. And in fact, I think you and I are more like if we're interested in achieving a goal, we'd rather focus on building a habit versus this specific, ambiguous we're going to publish ten blogs this year. But rather, I'd rather sit down and write for 15 minutes each day. And it seemed like a fun twist instead of thinking about what are my toxic traits, personal, at work? Large pull request is a really fun example. So I'll let you choose. I can go first, or you can go first, but I'm excited to hear your thoughts on this one. CHRIS: I think I've been talking too much. So let's have you go first at this point/ also, I want a few more seconds to think about my toxic trait. STEPH: [laughs] All right, I have a couple. So that's an interesting point start there [laughs], but here we are. So I was even bold because I asked other people. Because I'm like, well, if I'm going to be fully self-aware, I can't just...I might lie to myself. So I'm going to have to ask some other people. So I asked other folks. And my personal toxic trait is I am tardy. I am that person who I love to show up 5, 10, 15 minutes late. It's who I am. I don't find it a problem, but it often bothers other people. So that is my informed toxic trait. That might be a strong term for it. But that's the one that gives people the most grief. CHRIS: Interesting. I do find the framing of I don't find my own tardiness to be a problem as a really interesting sort of lens on it. But okay, it's okay. STEPH: I see it as long as I'm getting really good quality time with someone; if I'm five minutes late, I'm five minutes late. I think the voice going high means I'm a little defensive. [laughs] CHRIS: But at least you're self-aware about all of these aspects. [laughs] That's critical. STEPH: I am self-aware, and most of the people in my life are also self-aware, although I do correct that behavior for work. That feels more important that I be on time for everything because I don't want anyone to feel that I am not valuing their time. But when it comes to friends and family, they thankfully accept me for who I am. But then, on the work note, I started thinking about toxic traits there. And the one I came up with is that I'm a pretty empathetic person. And there's something that I learned that's called toxic empathy. And it's when you let people's emotions hijack your own emotions, or you'll prioritize someone else's physical or mental health over your own. So, for example, it could be letting another person's anxiety and stress keep you from getting your current tasks and responsibilities done. And there's a really funny tweet that I saw where someone says, "Hey, can I vent to you about something?" And the first person telling it from their perspective they're crying in the middle of a breakdown. And they're like, "Yeah, sure, what's up?" And I felt seen by that tweet. I was like, yeah; this seems like something I would do. [laughs] So over time, as something I'm aware of about myself, I've learned to set more boundaries and only keep relationships where equal support is given to both individuals. And this circles back to the book anecdote that I shared where I had to be careful about the books that I read because they can really affect my mood based on how the characters are doing in that book. So yeah, that's mine. I have one other one that I want to talk about. But I'm going to pause there so you can go. CHRIS: Okay, fun. [laughs] This is fun. And it is a challenging mental exercise. But it is also, I don't know, vulnerable, and you have to look inside and all that. I think I poked at one earlier on as we were talking, but the idea of perfect is the enemy of the good. And I don't mean this in the terrible like; what's your worst trait in a job interview? And you're like, "I'm a perfectionist." I don't mean it in that way. I mean, I have at times struggled to make progress because so much of me wants to build the complete plan, and then very meticulously worked through in exactly the order that I define, sort of like a waterfall versus agile sort of thing. And it is an ongoing very intentional body of work for me to try and break myself off those habits to try and accept what's the best thing that I can do? How can I move forward? How can I identify things that I will regret later versus things that are probably fine? They're little messes that I can clean up, that sort of thing. And even that construing it as like there's a good choice and a bad choice, and I'm trying to find the perfect choice. It's like almost nothing in the world actually falls into that shape. So perfect is the enemy of the good is a really useful phrase that I've held onto that helps me. And it's like, aiming for that perfection will cause you to miss the good that is available. And so, trying to be very intentional with that is the work that I'm doing. But that I think is a toxic trait that I have. STEPH: I really like what you just said about being able to identify regrets. That feels huge. If you can look at a moment and say, "I really want to get all this done. I will regret if I don't do this, but the rest of it can wait," that feels really significant. So the other one that I wanted to talk about is actually one that I feel like I've overcome. So this one makes me happy because I feel like I'm in a much better space with it, but it's negative self-talk. And it's essentially just how you treat yourself when you make a mistake. Or what's your internal dialogue throughout the day? And I used to be harsh on myself. If I made a mistake, I was upset, I was annoyed with myself, and I wouldn't have a kind voice. And I don't know if I've shared this with you. But over time, I've gotten much better at that. And what has really helped me with it is instead of talking to myself in an unkind voice, I talk to myself how someone who loves me will talk to me. I'm not going to talk to a friend in a really terrible, mean voice, and I wouldn't expect them to talk to me. So I channel someone that I know is very positive and supportive of me. And I will frame it in that context. So then, when I make a mistake, it's not a big deal. And I just will say kind things to myself or laugh about it and move through it. And I found that has been very helpful and also funny and maybe a little embarrassing at times because when pairing, I will talk out loud to myself. And so I'll do something silly, and I'll laugh. I'm like, "Oh, Stephanie," that was silly. And the other person hears me say that. [laughs] So it's a little entertainment for them too, I suppose. CHRIS: Having observed it, it is charming. STEPH: It's something that I've noticed that a lot of people do, and we don't talk about a lot. I mean, there's imposter syndrome. People will talk about that. But we don't often talk about how critical we are of ourselves. It's something that I will talk to people who I highly admire and just think they're incredibly good at what they do. And then when they give me a glimpse into how they think about themselves at times or how they will berate themselves for something they have done or because they didn't sit down for that 15 minutes and write per day, then it really highlights. And I hope that if we talk about this more, the fact that people tend to have such a negative inner critical voice, that maybe we can encourage people to start filtering that voice to a more kind voice and more supportive voice, and not have this unhelpful energy that's holding us back from really enjoying our work and being our best self. CHRIS: That's so interesting to hear you say all of that for one of your traits because it's very similar to the last one for myself, which is I find that I do not feel safe unless (This is going to sound perhaps boastful, and I definitely do not mean it as boastful.) but unless I'm perfect. I guess the standard that I hold myself to versus the standard that I hold others to are wildly different. Of course, for other people, yes, bugs will get into the code, or they may misunderstand something, or they may miss communicate something, or they may forget something. But if I do that, I feel unsafe, which is a thing that I've slowly come to recognize. I'm like, well, that shouldn't be true because that's definitely not how I feel about other people. That's not a reasonable standard to hold. But that needing to be perfectly secured on all fronts and have just this very defensible like, yeah, I did the work, and it's great, and that's all that's true in the world. That's not reasonable. I'm never going to achieve that. And so, for a long time, there have been moments where I just don't feel great as a result of this, as a result of the standard that I'm trying to hold myself to. But very similarly, I have brought voices into my head. In my case, I've actually identified a board of directors which are random actual people from my world but then also celebrities or fake people, and I will have conversations with them in my head. And that is a true thing about me that I'm now saying on the internet, here we are. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And I'm going to throw it out there. It is fantastic. It is one of my favorite things that I have in my world. As a pointed example of a time that I did this, I was running a race at one point, which I occasionally will run road races. I am not good at it at all. But I was running this particular race. It was a five-mile January race a couple of years back. And I was getting towards the end, and I was just going way faster than I normally do. I was at the four-mile mark, and I was well ahead of pace. I was like, what is this? I was on track to get a personal record. I was like, this is exciting. But I didn't know if I could finish. And so I started to consult the board of directors and just check in with them and see what they would think about this. And I got weirdly emotional, and it was weirdly real is the thing that was very interesting, not like I actually believed that these people were running with me or anything of that nature. But the emotions and the feelings that I was able to build up in that moment were so real and so powerful and useful to me that it was just like, oh, okay, yeah, that's a neat trick. I'm going to hold on to that one. And it has been continuously useful moving forward from that of like, yeah, I can just have random conversations with anyone and find useful things in that and then use that to feel better about how I'm working. STEPH: I so love this idea. And I'm now thinking about who to put on my board of directors. [laughs] CHRIS: I'm telling you, everybody should have one. As I'm saying this, there is definitely a portion of me that is very self-conscious that I'm saying this on the internet because this is probably one of the weirdest things that I do. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: But it is so valuable. And it's one of those like; I like getting over that hump of like, well, this is an odd little habit that I have, but the utility that I get from it and the value is great. So highly recommend it. It's a fun game of who gets to go on your board. You can change it out every year. And it is interesting because the more formed picture that you have of the individual, the more you can have a real conversation with them, and that's fun. STEPH: So, as I'm working on forming a board of directors, how do you separate? Is it based on one person is running work and one is finance? How does each person have a role? CHRIS: So there are no rules in this game. [laughs] This is a ridiculous thing that I do. But I find value in it's sort of vaguely the same collection of individuals. Some of them are truly archetypal, even fictitious characters. As long as I can have a picture in my head of them and say, "What would they say in a situation?" If you're considering, say, moving jobs? What would Arnold Schwarzenegger have to say about that? And you'd be surprised the minute you ask it in your head; your brain is surprisingly good at these things. And it's like, let me paint The Terminator yelling at you to get the new job. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Not get to the chopper, but get the new job. And it's surprisingly effective. And so I don't have a compartmentalized like, this is my work crew, this is my life crew. It's a nonsense collection of fake people in my head that I get to talk to. I'm saying this on the internet; here we are. [laughs] STEPH: That makes sense to me, though, because as you're describing that situation, I do something similar, but I've just never thought about it in these concrete terms where I have someone in mind, and it's a real person in my life who are my confidence person. They're the one that I know they are very confident. They're going to push for the best deal for themselves. They're going to look out for themselves. They're going to look out for me. They're going to support me. I have that person. And so, even if I can't talk to them in reality, then I will still channel that energy. And then I have someone else who's like my kind filter, and they're the person that's going to be very supportive. And you make mistakes, and it's not a big deal, and you learn, and you move on. And so I have those different...and in my mind, I just saw them as coaches. Instead of board of directors, I just see them as different things that I don't see as strong in my character. And so I have these coaches in those particular areas that then I will pull energy from to then bolster myself in a particular way or skill. This was fun. I'm so glad we talked about this because that is very insightful to you, and for me as well, and to myself. CHRIS: Yeah, we went deep on this episode. STEPH: No tech but lots of deep personal insight. CHRIS: I talked a little bit about bcrypt. [laughs] You can't stop me from talking about tech for an entire episode. But then I also talked about my board of directors and the conversations I have with myself, so I feel like I rounded it out pretty good. STEPH: It's a very round episode. CHRIS: Yeah, I agree. And with that roundedness, should we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeee!!! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
319: Wins & Losses

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 14, 2021 35:20


Steph started a new project and shares details about the new tools she's using, including working on a remote dev environment. Chris shares a journey with Lograge and Rails flash messages as he strives to capture user-facing errors. They also discuss "silencing" flaky tests, using Graphviz to visualize data dependencies, and porting Devise views to use Inertia and Svelte. It's also interesting how different their paths have been this year! This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Joel Quenneville (https://twitter.com/joelquen) GitHub - roidrage/lograge: An attempt to tame Rails' default policy to log everything (https://github.com/roidrage/lograge) Graphviz (https://graphviz.org/) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: Tech talk nonsense and songs, that's what people come to The Bike Shed for, variations on the Jurassic Park theme song, you know, normal stuff. Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. Let's see. So I've started a new project. So frankly, there's a ton of new stuff in my world. And I've been on the project for about a week and a half now. I started over the holiday, and it's been going really well. Still in that whole early stage with getting to know the application, the codebase, the processes, the team, all the dynamics. It's a large company. So I'm working with a small group of individuals, but there are about over 100 developers that work at this company. And they do have a lot of documentation, which has been very helpful. But there's a lot to learn in terms of setup and processes, specifically. So they have provided a laptop that I'm using to access their codebase. So I'm using their laptop. And then, I am also using a dev machine, a remote dev machine, that they have set up for me. So I need to be on their VPN and SSH into that dev machine. So that's novel as well. CHRIS: Ooh, I'm very intrigued by that bit, not that they gave you a laptop bit but the dev machine. This is in the cloud sort of thing? What is this? I'm very intrigued. STEPH: I don't know if I have concrete answers for you. But yes, for me to be able to access their codebase, I have to go into the dev machine. And then that's where then I can do my normal development work. CHRIS: So is this like an EC2 instance or something like that that you're SSH-ing into, and then you can run processes on it? Or is it closer to the GitHub dev containers thing that they just released? Or are you running with your local Vim? Is it a remote Vim? Are you using Vim? Is it VS Code? I have so many questions. STEPH: [laughs] I think it's more like the first version, although I don't know the backbone of it. I don't know specifically if it's an EC2 instance or exactly how it's being hosted and how I have access to it. But I did have to set everything up on it. So they started the dev machine up for me. Their DevOps team started an environment where then I could access, and then I did need to cultivate it to my own habits. So I had to install several things. I had to install Brew and Vim and also the tmux and all those configurations that I'd really like to have. They do have a really nice Confluence document that walks you through how to set up a connection between VS Code and the remote environment. So then that way, you can really just hang out in VS Code all day. And initially, I was like, okay, I could do this. And immediately, I was like, no, I love Vim. I'm going back to it even if I have to spend the 20, 30 minutes setting it up. I'm so comfortable with Vim and tmux that I stuck to my roots, and I didn't branch out into VS Code. But I think VS Code is one of the more popular tools that they're using. So that way, it feels more local versus having to work in a remote machine. I think I answered some of your questions. I don't think I answered all of them. CHRIS: Yes. I think you did answer all the questions. But just for clarification, the Vim and tmux and whatnot setup is that you're running SSH, and then on the remote machine, you are using Vim and tmux? Or is it a local Vim that is doing…I think Vim has some remote editing capabilities but not anywhere near what VS Code can do. STEPH: It's the first setup. So I am SSH-ed in. And then I have Vim and tmux running on that remote machine. CHRIS: Gotcha. Novel. STEPH: Yeah, it's a thing. It's working. So that's good. And it feels cozy. I feel like I'm at home. I feel like I can be productive. So that's great as well. Some of the other tools that I'm also new to, so they use Zeus, which is used to then speed up the booting of your application. And you can also use it for speeding up test runs. So very similar to Spring, which I think we've had some discussions about Spring and who loves it and who doesn't. [laughs] CHRIS: I don't know. I'm not...[chuckles] I feel like I remember Zeus. But Zeus is like three iterations ago of this preloader thing. I'm intrigued by that. I thought Spring had fully supplanted it in the Rails ecosystem but maybe not. STEPH: So this company has been around for a very long time. So there are a number of tools that I think they're using because that was the tool to use the day when they got started. And then it just hasn't been a need to move on to one of the newer tools to use Spring. So at least that's my current explanation for why we're using Zeus. And also, Zeus works most of the time. I'm frankly still getting comfortable with it. [laughs] I still have gripes about Spring too. CHRIS: 60% of the time, they work most of the time. STEPH: [laughs] So, Zeus is another new tool that I'm adding to my tool belt during this engagement. Another new tool that I'm using is Gerrit. And so they use Gerrit…it is used for managing their Git repositories. It is used for code reviews. And being as accustomed and familiar with GitHub as I am, that one has been a little tricky to then navigate and change the whole UI that I'm used to when it comes to pushing up code, reviewing code, asking for feedback on changes. And at one point, I was reviewing a change request for someone else. And there's a button on there where I was adding comments, but they were in draft mode. And I'm trying to figure out how to get them out of draft mode so that they're actually submitted, and the other person could see it. And I saw a submit button. I was like, cool. So I hit the submit button. And then it said something in red text about ready to be merged into main. [laughs] I was like, oh, no, I mean, maybe, but that's not what I meant to do. So I had to reach out to that person and be like, "Hey, I'm new to Gerrit. I don't know what I did. I hit a button. I hope everything's fine. Here's my review. Best of luck. [laughs] I think everything is fine. Nothing dramatic came out of it. But I had my own little dramatic moment. CHRIS: Wow, that is a bunch of new stuff. It's interesting. On the one hand, I totally understand projects get started, and there's a certain set of tools that are current at that point, and so then you're using them. And then, over time, it takes a very active effort to try and keep up with the new current, that new-new as we call it. But the trade-off there is really interesting because, at any given time, it never feels like the right investment to pursue the new thing to just upgrade for upgrading sake. But then the counterpoint is the cost to someone like you coming onto the project. And it's like, it's a bunch of new stuff. It's kind of old stuff. It's new for me, but it is old, and less documented, and less familiar. And it's also certainly less compatible with other things that are going on, almost certainly. And so, how to stay on top of those updates is always the thing that's really intriguing to me. I say as someone who started a project recently, and I have not thought about upgrading anything at this point. And we have bundler-audit I want to say is the one thing that we have in there. So if there's a CVE for a gem, then security-wise, we will be upgrading those. But otherwise, I haven't thought about upgrading our Ruby version or anything. And I think we're on 2.6 or something like that, which is a couple back at this point. And so it's something that's in the back of my mind. I feel like I should have a formal answer to this. Like, company-wide, how do we think about the process of upgrading? And Dependabot and things like that answers some of it, but that doesn't tell me when to upgrade Ruby, I don't think. It could. That would be annoying. I don't want that. But it's one of those many things that depends and is subtle. And you have to decide where you put the trade-offs and whatnot. So just an interesting thing. And to observe you now going into this project building and being like, there's a bunch of new stuff. STEPH: I think it really takes passion or pain. Those are the two things that then prompt us to upgrade. Either it's pain, and you need to change it to get rid of that, or it's passion. So you're really excited about the next version of Ruby or the next version of Rails. And I think that's fine. I think that's fine that those are often our drivers. But yeah, that is interesting. I hadn't really thought about that in terms of there's often no real strict process around when we upgrade except those are then the natural human catalyst. CHRIS: I think you're right that those are the catalysts. But I think quite often those cannot be sufficient to push us to do the work. And so what do you do in the absence of that? It's not really painful. And I'm not really passionate about it. But I probably should do it is the 80% of the time middle space that we live in. And so yeah, I don't have an answer to it. I'm more observing the question. But like so many other things, I feel like often we just exist in that awkward middle and got to find a way through, so how like life. STEPH: I was having a conversation with someone earlier a bit about these life cycles that we live in. Specifically, we were talking about consulting and how changing from project to project is so daunting. Because you go from I'm accustomed to this project, I'm accustomed to the team. And then all of a sudden you jump into this new project and with all these new things it can be really interesting. But then there's also this feeling of like, wait, I used to be smart, and I knew everything that was going on. And the team knew me, and I knew all the team processes, and I felt good. And now I'm in this totally new space, and I have to relearn, and I have to reprove myself and relearn all the company politics. And there's always that initial jumping from a sure space over to a very new space that always makes me then question and be like, yeah, I can do this, right? I can do this. And then I have to keep letting that voice build until about two weeks in. And I'm like, oh okay, I'm back in a good spot. I said two weeks; it's probably more like four. But there's still that grace period of a new project where you're leveling up on all the things and learning the new team. And as daunting as it is; apparently, it's what I like. Apparently, I like that roller coaster ride that comes from jumping from one project to the next. So on that note of a bit of novel insight into myself, what's new in your world? CHRIS: What is new in my world? Let's see. I think I've got two updates, two anecdotes to share. One, I lost the battle, one I won the battle. So we'll go with the lost battle first because that seems fun. So we have Lograge on this application, which Lograge, for anyone that's not familiar, is a library that helps with producing more structured and more complete log lines from a Rails application. You can tell it to do JSON log lines, which is useful for many of the tools that will receive your logs. And then with it, you can say grab me the controller name and the params but sanitized and this and that. And so, you aggregate a bunch more data than would traditionally be in the logs. In general, I've just found it to be a much better foundation. I find the logs to be more readable, and more informative, more useful, all those lovely things. But slowly, I've been looking at what's the other stuff that I want to have in here? What else would be nice to know? So one example is we use Inertia on this project. And Inertia has a particular way in which errors get mapped back to the front end. And it's an interesting little trick that involves the session, but that's sort of an aside. Basically, this is something that the user will see that I would love to know about. So how many users are hitting their head against the wall? Because typically, whenever these errors happen, that means this is a flash message or something like that we're going to show to the user. So we were able to add that into our log lines. Now we can see those. We can aggregate on them. We can do counts. We can do alerting and monitoring, all those kinds of fun things. So cool. That was great. That worked well. I then specifically…I mentioned the flash a second ago, but that's actually not…the Inertia messages will not show up in the flash. They end up in forms inline on certain inputs or whatnot. But we do also use the flash message pretty regularly as a way to communicate to the user success or failure or what have you. And I really wanted to get those into the logs. And I tried very hard, and I failed. I gave up. I threw in the towel. I raised the white flag. So the nature of the flash, which is something that knew in the back of my mind but I had never really experienced as pointedly as this, is the flash is a magic value within the Rails ecosystem that can be written to and then once read clears itself. That's the nature of how the flash is supposed to work. And it persists across requests. So it's doing some fun stuff there, which I assume is tunneling through the session or maybe putting it into a cookie. I'm not actually sure. But there's some way that you post to an endpoint, and then you get redirected to the show page. And on the show page, we actually display that flash value. But the flash is set on the controller endpoint that is handling the POST request. So this value spans across two request-response life cycles, which is interesting. And so the manner in which that works is Rails is managing that on our behalf. We write to it on the one side. And then, when we do the subsequent requests, if there's a value in the flash, we show it to the user, which is why occasionally you'll see those weird things where that flash message shouldn't show up. But it's like a sticky value that was left in the system that didn't get cleared via one thing or another. But I really wanted to put those into the logs. Like, what are we saying to the user is the thing I want to know. This is that question of like, what's my system doing at runtime? I understand what it's doing. I can read the code and understand what should happen. But what actually happened? Are users seeing this flash message way more than they should? That's a question I want to be able to answer. And I have lost the battle. I cannot find a way to read the flash value, put it into my loglines, but then also have it persist through. The first attempt I did, I was able to get it into my loglines, but then it didn't show to the user, which is a bad outcome. Because now I've read the value, Rails clears it, cool, that's fine. There is a flash.keep method. And that I thought would do the thing I wanted, which is like, oh, I want to read this value. I want to tap this value, I want to observe it, I want to peek at it. And I thought this keep method would do the thing that I wanted. It did not. It just caused the flash to be persistent. So now, anywhere I went had the same flash message for forever, which was not the behavior that I was looking for. I then tried, like, all right, just for exploration purposes, what if I reach inside and read the instance variables of the flash objects? Also did not work. Everything I tried did not work. And it had these fun failure modes that just made me very sad. Thankfully, we had feature specs that told me about this failure mode because I would not have known about it otherwise. This was not obvious to me on first implementation. But yeah, I lost, and I feel sad. And then I did the thing that we do, which is I searched Google, and there's nothing. I cannot find…This is one of those cases where like, I can't be the first person who wants to know what's in the flash. I can't be breaking new ground here. And yet I couldn't find anything on the internet. So that's where I'm at. STEPH: That's interesting. Yeah, I'm trying to think…I think I'm one of those people. I don't think I've ever tried to peek into the flash and see what's there ahead of time. And it makes me wonder if it's partially…so we can't peek into the flash. You've exhausted several examples or tries there. When you're setting the value of the flash, it makes me wonder if there's an order of operations that you have to pursue. So before you set the flash, you know what messages that you're going to share. So you send that off to the logs, but then also share that to the flash. So instead of writing the message directly to the flash and then having to check the flash, if you just stored that value elsewhere and shared it to the logs first. Is that a reasonable approach? CHRIS: It definitely could work. But that was in the space of this is getting weird enough. I thought about things like that, but I didn't want to do anything weird. And part of the benefit that I get from using Lograge is rather than having multiple lines for each request…so a request came in and rendered this partial and did this thing. It gets constructed such that there's a single logline, which is one big JSON object that contains all of the data about that request. And I really liked that structure because then everything's correlated like, oh, did we 404, or did we 302? And what was the message that we said to the user? And what were the params? It's all there in one line. I found that to be really useful. So I wanted to do that. I could just separately log it. But then I'm also worried of there is a statefulness there. Because again, the flash is written on one side and read on the…it's like a Hail Mary to ourselves between requests. Look at me with a sports reference. And so, I didn't want to try anything out of the ordinary. I really just wanted to find a way to just like; I just want to read this value but not like Heisenberg uncertainty principle observing changes in the system. I found myself in that space, and I was like, can't there be a way that I can just flash.peek? And I just want to take a quick look. I don't want to mess with anything. You do your normal thing, flash. Just let me know. And I do not have an answer for it yet. And for now, this is one of those nice to have, not an absolute requirement. So I wasn't yet in the position of okay, fine, let's do some out-of-the-box ideas here. So I'm still in the in the box phase, I would say, but who knows? Maybe down the road, I'll be like; I would really love to know what the flash message was for that request because this user is seeing stuff that we do not understand. And that information would tell us the answer. So we're not there yet. But I was surprised by how thoroughly I was defeated by Rails and the flash message on this adventure. STEPH: I am equally surprised. I wouldn't have thought that particular achievement would have or is proving to be that hard or, frankly, not doable. So yeah, I'm intrigued to see if anybody has thoughts on it or if you do find a different solution because Lograge is one that I haven't used. But I would be surprised if other people haven't had a similar request of like; I want to be able to store what's in the flash message. Because like you said, that seems super helpful. CHRIS: Well, certainly, if I do figure anything out, then I will share that with the world. But yes, part of this is putting it out there into the universe. And if the universe happens to send me back an answer, I will happily accept that. But yeah, again, I had two stories, and that was the one where I lost. I'm going to send it back over to you because I'm interested in anything else that's up in your world. And later, I'll tell the story of a victory. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: I have a victory that I can share as well, and I'm excited to hear about yours. So to share a bit more context about the project that I'm on, we are focused very heavily on improving their test suite, not only the time that it takes to run the test suite but predominantly addressing a lot of the flaky tests that they have. Because that is a huge pain point for the team and often leads to the team having to rerun tests. And so, there are a couple of areas that we're very excited to make some contributions. The first part is that we are just looking at those flaky tests to figure out what is going on and how can we address these? And one of the nice things, one of the tools that they're using TeamCity is the tooling that they're using to run their automated test suite. And TeamCity will let you mute tests, so then that way, if you do encounter a flaky test, you can mute it. So then, at least it's not impacting other people. I say this with some asterisks that go along with it because, for people who can't see, Chris is making a very interesting face. I think you have thoughts on this. And the other thing that they will show is a flip rate for the flaky tests, which is really nice, too, because then you can see which tests are flaky the most. So then that helps us prioritize which ones we want to look into. All right, I'm going to pause so you can respond to that comment I made about muting tests. CHRIS: I'm intrigued. I talked in a recent episode about adding RSpec::Retry. So the idea of flakiness being a thing that exists and trying to decide how much engineering effort to apply to fixing it. But the idea of muting it and especially muting it in the UI, not in the test suite or not having that be something that's committed, there's something about that that caught my attention, and thus apparently, my eyebrows raised. You saw that. [laughs] But I don't actually know how I feel about it. This is such a complicated, murky area that I wish I had a stronger set of beliefs around. It was interesting when we talked about the RSpec::Retry thing. I think you rightly pushed back on me, and you were like, that's interesting, maybe don't do that. And I was like, that's a fair point. [laughs] And so now hearing you're in the quagmire of flaky tests, and yeah, it's an interesting space. STEPH: Well, I think my hard belief is that muting tests is a thing that we shouldn't do. It's going to lead to more problems, and you're not really addressing the issue that you have. It is a temporary solution to a much bigger problem that you have. And so it is a tool that you can use to then buy you some more time. And so that is the space that this team is in where they have used this particular tool to buy them more time and to be able to keep shipping changes while realizing that they do still need to address these underlying issues. So it is a tricky space to be in where essentially, you've gotten to the point that you do have these muted tests. It is a way to help you keep going forward, but you are going to have to come back to it at some point. And so that's the space that I'm in right now joining the team is that we have been brought in to help some of their engineers specifically address this issue while ideally letting the rest of the team continue to focus on shipping changes while we address the test. Although I really think there's going to be two angles that we've talked about in how we're going to help this particular codebase. One of them is that we are going to address a flaky test. But the other one is empowering people that they feel like they have the time and the knowledge that they can address a flaky test and also not contribute more flaky tests to the codebase. But I appreciate that you called me on that a bit because we've had those conversations around when we should actually address something versus muted, all the interesting trade-offs that come along with that conversation. So this particular flaky test that we addressed earlier this week is specific to hard coding primary IDs. The short version is that it's bad, don't do it. The longer version is that they were having a test that was failing intermittently because it would pass the first two runs, but then it would start to fail for all future runs. And the reason it would pass for the first two runs is because when they were setting the ID for a record that the test setup is creating, they were looking for existing records and saying, "Hey, what's your latest ID?" And then I'm going to guess the next ID. I'm going to add one to that to figure out what the next ID should be. Some additional context, when the tests boot up, there's some data that's being created before the test run. So then that's why they're checking to see, okay, what records already exist? And then let's add one to that. The reason that fails sometimes is because then once the tests have run, the Postgres IDs aren't being reset, so they're using a truncate approach. So then, when the test runs once or twice, that works. But then, at some point, there's a collision between those IDs where they tried to guess the next ID, but then Postgres is also on that same ID, and it ends up failing. There are also some callbacks. There's some trickery afoot. It took a little while [chuckles] to work through these tests to understand why they're failing. But the short version is that we thought we had to restructure the data in a way that no longer required us to guess what the next primary key should be for a record. We could actually use Factory Bot to generate that record, and then ask Postgres, okay, what ID did you assign? And we're going to pass that in. And that part was really challenging when you're in a new codebase, and you are learning the domain knowledge and exactly how data should be structured. So that was one challenge of it. The other part was that a lot of the data relies on each other. So then figuring out the right hierarchy in which we could create the data. So we didn't have a circular reference at some point. It took some time. And Joël Quenneville, who's on the project with me, used a tool that I found very helpful. It's called Dataviz. He went through and documented the let statements, the data that's being created, and then it generated a nice tree structure that shows you okay; these are your dependencies. This is the test setup that you're using. And then from there, just by changing a few lines in that particular file that used to generate that Dataviz tree, he would move it around. And we could simulate what we were already mentally trying to construct in our head. So as programmers, we're already thinking, okay, I know this record needs that data. And that data needs that data before I can build this. But this actually turned it into a concrete visualization where we could see it. And I was really struggling. And he was like, "Hey, I got it into a visual form that we can look at. And there's a circular reference. That's why this keeps happening and why we're not making progress." So then, using that, we were able to then reformat some of the dependencies, look at the graph, see that we didn't have that circular reference anymore. And then we could implement that in code. And it really helped me to be able to walk through that visual aspect because then I could say, okay, this is all the stuff that I'm trying to mentally hold on to, but instead, I can just look at this and know it's going to work. I don't have a circular reference. It also helped concretely show why the previous efforts were failing and why we kept running into some issues. So I'm really interested now in Dataviz because I found it very helpful in this particular case. And I'm very intrigued to see if I can apply this to more tests that I'm trying to fix and to see if I can start out with here's the current structure. Here's where I'm trying to go. And then essentially build that graph first before I start changing the code around. I would love to have that optimization. And I feel like it would speed up the process. CHRIS: It was funny as you started to say that I had observed some tweets going out into the world recently. And I was like, this is Joël. This is definitely Joël talking about these things. As an aside, for anyone who doesn't follow Joël Quenneville on Twitter, @joelquen, I would highly recommend it. We can include a link to Joël's Twitter in the show notes. Joël is one of the clearest thinkers and communicators about programming that I have ever worked with. And in particular, what you're describing of the data visualization is something that I think he does incredibly well. Often he'll make blog posts, but they'll include just simple little visualizations, little images, or diagrams, or flowcharts that just so concretely encapsulate an idea and express it so much better than text ever could. And so, in so many ways, I look to Joël's writing, both on Twitter, in the blog, in many places. And I just appreciate so much what he puts out there and the manner in which he does it. So I was by no means surprised when you said, "Oh, and I'm working with Joël on this project." I was like, yes, I bet you are. That sounds true, and in particular, some of the conversations about flaky tests and determinism and all of that. So yeah, the visualization stuff is also particularly interesting in taking a system that it's very hard to hold all of this in our heads. But that visualization, the tree and/or graph thing at play, having that in a picture and being like, oh, look, there's a cycle now. There we go. Can't have those. That's not okay. That's a really interesting solution that's just very cool to hear about and presumably led to a good outcome where you were able to break that cycle. And now you're happy and deterministic in your tests. STEPH: Yeah, it's one of those approaches where I wonder if it was helpful afterwards and how can I make it helpful beforehand? Because it felt like a confirmation of the pain in the process that we had been through. And I'm eager to see if now I can apply it ahead of time and save myself some of that pain. That's where I get really excited. But yes, it was a successful outcome. And we have fixed that particular flaky test. But I'm very excited to hear about your victory from the week. CHRIS: It's a shared victory. It was a team victory, just to be clear. But we are working in a system that is using Inertia. Inertia.js is a project that I've talked about a number of times on the show. I'm a huge fan of it. It is the core architecture of how we're building our application. But as a very brief revisiting of what it is, on the server-side, we have Rails, and Rails is acting in a pretty traditional way. We do not have an API. And on the front end, we have Svelte, which is a JavaScript view layer framework. Inertia sits between them and binds the traditional Rails MVC architecture and the Svelte front end. So again, there's no API in the traditional sense of this is a REST endpoint, and we hit it, and we get some data, and then the front end holds on to that in a store. None of that is going on. Inertia does a wonderful job of marrying these two concepts and allowing us to use familiar programming techniques on the server-side but then also have a more future-friendly front end. Animations and transitions and things like that are now totally possible while not throwing away the entirety of our programming model that we've had in Rails server-side applications. That's all well and good. Almost all of the UI in our application is rendered via Inertia and Svelte. That's great. We love it. The one caveat is Devise. So we have Devise on this project, and Devise comes with a lot of views built-in. And we have both an admin and a user model. So we have sign in and sign up, and confirm registration, and forgot password and all of these different views and flows and things that Devise just gives you out of the box. And being an early-stage startup, it was not a good time to revisit any of that or to try and build it from scratch or any of that. We just wanted to build on the good known trusted foundation that Devise gives us. But the trade-off there is that now all of our Devise logic lives in this uncanny valley. It's the only stuff that is in ERB views. Our styling, thankfully, we're using Tailwind, and so we are able to have some consistency between the styling. But recently, we redesigned the flash messages on the client-side in our Svelte pages. But on the server-side, they are a little on the Devise-side because Devise is the only pages that are being rendered truly server-side. They look a little different. And this is a pain that we felt, that inconsistency or that mismatch between the Devise views. And then the rest of the application is a pain that we felt but one that we consistently were like, I don't think it's worth the effort to try and change this. Finally, this week, we've been doing a lot of work on our user onboarding funnel. So the initial signup flow going through it's a progressive form screen where you go in between different pages. And a majority of it is implemented in the Inertia and Svelte side of things. And it's very nice and very fun to work with. But the signup form, the user signup form, is in Devise, and it's a traditional Rails server-rendered post, and then all the normal stuff happens. We finally decided to bite the bullet this week and see how painful it would be to port that over to Inertia and Svelte. And spoiler, it was awesome. It was very straightforward, and coming out of it, immediately, the page was largely the same. The server-side code was largely the same. But now we had things like when you submit this form, if there's a validation error, we don't clear out your passwords because we're staying on that page on the client-side. We're taking advantage of the way Inertia's error flow works. That's a subtlety of how Inertia works. That's probably more detail than we want to get into here, but it's an awesome thing that works and is great. And so immediately, this page just got better. We got inline errors for each of the fields. We were able to very easily add a library called Mailcheck, which I've talked about on an episode a while back. But this is a thing where if you have a typo in your email address, we can say, "Hey, you have a typo in your email address. And if you click this link where we suggest the alternative, we'll just replace it inline." That would have been really awkward to wire up in our Devise view. It would have been some jQuery-esque script tag at the bottom of the view page that doesn't stop…We don't have jQuery actually at this point. We wouldn't have jQuery. And we could certainly, but it would only be for that view. And it would be weird and different in a fundamentally different programming model. It was trivial to do in the Inertia and Svelte world once we had made that port over. This was always my hope. This was the dream that I had in mind. And it speaks to the architecture of Inertia. And Inertia is a really great abstraction that is very minimally leaky. I won't say it has zero leaks because no abstraction does. But this was my hope is I think the server-side should mostly stay the same. And I think the client-side, we just take an ERB template, turn it into a Svelte template, and we're good to go. And that has largely been the case. But suddenly, this page is so much more. There are subtle animations as things come in. And there are just lots of nice features that were trivial to add now and that fit with the rest of the programming model that we have throughout it. So that was awesome. STEPH: That is awesome. I love these styles of updates where there's like, oh, I had a loss this week. But I also had this really great win because that feels just so representative of a typical week. So I love this back and forth. CHRIS: It's also that sequence is how the week went. So the loss happened earlier in the week, and then the win happened later in the week, which is how I would prefer it because now I'm going into the weekend with a win. Like, cool, I'll take it. Had it gone in the other direction, I would have been like, oh man, Rails beat me. But I guess it's the weekend now. I'll forget about it for a little while. STEPH: Yeah, that definitely helps to end on a positive note. CHRIS: But yeah, I don't think too much more to say about that beyond it was both really nice to get the added functionality to get the better, more user-friendly behavior in this view that naturally falls out of this programming model. But also to have that reinforcement of my belief in Inertia as a good architecture. Not only did we get some really nice stuff out of doing this port, but it was also pretty straightforward because Inertia sits so comfortably between the pieces. And that's a story that I really like. I want more of that in my programming world, where to change this thing requires changing everything in our app. Oh no, this is sad. No, this was a great example of we were able to very minimally change things and get a much better experience out of it. So once again, I am very pro Inertia.js STEPH: It's interesting to me how different our paths have been this year where I have been working on applications that are brought on thoughtbot to then help out with some of the concerns that they have, either their application is going down, or they have a test suite that they need to improve, or there's a lot of triage that's involved. And so it makes me very excited to hear that, when you are building stuff, and it's going really well and how awesome that is. Because then I feel like most of my world has definitely been more in the triage space, which is a very interesting and fun space to be. But it brings me a lot of joy to hear about wins from let's build new stuff and hearing it be built from the ground up and how well that's going. CHRIS: Well, I'm definitely happy to provide that. But also, I want to be realistic and be like, I'm just writing next year's legacy code right now, let's be honest. I'm very happy with where we're at in this moment. But I also know how early I am in the project that I'm working on. And I'm burdened with the knowledge that I'm certain one decision that I'm making of the many that are being made I will deeply regret a year from now. I just know that that's true, and I can't let it slow me down. I got to just keep making decisions and do stuff. But I know that there's going to be one. I know that a year from now, I'm going to be like, why did we choose that option? But it's sort of the game. STEPH: [singing] We'll just know that there's something strange and your code won't change. Who are you gonna call? thoughtboters! CHRIS: Well, yes. I will definitely be calling you when I find myself in the uncertain times of legacy code of my own creation. So I look forward to that, frankly. But that's a problem for a year; I don't know, maybe two years from now. Who knows? But for now, what do you think? Let's wrap up. STEPH: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. CHRIS: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. STEPH: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or a review in iTunes as it really helps other people find the show. CHRIS: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed on Twitter, and I'm @christoomey. STEPH: And I'm @SViccari. CHRIS: Or you can email us at hosts@bikeshed.fm STEPH: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeee!!! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
317: Burn The Ships!

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 30, 2021 41:41


Steph gives an update about RSpec focus and how she often forgets to remove the focus feature from tests. She figured out two solutions: one using Rubocop, and the other from a Twitter user, suggesting using a GitHub gist. She also suggests that if you're one of those people who misses being in an office environment, you check out soundofcolleagues.com for ambient office noise selection. Chris has been struggling to actually do any coding and is adjusting to doing more product management and shares some strategies that have been helping him. They answer a listener question about dealing with large pull requests and how it's hard to recognize a good seam to break them up when you are in the thick of one. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Twitter note re: rspec-retry (https://twitter.com/jasonrudolph/status/1458416077726158852) soundofcolleagues.com (https://soundofcolleagues.com) mailcheck (https://github.com/mailcheck/mailcheck) Inertia.js (https://inertiajs.com/) Svelte (https://svelte.dev/) devise (https://github.com/heartcombo/devise) clearance (https://github.com/thoughtbot/clearance) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: One day, I'll grow up. It's fine. I look forward to that day. But today, I don't think it's that day. Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. Well, in some fun news, Utah started his professional training as of this morning, which I'm very excited about. Because we've been working with him to work on being good with walking on a leash, FYI, he's not, [laughs] and also being good about not jumping on people. And essentially, being a really good roommate. And he started training today, and we are using an e-collar, which initially I was really hesitant about because I don't want it to hurt him in any way. But now that I have felt the e-collar myself and we've had a first day with it, it's going super well. I'm very excited for where this is headed. CHRIS: That's very exciting. When does he start paying rent? STEPH: Ooh. I'll have to check with him, or I guess I have set those boundaries. That's my job. CHRIS: I just figured that's a core part of being a good roommate. But maybe we've got baby steps or doggy steps to get there. But that's exciting. I'm glad [laughs] that the first day of training is going well. STEPH: Yeah, it's going great. And the place that we're going to the trainer they have horses, and mules, and goats. And so now I have a very cute video of him trying to play with a goat, and the goat was having none of it. But it's still all very cute. In tech-related news, I have an update for when you and I were recently chatting about the RSpec focus and how I mentioned that I often forget to remove the focus feature from tests. And so then that goes up to a PR, and I have to rely on a kind human to let me know, and then I remove it. Or worst-case scenario, it gets merged into the main branch. And for anyone that's not on Twitter, I just wanted to share an update because I also shared something there. But the resolution for what I was looking for there's already a rule that's written into Rubocop, but it's specifically written in the Rubocop RSpec codebase. And with that rule, you can essentially just say, hey, let me know anytime that a test is using the focus metadata, and then make sure to let me know and fail. And then if you don't want to actually include all of Rubocop into your project because Rubocop is pretty opinionated, you can still add Rubocop to your project, but you can specifically add Rubocop RSpec, and then you can say, hey, all other rules disabled by default, but then you can enable that specific rule. So then, that way, you will catch all of your focus tests. There's also another approach that someone on Twitter shared with us recently from Marz Drel. And Marz shared specifically a really nice simple GitHub Gist that documents or exemplifies that you can add an environment variable that checks to say, hey, if we're in CI mode, then add a before hook. And then that before hook will look for any examples that are using that focus metadata, and then it's going to raise. And then if we're not in CI mode, then don't do anything, don't raise, and carry on. And that's just a really nice simple addition if someone didn't want to pull in Rubocop into their project. CHRIS: Both of those definitely sound like great options. I don't think we have Rubocop on the current project that I'm working on. But I think the RSpec focus thing, the metadata one, seems like it'll work great. More generally, I just want to thank folks out there who listen to the show and then write back in like, "Hey, this is probably what you want." There was a similar thread that someone shared around the RSpec::Retry stuff that I was talking about recently and the failure mode there and trying to get that into the Junit Reporter. And so they had some suggestions around that. Jason Rudolph on Twitter reached out, sharing just his initial exploration and thoughts on how it might be possible to extend the XML reports that are generated and capture a flaky test in that way. So that's really interesting. And again, just really love that folks are listening to the things that we say and then even adding on to them and continuing the conversation. So thanks to everybody for sharing those things. STEPH: Yeah, it's incredibly helpful. And then one other fun thing that I'd love to share, and I found this out from someone else at thoughtbot because they had shared it recently. But it's a neat website called soundofcolleagues.com. And I know you've got your laptop in front of you. So if you'll go visit it, it'll be neat to see as we're talking through it. For anyone else that wants to pull it up, too, we'll include a link in the show notes. But it's a neat project that someone started where you can bump up the sounds that you would normally hear in an office. So maybe you want to bump up background noise of people or an open window. There's one specifically for printers and a coffee machine, and keyboards are on there as well. [laughs] I have discovered I am partial open window and partial rain, although rain is just always my go-to. I like the sound of rain for when I'm working. CHRIS: Gentle rain is definitely nice white noise in general. I've seen this for coffee shops, but I haven't seen the particular one. Also, yes, I definitely know how to spell the word colleague on the first of three tries. Definitely didn't have to rely on Google for that one. But yeah, nice site there. I enjoy that. STEPH: I tried the keyboard option that's on there because I was like, oh yeah, I'm totally going to be into this. This is going to be my jam. I don't think it is because I realized that I'm very biased. I like the sound of my own keyboard. So I had to shush the other one and just listen to the rain and the open window. But that's some of the fun things that are going on in my world today. What's new in your world? CHRIS: I'm just now spending a moment with the keyboard sound. It's a very muted keyboard. I want a little more clackety. STEPH: A little more clackety? CHRIS: I was assuming it would be too much clackety, and that would be the problem. But it sounds more mushy. Maybe we can pipe in some of the sound here [laughs] at this point. Or we can link to these sounds, and everyone can dial up the keyboards to 100. But I, too, am partial to the sounds of my own keyboard. But what's new in my world? This past week and I think probably even a little bit more of the prior week, I've been noticing that I've been struggling to actually do any coding, which has been interesting to observe. And again, trying to observe it, not necessarily judge it, although if that's not the thing that we want to be doing, then try and improve that. But mostly trying to observe what's going on, what is taking my time. A lot of it is product management type work. So I am spending a good amount of time trying to gather the different voices and understand what is the work to be done, and then shape that into the backlog and make sure that that's clear and ready for the team to pick up. And then, thankfully, the other two developers that are working on the project are fantastically prolific. So they're often very quickly working through the work that has been set up in front of them. And so I'm trying to then be proactive and respond to the code. But there's almost a cycle to it where I'm just staying out in front of them, but they're catching up with everything that's going on. So it's something that I'm trying again to be intentional about, name, share some of that back up with the group. If there are things that I'm doing that I don't uniquely need to be doing, then let's share as much of that knowledge as possible. But one thing that I will say is the product management, shaping the backlog work is exhausting. I am astonished by just how drained I am at the end of the day. And I'm like, I don't even really feel like I did anything. I didn't write any code, but I am just completely spent. And there really is something to when the work is clear, just doing the work, I can actually find energizing. And it's fun, and I can get in flow state. And sometimes, I'll be drained in a certain way. But the work of taking a bunch of different slack threads, and communications, and meetings, and synthesizing that down, and then determining what the work needs to look like moving forward, and providing enough clarity but then not over constraining and not providing too much clarity. And there are so many micro-decisions that are being made in there. And I'm just spent at the end of the day, and I have so much...I've always had a lot of respect for product managers and folks that are existing in that interstitial space and trying to make sense of the noise, especially of a growing company, but all the more so this week as I've been feeling some of that myself. STEPH: I totally agree. I have felt that having a strong product manager really makes or breaks a project for me where even though having technical leadership is really nice, I'd prefer someone that's really strong at the product knowledge and then helping direct where the product is headed. That is incredibly helpful. Like you mentioned, the work is exhausting. There's someone that joined the thoughtbot team fairly recently, and I was chatting with them about what type of projects they would be interested in working on. And one of their responses was, "I'd love to work on a project with a strong product manager because I have been doing that a fair amount for recent years. And I would love to get back to just focusing on coding." And so I think they enjoyed some of the work, but they just recognize it's exhausting. And I'd really like to just get back to writing code for a while. CHRIS: Yeah, I'm definitely in that space. And I think there's a ton of value to spending a little bit of time, like having any developer at some point in their career spend a little bit of time managing the backlog, and you will learn a bunch from that. But I'm also in the space of I would love to just turn on some music and code for a while. That sounds fun. There's a lot of work to be done right now. I'd love to just be in there doing the work. But sometimes, out of necessity, the defining of the work is the thing that's important. And so, I think I've been correctly assessing the most important thing. And that that has consistently for a while now been the defining and responding to the work that's in process as opposed to doing it myself. But, man, I really hope I get to dive back into the code sometime and use my clackety keyboard to its fullest extent. STEPH: Have you found any particular strategies that really help you with the product management work? CHRIS: I will say that I think this is a competency. This is a skillset and a career path that...again, I've been at plenty of organizations that I don't think respected the role as much as it should be. But it's an incredibly hard role and multidisciplinary communication at the core of it. And so I don't think I'm great at it is the thing that I'll say. So everything that follows is just to be clear; I'm not saying that I'm great at this, but I have been doing some of it. So here are some thoughts that I have. I think a lot of it is in reaction to where I felt like the work was clear. So I have a sense of what it looks like when I can go to the backlog, trust that it is in a roughly solid priority order, pick up a piece of work and immediately go to work on it. And understand what are the end-user implications of this piece of work? Where would I start on it like, how technically? What's a rough approach that I would have? And getting that level of specificity just right. So it's not overconstrained, but it's not under constrained. So having experienced that on the developer side, I try and then use that to shape some of the guidance that I'm putting into, say, the Trello tickets that I'm writing up here. We recently introduced Trello epics, which is I want to say like an add-on. And that allows us just the tiniest bit of product management, like one level up. So instead of just having cards and a list that is like, here's the work to be done, we now have an epics list that is separate to it, and it links between a card and its associated epics. So it's like project and action within that project. And just that little touch of structure there has been really, really useful to help look at like, okay, what are the big pieces that we're trying to move? And then how do they break down into the smaller pieces? So a tiny, tiny bit of fanciness in our product management tool, not Jira-like not going in that direction yet for as long as I cannot. But that little bit of structure. And then thinking about what has been useful to me as I pick up tickets. And then, as always, trying to just always be cognizant of what is the user's experience here? What problem am I trying to solve for them? What is their experience going to be? How will they know how to work with this feature? And just always asking that and then framing the work to be done in the context of that. STEPH: I like how you're adamant about a little bit of fanciness but not all the way to Jira-like. I also like how you highlighted end-users. All of that, I think, is awesome when developers are able to expand their role to experience all the other facets of building software. CHRIS: Yeah, definitely. I think that whole list of all of the different facets of where our work interacts with different groups. The more empathy or, the more experience that you can have there, the better that you'll be able to understand how to communicate there, how to express things in terms, et cetera, et cetera. So a huge fan of all of those ideas. I am ready to just get back in the code for a few minutes, though. But for now, for as long as necessary, I'll do some of this work. But I am trying to find my way to other things. In terms of actual feature work that we're working on, one of the things that we're doing right now is restructuring our onboarding. So when a user comes and signs up to the website and then subsequently has to fill out a handful of other forms, there's actually an external system that we've been working with that houses some of the core data of our application. And they have a hosted application form. So we can send the user over to them, and the user fills out the rest of the application on this other system's site. And then they get redirected back to us. And everything's got nice DNS entries for a particular subdomain and whatnot. So it looks roughly consistent. There's some branding. But it's still someone else's UI, essentially. And we were feeling enough pain from that experience. We were like; you know what? It's time. We're going to bring this back in-house. We're going to do all the forms ourselves. We're going to do a nice progressive little progress bar. You can see all the steps as you're going through onboarding. We're just going to own that more because that's a core part of the experience that we're building here. So biting the bullet, deciding to do that. But there's an interesting edge case that we run into, which is we are using Devise for authentication. Totally makes sense. We're in Rails context; there we go. It's the thing to use. But Devise exists in truly the Rails world. So like HTML ERB templates, the controllers have certain expectations as to what's going on. So thus far, we've just let that exist in that world and everything else we're building in Inertia and Svelte. But we're just now starting to feel enough of the pain, and that Devise exists in this other context. And for a while, we just kept saying, "You know what? It's not worth the effort to port it over. It's fine." Because we're using Tailwind, we have a consistent design language that we can use across them. That said, the components are drifting a little bit. And it's like, oh, this one's got a rounded corner like this, and that one's got this color. And we don't have the disabled style. But it is nice that it's not completely distinct. But we have finally decided it is time. We need to port this thing over because we feel like the onboarding and authentication type flows; they're actually a big part of the user experience or at least the first run user experience when someone's signing up to our site. So we want to own that a little bit more. One of the things that I ran into as I was trying to introduce Mailcheck, which is a library that I've talked about, I think in a previous episode...but basically, you can have it observe a field and if someone types in like, user@gmaip.com, you can like, did you mean gmail.com? And then go from there. And I think there's more subtlety. They can maybe even look up MX records and things like that. But basically validate an email address heuristically and offer the nice, very friendly to a user, "Hey, did you mean this instead?" So not a full validation that says, "No, you cannot put your email address," because maybe you have a weird one that sounds like Gmail but isn't. But that's a little bit trickier to implement both on the Devise side and then in any other place that we have an email input. And so what we want to do is port over to Inertia and Svelte, and then everything's in our nice, happy context with all our components and all the other work that we're doing. And it really does just highlight how much I've come to enjoy working with Inertia and Svelte. They are fantastic technologies. And now I just want absolutely everything to be in them. So we're finally going to bite the bullet, and I think port those over a little bit after we get the current batch of work done. But soon, soon, that's the goal. STEPH: I'm having a bit of déjà vu where I feel like there was a project that you were working on that was using Devise, and then removing Devise and replacing it with something else was a challenge. Does that ring a bell? CHRIS: Yes, that is accurate. So I had a project that I worked on where we had both Devise and Clearance was actually what was going on. There were basically two different applications that existed; one was using Clearance, the later one used Devise. But then we folded those two applications back together. And by virtue of that, I tried to unify the authentication schemes, and it was like, nope, not going to happen. And then we didn't. STEPH: And then we didn't. [laughs] I like that ending. CHRIS: Well, sometimes you don't. [laughs] STEPH: Yeah, I love that ending because it reflects reality. Sometimes that just happens. In fact, I'm going to segue for just a moment because you're reminding me that there's something I don't think I've shared with you yet. On my previous project, there was a particular feature. It was a big feature that someone had picked up and worked on. And at one point, we were essentially playing hot potato with this feature because we hadn't gotten it to the point that it was merged. There was too much that was happening in that pull request, although then we ended up merging it. But then we found lots of bugs. And it was just one of those features that we couldn't really get across the finish line. There was always something else that was wrong with it or needed to be done or needed to be considered. And we'd reach that point where Chad Pytel, who is on the project, was like, "We're either going to finish this, or we're going to throw it away." And I felt a little guilty saying this, and I was like, "I vote we throw it away. I have lots of concerns about this. We are essentially reimplementing another complex workflow. But now, we are implementing it pretty differently in another portion of the application. It's going to be hard to manage. The cost of adding this and maintaining this is a really high concern." And so he talked with the rest of the team and came back, and he's like, "Yep, we're going to throw it away." And so then he issued a PR, and we removed it. And it was one of those moments of like; this isn't great because then we have invested hours into this, and now we are taking it away. But it also felt really good that that's always an option. And that was the better option because it was either we're going to continue sinking more time into this, or we can stop it now. And then we can move on to more important work. CHRIS: Sunk costs and all that. STEPH: Yeah. I feel like it's so rare when that really happens because then we just feel dedicated to like, well, we're going to make this valuable to somebody. We're going to keep this. And in this case, we just threw it away. It's very nice. CHRIS: There's a similar anecdote that I remember. Actually, I think it's happened more than once. But very particularly, we were working on a system. And this was with our friend, Matt Sumner, a friend of the show, as well been on a few times. And Matt was working on the project. And we got to a point where we had two competing implementations of a given workflow, and we were opting to go with the new one. But there were folks that were saying, "Let's keep the code around for the old one." And Matt was like, "Absolutely not. If we do that, we might go...no, this will be bad. Then we have to maintain that code. We need to burn the ships," as he said. And he actually named the pull request burn the ships where he just removed all the code. And I was like, I like your style, man. You made a decision here. We collectively made a decision. And then this is a classic Matt Sumner move. But he did the thing that we said we were going to do. And he just held that line. And I really appreciated it. And it's a voice that I have in the back of my head often now, which is just like, no, burn the ships. If we need it, it'll be in Git history. We can recover it. But it's going to need to be handled in the interim. We don't want to have to support that code right now and for however long until we actually decide to remove it from the codebase. So let's get rid of it. And if we really need it, well, then we'll resurrect it, but for now, burn the ships. And I like that. STEPH: I like that too. I think it's one of those areas where it takes experience to feel that pain too. If you're pretty new to writing code, you're going to think, well, we can keep it around. There's no harm. And so it often has to be that sage, that person who's been around long enough and felt some pain from making that decision in prior centuries or years. And he's like, "No, we're not going to do this." The WE collective of developers who have experienced the pain from this understand that that's not a good choice. And so we're going to burn the ships instead. But it is one of those that if you're newer, you won't think that way. And I think that's totally reasonable that you wouldn't think that immediately. CHRIS: I think that tacit knowledge that oh, I've gone through this before, and I've experienced the pain, and now let me tell you about that. And let me try and share that with you because there's always the cost-benefit trade-off. Because if that code stays in the codebase, then we know it works because we've kept it around for that whole time. And so there's a nicety to that, but there's a cost, that maintenance cost. And being able to express that well and being able to say, "I've been here, and let me tell you a tale," but do it in a way that doesn't sound overly condescending or explainy or things like that. I think that's a very subtle skill and a very important one, and frankly, really hard one to get right. I'm not sure I always hit the mark on that where I'm just like, "No, can't do it. It's bad." I think it's very easy to end up in a space where you're just like, "No, it's bad." And they're like, "But why?" And you're like, "Because it's bad. Trust me." It's like, well, I feel like you do need to be able to explain the stories, the experiences that you've had in the past, the anecdotes that you've heard, the blog posts that you've read that have really informed your thinking. But I think that is a big part of what it means to continue on in this profession and be able to do the work and make those subtle trade-offs, and the it depends because, at the end of the day, it all depends. STEPH: Or you just issue a pull request and title it burn the ships. [laughs] CHRIS: Burn the ships. Indeed, that is, in fact an option. And actually, while we're on the topic of pull requests, this might be a perfect segue into a listener question that we have. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. CHRIS: As always, thanks to everyone who sends in listener questions. We so appreciate getting them. They help direct the conversation and give us something to chat about. So this question comes in from Bryan Robles. And Bryan writes in about large pull requests. And Bryan writes in with, "My toxic trait is large pull requests. Any tips on when you get into a place where you're fixing or refactoring something, and it ends up cascading to many more changes than you want it to? I sometimes can go back and break it up. But it's hard to recognize a good seam when you're in the thick of it." So, Steph, what do you think? Large pull requests and finding yourself in them after [laughs] certain amounts of time. STEPH: Yeah, speaking of that knowledge that often comes from experience, this is something that I'm certainly always striving to get better at. I think it does take practice. There are some things that I do that I can share. And I categorize them really into a before, and I guess midway. So there's the before I set sail and set off to deeper waters list that I will think through as I'm starting a new task, and then there's the I'm lost at sea. And then, I need to figure out how I'm going to organize this change. So in the first category, when I'm first starting off a task, I consider what sort of changes need to be made, and are there any obvious roadblocks? So an obvious roadblock may be changing or updating a model that has one relationship, and I need to change it to has many relationships. Or perhaps there's a part of the application that is untested. And before I make any changes, I need to document that existing behavior. And that really falls neatly within Kent Beck's advice where he said, "First make the change easy (warning: this might be hard) and then make the easy change." So I try to think upfront what are some of the small, incremental changes that I can make first that will then make the final change easy? And then I separate that mentally into PRs. Or I may separate it into tickets, whatever is going to help me stay organized and communicate how I'm breaking up that work. And then the other thing that I'll do is I'll consider what's my MVP? So what's my minimum viable pull request? What set of changes include just enough changes to be helpful to users or to other developers? Which, by the way, is also a helpful mindset to have when you're breaking down work into tickets. So, as an example, let's say that I need to fix some bad data that's causing a site to error. So my first step could be to write a task to fix the bad data. And then, step two, prevent bad data from being created. And then probably step three, I need to rerun the task to fix data that was created during step two. But I can think through each of those steps and separate them into different pull requests. And then there may also be the question of well, how small is too small? Like you're saying, what's a minimum viable pull request? How do I know if I am not delivering value? And that one gets a little trickier and vague. But ultimately, I will think, does it pass CI? Is this change deployable? And then I do have to define what value I'm delivering. And I think that's a common area that folks struggle because we'll think of delivering value as delivering a whole new feature or adding complete test coverage for an untested interface. But delivering value doesn't have to represent that end goal. It may be that you added one test for an untested interface. And that's still delivering really great value to your team, same for delivering a feature to a user. You may be able to speak with that wonderful product manager and find what's the smallest bit of value that you can deliver instead of the whole feature set? I think the smallest PR I can think of that I've issued is either fixing a typo or removing a focus metadata from an RSpec test. So that's my starting point. That's the before I set sail. Those are some of the things I think about. I have more for the I'm lost at sea. But what are your thoughts? CHRIS: First, that was a great summary that you gave. So I totally agree with everything that you just said. I think part of the question I would have...So Bryan wrote this in and described this as his toxic trait. So he's identifying this as something that seemingly consistently plagues him. So I would ask, is there a way that you can introduce something? Like, are there natural breaks in your day? And can you ask the question at those breaks? Like, hey, I've been working on a thing for a little while. Is there a version that I could...like, could I close off a body of work at this moment? When you break for lunch, if you go grab coffee in the morning, when you're leaving at the end of the day, use those natural breakpoints. I'm not sure exactly what you mean when you say large pull requests. But if those are spanning multiple days, in my mind, if anything starts to span more than a day, I will start to ask that question to myself. And that's a reflex that I built up over time by feeling the pain of large pull requests and putting it up, and feeling apologetic. And then having my colleagues gently, professionally kindly ask me to break it down into smaller pieces. And me saying, "I really don't want it. All right, fine, fine, fine, I'll do it." And then I do it. And it's one of those things that I never want to do in the first place, but I'm always happy to have done after the fact. But it is work. And so, if I can get better at pulling that thinking and pulling that question earlier in the process, that I think is really useful. Similarly, I will try to, again, as friendly as I can; if I notice someone mentioning the same body of work at stand up for a few days, I might gently ask, "Hey, is there a way that we can find a shippable version of a portion of that of a subset? Can we put it up behind a feature flag and get something out there just to try and keep the PR small, et cetera?" And so gently nudge in that direction. And then I think the other side of that is being very okay with one character PRs. Like, that's it. We changed one character. It turns out we need to pluralize that word, or we need one-line changes are great. That's fine. And more pull requests, in my mind, are better than fewer, larger pull requests. And so really embracing that and having that be part of the core conversation and demonstrating that throughout the team is a way to share this idea. So that's perhaps more in the process or person point of view on this as opposed to the technical, but that's part of the consideration that I would have. I am interested, and I'll bounce back to, Steph, what you were saying of now that you're out at sea, what do you do? STEPH: So I need to react positively to some of the things that you just said because you made me think of two things. One of them is I've never had someone say, "Hey, Steph, that PR is too small. Could you add some more changes to it? Could you do some more work?" I have had people say, "Hey, that PR was hard to review." But even then, sometimes getting that feedback from folks is hard because nobody really wants to say, "I had a hard time reviewing your PR." That's something that, over time, you may become really comfortable saying to someone. But I think initially, people don't want to say, "Hey, that was hard to review," or "There were a lot of changes in that. Would you break it down?" Because that's a lot of complex emotions and discussion to have there. But yeah, I just figured I'd share that I have never had someone complain that a PR is too small, and I've issued a single character change. And then I love, love how much you asked the question of what's the problem we're trying to solve? And so there's this ambiguous idea of a large PR. But what does that mean? What are the pain points? What are we actually looking to change about our behavior? And then how is that going to impact or benefit the team or benefit ourselves? And so, going back to the question of how do we measure this? How do I know I'm starting to break up my changes in a helpful way? We may need to circle back to that because I don't have answers to it. But I just really like asking that question. As for the I'm lost at sea part, or maybe you're not lost at sea, but you've caught too many fish, and the fish warden is going to fuss at you if you bring too many fish back to dock. I don't think this is a real nautical example. But here we are. CHRIS: Was that the fish warden? STEPH: Yeah, the fish warden. You know, the fish warden. [laughs] CHRIS: Sure, I do, yeah. Yeah, I know about that, well-versed in fish law. STEPH: [laughs] Got to know your fish law. If we're going to talk about pull requests, you got to introduce fish law. But I'm actually going to quote Joël Quenneville, a fellow thoughtboter, because they shared a thoughtful thread on Twitter that talks a lot about breaking up your changes and how to break up your pull requests and your commits. And I'll be sure to include a link in the show notes because it's really worth reading as there's a lot of knowledge in that thread. But one of the things that Joël says is get comfortable with Git, and it makes a world of difference. In particular, you want to get really good at git add --patch, git reset, and git rebase interactive. And that is so true for me. Once I have gotten really good at using those commands, then I feel like I can break up anything. Because often when I am helping someone break something up, it's often they want to, but they're like, "I don't know how. And this is going to take so much of my time. It doesn't feel efficient and the right thing to do." And they're probably right. If you don't know how to break it up, then it may take you too long. And maybe it's not worth it at that point. But if you can ask a friend, and they can help walk you through this process, or if you can learn on your own, that's going to be a game-changer because you will start to think about how can I separate these commits? And I can reorder them, and then issue separate PRs, or just keep them in separate commits, whatever process you're looking to improve. In fact, there's a really great course on Upcase called Mastering Git written by someone who is co-host of this podcast. And it has a lot of great videos and tutorials that will help you get really good at these Git commands and then will help you split up your commits. CHRIS: Oh yeah, I did do that. Warning: it's like three and a half hours long. But it is broken up into, I believe, 10 or 11 videos. So you can find just the ones that you want. There's a couple in the middle that I think are particularly useful talking about the object model of Git. Git is weird, unfortunately. And so I spent a bunch of time in that course. Also, thank you for the kind words, Steph. [laughs] But I spent a bunch of time in that course trying to make Git less weird or understandable. If you look under the hood, it starts to make more sense. But if you really want to get comfortable with manipulating Git history, which I think is a really useful skill for this conversation that we're having, that's the only way I found to do it, just memorizing the steps. It's always going to feel a little bit foreign. But once you understand the stuff under the hood, that's a really useful thing for being able to manipulate and tease apart a pull request and break it into different things, and port things from one branch to another, and all those fun activities. Yeah, man, that was a bunch of years ago too. I wonder what I look like in it. Huh. STEPH: I really liked that episode, the one you just mentioned, the Git Object Model. Now that you've mentioned it, I remember watching it, and it's very interesting. So yeah, thank you for making all this helpful content for folks. There's also a blog post that we can include in the show notes as well that is a really nice overview of using git interactive, and rebase, and squash and amend those types of behaviors as well. So will be sure to include both so folks can check those out. And then to round things out, one of the other things that I will do is I will ask a friend. I will ask someone for help. So we've talked about some of these behaviors, or some of these processes that we have are really built up from experience and practice. And you can watch a lot of helpful content, and you can read blog posts. But sometimes, it really just takes time to get good at it. I know, as I'd mentioned earlier, I am always still looking to improve this particular skill because I think it's so valuable. And one of the ways I do that is I will just phone a friend. And I'll say, "Hey, can we chat for a bit? I would like to show you my changes. I want to hear from you if you see something in here that's valuable that you think can be shipped independently, so that way we can get it delivered faster." Or it may be a change that's just like a test improvement or something. And we can go ahead and get that immediately released to the team, and it will benefit them. Or you may want to do this at the start of a ticket. If I am new to a project or when I am new to a project, I will often ask someone to break down a ticket with me if I'm feeling a little bit uncertain. Or just say, "Hey, do you see any clean lines of division here? I feel like there's a lot in this ticket. You're more familiar with the codebase. What would you ship? How would you ship this incrementally?" and have someone else walk through the process with you. CHRIS: Yep, the phone a friend and/or, as always, pairing is a wonderful tool in these sorts of situations. The one other thing that comes to mind for me is part of the question was about sometimes it's difficult to find a clear parting line within a larger body of work, within a larger change. And that can definitely be true. I think there are certain standouts of like is this a refactoring that can be shipped separately? Is this a test change that would be useful on its own? Is there a model change that we could break out and have just that go out? So there's a bunch of mechanical questions that we can ask and say; here's categories of things that might fit that bill. But to flip this to the other side, the question was asked by Bryan very much as an I struggle with this thing. This is my toxic trait is the phrase that he used, which I thought was really interesting. And that can be true. This can be something that if you're consistently and uniquely within the team producing these giant PRs and then folks find that difficult to review, then I think that is absolutely something to work on. But if this is something that is happening between members like, other members of the team are also finding that they keep ending up with PRs that are bigger than they expected and taking longer and harder to review, there is a question of is the codebase actually in a shape that makes it harder to do small changes? There's the phrase shotgun surgery, which refers to a codebase that is so entangled and coupled that any change requires modifying ten files just to make one small alteration. And I think that's a worthwhile question to step back and ask, actually, is it not me? Is it actually the codebase? It could be both certainly. But there is a version of your codebase is coupled in a way that means that any even small, tiny change requires touching so many different places in the code. And if that's true, that's at least worth naming and worth highlighting and maybe talking about in retro and saying, hey, this feels like it's true. So maybe we start to get intentional about refactoring, and breaking out, and starting to add those dividing lines within the code such that hopefully, down the road, small changes can, in fact, be small changes. So that is the one last thing that I would consider here. Also, anecdotally, this is just a thing that came to mind. As I've worked with strongly-typed languages, systems that have a compiler, and have a type system, and the ability for the compiler to keep an eye on the whole codebase, I've noticed that it's very easy to do this sort of thing where I just start with one small data model change, and then the compiler is like, oh, you got to go fix it here, and here, and here, and here. And I found that because the compiler is your friend and will just point you to all the places you need to make the change, it is very easy to just keep going because some of that mechanical work is happening on your behalf. And it's a wonderful facet of typed languages and of having a compiler and being able to have that conversation with the compiler. But I found that for me, it is much easier to end up in this mode where I'm like, oh no, this PR is way too large. When I'm working in a system that has types, that has a compiler, that frankly makes it a little bit easier to chase down all the places you need to make a change. So that's also a consideration. It's not necessarily a good or a bad thing, just something that I've observed that feels like it's adjacent to this conversation. But yeah, I think those are my thoughts. STEPH: Yeah, those are great points. I've certainly worked on projects where that felt very true where it's a small change, but it would cascade throughout the project. And all the changes were necessary. It wasn't something that I could split into smaller PRs. So checking if it is the codebase that's really making it hard to have small PRS is a really great idea. CHRIS: Who'd have thunk such a little question could get us rambling for so long? Oh, wait, I would have thunk that. STEPH: And so far, reflecting on the things that we've talked about so far, I think I've talked a good game of where I'm saying, "Oh, I identify the seams upfront, and then I organize and create different tickets." And that is very much not the case. That's the really ideal outcome. But often, I am in the thick of things where like you just said...and it's this moment of, oh, I've done a lot in this PR. And how can I break this up? And that does take time. And it becomes a conversation of trade-off, which is why those Git skills really come in handy because then it will lower the cost of then splitting things out for others. But for people that are struggling with creating smaller PRs, I do think it's very fair to ask your team for help. I think it's also fair that if you issued a large pull request and folks have already reviewed it, and it's gotten approved, and someone makes a comment like, "Oh, this would be great as two PRs instead of one," to say, "Awesome, thank you for letting me know. I will take that forward with me, but I'm not going to do it for this PR." I wouldn't recommend making that a habit. But just know that that is something that you can say to someone to say, "I think this one is good to go at this point. But I will keep that in mind for future PRs. And I may even reach out to you for help if I feel like I'm having trouble splitting up a PR." And bring that person into your progress and use them as an accountability buddy. They can be someone that helps you down that path towards smaller PRs. CHRIS: Yeah, I definitely agree with that, although it becomes a very subtle line. Saying, "Thank you, but no thank you," in a pull request or to feedback is delicate. It's difficult. That's a whole thing. But I agree there have been times where I have either been the one making that decision or suggesting that or being like, "We probably should have broken this up. But we're far enough along now. Let's get this merged. And then we'll iterate on it after the fact." One last thing, actually. I thought I was done, but I have one more thing, which is I feel like there's a strong parallel between test-driven development and this question in that, often, I hear folks saying, "I don't know how to write tests upfront. I don't know how to do that. I know after the fact I can write tests, and I can add them after." And that can definitely be true. It can become more obvious after you've written the code how you could then write a test that would constrain that behavior that would interact with the system. But I think the useful thing that you can do there is take a moment and pause there and say, "Okay, now that I have written the test, what would it look like if I had written this in the first place?" Or if you really want to go for it, throw away the code, try again. Start with the test first and then rebuild it. That's maybe a little much. But that thing of taking these moments of maybe you don't know upfront how to break the work into smaller pieces, but then you get to the end, and you have that conversation with someone. And they highlight where some parting lines would be, or you figure it out after the fact. Stay there in that moment. Meditate on it a bit and try and internalize that knowledge because that's how moving forward, you might know how to do this in the future. So take those moments, whether it be with TDD or with pull requests, or breaking up a ticket into smaller tickets, anything like that. And spend a moment there and try and internalize that knowledge so that you have it proactively moving forward. STEPH: You know how Slack has status? I really like the idea of there being a status that's meditating on...and you can fill it in. And the example that you just provided, meditating on splitting up a pull request or meditating on how to write a test first, [laughs] I think that would be delightful. CHRIS: I, too, think that would be delightful. But with that long, adventurous answer to what seemed like a simple question, and they always do, but here we are, shall we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeeee! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Swyx Mixtape
Sidekiq Race Conditions [Chris Toomey]

The Swyx Mixtape

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 11, 2021 11:19


Listen to The Bikeshed (24mins in) https://www.bikeshed.fm/313TranscriptSo we had a bug that occurred in the application where something was supposed to have happened. And then there was an email that needed to go out to tell the user that this thing had happened. And the bug popped up within AppSignal and said something was nil that shouldn't have been nil.Particularly, we're using a gem called Time For a Boolean, which is by Caleb Hearth. And he's a former thoughtboter and maintains this wonderful gem that instead of having a Boolean for like, is this thing approved, or is it paid? Or is it processed? You use a timestamp. And then this gem gives you nice Boolean-like methods on top of that timestamp. Because it turns out, very often just having the Boolean of like, this was paid, it turns out you really want to know when it was paid. That would be a really useful piece of information. And so, while you're still in Postgres land, it's nice to be able to reach for this and have the affordances of the Boolean-like interface but also have the timestamp where available.So anyway, the email was trying to process but that timestamp...let's pretend that it was paid as the one that matters here so paid at was nil, which was very concerning. Because this was the email that's like, hey, that thing was processed. Or let's say it was processed, actually, because that's closer to what it was. Hey, this thing was processed, and here's an email notification to tell you that. But the process timestamp was nil. I was like, oh no. Oh no. And so when I saw this pop up, I was like, this is very bad. Everything is very bad. Oh goodness.Turns out what had happened was...because I very quickly chased after this, looked in the background job queue, looked in Sidekiq's UI, and the job was gone. So it had been processed. I was like, wait a minute, how? How did this fix itself? Like, that's not the kind of bug that resolves itself, except, in this case, it was. This was an interaction that I'd run into many times before. Sidekiq was immediately processing the job. But the job was being enqueued from within the context of a database transaction. And the database transaction had not been committed yet. But Sidekiq was already off to the races trying to process.So the record that was being worked on, the database record, had local changes within the context of that transaction, but that hadn't been committed. Sidekiq then reads that record from the database, but it's now out of sync because that tiny bit of Sidekiq is apparently very fast off to the races immediately. And so there's just this tiny little bit of time that can occur. And this is also a fun one where this isn't going to happen every time. It's only going to happen sometimes. Like, if the queue had a couple of other things in it, Sidekiq probably would have not gotten to this until the database transaction had fully closed.So the failure mode here is super annoying. But the solution is pretty easy. You just have to make sure that you enqueue outside of the database transaction. But I'm going to be honest, that's difficult to always do right.STEPH: That's a gnarly bug or something to investigate that I don't think I have run into before. Could you talk a little bit more about enqueueing the job outside the database transaction?CHRIS: Sure. And I think I've talked about this on a previous episode a while back because I have run into this one a few times. But I think it is sufficiently rare; like, you need almost a perfect storm because the database transaction is going to close very quickly. Sidekiq needs to be all that much more speedy in picking up the job in order for this to happen.But basically, the idea is within some processing logic that we have in our system; we find a record, we do some work. And then we need to update that record to assign this timestamp or whatever it is. And then we also want to inform the user, so we're going to enqueue a job to send the email notification. But for all of the database work, we are wrapping it in a transaction because we want it to either succeed or fail atomically. So there are three different records that we need to update. We want all of them to be updated or none of them to be updated. So, therefore, we wrap it in a transaction.And the way we had written, this was to also enqueue the job from within the transaction. That wasn't something we were actively intentionally doing because those are different systems. It doesn't really mean anything. But we were still within the block of ApplicationRecord.transaction do. We're now inside of that block. We're doing all of the record updates. And then the last piece of work that we want to think about is enqueueing the job to send the email.The problem is if we're still within that database transaction if it's yet to be committed, then when Sidekiq picks up that job to run it, it will see the prior state of the world. And it's only if the Sidekiq job waits a little bit that then the database transaction will have been committed. The record is now updated and available to be read by Sidekiq in the correct updated state.And so there's this tiny little bit of inconsistency that can happen. It's basically because Sidekiq is going out to Redis, which is a distinct system. It doesn't have any knowledge of the database transaction at play. That's why I sometimes consider using a Postgres-backed background job system because then actually the job can be as part of the database transaction.STEPH: Cool. That's helpful. That makes a lot of sense the way you explained the whole you're actually enqueueing the job from inside that transaction. I'm curious, that prompts another question. In the case where you mentioned you're using a transaction because you want to make sure that if something fails to update so, everything gets updated together, in the event that something does fail to update because you were previously enqueueing that job from the transaction, does that mean that the update could have failed but that email would still have gone out?CHRIS: That does not. And the reason for that is because we're within dry-monad world. And so dry-monad will implicitly capture the ActiveRecord rollback, which I think is an exception that gets raised or somehow...But basically, if that database transaction fails for any reason and ends up getting rolled back, then dry-monads will not continue processing through the rest of the sequential operation. And so, therefore, even if we move the enqueuing of the email outside of the database transaction, the sequential nature of that processing and the dry-monad stuff that we have in play will handle that. And I think that would more generally be true because I think Rails raises an exception on rollback. Not certain there. But I know in our case, we're fine on that. And we have actually explicitly checked7 for that sort of thing.STEPH: So I meant a slightly different question because that makes sense to me everything that you just said where if it's outside of the transaction, then that sequential order won't fire because of that ActiveRecord migration error. But when you have the enqueuing inside of the transaction because then that's going to be inside of the sequential order, maybe before the rollback error gets raised. Does that make sense?CHRIS: Yes. I think what you're asking is basically like, do we make sure to not send the job if the rest of the stuff didn't succeed?STEPH: I'm just wondering from a transaction perspective, actually. If you have a transaction wrapped block and then you have in there, like, update this record, send email, end block, let's say update...well, I guess it's going raise because you've got probably like an update bank. Okay, so then yeah, you won't get to the next line. Got it. Got it. Got it. I just had to walk myself through that because I forgot that you probably...I have to visualize [laughs] as to what that code probably looks like. All right, that answered my question.CHRIS: Okay. So back up to the top level then, this is the problem that we have. And looking through the codebase, we actually have it in a bunch of different places. So the solution in any one of those cases is to just take the line of code where we're saying enqueue UserMailer.deliver_later take that line of code, move it outside of the database transaction, and make sure it only happens if the database transaction succeeds. That's very easy to do in one case.But my concern was this is a very easy failure mode to end up in. And this is a very easy incorrect version of the code to write. As far as I can tell, we never want to write the code where this is happening inside of the transaction because it has this failure mode. But how do we enforce that? That was the thing that came to mind. So I immediately did a quick look of like, is there a RuboCop thing I can do here or something?And I actually found something even more specific, which was so exciting to find. It's a gem called Isolator. And its job is to detect non-atomic interactions within database transactions. And so it's fantastic. I was like, wait, really? Is this going to do the thing? And so I just installed the gem, configured it where I wanted, and then ran the test suite. And it showed me every place throughout the app right now where we were doing this pattern of behavior like enqueueing work from within a database transaction, which was great.STEPH: Ooh, that's really nifty. I kind of want to install that and just run it on my current client's codebase and see what I find.CHRIS: This feels like something like strong migrations where it's like, yeah, this is great. I kind of want to have this as part of my core toolset now. This one feels even perhaps slightly more so because sometimes I look at strong migrations, and I'm like, no, no, no, strong migrations, I get why you would say that, but for reasons, this is actually fine. And they have configurations within it to say, like, no, this is okay. Isolator feels like it's always telling me something I want to know. So this, very quickly, I'm like, I think this might be part of my toolset moving forward on every single app forever.

The Bike Shed
315: Emotions Are A Pendulum

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 9, 2021 41:23


Steph talks about starting a new project and identifying "focused" tests while Chris shares his latest strategy for managing flaky tests. They also ponder the squishy "it depends" side of software and respond to a listener question about testing all commits in a pull request. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. rspec-retry (https://github.com/NoRedInk/rspec-retry) Cassidy Williams - It Depends - GitHub Universe 2021 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMWh2uLO9OM) Say No To More Process (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/say-no-to-more-process-say-yes-to-trust) StandardRB (https://github.com/testdouble/standard) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: My new computer is due on the fourth. I'm so close. STEPH: On the fourth? CHRIS: On the fourth. STEPH: That's so exciting. CHRIS: And I'm very excited. But no, I don't want to upgrade any software on this computer anymore. Never again shall I update a piece of software on this computer. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: This is its final state. And then I will take its soul and move it into the new computer, and we'll go from there. [chuckles] STEPH: Take its soul. [laughs] CHRIS: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we learn along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. Let's see. It's been kind of a busy week. It's been a busy family week. Utah, my dog, hasn't been feeling well as you know because you and I have chatted off-mic about that a bit. So he is still recovering from something, I don't know what. He's still on most days his normal captain chaos self, but then other days, he's not feeling well. So I'm just keeping a close eye on him. And then I also got some other family illnesses going on. So it has been a busy family week for sure. On the more technical project side, I am wrapping up my current project. So I have one more week, and then I will shift into a new project, which I'm very excited about. And you and I have chatted about this several times. So there's always just that interesting phase where you're trying to wrap up and hand things off and then accomplish last-minute wishlist items for a project before then you start with a new one. So I am currently in that phase. CHRIS: How long were you on this project for? STEPH: It'll be a total of I think eight months. CHRIS: Eight months, that's healthy. That's a bunch. It's always interesting to be on a project for that long but then not longer. There were plenty of three and four-month projects that I did. And you can definitely get a large body of work done. You can look back at it and proudly stare at the code that you have written. But that length of time is always interesting to me because you end up really...for me, when I've had projects that went that long but then not longer, I always found that to be an interesting breaking point. How are you feeling moving on from it? Are you ready for something new? Are you sad to be moving on? Do you feel attached to things? STEPH: It's always a mix. I'm definitely attached to the team, and then there are always lots of things that I'd still love to work on with that team. But then, I am also excited to start something new. That's why I love this role of consulting because then I get to hop around and see new projects and challenges and work with new people. I'm thinking seven to eight months might be a sweet spot for me in terms of the length of a project. Because I find that first month with a project, I'm really still ramping up, I'm getting comfortable, I'm getting in the groove, and I'm contributing within a short amount of time. But I still feel like that first month; I'm getting really comfortable with this new environment that I'm in. And so then I have that first month. And then, at six months, I have more of heads-down time. And I get to really focus and work with a team. And then there's that transition period, and it's nice to know when that's coming up for several weeks, so then I have a couple of weeks to then start working on that transition phase. So eight months might be perfect because then it's like a month for onboarding, ramping up, getting comfortable. And then six months of focus, and then another month of just focusing on what needs to be transitioned so then I can transition off the team. CHRIS: All right. Well, now we've defined it - eight months is the perfect length of a project. STEPH: That's one of the things I like about the Boost team is because we typically have longer engagements. So that was one of the reasons when we were splitting up the teams in thoughtbot that I chose the Boost team because I was like, yeah, I like the six-month-plus project. Speaking of that wishlist, there are little things that I've wanted to make improvements on but haven't really had time to do. There's one that's currently on my mind that I figured I'd share with you in case you have thoughts on it. But I am a big proponent of using the RSpec focus filter for when running tests. So that way, I can just prefix a context it block or describe block with F, and then RSpec I can just run all the tests. But RSpec will only run the tests that I've prefixed with that F focus command., and I love it. But we are running into some challenges with it because right now, there's nothing that catches that in a pull request. So if you commit that focus filter on some of your tests, and then that gets pushed up, if someone doesn't notice it while reviewing your pull request, then that gets merged into main. And all of the tests are still green, but it's only a subset of the tests that are actually running. And so it's been on my mind that I'd love something that's going to notice that, that's going to catch it, something that is not just us humans doing our best but something that's automated that's going to notice it for us. And I have some thoughts. But I'm curious, have you run into something like this? Do you have a way that you avoid things like that from sneaking into the main branch? CHRIS: Interestingly, I have not run into this particular problem with RSpec, and that's because of the way that I run RSpec tests. I almost never use the focus functionality where you actually change the code file to say, instead of it, it is now fit to focus that it. I tend to lean into the functionality where RSpec you can pass it the line number just say, file: and then line number. And RSpec will automatically figure out which either spec or context block or entire file. And also, I have Vim stuff that allows me to do that very easily from the file. It's very rare that I would want to run more than one file. So basically, with that, I have all of the flexibility I need. And it doesn't require any changes to the file. So that's almost always how I'm working in that mode. I really love that. And it makes me so sad when I go to JavaScript test runners because they don't have that. That said, I've definitely felt a very similar thing with ESLint and ESLint yelling at me for having a console.log. And I'm like, ESLint, I'm working here. I got to debug some stuff, so if you could just calm down for a minute. And what I would like is a differentiation between these are checks that should only run in CI but definitely need to run in CI. And so I think an equivalent would be there's probably a RuboCop rule that says disallow fit or disallow any of the focus versions for RSpec. But I only want those to run in CI. And this has been a pain point that I felt a bunch of times. And it's never been painful enough that I put in the effort to fix it. But I really dislike particularly that version of I'm in my editor, and I almost always want there to be no warnings within the editor. I love that TypeScript or ESLint, or other things can run within the editor and tell me what's going on. But I want them to be contextually aware. And that's the dream I've yet to get there. STEPH: I like the idea of ESLint having a work mode where you're like, back off, I am in work mode right now. [chuckles] I understand that I won't commit this. CHRIS: I'm working here. [laughter] STEPH: And I like the idea of a RuboCop. So that's where my mind went initially is like, well, maybe there's a custom cop, or maybe there's an existing one, and I just haven't noticed it yet. But so I'm adding a rule that says, hey, if you do see an fcontext, fdescribe, ffit, something like that, please fail. Please let us know, so we don't merge this in. So that's on my wishlist, not my to-don't list. That one is on my to-do list. CHRIS: I'm also intrigued, though, because the particular failure mode that you're describing is you take what is an entire spec suite, and instead, you focus down to one context block within a given file. So previously, there were 700 specs that ran, and now there are 12. And that's actually something that I would love for Circle or whatever platform you're running your tests on to be like, hey, just as a note, you had been slowly creeping up and had hit a high watermark of roughly 700 specs. And then today, we're down to 12. So either you did some aggressive grooming, or something's wrong. But a heuristic analysis of like, I know sometimes people delete specs, and that's a thing that's okay but probably not this many. So maybe something went wrong there. STEPH: I feel like we're turning CI into this friend at the bar that's like, "Hey, you've had a couple of drinks. I just wanted to check in with you to make sure that you're good." [laughs] CHRIS: Yes. STEPH: "You've had 100 tests that were running and now only 50. Hey, friend, how are you? What's going on?" CHRIS: "This doesn't sound like you. You're normally a little more level-headed." [laughs] And that's the CI that is my friend that keeps me honest. It's like, "Wait, you promised never to overspend anymore, and yet you're overspending." I'm like, "Thank you, CI. You're right; I did say I want the test to pass." STEPH: [laughs] I love it. I'll keep you posted if I figure something out; if I either turn CI into that friend, that lets me know when my behavior has changed in a concerning way, and an intervention is needed. Or, more likely, I will see if there's a RuboCop or some other process that I can apply that will check for this, which I imagine will be fast. I mean, we're very mindful about ensuring our test suite doesn't slow down as we're running it. But I'm just thinking about this out loud. If we add that additional cop, I imagine that will be fast. So I don't think that's too much of an overhead to add to our CI process. CHRIS: If you've already got RuboCop in there, I'm guessing the incremental cost of one additional cop is very small. But yeah, it is interesting. That general thing of I want CI to go fast; I definitely feel that feel. And we're slowly creeping up on the project I'm working on. I think we're at about somewhere between five to six minutes, but we've gotten there pretty quickly where not that long ago; it was only three minutes. We're adding a lot of features specs, and so they are definitely accruing slowdowns in our CI. And they're worth it; I think, because they're so valuable. And they test the whole integration of everything, but it's a thing that I'm very closely watching. And I have a long list of things that I might pursue when I decide it's time for CI to get a haircut, as it were. STEPH: I have a very hot tip for a way to speed up your test, and that is to check if any of your tests have a very long sleep in them. That came up recently [chuckles] this week where someone was working in a test and found some relic that had been added a while back that then wasn't caught. And I think it was a sleep 30. And they were like, "Hey, I just sped up our test by 30 seconds." I was like, ooh, we should grep now to see if there's anything else like that. [laughs] CHRIS: Oh, I love the sentence we should grep now. [laughter] The correct response to this is to grep immediately. I thought you were going to go with the pro tip of you can just focus down to one context block. And then the specs will run so much faster because you're ignoring most of them, but we don't want to do that. The sleep, though, that's a pro tip. And that does feel like a thing that there could be a cop for, like, never sleep more than...frankly, let's try not to sleep at all but also, add a sleep in our specs. We can sleep in life; it's important, but anyway. [chuckles] STEPH: [laughs] That was the second hot tip, and you got it. CHRIS: Lots of hot tips. Well, I'm going to put this in the category of good idea, terrible idea. I won't call it a hot tip. It's a thing we're trying. So much as we have tried to build a spec suite that is consistent and deterministic and tells us only the truth, feature specs, even in our best efforts, still end up flaking from time to time. We'll have feature specs that fail, and then eventually, on a subsequent rerun, they will pass. And I am of the mindset that A, we should try and look into those and see if there is a real cause to it. But sometimes, just the machinery of feature specs, there's so much going on there. We've got the additional overhead of we're running it within a JavaScript context. There's just so much there that...let me say what I did, and then we can talk more about the context. So there's a gem called RSpec::Retry. It comes from the wonderful folks over at NoRedInk, a well-known Elm shop for anyone out there in the Elm world. But RSpec::Retry does basically what it says in the name. If the spec fails, you can annotate specs. In our case, we've only enabled this for the feature specs. And you can tell it to retry, and you can say, "Retry up to this many times," and et cetera, et cetera. So I have enabled this for our feature specs. And I've only enabled it on CI. That's an important distinction. This does not run locally. So if you run a feature spec and it fails locally, that's a good chance for us to intervene and look at whether or not there's some flakiness there. But on CI, I particularly don't want the case where we have a pull request, everything's great, and we merge that pull request, and then the subsequent rebuild, which again, as a note, I would rather that Circle not rebuild it because we've already built that one. But that is another topic that I have talked about in the past, and we'll probably talk about it again in the future. But setting that aside, Circle will rebuild on the main branch when we merge in, and sometimes we'll see failures there. And that's where it's most painful. Like, this is now the deploy queue. This is trying to get this out into whatever environment we're deploying to. And it is very sad when that fails. And I have to go in and manually say, hey, rebuild. I know that this works because it just worked in the pull request, and it's the same commit hash. So I know deterministically for reasons that this should work. And then it does work on a rebuild. So we introduced RSpec::Retry. We have wrapped it around our feature specs. And so now I believe we have three possible retries. So if it fails once, it'll try it again, and then it'll try it a third time. So far, we've seen each time that it has had to step in; it will pass on the subsequent run. But I don't know; there was some very gentle pushback or concerns; let's call them when I introduced this pull request from another developer on the team, saying, "I don't know, though, I feel like this is something that we should solve at the root layer. The failures are a symptom of flaky tests, or inconsistency or et cetera, and so I'd rather not do this." And I said, "Yeah, I know. But I'm going to merge it," and then I merged it. We had a better conversation about that. I didn't just broadly overrule. But I said, "I get it, but I don't see the obvious place to shore this up. I don't see where we're doing weird inconsistent things in our code. This is just, I think, inherent complexity of feature specs." So I did it, but yeah, good idea, terrible idea. What do you think, Steph? Maybe terrible is too strong of a word. Good idea, mediocre idea. STEPH: I like the original branding. I like the good idea, terrible idea. Although you're right, that terrible is a very strong branding. So I am biased right now, so I'm going to lead in answering your question by stating that because our current project has that problem as well where we have these flaky tests. And it's one of those that, yes, we need to look at them. And we have fixed a large number of them, but there are still more of them. And it becomes a question of are we actually doing something wrong here that then we need to fix? Or, like you said, is it just the nature of these features-specs? Some of them are going to occasionally fail. What reasonable improvements can we make to address this at the root cause? I'm interested enough that I haven't heard of RSpec::Retry that I want to check it out because when you add that, you annotate a test. When a test fails, does it run the entire build, or will it rerun just that test? Do you happen to know? CHRIS: Just the test. So it's configured as in a round block on the feature specs. And so you tell it like, for any feature spec, it's like config.include for feature specs RSpec::Retry or whatever. So it's just going to rerun the one feature spec that failed when and if that happens. So it's very, very precise as well in that sense where when we have a failure merging into the main branch, I have to rebuild the whole thing. So that's five or six minutes plus whatever latency for me to notice it, et cetera, whereas this is two more seconds in our CI runtime. So that's great. But again, the question is, am I hiding? Am I dealing with the symptoms and not the root cause, et cetera? STEPH: Is there a report that's provided at the end that does show these are the tests that failed and we had to rerun them? CHRIS: I believe no-ish. You can configure it to output, but it's just going to be outputting to standard out, I believe. So along with the sea of green dots, you'll see had to retry this one. So it is visible, but it's not aggregated. And the particular thing is there's the JUnit reporter that we're using. So the XML common format for this is how long our tests took to run, and these ones passed and failed. So Circle, as a particular example, has platform-level insights for that kind of stuff. And they can tell you these are your tests that fail most commonly. These are the tests that take the longest run, et cetera. I would love to get it integrated into that such that retried and then surface this to Circle. Circle could then surface it to us. But right now, I don't believe that's happening. So it is truly I will not see it unless I actively go search for it. To be truly honest, I'm probably not doing that. STEPH: Yeah, that's a good, fair, honest answer. You mentioned earlier that if you want a test to retry, you have to annotate the test. Does that mean that you get to highlight specific tests that you're marking those to say, "Hey, I know that these are flaky. I'm okay with that. Please retry them." Or does it apply to all of them? CHRIS: I think there are different ways that you can configure it. You could go the granular route of we know this is a flaky spec, so we're going to only put the retry logic around it. And that would be a normal RSpec annotation sort of tagging the spec, I think, is the terminology there. But we've configured it globally for all feature specs. So in a spec support file, we just say config.include Rspec::Retry where type is a feature. And so every feature spec now has the possibility to retry. If they pass on the first pass, which is the hope most of the time, then they will not be tried. But if they don't, if they fail, then they'll be retried up to three times or up to two additional times, I think is the total. STEPH: Okay, cool. That's helpful. So then I think I have my answer. I really think it's a good idea to automate retrying tests that we have identified that are flaky. We've tried to address the root, and our resolution was this is fine. This happens sometimes. We don't have a great way to improve this, and we want to keep the test. So we're going to highlight that this test we want to retry. And then I'm going to say it's not a great idea to turn it on for all of them just because then I have that same fear about you're now hiding any flaky tests that get introduced into the system. And nobody reasonably is going to go and read through to see which tests are going to get retried, so that part makes me nervous. CHRIS: I like it. I think it's a balanced and reasonable set of good and terrible idea. Ooh, it's perfect. I don't think we've had a balanced answer on that yet. STEPH: I don't think so. CHRIS: This is a new outcome for this segment. I agree. Ideally, in my mind, it would be getting into that XML format, the output from the tests, so that we now have this artifact, we can see which ones are flaky and eventually apply effort there. What you're saying feels totally right of we should be more particular and granular. But at the same time, the failure mode and the thing that I'm trying, I want to keep deploys going. And I only want to stop deploys if something's really broken. And if a spec retries, then I'm fine with it is where I've landed, particularly because we haven't had any real solutions where there was anything weird in our code. Like, there's just flakiness sometimes. As I say it, I feel like I'm just giving up. [laughs] And I can hear this tone of stuff's just hard sometimes, and so I've taken the easy way out. And I guess that's where I'm at right now. But I think what you're saying is a good, balanced answer here. I like it. I don't know if I'm going to do anything about it, but...[laughter] STEPH: Well, going back to when I was saying that I'm biased, our team is feeling this pain because we have flaky tests. And we're creating tickets, and we're trying to do all the right things. We create a ticket. We have that. So it's public. So people know it's been acknowledged. If someone's working on it, we let the team know; hey, I'm working on this. So we're not duplicating efforts. And so, we are trying to address all of them. But then some of them don't feel like a great investment of our time trying to improve. So that's what I really do like about the RSpec::Retry is then you can still have a resolution. Because it's either right now your resolution is to fix it or to change the code, so then maybe you can test it in a different way. There's not really a good medium step there. And so the retry feels like an additional good outcome to add to your tool bag to say, hey, I've triaged this, and this feels reasonable that we want to retry this. But then there's also that concern of we don't want to hide all of these flaky tests from ourselves in case we have done it and there is an opportunity for us to improve it. So I think that's what I do really like about it because right now, for us, when a test fails, we have to rerun the entire build, and that's painful. So if tests are taking about 20 minutes right now, then one spec fails, and then you have to wait another 20 minutes. CHRIS: I would have turned this on years ago with a 20-minute build time. [chuckles] STEPH: [laughs] Yeah, you're not wrong. But also, I didn't actually know about RSpec::Retry until today. So that may be something that we introduce into our application or something that I bring up to the team to see if it's something that we want to add. But it is interesting that initial sort of ooh kind of feeling that the team will give you introducing because it feels bad. It feels wrong to be like, hey, we're just going to let these flaky tests live on, and we're going to automate retrying them to at least speed us up. And it's just a very interesting conversation around where we want to invest our time and between the risk and pay off. And I had a similar experience this week where I had that conversation, but this one was more with myself where I was working through a particular issue where we have a state in the application where something weird was done in the past that led us to a weird state. And so someone raised a very good question where it's like, well, if what you're saying is technically an impossible state, we should make it impossible, like at the database layer. And I love that phrase. And yet, there was a part of me that was like, yes, but also doing that is not a trivial investment. And we're here because of a very weird thing that happened before. It felt one of those interesting, like, do we want to pursue the more aggressive, like, let's make this impossible for the future? Or do we want to address it for now and see if it comes back up, and then we can invest more time in it? And I had a hard time walking myself through that because my initial response was, well, yeah, totally, we should make it impossible. But then I walked through all the steps that it would take to make that happen, and it was not very trivial. And so it was one of those; it felt like the change that we ended up with was still an improvement. It was going to prevent users from seeing an error. It was still going to communicate that this state is an odd state for the application to be in. But it didn't go as far as to then add in all of the safety measures. And I felt good about it. But I had to convince myself to feel good about it. CHRIS: What you're describing there, the whole thought sequence, really feels like the encapsulation of it depends. And that being part of the journey of learning how to do software development and what it means. And you actually shared a wonderful video with me yesterday, and it was Cassidy Williams at GitHub Universe. And it was her talking to her younger self, and just it depends, and it was so true. So we will include a link to that in the show note because that was a wonderful thing for you to share. And it really does encapsulate this thing. And from the outside, before I started doing software development, I'm like, it's cool. I'm going to learn how to sling code and fix the stuff and hack, and it'll be great, and obvious, and correct, and knowable. And now I'm like, oh man, squishy nonsense. That's all it is. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Fun squishy, and I like it. It's so good. But it depends. Exactly that one where you're like, I know that there's a way to get to correctness here but is it worth the effort? And looping back to...I'm surprised at the stance that I've taken where I'm just like, yeah, I'm putting in RSpec::Retry. This feels like the right thing. I feel good about this decision. And so I've tried to poke at it a tiny bit. And I think what matters to me deeply in a list of priorities is number one correctness. I care deeply that our system behaves correctly as intended and that we are able to verify that. I want to know if the system is not behaving correctly. And that's what we've talked about, like, if the test suite is green, I want to be able to deploy. I want to feel confident in that. Flaky specs exist in this interesting space where if there is a real underlying issue, if we've architected our system in a way that causes this flakiness and that a user may ever experience that, then that is a broken system. That is an incorrect system, and I want to resolve that. But that's not the case with what we're experiencing. We're happy with the architecture of our system. And when we're resolving it, we're not even really resolving them. We're just rerunning manually at this point. We're just like, oh, that spec flaked. And there's nothing to do here because sometimes that just happens. So we're re-running manually. And so my belief is if I see all green, if the specs all pass, I know that I can deploy to production. And so if occasionally a spec is going to flake and retrying it will make it pass (and I know that pass doesn't mean oh, this time it happened to pass; it's that is the correct outcome) and we have a false negative before, then I'm happy to instrument the system in a way that hides that from me because, at this point, it does feel like noise. I'm not doing anything else with the failures when we were looking at them more pointedly. I'm not resolving those flaky specs. There are no changes that we've made to the underlying system. And they don't represent a failure mode or an incorrectness that an end-user might see. So I honestly want to paper over and hide it from myself. And that's why I've chosen this. But you can see I need to defend my actions here because I feel weird. I feel a little off about this. But as I talk through it, that is the hierarchy. I care about correctness. And then, the next thing I care about is maintaining the deployment pipeline. I want that to be as quick and as efficient as possible. And I've talked a bunch about explorations into the world of observability and trying to figure out how to do continuous deployment because I think that really encourages overall better engineering outcomes. And so first is correctness. Second is velocity. And flaky specs impact velocity heavily, but they don't actually impact correctness in the particular mode that we're experiencing them here. They definitely can. But in this case, as I look at the code, I'm like, nah, that was just noise in the system. That was just too much complexity stacked up in trying to run a feature spec that simulates a browser and a user clicking in JavaScript and all this stuff and the things. But again, [laughs] here I am. I am very defensive about this apparently. STEPH: Well, I can certainly relate because I was defending my answer to myself earlier. And it is really interesting what you're pointing out. I like how you appreciate correctness and then velocity, that those are the two things that you're going after. And flaky tests often don't highlight an incorrect system. It is highlighting that maybe our code or our tests are not as performant as we would like them to be, but the behavior is correct. So I think that's a really important thing to recognize. The part where I get squishy is where we have encountered on this project some flaky tests that did highlight that we had incorrect behavior, and there's only been maybe one or two. It was rare that it happened, but it at least has happened once or twice where it highlighted something to us that when tests were run...I think there's a whole lot of context. I won't get into it. But essentially, when tests were being run in a particular way that made them look like a flaky test, it was actually telling us something truthful about the system, that something was behaving in a way that we didn't want it to behave. So that's why I still like that triage that you have to go through. But I also agree that if you're trying to get out at a deploy, you don't want to have to deal with flaky tests. There's a time to eat your vegetables, and I don't know if it's when you've got a deploy that needs to go out. That might not be the right time to be like, oh, we've got a flaky test. We should really address this. It's like, yes; you should note to yourself, hey, have a couple of vegetables tomorrow, make a ticket, and address that flaky test but not right now. That's not the time. So I think you've struck a good balance. But I also do like the idea of annotating specific tests instead of just retrying all of them, so you don't hide anything from yourself. CHRIS: Yeah. And now that I'm saying it and now that I'm circling back around, what I'm saying is true of everything we've done so far. But it is possible that now this new mode that the system behaves in where it will essentially hide flaky specs on CI means that any new flaky regressions, as it were, will be hidden from us. And thus far, almost all or I think all of the flakiness that we've seen has basically been related to timeouts. So a different way to solve this would potentially be to up the Capybara wait time. So there are occasionally times where the system's churning through, and the various layers of the feature specs just take a little bit longer. And so they miss...I forget what it is, but it's like two seconds right now or something like that. And I can just bump that up and say it's 10 seconds. And that's a mode that if eventually, the system ends in the state that we want, I'm happy to wait a little longer to see that, and that's fine. But there are...to name some of the ways that flaky tests can actually highlight truly incorrect things; race conditions are a pretty common one where this behaves fine most of the time. But if the background job happens to succeed before the subsequent request happens, then you'll go to the page. That's a thing that a real user may experience, and in fact, it might even be more likely in production because production has differential performance characteristics on your background jobs versus your actual application. And so that's the sort of thing that would definitely be worth keeping in mind. Additionally, if there are order issues within your spec suite if the randomize...I think actually RSpec::Retry wouldn't fix this, though, because it's going to retry within the same order. So that's a case that I think would be still highlighted. It would fail three times and then move on. But those we should definitely deal with. That's a test-related thing. But the first one, race conditions, that's totally a thing. They come up all the time. And I think I've potentially hidden that from myself now. And so, I might need to lock back what I said earlier because I feel like it's been true thus far that that has not been the failure mode, but it could be moving forward. And so I really want to find out if we got flaky specs. I don't know; I feel like I've said enough about this. So I'm going to stop saying anything new. [laughs] Do you have any other thoughts on this topic? STEPH: Our emotions are a pendulum. We swing hard one way, and then we have to wait till we come back and settle in the middle. But there's that initial passion play where you're really frustrated by something, and then you swing, and you settle back towards something that's a little more neutral. CHRIS: I don't trust anyone who pretends like their opinions never change. It doesn't feel like a good way to be. STEPH: Oh, I hope that...Do people say that? I hope that's not true. I hope we are all changing our opinions as we get more information. CHRIS: Me too. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. CHRIS: Well, shifting only ever so slightly because it turns out it's a very related question, but we have a listener question. As always, thank you so much to everyone who sends in listener questions. We really appreciate them. And today's question comes from Mikhail, and he writes in, "Regarding the discussion in Episode 311 on requiring commits merged to be tested, I have a question on how you view multi commit PRs. Do you think all the commits in a PR should be tested or only the last one? If you test all commits in a PR, do you have any good tips on setups for that? Would you want all commits to pass all tests? For one, it helps a lot when using Git bisect. It is also a question of keeping the history clean and understandable. As a background on the project I currently work on, we have the opinion that all commits should be tested and working. We have now decided on single commit PRs only since this is the only way that we can currently get the setup reasonably on our CI. I would like to sometimes make PRs with more than one commit since I want to make commits as small as possible. In order to do that, we would have to find a way to make sure all commits in the PR are tested. There seems to be some hacky ways to accomplish this, but there is not much talk about it. Also, we are strict in requiring a linear history in all our projects. Kind regards, Mikhail." So, Steph, what do you think? STEPH: I remember reading this question when it came in. And I have an experience this week that is relevant to this mainly because I had seen this question, and I was thinking about it. And off the cuff, I haven't really thought about this. I haven't been very concerned about ensuring every single commit passes because I want to ensure that, ultimately, the final commit that I have is going in. But I also rarely have more than one commit in a PR. So that's often my default mode. There are a couple of times that I'll have two, maybe three commits, but I think that's pretty rare for me. I'll typically have just one commit. So I haven't thought about this heavily. And it's not something that frankly I've been concerned about or that I've run into issues with. From their perspective about using Git bisect, I could see how that could be troublesome, like if you're looking at a commit and you realize there's a particular commit that's already merged and that fails. The other area that I could think of where this could be problematic is if you're trying to roll back to a specific commit. And if you accidentally roll back to a commit that is technically broken, but you didn't know that because it was not the final commit as was getting tested on CI, that could happen. I haven't seen that happen. I haven't experienced it. So while that does seem like a legitimate concern, it's also one that I frankly just haven't had. But because I read this question from this person earlier this week, I actually thought about it when I was crafting a PR that had several commits in it, which is kind of unusual for me since I'm usually one or two commits in a PR. But for this one, I had several because we use standard RB in our project to handle all the formatting. And right now, we have one of those standard to-do files because we added it to the project. But there are still a number of manual fixes that need to be applied. So we just have this list of files that still need to be formatted. And as someone touches that file, we will format it, and then we'll take it out of that to-do list. So then standard RB will include it as it's linting all of our files. And I decided to do that for all of our spec files. Because I was like, well, this was the safest chunk of files to format that will require the least amount of review from folks. So I just want to address all of them in one go. But I separated the more interesting changes into different commits just to make others aware of, like, hey, this is something standard RB wants. And it was interesting enough that I thought I would point it out. So my first commit removed all the files from that to-do list, but then my other commits are the ones that made actual changes to some of those files that needed to be corrected. So technically, one or two of my middle commits didn't pass the standard RB linting. But because CI was only running that final commit, it didn't notice that. And I thought about this question, and so I intentionally went back and made sure each of those commits were correct at that point in time. And I feel good about that. But I still don't feel the need to add more process around ensuring each commit is going to be green. I think I would lean more in favor of let's keep our PR small to one or two commits. But I don't know; it's something I haven't really run into. It's an interesting question. How about you? What are your experiences, or what are your thoughts on this, Chris? CHRIS: When this question came through, I thought it was such an interesting example of considering the cost of process changes. And to once again reference one of our favorite blog posts by German Velasco, the Say No to More Process post, which we will, of course, link in the show notes. This is such a great example of there was likely a small amount of pain that was felt at one point where someone tried to run git bisect. They ran into a troublesome commit, and they were like, oh no, this happened. We need to add processes, add automation, add control to make sure this never happens again. Personally, I run git bisect very rarely. When I do, it's always a heroic moment just to get it started and to even know which is the good and which is the bad. It's always a thing anyway. So it would be sad if I ran into one of these commits. But I think this is a pretty rare outcome. I think in the particular case that you're talking about, there's probably a way to actually tease that apart. I think it sounds like you fixed those commits knowing this, maybe because you just put it in your head. But the idea that the process that this team is working on has been changed such that they only now allow single commit PRs feels like too much process in my mind. I think I'm probably 80%, maybe 90% of the time; it's only a single commit in a PR for me. But occasionally, I really value having the ability to break it out into discrete steps, like these are all logically grouped in one changeset that I want to send through. But they're discrete steps that I want to break apart so that the team can more easily review it so that we have granular separation, and I can highlight this as a reference. That's often something that I'll do is I want this commit to standalone because I want it to be referenced later on. I don't want to just fold it into the broader context in which it happened, but it's pretty rare. And so to say that we can't do that feels like we're adding process where it may not be worth it, where the cost of that process change is too high relative to the value that we're getting, which is speculatively being able to run git bisect and not hit something problematic in the future. There's also the more purist, dogmatic view of well, all commits should be passing, of course. Yeah, I totally agree with that. But what's it worth to you? How much are you willing to spend to achieve that goal? I care deeply about the correctness of my system but only the current correctness. I don't care about historical correctness as much, some. I think I'm diminishing this more than I mean to. But really back to that core question of yes, this thing has value, but is it worth the cost that we have to pay in terms of process, in terms of automation and maintenance of that automation over time, et cetera or whatever the outcome is? Is it worth that cost? And in this case, for me, this would not be worth the cost. And I would not want to adopt a workflow that says we can only ever have single commit PRs, or all commits must be run on CI or any of those variants. STEPH: This is an interesting situation where I very much agree with everything you're saying. But I actually feel like what Mikhail wants in this world; I want it too. I think it's correct in the way that I do want all the commits to pass, and I do want to know that. And I think since I do fall into the default, like you mentioned, 80%, 90% of my PRs are one commit. I just already have that. And the fact that they're enforcing that with their team is interesting. And I'm trying to think through why that feels cumbersome to enforce that. And I'm with you where I'll maybe have a refactor commit or something that goes before. And it's like, well, what's wrong with splitting that out into a separate PR? What's the pain point of that? And I think the pain point is the fact that one, you have two PRs that are stacked on each other. So you have the first one that you need to get reviewed, and then the second one; there's that bit of having to hop between the two if there's some shared context that someone can't just easily review in one pull request. But then there's also, as we just mentioned, there's CI that has to run. And so now it's running on both of them, even though maybe that's a good thing because it's running on both commits. I like the idea that every commit is tested, and every commit is green. But I actually feel like it's some of our other processes that make it cumbersome and hard to get there. And if CI did run on every commit, I think it would be ideal, but then we are increasing our CI time by running it on every commit. And then it comes down to essentially what you said, what's the risk? So if we do merge in a commit that doesn't work or has something that's failing about it but then the next commit after that fixes it, what's the risk that we're going to roll back to that one specific commit that was broken? If that's a high risk for you and your team, then adding this process is probably the really wise thing to do because you want to make sure the app doesn't go down for users. That's incredibly important. If that's not a high risk for your team, then I wouldn't add the process. CHRIS: Yeah, I totally agree. And to clarify my stances, for me, this change, this process change would not be worth the trade-off. I love the idea. I love the goal of it. But it is not worth the process change, and that's partly because I haven't particularly felt the pain. CI is not an inexhaustible resource I have learned. I'm actually somewhat proud our very small team that is working on the project that we're working on; we just recently ran out of our CI budget, and Circle was like, "Hey, we got to charge you more." And I was like, "Cool, do that." But it was like, there is cost both in terms of the time, clock time, and each PR running and all of those. We have to consider all of these different things. And hopefully, we did a useful job of framing the conversation, because as always, it depends, but it depends on what. And in this case, there's a good outcome that we want to get to, but there's an associated cost. And for any individual team, how you weigh the positive of the outcome versus how you weigh the cost will alter the decision that you make. But that's I think, critically, the thing that we have to consider. I've also noticed I've seen this conversation play out within teams where one individual may acutely feel the pain, and therefore they're anchored in that side. And the cost is irrelevant to them because they're like, I feel this pain so acutely, but other people on the team aren't working in that part of the codebase or aren't dealing with bug triage in the same way that that other developer is. And so, even within a team, there may be different levels of how you measure that. And being able to have meaningful conversations around that and productively come to a group decision and own that and move forward with that is the hard work but the important work that we have to do. STEPH: Yeah. I think that's a great summary; it depends. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeee! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Screaming in the Cloud
Teasing Out the Titular Titles with Chris Williams

Screaming in the Cloud

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 27, 2021 39:59


About ChrisChris Williams is a Enterprise Architect for World Wide Technology — a technology solution and service provider. There he helps customers design the next generation of public, private, and hybrid cloud solutions, specializing in AWS and VMware. His first computer was a Commodore 64, and he's been playing video games ever since.Chris blogs about virtualization, technology, and design at Mistwire. He is an active community leader, co-organizing the AWS Portsmouth User Group, and both hosts and presents on vBrownBag. He is also an active mentor, helping students at the University of New Hampshire through Diversify Thinking—an initiative focused on empowering girls and women to pursue education and careers in STEM.Chris is a certified AWS Hero as well as a VMware vExpert. Fun fact that Chris doesn't want you to know: he has a degree in psychology so you can totally talk to him about your feelings.Links: WWT: https://www.wwt.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/mistwire Personal site: https://mistwire.com vBrownBag: https://vbrownbag.com/team/chris-williams/ TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: This episode is sponsored in part by Honeycomb. When production is running slow, it's hard to know where problems originate: is it your application code, users, or the underlying systems? I've got five bucks on DNS, personally. Why scroll through endless dashboards, while dealing with alert floods, going from tool to tool to tool that you employ, guessing at which puzzle pieces matter? Context switching and tool sprawl are slowly killing both your team and your business. You should care more about one of those than the other, which one is up to you. Drop the separate pillars and enter a world of getting one unified understanding of the one thing driving your business: production. With Honeycomb, you guess less and know more. Try it for free at Honeycomb.io/screaminginthecloud. Observability, it's more than just hipster monitoring.Corey: This episode is sponsored in part by our friends at Vultr. Spelled V-U-L-T-R because they're all about helping save money, including on things like, you know, vowels. So, what they do is they are a cloud provider that provides surprisingly high performance cloud compute at a price that—while sure they claim its better than AWS pricing—and when they say that they mean it is less money. Sure, I don't dispute that but what I find interesting is that it's predictable. They tell you in advance on a monthly basis what it's going to going to cost. They have a bunch of advanced networking features. They have nineteen global locations and scale things elastically. Not to be confused with openly, because apparently elastic and open can mean the same thing sometimes. They have had over a million users. Deployments take less that sixty seconds across twelve pre-selected operating systems. Or, if you're one of those nutters like me, you can bring your own ISO and install basically any operating system you want. Starting with pricing as low as $2.50 a month for Vultr cloud compute they have plans for developers and businesses of all sizes, except maybe Amazon, who stubbornly insists on having something to scale all on their own. Try Vultr today for free by visiting: vultr.com/screaming, and you'll receive a $100 in credit. Thats v-u-l-t-r.com slash screaming.Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. One of the things I miss the most from the pre-pandemic times is meeting people at conferences or at various business meetings, not because I like people—far from it—but because we go through a ritual that I am a huge fan of, which is the exchange of business cards. Now, it's not because I'm a collector or anything here, but because I like seeing what people's actual titles are instead of diving into the morass of what we call ourselves on Twitter and whatnot. Today, I have just one of those folks with me. My guest is Chris Williams, who works at WWT, and his business card title is Enterprise Architect, comma AWS Cloud. Chris, welcome.Chris: Hi. Thanks for having me on the show, Corey.Corey: No, thank you for taking the time to speak with me. I have to imagine that the next line in your business card is, “No, I don't work for AWS,” because you know a company has succeeded when they get their name into people's job titles who don't work there.Chris: So, I have a running joke where the next line should actually be cloud therapist. And my degree is actually in psychology, so I was striving to get cloud therapist in there, but they still don't want to let me have it.Corey: Former guest Bobby Allen is now a cloud therapist over at Google Cloud, which is just phenomenal. I don't know what they're doing in a marketing context over there; I just know that they're just blasting them out of the park on a consistent, ongoing basis. It's really nice to see. It's forcing me to up my game a little bit. So, one of the challenges I've always had is, I don't like putting other companies' names into the title.Now, I run the Last Week in AWS newsletter, so yeah, okay, great, there's a little bit of ‘do as I say, not as I do' going on here. Because it feels, on some level, like doing unpaid volunteer work for a $2 trillion company. Speaking of, you are an AWS Community Hero, where you do volunteer work for a $2 trillion company. How'd that come about? What did you do that made you rise to their notice?Chris: That was a brilliant segue. Um—[laugh]—Corey: I do my best.Chris: So I, actually prior to becoming an AWS Community Hero, I do a lot of community work. So, I have run and helped to run four different community-led organizations: the Virtualization Technology User Group of New England; the AWS Portsmouth User Group, now the AWS Boston User Group; I'm a co-host and presenter for vBrownBag; I also do the New England AWS Community Day, which is a conglomeration of all the different user groups in one setting; and various and sundry other things, as well, along the way. Having done all of that, and having had a lot of the SAs and team members come and do speaking presentations for these various and sundry things, I was nominated internally by AWS to become one of their Community Heroes. Like you said, it's basically unpaid volunteer work where I go out and tout the services. I love talking about nerd stuff, so when I started working on AWS technologies, I really enjoyed it, and I just, kind of like, glommed on with other people that did it as well. I'm also a VMware vExpert, which basically use the exact same accolade for VMware. I have not been doing as much VMware stuff in the recent past, but that's kind of how I got into this gig.Corey: One of the things that strikes me as being the right move with respect to these, effectively, community voice accolades is Microsoft got something very right—they've been doing this a long time—they have their MVP program, but they have to re-invite people who have to requalify for it by whatever criteria they are, every year. AWS does not do this with their Heroes program. If you look at their Heroes page, there's a number of folks up there who have been doing interesting things in the cloud years ago, but then fell off the radar for a variety of reasons. In fact, the only way that I'm aware that you can lose Hero status is via getting a job at AWS or one of AWS competitors.Now, the hard part, of course, is well, who is Amazon's competitors? Basically everyone, but it mostly distills down to Microsoft, Google, and Oracle, as best I can tell, for Hero status. How does VMware fall on that spectrum? To be more specific, how does VMware fall on the spectrum of their community engagement program and having to renew, not, “Are they AWS's competitor?” To which the answer is, “Of course.”Chris: So, the renewal process for the VMware vExpert program is an annual re-up process where you fill out the form, list your contribution of the year, what you've done over the previous year, and then put it in for submission to the board of VMware vExperts who then give you the thumbs up or thumbs down. Much like Nero, you know, pass or fail, live or die. And I've been fortunate enough, so my vBrownBag contributions are every week; we have a show that happens every week. It can be either VMware stuff, or cloud in general stuff, or developer-related stuff. We cover the gamut; you know, people that want to come on and talk about whatever they want to talk about, they come on. And by virtue of that, we've had a lot of VMware speakers, we've had a lot of AWS speakers, we've had a lot of Azure speakers. So, I've been fortunate enough to be able to qualify each year with those contributions.Corey: I think that's the right way to go, from my perspective at least. But I want to get into this a little bit because you are an enterprise architect, which is always one of those terms that is super easy to make fun of in a variety of different ways. Your IDE is probably a whiteboard, and at some point when you have to write code, I thought you had a team of people who would be able to do that all for you because your job is to cogitate, and your artifacts are documentation, and the entire value of what you do can only be measured in the grand sweep of time, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.Chris: [laugh].Corey: But you don't generally get to be a Community Hero for stuff like that, and you don't usually get to be a vExpert on the VMware side, by not having at least technical chops that make people take a second look. What is it you'd say it is you do hear for, lack of a better term?Chris: “What would you say ya, do you here, Bob?” So, I'm not being facetious when I say cloud therapist. There is a lot of working at the eighth layer of the OSI model, the political layer. There's a lot of taking the requirements from the customer and sending them to the engineer. I'm a people person.The easy answer is to say, I do all the things from the TOGAF certification manual: the requirements, risks, assumptions, and constraints; the logical, conceptual, and physical diagrams; the harder answer is the soft skill side of that, is actually being able to communicate with the various levels of the industry, figuring out what the business really wants to do and how to technically solution that and figure out how to talk to the engineers to make that happen. You're right EAs get made fun of all the time, almost as much as consultants get made fun of. And it's a very squishy layer that, you know, depending upon your personality and the personality of the customer that you're dealing with, it can work wonderfully well or it can crash and burn immediately. I know from personal experience that I don't mesh well with financials, but I'm really, really good with, like, medical industry stuff, just the way that the brain works. But ironically, right now I'm working with a financial and we're getting along like a house on fire.Corey: Oh, yeah. I've been saying for a while now that when it comes to cloud, cost and architecture are the same things, and I think that ties back to a lot of different areas. But I want to be very clear here that we talk about, I'm not super deep into the financials, that does not mean you're bad at architecture because working on finance means different things to different folks. I don't think that it is possibly a good architect in the cloud environment and not have a conception of, “Huh, that thing seems really expensive if I do it that way.” That is very different than having the skill of reading a profit and loss statement or understanding various implications of the time value of money calculation that a company uses, or how things get amortized.There are nuances piled on top of nuances in finance, and it's easy to sit here and think that oh, I'm not great at finance means I don't know how money works. That is very rarely true. If you really don't know how money works, you'll go start a cryptocurrency startup.Chris: [laugh]. So, I plugged back to you; I was listening to one of your old shows and I cribbed one of your ideas and totally went with it. So, I just said that there's the logical, conceptual, and physical diagrams of an environment; on one of your shows, you had mentioned a financial diagram for an environment, and I was like, “That's brilliant.” So, now when I go into a customer, I actually do that, too. I take my physical diagram, I strip out all of the IP addresses, and our names, and everything like that, and I plot down how much it's going to cost, like, “This is the value of the EC2 instance,” or, “This is how much this pipe is going to cost if you run this over it.” And they go bananas over it. So, thanks for providing that idea that I mercilessly stole.Corey: Kind of fun on a lot of levels. Part of the challenge is as things get cloudier and it moves away from EC2 instances, ideally the lie we would like to tell ourselves that everything's in an auto-scaling group. Great—Chris: Right.Corey: —stepping beyond that when you start getting into something that's even more intricately tied to a specific user, we're talking about effectively trying to get unit economic measures of every user, every thousand users is going to cost me X dollars to service them on average, on top of a baseline of steady-state spend that is going to increase differently. At that point, talking to finance about predictive models turn into, “Well, this comes down to a question of business modeling.” But conversely, for engineering minds that is exactly what finance is used to figuring out. The problem they have is, “Well, every time we hire a new engineer, we wind up seeing our AWS bill increase.” Funny how that works. Yeah, how do you map that to something that the business understands? That is part of what they do. But it does, I admit, make it much more challenging from a financial map of an environment.Chris: Yeah, especially when the customer or the company is—you know, they've been around for a while, and they're used to just like that large bolus of money at the very beginning of a data center, and they buy the switches, and they buy the servers, and they virtualize them, and they have that set cost that they knew that they had to plunk down at the beginning. And it's a mindset shift. And they're coming around to it, some faster than others. Oddly enough, the startups nowadays are catching on very quickly. I don't deal with a lot of startups, so it takes some finesse.Corey: An interesting inflection that I've seen is that there's an awful lot of enterprises out there that say, “Oh, we're like a startup.” Great. You mean with weird cultural inflections that often distill down to cult of personality, the constant worry about whether you're going to wind up running out of runway before finding product-market fit? And the rooms filled with—Chris: The eighty-hour work weeks? The—[laugh]—Corey: And they're like, “No, no, no, it's like the good parts.” “Oh, so you mean out the upside.” But you don't hear it the other way around where you have a startup that you're interviewing with, “Ha-ha, we're like an enterprise. We have a six-month interview process that takes 18 different stages,” and so on and so forth. However, we do see startups having to mature rapidly, and move up the compliance path as they're dealing with regulated entities and the rest, and wanting to deal with serious customers who have no sense of humor about, “Yeah, we'll figure that part out later as part of an audit document.”So, what we also see, though, is that enterprises are doing things that look a lot more startup-y. If I take a look at the common development environments and tools and techniques that big enterprises use, it looks an awful lot like how startups were doing it five or ten years ago. That is the slow and steady evolution of time. And what startups are doing today becomes enterprise tomorrow, and I can't shake the feeling that there's a sea of vendors out there who, in the event that winds up happening are eventually going to find themselves without a market at all. My model has been that if I go and found a Twitter for Pets style startup tomorrow and in ten years, it has grown to become an S&P 500 component—which is still easier to take seriously than most of what Tesla says—great.During that journey, at what point do I become a given company's customer because if there is no onboarding story for me to become your customer, you're in a long-tail decline phase. That's been my philosophy, but you are a—trademarked term—Enterprise Architect, so please feel free to tell me if I'm missing any of the nuances there, which I'm sure I am because let's face it, nuance is hard; sweeping statements are easy.Chris: As an architect, [laugh] it would be a disservice to not say my favorite catchphrase, it depends. There are so many dependencies to those kinds of sweeping statements. I mean, there's a lot of enterprises that have good process; there are a lot of enterprises that have bad process. And going back to your previous statement of the startup inside the enterprise, I'm hearing a lot of companies nowadays saying, “Oh, well, we've now got this brand new incubator system that we're currently running our little startup inside of. It's got the best of both worlds.”And I'm not going to go through the litany of bad things that you just said about startups, but they'll try to encapsulate that shift that you're talking about where the cheese is moving so quickly now that it's very hard for these companies to know the customer well enough to continue to stay salient and continue to be able to look into that crystal ball to stay relevant in the future. My job as an EA is to try to capture that point in time where what are the requirements today and what are the known detriments that you're going to see in your future that you need to protect against? So, that's kind of my job—other than being a cloud therapist—in a nutshell.Corey: I love the approach. My line has been that I do a lot of marriage counseling between engineering and finance, which is a fun term that also just so happens to be completely accurate.Chris: Absolutely. [laugh]. I'm currently being a marriage counselor right now.Corey: It's an interesting time. So, you had a viral tweet recently that honestly, I'm a bit jealous about. I have had a lot of tweets that have done reasonably well, but I haven't ever had anything go super-viral, where it was just a screenshot of a conversation you had with an AWS recruiter. Now, before we go into this, I want to make a couple of disclaimers here. Before I entered tech myself, I was a technical recruiter, and I can say that these people have hard jobs.There is a constant pressure to perform, it is a sales job that is unlike most others. If you sell someone a pen, great, you can wrap your head around what that's like. But you don't have to worry about the pen deciding it doesn't want to go home with the buyer. So, it becomes a double sale in a lot of weird ways, and there's a constant race to the bottom and there's a lot of competition in the space. It's a numbers game and a lot of folks get in and wash out who have terrible behaviors and terrible patterns, so the whole industry gets tainted—in some respects—like that. A great example of someone who historically has been a terrific example of recruiting done right has been Jill Wohlner. And she's one of the shining beacons of the industry as far as how to do these things in the right way—Chris: Yes.Corey: —but the fact that she is as exceptional as she is is in no small part because there's a lot of random folks coming by. All which is to say that our conversation going forward is not and should not be aimed at smacking around individual recruiters or recruiting as a whole because that is unfair. Now, that disclaimer has been given. Great, what happened?Chris: So, first off, shout out to Jill; she actually used to be a host on vBrownBag. So, hey girl. [laugh]. What happened was—and I have the utmost empathy and sympathy for recruiting; I actually used to have a side gig where I would go around to the local recruiting places around my area here and teach them how to read a cloud resume and how to read a req and try to separate the wheat from the chaff, and to actually have good conversations. This was back when cloud wasn't—this was, like, three or four years ago.And I would go in there and say, “This is how you recruit a cloud person nowadays.” So, I love good recruiters. This one was a weird experience in that—so when a recruiter reaches out to me, what I do is I take an assessment of my current situation: “Am I happy where I'm at right now?” The answer is, “Yes.” And if they ping me, I'll say, “Hey, I'm happy right now, but if you have something that is, you know, a million dollars an hour, taste-testing margaritas on St. John island in the sand, I'm all ears. I'm listening. Conversely, I also am a Community Hero, so I know a ton of people out in the industry. Maybe I can help you out with landing that next person.”Corey: I just want to say for the record, that is absolutely the right answer. And something like that is exactly what I would give, historically. I can't do it now because let's be clear here. I have a number of employees and, “Hey, Corey's out there doing job interviews,” sends a message that isn't good when it comes to how is that company doing anyway. I miss it because I enjoyed the process and I enjoyed the fun, but even when I was perfectly happy, it's, “Well, I'm not actively on the market, but I am interested to have a conversation if you've got something interesting.”Because let's face it, I want to hear what's going on in the market, and if I'm starting to hear a lot of questions about a technology I have been dismissive of, okay, maybe it's time to pay more attention. I have repeatedly been able to hire the people interviewing me in some cases, and sometimes I've gone on interviews just to keep my interview skills sharp and then wound up accepting the job because it turned out they did have something interesting that was compelling to me even though I was reasonably happy at the time. I will always take the meeting; I will always at least have a chat about what they're doing, and I think that doing otherwise is doing yourself a disservice in the long arc of your career.Chris: Right. And that's basically the approach that I take, too. I want to hear what's out there. I am very happy at World Wide right now, so I'm not interested, interested. But again, if they come up with an amazing opportunity, things could happen. So, I implied that in my response to him.I said, “I'm happy right now, thanks for asking, but let's set up the meeting and we can have a chat.” The response was unexpected. [laugh]. The response was basically, “If you're not ready to leave right now, it makes no sense for me to talk to you.” And it was a funny… interaction.I was like, “Huh. That's funny.” I'm going to tweet about that because I thought it was funny—I'm not a jerk, so I'm going to block out all of the names and all of the identifying information and everything—and I threw it up. And the commiseration was so impressive. Not impressive in a good way; impressive in a bad way.Every person that responded was like, “Yes. This has happened to me. Yes, this is”—and honestly, I got a lot of directors from AWS reaching out to me trying to figure out who that person was, apologizing saying that's not our way. And I responded to each and every single one of them. And I was like, “Somebody has already found that person; somebody has already spoken to that person. That being said, look at all of the responses in the timeline. When you tell me personally, that's not the way you do things, I believe that you believe that.”Corey: Yeah, I believe you're being sincere when you say this, however the reality of what the data shows and people's lived experience in the form of anecdotes are worlds apart.Chris: Yeah. And I'm an AWS Hero. [laugh]. That's how I got treated. Not to blow my own horn or anything like that, but if that's happening to me, either A, he didn't look me up and just cold-called me—which is probably the case—and b, if he treats me like that, imagine how he's treating everybody else?Corey: This episode is sponsored in part by something new. Cloud Academy is a training platform built on two primary goals. Having the highest quality content in tech and cloud skills, and building a good community the is rich and full of IT and engineering professionals. You wouldn't think those things go together, but sometimes they do. Its both useful for individuals and large enterprises, but here's what makes it new. I don't use that term lightly. Cloud Academy invites you to showcase just how good your AWS skills are. For the next four weeks you'll have a chance to prove yourself. Compete in four unique lab challenges, where they'll be awarding more than $2000 in cash and prizes. I'm not kidding, first place is a thousand bucks. Pre-register for the first challenge now, one that I picked out myself on Amazon SNS image resizing, by visiting cloudacademy.com/corey. C-O-R-E-Y. That's cloudacademy.com/corey. We're gonna have some fun with this one!Corey: Every once in a while I get some of their sourcers doing outreach to see folks who are somewhat aligned on them via LinkedIn or other things, and, “Oh, okay, yeah; if you look at the things I talked about in various places, I can understand how I might look like a potentially interesting hire.” And they send outreach emails to me, they're always formulaic, and once in a while, I'll tweet a screenshot of them where I redact the person's name, and it was—and there's a comment, like, “Should I tell them?” Because it's fun; it's hilarious. But I want to be clear because that often gets misconstrued; they have done absolutely nothing wrong. You've got to cast a wide net to find talent.I'm surprised I get as few incidents of recruiter outreach as I do. I am not hireable and that's okay, but I don't begrudge people reaching out. I either respond with a, “No thanks,” if it's a particularly good email, or I just hit the archive button and never think about it again. And that's fine, too. But I don't make people feel like a jerk for asking, and that is an engineering behavioral pattern that drives me up a wall.It's, “So, I'm thinking about a job here and I'm wondering if you might be a fit,” and your response is just to set them on fire? Well, guess what an awful lot of those people sending out those emails in the sourcing phase of recruiting are early career, and guess what, they tend to get promoted in the fullness of time. Sometimes they're no longer recruiting at all; sometimes they wind up being hiring managers in different ways or trying to figure out what offer they're going to extend to someone. And if you don't think that people in those roles remember when they're treated poorly as a response to their outreach, I have news for you. Don't do it. Your reputation lingers long after you no longer work there.Chris: Just exactly so. And I feel really bad for that guy.Corey: I do hope that he was not reprimanded because he should not be. It is clearly a systemic problem, and the fact that one person happened to do this in a situation where it went viral does not mean that they are any worse than other folks doing it. It is a teachable opportunity. It is, “I know that you have incredible numbers of roles to hire for, all made all the more urgent by the fact that you're having some significant numbers of departures—clearly—in the industry right now.” So, I get it; you have a hard job. I'm not going to waste your time because I don't even respond to them just because, at AWS particularly, they have hard work to do, and just jawboning with me is not going to be useful for them.Chris: [laugh].Corey: I get it.Chris: And you're trying to hire the same talent too. So.Corey: Exactly. One of the most egregious things I've seen in the course of my career was when that whole multiple accounts opened for Wells Fargo's customers and they wound up firing 3500 people. Yeah, that's not individual tellers doing something unethical. That is a systemic problem, and you clean house at the top because you're not going to convince me that you're hiring that many people who are unethical and setting out to do these things as a matter of course. It means that the incentives are wrong, it means that the way you're measuring things are wrong, and people tend to do things out of fear or because there's now a culture of it. And if you fire individuals for that, you're wrong.Chris: And that was the message that I conveyed to the people that reached out to me and spoke to me. I was like, there is a misaligned KPI, or OKR, or whatever acronym you want to use, that is forcing them to do this churn-and-burn mentality instead of active, compassionate recruiting. I don't know what that term is; I'm very far removed from the recruiting world. But that person isn't doing that because they're a jerk. They're doing that because they have numbers to hit and they've got to grind out as many as humanly possible. And you're going to get bad employees when you do that. That's not a long-term sustainable path. So, that was the conversation that I had with them. Hopefully, it resonated and hits home.Corey: I still remember from ten years ago—and I don't always tell the story, but I absolutely will now—I went up to San Francisco when I lived in Los Angeles; I interviewed with Yammer. I went through the entire process—this was not too long before they got acquired by Microsoft so that gives you some time basis—and I got a job offer. And it was a not ridiculous offer. I was going to think about it, and I [unintelligible 00:24:19], “Great. Thank you. Let me sleep on this for a day or two and I'll get back to you definitely before the end of the week.”Within an hour, I got a response rescinding the offer claiming it had been sent by mistake. Now, I believe that that is true and that they are being sincere with this. I don't know that if it was the wrong person; I don't know if that suddenly they didn't have the req or they had another candidate that suddenly liked better that said no and then came back and said yes, but it's been over a decade now and every time I talk to someone who's considering something in that group, I tell this story. That's the sort of thing that leaves a mark because I have a certain philosophy of I don't ever resign from a job before I wind up making sure everything is solid—things are signed, good to go, the background check clears, et cetera—because I don't want to find myself suddenly without income or employment, especially in that era. And that was fine, but a lot of people don't do that.As soon as the offer comes in, they're like, “I'm going to go take a crap on my boss's desk,” which, let's be clear, I don't recommend. You should write a polite and formulaic resignation letter and then you should email it to your boss, you should not carve it into their door. Do this in a responsible way, and remember that you're going to encounter these people again throughout your career. But if I had done that, I would have had serious problems. And so that points to something systemically awful at a company.I have never in my career as a hiring manager extended an offer and then rescinded it for anything other than we can't come to an agreement on this. To be clear, this is also something I wonder about in the space, when people tell stories about how they get a job offer, they attempt to negotiate the offer, and then it gets withdrawn. There are two ways that goes. One is, “Well if you're not happy with this offer, get out of here.” Yeah, that is a crappy company, but there's also the story of people who don't know how to negotiate effectively, and in turn, they come back with indications that you do not know how to write a business email, you do not know how negotiations work, and suddenly, you're giving them a last-minute opportunity to get out before they hire someone who is going to be something of a wrecking ball in the company, and, “Whew, dodged a bullet on that.”I haven't encountered that scenario myself, but I've seen it from other folks and emails that have been passed around in various channels. So, my position on this is everyone should negotiate offers, but visit fearlesssalarynegotiation.com, it's run by my friend, Josh; he has a whole bunch of free content on his site. Look at it. Read it. It is how to handle this stuff effectively and why things are the way that they are. Follow his advice, and you won't go too far wrong. Again, I have no financial relationship, I just like what he's done a lot and I've been talking to him for years.Chris: Nice. I'll definitely check that out. [laugh].Corey: Another example is developher—that's develop H-E-R dot com. Someone else I've been speaking to who's great at this takes a different perspective on it, and that's fine. There's a lot of advice out there. Just make sure that whoever it is you're talking to about this is in a position to know what they're talking about because there's crap advice that's free. Yeah. How do you figure out the good advice and the bad advice? I'm worried someone out there is actually running Route 53 is a database for God's sake.Chris: That's crazy talk. Who would do that? That's madness.Corey: I can't imagine it.Chris: We're actually in the process of trying to figure out how to do a panel chat on exactly that, like, do a vBrownBag on salary negotiations, get some really good people in the room that can have a conversation around some of the tough questions that come around salary negotiation, what's too much to ask for? What kind of attitude should you go into it with? What kind of process should you have mentally? Is it scrawling in crayon, “No. More money,” and then hitting send? Or is it something a little bit more advanced?Corey: I also want to be clear that as you're building panels and stuff like that—because I got this wrong early on in my public speaking career, to be clear—I built talks aligned with this based on what worked for me—make sure that there are folks on the panel who are not painfully over-represented as you and I are because what works for us and we're considered oh, savvy business people who are great negotiators comes across as entitled, or demanding, or ooh, maybe we shouldn't hire her—and yes, I'm talking about her in a lot of these scenarios—make sure you have a diverse group of folks who can share lived experience and strategies that work because what works for you and me is not universal, I promise.Chris: So, the only requirement to set this panel is that you have to be a not-white guy; not-old-white guy. That's literally the one rule. [laugh].Corey: I like the approach. It's a good way to do it. I don't do manels.Chris: Yes. And it's tough because I'm not going to get into it, but the mental space that you have to be in to be a woman in tech, it's a delicate balance because when I'm approaching somebody, I don't want to slide into their DMs. It's like this, “Hey, I know this other person and they recommended you and I am not a weirdo.” [laugh]. As an old white guy, I have to be very not a weirdo when I'm talking to folks that I'm desperate to get on the show.Because I love having that diverse aspect, just different people from different backgrounds. Which is why we did the entire career series on vBrownBag. We did data science with Ayodele; we did how to get into cybersecurity with Christoph. It was a fantastic series of how to get into IT. This was at the beginning of the pandemic.We wanted to do a series on, okay, there's a lot of people out there that are furloughed right now. How do we get some people on the show that can talk to how to get into a part of IT that they're passionate about? We did a triple series on how to get into game development with Dennis Diack, the founder of Apocalypse Studios. We had a bunch of the other AWS Heroes from serverless, and Lambda, and AI on the show to talk, and it was really fantastic and I think it resonated well with the community.Corey: It takes work to have a group of guests on things like podcasts like this. You've been running vBrownBag for longer than I've been running this, and—Chris: 13 years now.Corey: Yeah. This is I think, coming up on what, four years-ish, maybe three, in that range? The passing of time, especially in a pandemic era, is challenging. And there's always a difference. If I invite a white dude to come on the podcast, the answer is yes before I get the word podcast fully out of my mouth, whereas folks who are not over-represented, they're a little more cautious. First, there's the question of, “Am I a trash bag?” And the answer is, “No.” Well, no, not in the way that you're concerned about other ways—Chris: [laugh]. That you're aware of. [laugh].Corey: Oh, God, yes, but—yeah. And then—and that's part of it, and then very often, there's a second one of, “Well, I don't think I have anything, really, to talk about,” is often a common objection here. And it's, yeah, if I'm inviting you on this show, I promise that's not true. Don't worry about that piece of it. And then it's the standard stuff that just comes with being me, of, “Yeah, I've read your Twitter feed; you got to insult me here?” It's, “No, no, not really the same tone. But great question; throw the”—it goes down to process. But it takes constant work, you can't just put an open call out for guest nominations, and expect that to wind up being representative of our industry. It is representative of our biases, in many respects.Chris: It's a tough needle to thread. Because the show has been around for a long time, it's easier for me now, because the show has been around for 13 years. We actually just recorded our two thousandth and sixtieth episode the other night. And even with that, getting that kind of outreach, [#techtwitter 00:31:32] is wonderful for making new recommendations of people. So, that's been really fun. The rest of Twitter is a hot trash fire, but that's beside the point. So yeah, I don't have a good solution for it. There's no easy answer for it other than to just be empathic, and communicative, and reach people on their level, and have a good show.Corey: And sometimes that's all it takes. The idea behind doing a podcast—despite my constant jokes—it's not out of a love affair of the sound of my own voice. It's about for better or worse, for reasons I don't fully understand, I have a platform. People listen to the show and they care what people have to say. So, my question is, how can I wind up using that platform to tell stories that lift up narratives that are helpful for folks that they can use as inspiration—in my case, as critical warnings of what to avoid—and effectively showcasing some of the best our industry has to offer, in many respects.So, if the guest has a good time and the audience can learn something, and I'm not accidentally perpetuating horrifying things, that's really more than I have any right to ask from a show like this. The fact that it's succeeded is due in no small part to not just an amazing audience, but also guests like you. So, thank you.Chris: Oh no, Thank you. And it is. It's… these kinds of shows are super fun. If it wasn't fun, I wouldn't have done it for as long as I have. I still enjoy chatting with folks and getting new voices.I love that first-time presenter who was, like, super nervous and I spend 15 minutes with them ahead of the show, I say, “Okay, relax. It's just going to be me and you facing each other. We're going to have a good time. You're going to talk about something that you love talking about, and we're going to be nerds and do nerd stuff. This is me and you in front of a water cooler with a whiteboard just being geeks and talking about cool stuff. We're also going to record it and some amount of people is going to see it afterwards.” [laugh].And yeah, that's the part that I love. And then watching somebody like that turn into the keynote speaker at a conference ten years down the road. And I get to say, “Oh, I knew that person when.”Corey: I just want to be remembered by folks who look back fondly at some of the things that we talk about here. I don't even need credit, just yeah. People who see that they've learned things and carry them forward and spread to others, there's so many favors that people have done for us that we can only ever pay forward.Chris: Yeah, exactly. So—and that's actually how I got into vBrownBag. I came to them saying, “Hey, I love the things that you guys have done. I actually passed my VCIX because of watching vBrownBags. What can I do to help contribute back to the community?” And Alistair said, “Funny you should mention that.” [laugh]. And here we are seven years later.Corey: Well, to that end, if people are inspired by what you're saying and they want to hear more about what you have to say or, heaven forbid, follow in your footsteps, where can they find you?Chris: So, you can find me on Twitter; I am at mistwire.com—M-I-S-T-W-I-R-E; if you Google ‘mistwire,' I am the first three pages of hits; so I have a blog; you can find me on vBrownBag. I'm hard to miss on Twitter [laugh] I discourage you from following me there. But yeah, you can hit me up on all of the formats. And if you want to present, I'd love to get you on the show. If you want to learn more about what it takes to become an AWS Hero or if you want to get into that line of work, I highly discourage it. It's a long slog but it's a—yeah, I'd love to talk to you.Corey: And we of course put links to that in the [show notes 00:35:01]. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me, Chris. I really appreciate it.Chris: Thank you, Corey. Thanks for having me on.Corey: Chris Williams, Enterprise Architect, comma AWS Cloud at WWT. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn, and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, along with a comment telling me that while you didn't actively enjoy this episode, you are at least open to enjoying future episodes if I have one that might potentially be exciting.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.

The Bike Shed
314: Communication, Testing, and Accountability

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 26, 2021 40:55


Chris regains several of his developer merit badges and embarks on a perilous CSRF (Cross-Site Request Forgery) adventure. Steph shares highlights from Plucky, a management training course, including ways we can "click" and "break apart" from our current role, and how to have hard conversations. They also discuss how software development processes change at different team sizes, processes that break down as teams grow, and processes that are resilient at any team size. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy The Nightmare Before Christmas - What's This (https://youtu.be/QLvvkTbHjHI) Giant Robots Smashing into other Giant Robots - Plucky with Jen Dary (https://www.giantrobots.fm/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&term=plucky) Plucky (https://www.beplucky.com/) Services are Not a Silver Bullet (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/services-are-not-a-silver-bullet) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: STEPH: Boom. I'm recording. Magic is happening. [singing] What's this? What's this? It's a Bike Shed episode. What's this? What's this? CHRIS: You did that on the mic. [laughter] So you just started recording too, so it's not like you're like, "Oh, I forgot I was recording." STEPH: Oh, I didn't have a finishing line that rhymes with shed. CHRIS: Head, dead, bread, spread. STEPH: [singing] Is TDD dead? I don't know. [laughs] CHRIS: Cool. I liked it. STEPH: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. Hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: What's new? I had a fun experience over the past week or two of regaining some of my developer merit badges, which is always enjoyable. So one was I had to configure AWS, specifically S3 and IAM such that I could upload files to an S3 bucket, which seems like one of those things that a developer should be able to do, and it's just not that hard. And, man, I failed so many times, and I stared at the screen. And the ARNs I think that's another acronym that I had to try and figure out what it means and fight against. Anyway, I got there. So that's one merit badge earned. I really hope [laughs] I correctly and securely configured access to an S3 bucket such that we could upload files in our Rails app. Cool, neat. Moving on, the next merit badge that I went for was restoring the sea of green dots. Our RSpec output had gathered some noise. There was a whole bunch of noise across a variety of things. There were some dev tools that were dumping some stuff in there. And there was something related to apparition, which is the...I want to say it's the Capybara feature spec driver that we're using now, which sits on top of ChromeDriver or something like that. I don't really understand the details, but it was complaining about something. And I found a fix, and then I fixed it and whatnot. But it was one of those. I did this on a Saturday because I was just like, you know what? This will be cathartic and healing. And then I got to the sea of green dots, and I was so happy to get to it. STEPH: This is me...I'm giving you a round of applause. CHRIS: Well, thank you. Arguable whether it delivered any real value to users, but again, this was Saturday effort, so I was allowed to indulge my fastidious caretaker of the code role. STEPH: Sorry, before we move on to more serious, can we pause to talk about developer merit badges? I really, really want cute felt badges that we can...I mean, I can't design them. I don't have the talent. But I think between us and other folks, we could design amazing merit badges, and then people could collect those. I'm very much in love with that idea. CHRIS: I love the idea. I am now certain that if we were to really pursue this, that we would fall into the deepest of bike sheds as we try and define well; what are all the merit badges? And what are the different levels? STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And how many do you need to collect before you can get to what are the different...There are just so many different taxonomies that we could introduce, and, oh man, I could spend a couple of weeks on that. STEPH: [laughs] It has a very strong Pokémon vibe too of you got to catch them all. CHRIS: Absolutely. STEPH: Okay. All right. We won't digress into bikeshedding merit badges, but I'm still very, very interested in that idea. CHRIS: Indeed. If anyone out there in the listener space wants to just make these, that would be great. This is the way that I avoid bikeshedding now is I just say I'm not allowed to make these decisions or even think about it. But if these happened into the world, I would be happy about that. STEPH: Oh, I just remembered we do have something similar at thoughtbot. They're not physical where you can hold them, but I think we've talked about turning them into physical badges. But we have our internal tool hub that we used to track our schedules. And one of the fun Ralphapalooza events that we had, a team came up with the idea of introducing badges in the tool hub, so then you could award people badges. You could give people badges. And it's very cute. So they could probably help us with the taxonomy. They've probably already figured out a number of badges we could get started with. CHRIS: And of course, this is where my brain went initially to like, oh, what would the taxonomy be? But I think that's how this goes bad. And if we just keep it in the this is cute and fun, and what are all the possible merit badges, but they're all equal, and the points are made up anyway, and then it's just a fun thing, then I'm like, I'm super into this. Let's do that. Have you used a regular expression to parse HTML? Congratulations, you get a merit badge. Have you not used regular expressions to parse HTML? You get a different merit badge. [chuckles] STEPH: [laughs] I feel very positive that I could be chief of cute and fun. I could manage that department. CHRIS: Yes, that feels like definitely a role that you could really excel at. But shifting around ever so slightly, I did run into a fun bug this week. And it was a mystery tour of, I'm going to say, sadness and then eventual learning and understanding, and I think we've come to a better place. But I want to tell a story, take us on a quick tour of the adventure that I went through. So we recently saw a handful of exceptions come through in our exception monitoring service and then piped into Slack, where we see those around CSRF token expiry. So this occasionally happens in a Rails app. The CSRF token that was on the page gets rotated. And therefore, when someone...if they have an older version of the page open and they try and submit a form or something like that, then CSRF protection is going to kick in. And you do get some false negatives there or some cases where like, nope, this is actually a fine user, this is not hacking, this is nothing bad. It's just that that user had a tab open or something like that. I'll be honest; I want to understand better the timeline of expiry and how Rails expires those and whatnot. But it's one of those things; it's deep enough in Rails that I trust that they are doing a very reasonable thing. And I think the failures that we're seeing that's part of the game. And so, mostly, we wanted to add a nicer handling around that. So thankfully, Inertia actually has a really wonderful page in their docs about handling Cross-Site Request Forgery expiration token, this whole thing. This is a particular failure mode that your app might have. And so it's nice to be able to provide a nicer user experience. And so what we ended up doing is if we catch that exception, we have a rescue_from in our application controller that will instead of having this be a 500 and just a full, like, something went wrong error page, we instead respond in an Inertia-like way to basically show a flash message that says, "This page has expired. Please refresh the page to continue." And if the user just refreshes the page, then they will get a new CSRF token. And from there, everything is going to be fine. So it's not ideal. But it is, I think, both secure and now a nicer user experience. STEPH: Yeah, that sounds really nice. When they refresh the page, do they lose all that form data? I'm curious how painful of a flow that is for the user. CHRIS: Currently, yes. Inertia actually has a really nice feature for remembering form data. If you've ever been on GitHub and you're filling in a box, and then you go away to a different tab, and you come back, and it's still there, and you're happy about that, it's that sort of thing. So we could configure that. At this point, we don't have...most of our forms are pretty small. So this is not something that we opted to do proactive management around. But that is definitely something that we could add but not something that's default or anything like that. STEPH: Cool. Yeah, that makes sense. I was just curious because yeah, either small form doesn't really matter, or also, this may be just a small enough error that only a handful of people are experiencing it that it's also just not that big of a deal. CHRIS: Yes, this definitely should be an edge case. And we've also recently been working on functionality to log folks out after a period of inactivity, which would also, I think, obviate this in a different way. So all total, this shouldn't be a big deal. And this was basically a quick, little snippet of code that we thought we could just drop in, and everything would be great because it shouldn't happen much. But then I was testing out a different feature on staging, and everything I tried to do was popping up this little alert flash message that was like, "Hey, your page is expired." And I was like, that seems bad. And then I realized literally every action, any non-GET request, was getting this response that the CSRF token didn't match. And I was like, well, this seems bad. Luckily, it was only on staging and hadn't made it to production. But it had made it to staging, which meant it had gotten through CI, which was very concerning because we have a pretty robust set of feature specs at this point. We built up a bunch of fakes for all of the external data systems that we're interacting with. And we're really putting the app through its paces and trying to do so in a very production-like way. And so I was like, this is such a deep fundamental breakage. I don't know what's going on here. And so I started to investigate. And it turns out that in a recent commit, I had started using Axios, which is a little wrapper around the Fetch API. They may not actually use the Fetch API under the hood, but it allows you to have a nicer interface to make XHRs. And we implicitly had that in our package already by virtue of Inertia. Inertia uses it under the hood, but I wanted to make it explicit because now I was using it directly. So I figured that's cool. I will yarn add Axios, and then I will continue on with my day. And I worked on my feature and everything was great. And then I pushed it up into a pull request, and everything was great, and CI passed. And I got it onto staging, and everything was very sad. So then I started on the adventure of like, what is going on here? It turns out that somewhere between version 0.21.1 of Axios and 0.23.0, which there's a bunch of things about those version numbers that make me uncomfortable but here we are, somehow the behavior where you can configure the XSRF header name, which is what they're calling it on their side, the configuration stopped working. And so our override that says this is what our CSRF or XSRF token should be called when it's sent back up to the server in a header that was getting lost. And so they were falling back to their default name, Axios was. And, therefore, Rails was like, "There's no CSRF token here. So this is going to be a no for me. I'm going to reject all of the requests." So the fix was relatively easy to roll back and to pin the version of Axios to the previous version that we had been using. I didn't actually intend to upgrade it. I just intended to make it an explicit dependency. But by doing that, I accidentally upgraded it. I don't love that there was this pretty deep breakage in that. I haven't done the good work of trying to open an issue. I still want to scan through and see if there is an open issue or a conversation around this before I start making any noise. But I think if I don't find anything, this is the sort of thing that should be reported because I can't imagine I'm the only one running into this. Likewise, I was very sad that my test suite did not find this. Turns out in Rails, CSRF protection is just turned off in test mode, which may be overall makes sense. But for feature specs, in particular, I definitely want to have it. And so, it was nice that I was able to find the relevant configuration. And we introduced an RSpec configuration that says, "If it's a feature spec, save off the existing configuration and enable CSRF. And then after the spec, go back to whatever the previous was." So now all feature specs run with CSRF. And I did make sure to push up that as a singular change to CI, and CI was very unhappy with me. Many, many features-specs failed, which was good. That was what we were going for. They failed for the right reason because things were fundamentally broken. And then, I was able to update the package-lock or the package.json on the yarn lock, pin the version, fix everything. But man, there was this period of like, oh man, the app is broken in such a fundamental way. Users just can't do stuff anymore. They can view anything, but they couldn't change any data. And it just snuck through CI. And that feeling is the worst feeling. We had, at this point, built up a lot of trust in our test suite. It was really telling us when stuff was wrong, and if it was green, I felt very good merging. And suddenly, this just really shook me to my core on that front. STEPH: I love these journeys that you take us on. I mean, they're painful for you, and I am sorry to hear that. But I love these journeys that you take us on. [chuckles] CHRIS: I usually only take us on them when I've figured out the answer. And I'm like, all right, here's where we're at. It was rough for a little while, but now we are happy. And thankfully, the one configuration of saying, hey, Rails, also, please include this as part of our production like, configuration for test mode. So I feel better that moving forward, this breakage won't happen again. STEPH: We should add that as another merit badge for telling a bug story. All right, I'm taking off my hat of chief of fun and cuteness. So this may not be terribly relevant to all the things that you just shared. But I am curious where you mentioned that with Axios because you'd specified the name of the token, and then that overriding behavior is what then broke. And so then that's what led to this whole adventure that you went on. I'm curious, why did y'all customize the name of that token? CHRIS: A, this is a great question. B, I'm not super sure. C, I think the reason is because we were trying to align to Rails. So we have a little middleware on the Rails side that will serialize the CSRF token into a cookie. And then that cookie value gets read by Axios and sent back up as a header on the request. So this is the way that with Inertia CSRF just kind of works and is good. And it's different than Rails' normal. We put a hidden input into any form. And so Rails holistically knows about both sides of that, and everything works fine. But now I have to manually round trip the CSRF token. And Axio's default configuration is a header name X-XSRF-TOKEN, and we needed X-CSRF-TOKEN because that's what Rails is looking for. I probably could have configured it the other way on the Rails side. But one way or another, I had to get Rails and Axios to come to an agreement, to meet at a table, and to agree to collectively protect the app. And so I had to mediate that discussion, and that's what ended us here. STEPH: A meeting of the minds. [chuckles] Cool, cool, cool. Yeah, that makes sense. I was just curious because then that would have changed the whole journey. But yeah, that is super interesting. And I definitely resonate with the idea of when you've really invested in your test suite, and you trust it that then when it doesn't catch something that obviously breaks the application, then that feels like something worth prioritizing and digging into and then figuring out how to bring back that parity. I don't know that I've turned on enable CSRF for feature spec. So I'm also very interested in looking at that configuration and considering if I need that for any of my future client projects if that's something that I need to remember for the future because that's very niche but good to know about. CHRIS: I feel like this only really comes up if you're working in the...it's called the odd middle ground that Inertia ends up occupying. If you're in a traditional Rails app that is generating HTML server-side, forms are generated. They got the CSRF token inlined there in a hidden input. And then when you post that form, it's coming back up. The names automatically are going to match. You don't need to worry about it. And it's probably fine to not have it included in test mode. And if you're at the other end of the spectrum and you've got API interaction, and that's the way you're doing everything, then you have a different auth mechanism and cookies, and whatnot just don't apply in the same way. And so it won't really matter on that side but for a different reason. And it's only because we're in this interesting middle ground, which, again, I really love. And it's the thing that I love about Inertia. But this is a rare case where it's like, oh, we do have to bring the two sides to meet in the middle. And this is a case where, unfortunately, due to a very subtle breakage on a minor release of...a package that we're using silently broke so, yeah. But yeah, thankfully, everything is back to working. And again, we've been able to enhance the test suite in that little way that I feel confident again because this won't sneak in another time. We have coverage around this. We're good to go. So while I was very scared when this initially happened, I feel better now. I'm happy to go into the weekend feeling better about this. But that's my story. What's new in your world? STEPH: So I feel like I've been having one of those weeks where I have less code adventures. In fact, it's one of those days where I went to thoughtbot's daily sync...because we often have our client daily syncs, but then we still have a thoughtbot sync as well. And I went to the group, and I was like, I get to write code today. It's going to be a great day. All the other things I'm doing are also interesting, but I get particularly excited when I get some maker's time and get to write some code. So I feel like I've had less coding adventures recently and more hiring and process-related adventures. And specifically, I just completed the Plucky Manager Training, which is a program that's founded and led by Jen Dary, who was recently on thoughbot's podcast, The Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots. I'll be sure to include a link in the show notes for anyone that's interested. CHRIS: I believe this was the third time she was on. It's at least the second, possibly the third. And all of them are great listens, just as an aside, so we should include links to all of them. STEPH: Yes, I think she's one of the rare guests that has been on the show three times. And I think I've only listened to the first couple minutes of that episode. But I think they talk about the fact that this is her third episode, which is really, really cool. And I'm still frankly synthesizing all the information and the ideas that I've collected from the course. But I do have a few quick takes that I'm interested in sharing with you. So the first one is my cohort...we were the Panda Cohort, so go, Pandas. And some of the things that we talked about were…, and I think that this may have been the first day. So it was three days, and it was three hours for those three days. And they're spread out over a couple of weeks, which is really nice because then you show up for those three hours of the class, but then you leave with some ideas and some things to experiment with. You get a week to then try out an experiment and then come back to class next time and talk about this is how it went; it went to wonderful, or it went terrible. And you get to share that with others and work through it. And in the first class, we talked about coaching versus managing, which I found just a helpful definition to review. So managing is more direct, and telling someone what to do while coaching is encouraging someone to determine their own path and find their own solution. And I find that as a team lead at thoughtbot, I'm very often more in that coaching space than I am in that managing space. I think it's frankly pretty rare that I actually need to put on a manager's hat. And I often feel like I'm wearing my coaching hat instead. And some of the other things we talked about one of them is what is work? Which is a fun question to ask. And Jen had an analogy for this speaking about imagine that you have a plastic Easter egg. So it's got two sides, and side one is all the skills and desires and things that you're fulfilled by. And side two is a company that needs those skills. And it's great when those line up and click together, like when you take a job or get a promotion. Have you ever played...do you know what I'm talking about? Those little plastic Easter eggs. Have you ever played with those as a kid? CHRIS: Yes, certainly. STEPH: [laughs] I realize I just launched into that analogy. [chuckles] And then Jen goes on to say that's totally normal for then those sides to unclick. And Jen continues to say that it's totally normal for them to unclick. So maybe the company changes direction, the company is acquired. You've fallen out of love with something that you do about your job, or you have kids, and that has changed the things that you are fulfilled by and what you're looking for. And that's not necessarily bad. So it can be like, hey, you are working on x now, and you're not fulfilled by that anymore. But then another company comes along and says, "Hey, we're working on this, and you are fulfilled by that." So then another click happens. And essentially, it's a nice analogy to represent someone's career path and the ways that we are going to shift and re-prioritize what we're interested in. But it's also a really nice way to help it feel less personal because both sides are allowed to change. The company can change. You, as an employee, can change. And then you can look for that next click that is going to match up with a company that meets your skills and things that help you feel fulfilled. One of the other topics that we talked about are hard conversations, which I love that we dug into this one because that's certainly one that I struggle with or...I mean, we all get that feeling if you have to confront someone if you have to have that uncomfortable discussion with someone. It is a very hard thing to do. And so we had some very honest conversations around what is a hard conversation? What does that represent? And essentially, they represent that there is stalled progress and something can be improved. So Jen likens a hard conversation to a tool. It's something that you can use to then help something move forward again if something feels stalled or if there's something that needs to change. And during those hard conversations, you may not get to the resolution that you're looking for. So you may be looking for a specific outcome. But you also have another person that needs time to respond and to take in everything that you have said and process that information. So when you have a hard conversation, you may actually only move forward an inch. So if you had a lofty goal of we're going to talk and then we're going to have this hard conversation, and we're going to get to this space...But instead, you actually just make incremental progress. Like, okay, at least this person is now aware of this concern. That might be your win for the hard conversation versus actually tackling; how are we going to address it? I just want them to be aware of this concern. And it's a very vulnerable conversation, and they often take time before you can get to that ideal resolution. But essentially, the idea is get in the game, start the conversation, and then have follow-up conversations for that hard conversation. And I really appreciated that framing because I often will think of hard conversations of oh, we have to have this hard conversation and get to this specific outcome. But if you shift the goal line to be like, no, I really just need to at least make this person aware of a concern, that makes it a lot more approachable. And then also probably yields more fruitful outcomes because that gives the other person time to think about what you've shared to also come to the table with their own ideas and then work together to then get to that ideal resolution. CHRIS: I like that framing a lot. I can definitely see the case where you, as someone who has recognized something that needs to change (perhaps you're a manager),lineup you've now thought about that a good bit; you've observed it, but the individual that you're bringing that to this may be novel. This may be a surprise for them. And so if you come into that interaction both about to share this information but then also trying to resolve it and trying to get to I need you to internalize it, and I need you to fundamentally change your behavior as a result of this conversation we're going to have, that's quite possibly not a realistic outcome. And if you're trying for that, it might inherently lead to just a bad outcome because that individual is not in a position to do that. But they are potentially ready to hear it. And so you can just achieve step one and then later have step two. So I like that a lot. STEPH: Yeah, in general, I found the course incredibly helpful, very insightful. It was also really nice to hear from other managers that are facing similar problems or perhaps novel problems and then getting to weigh in and help each other. So it's a wonderful course. I'll be sure to include a link in the show notes for anyone that is interested. And I'll probably come back with some more insights from the class because it's really...we just wrapped up. So I'm sure I still have some ideas that will percolate over time, and I want to come back and share those with the group. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: Pivoting just a bit, we have a listener question that I'm excited to dive into. This question comes from the one and only, the Edward Loveall, fellow thoughtboter. And Edward wrote in, "How does the process of software development change at different team sizes? What's a process that breaks down soon after the team starts growing? What's a process that is resilient at all sizes? And by process, I mean anything that involves other people including organizing tasks, code review, deployment, or anything else that isn't you alone writing code in a vacuum." I'm really excited about this question because I think there's a lot here. And there's actually one part that I'm struggling with a bit, so I'm curious to see what you think, Chris, about it. But I'm going to start off with saying that I think there are a number of management processes that definitely break down as a team grows. But in the spirit of Edward's question, I'm going to focus more on the software development process and how those might need to change and what starts to break as your team grows. So starting off with processes that break after the team starts growing, this one, frankly, what really starts to break is not a process specifically, but it's the lack of process that really starts to become visible and painful. So, how do we track work? Before, maybe the product manager or someone would just send you a message and say, "Hey, can you work on this?" or "Hey, can you fix this thing?" And how does code need to be reviewed before being merged? Does it need to be reviewed? Are people just merging as they get stuff done? How are deploys performed? Oh, we have a super urgent production fix that needs to go out, and the only person that knows how to deploy is out sick today? Cool. That's the type of process that I think that really breaks down, or at least you start to notice when the team starts to grow. What are your thoughts? CHRIS: I definitely feel that first one very strongly. We're feeling it right now on the team, which is still very small. There are only three developers working on the project, and then we have a product manager. And each week, we're slowly iterating, and tweaking, and honing, and trying to introduce just enough process in terms of how we define the work to be done, communicate the status of it, all of that fun stuff. We started with Trello. And we just had a board with some columns, and then we had more columns, and then we got rid of a few of them. And then we recently added a Power-Up to the Trello board, which allows for epics. So there are cards which are epics which tie to sub cards. And I'm staring at it, and I'm like, how long until we're Jira? How long can I hold out here and not be Jira? But it does feel like we're slowly iterating towards a more useful process for this team rather than process for process' sake, which I feel like is a really useful distinction. There's also a question of like, what can be known or what can be adequately measured and whatnot versus what can't be? So we've talked many a time on the show about estimation and velocity and trying to track that and the pitfalls inherent with that. And so there's, in my mind, two different camps. There's the process we want to avoid. And again, to reference German Velasco's wonderful blog post, Say No To More Process. And I really feel like there is a tendency often when things go wrong to then try and paper over that with process. Oh, this team didn't use the design system. So we need to write ESLint rules to make sure you can't import from the directories that aren't the thing. And it's like, we can do that, and I've definitely done that. And I will do that again in the future. But I always have the lens of do we need this? Is it worth the trade-off, the cost, the overhead, the complexity that it's bringing in? But definitely, organizing and communicating tasks is one of the ones that becomes really difficult. The more people that are working on something, the more you need probably more than one person staying out in front of them and trying to define the next bit of work that needs to be done after that. Code review feels like it probably should stay similar, with the exception that I lose the ability to review all code at some point. Right now, I'm trying to review every single PR that goes through or close to it. At some point, I'm just going to have to give up on that. But for now, that's my goal. But fundamentally, code review, I think, will hopefully take the same shape. Deployment, similarly, like, I've talked about the merge queue thing. I want to get a little bit of process in there but not too much. There is definitely some necessity for change. But I definitely want to resist the urge to change everything and to just say, like, slowly over time; we're going to have to be a big Byzantine organization with lots of rules and standard operating procedures and all of that. I've heard anecdotally, and I don't know if this is true, so maybe someone out there on the internet can correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that at Google, they're pretty tight in terms of what languages and frameworks can be used and what processes, and workflows, and build tools and all of that whereas Facebook, as a counterpoint, is relatively lax. Obviously, React is used very heavily on the core web application. But there's some flexibility in terms of different languages and frameworks and things for sub-projects or small individual teams having a little bit more autonomy. And I think that's a really interesting thing of are you one large, cohesive, organized company or do you try to act like a bunch of small disparate but roughly connected teams that share good ideas but can work independently? And that changes how I would think about this question. STEPH: I really like how you're describing the addition of process. It sounds like a just-in-time process. So as you're learning that something needs to be added, then that's when you look for answers. And then you sprinkle on a bit of process that everyone agrees that feels very helpful within also the right to review and see if that still makes sense for the team. There's one additional area where I think the lack of process really shines through in addition to the number of ways that you've mentioned is also onboarding. So if you have a very small team and you are onboarding, it's likely that...Chris, you can let me know if I'm wrong, but when someone's joining the team, there's probably a good chance that they get to pair with you at some point, or they even get welcomed by you to the team. And then, they get an overview of the product and the codebase. And there's probably this really nice session where they get to ask you questions, and then they have that onboarding session. Does that sound about right? CHRIS: Yes. But I would go so far as to say it's not just a day or a session, but it's probably a couple of days. So yes, and. STEPH: That's even better. And with some of the smaller teams that I've seen, that onboarding process is where they are pairing with that lead person on the team. And that's going well until suddenly that lead person can't pair with everybody. And nobody has really thought about how to streamline that onboarding or how to coach or teach someone else to be a really good onboarding pair. And I have strong feelings about this area because we often focus so much on hiring, but then we drop the ball when it comes to onboarding that new, wonderful colleague that we've worked so hard to recruit. And at the end of that day, someone's going to reach out to them and say, "Hey, how was your first day?" And it makes a big difference for that person's retention as to how those first couple of days ago. So I think onboarding is another really important part that when you're a smaller team, you probably don't need much process because you have more of that personable onboarding experience. But as the team grows, there needs to be more of a process to help other teammates join the team. CHRIS: It's interesting. I think I totally agree with you that over time, there is a necessity to be more intentional and to have a little bit more structure in the process. And I don't think you're saying this, but I just want to make sure we are saying the thing that I think we believe, which is that shouldn't replace the human that helps you onboard. Like, I still like the idea that everybody gets a pair for some amount of time when they start at a new company. And you're working together on a feature, or you're working together on bug fixes. You're shipping to production as soon as possible. But you're not doing that based on some guides in a wiki. You're doing that with another human that's helping you. There should also be guides, and a wiki, and documentation, and formalization as the organization grows but not in place of having another person that you get to talk to. STEPH: We're just going to send you a little yellow rubber duck and then with a little Post-It note that says, "Good luck [laughs] with your onboarding process." Definitely. I agree with everything you said. It does not replace that human element where there's someone that's helping you onboard. I just see that onboarding is one of those things that gets forgotten, or we often point someone to a README which I do think is great because then it is battle-testing our README. But then there still needs to be someone that is readily there to say, "Hey, how's it going? What are you struggling with? Can I pair with you?" There still has to be that human element that is helping guide you through the process. And I think smaller teams may forget that they actually need to assign somebody to you to make sure that you have someone that you know. Like, hey, this is who I can reach out to with all my questions. Because they're probably not going to be comfortable posting in the company channel at that point or a larger communication to say, "Hey, I'm stuck on something." CHRIS: There's one other area that comes to mind, or I guess it's more of an anecdote that I have heard, but it speaks back to GitHub's early, early days. And they were somewhat famous for being very flat in terms of the organization and very self-organized, and everybody's figuring it out, and you're working on the thing that's most important in your mind. And for a long time, this was a celebrated facet of the company and a thing that they talked about rather publicly. And then I think there was this collective recognition, and maybe they reached a tipping point where that just didn't work anymore. Or maybe it actually hadn't been working for a bit, and there was just the collective realization of that. But it was interesting to watch from the outside as GitHub added more formalization, more structure, more managers, and hierarchy, and career ladders, and things of that nature. And I think there's a way to do all of those things in a complicated, overloaded, heavy way. But I think a different version of it is...like, you were using the word coaching earlier. Having formal structures within your organization to encourage people on their career path, to help them grow, to have structure around that, I think is a really difficult thing to get right. But I think it is critical, and I think just not having it can't be the answer past a certain probably pretty small size. So that is an interesting one where I think you do need to introduce some process and formalization around how you think about the group of people and how they work together within your organization. STEPH: I agree. I think where some folks may see a lack of hierarchy; others feel a lack of support. And adding levels of management should really be focused on the outcome is that we're helping people feel supported. So even getting feedback as you're adding those different levels of management, like, hey, did we make your life better? Did we make your life worse? I think that's a great question for management to ask as they're exploring a less flat structure. CHRIS: So, Steph, I have a question for you now on a variant of this topic. In general, we seem to be fans of having a codebase. Probably a Rails app that's got a database behind it, and that's where you put the data. Everybody commits to that same repository. It's all kind of one collected thing. And often, organizations grow to a certain size, and they're like, this is untenable. We cannot have this many people working on this same codebase. So we shall do the logical thing, which is we will break it up into small pieces. And those pieces will communicate over HTTP, and it will be great because then our teams can be separate from each other and can manage their little piece of the world. What do you think about that? Is there truth there? Is it not true at all? What do you think? STEPH: All right, so your team is getting too big, and to the point that you feel like you need to split it out so then you can have small teams, and they can all work independently on different parts and services of the codebase. I don't love the idea. I'm trying to think through because I feel like there's a lot of nuance here. But I don't love the idea that that's the driving force as to why are we making the change? And that is often a question that comes to mind whenever we are making a big change, either architecture or process-related is like, what's driving this? And then how are we going to measure it? And if we are driving it just because we have a large team, let's talk more. Why are people blocked? Why can't people work together? What's preventing people from being able to contribute to the same codebase? Are people blocked for a long time because they're having to wait on someone else to complete that work? I have a lot of questions that I don't know if I can fully answer your question. But my instinct is to say let's not break up the architecture just because our team grew in size. CHRIS: Yeah, I think I definitely agree with that. There's probably a breaking point where it's just too many individuals, and there'll be too much contention. But I think resisting that or at least naming that as like, okay, that's what we're saying but is that really what's true? Or are we actually feeling that this system is so deeply coupled that there's no way to change some small piece of the code without impacting other parts of it? Like, is the CSS completely untenable because we're just using global class names, and it's leaking everywhere? Okay, do we need a different solution there? And then it's actually fine. We don't need to have different services that have their own different style sheets. We just need a different approach to CSS. That's a particularly easy one to go for because there's inherently a global namespace there. But the same thing is true in a lot of different contexts. So services are a way to break things apart and enforce those boundaries. But if inherently coupling is your problem, then you're just going to be coupled over HTTP, and I think it's going to be difficult. There's a wonderful blog post by Josh Clayton, which I think does a better job than I'm doing in this moment of highlighting some of the questions I would want to ask. The blog post is titled Services are Not a Silver Bullet. And so Josh goes through and enumerates a bunch of the different versions of the story that he's heard throughout the years of well, we need to go to services because x, because our test suite is slow because pull requests are constantly having merge conflicts and whatnot, because the code is very deeply coupled and any change here affects everything else. And a fix over here broke something over there. This is no good. And so he does a really good job of presenting alternatives or at least questions that you can ask to say, like, is this the problem, or is this a symptom? And we need to address the more underlying cause. And so I think there is a point where you just can't have 1,000 people trying to commit to the same Rails codebase. That feels like it's maybe too big. But it takes a while to get to 1,000 people. And there will be times where extracting a service makes sense or integrating with an external service that exists. Like, I've talked about Stripe before as my canonical like, yeah, it's actually deeply intertwined with the data model, but they're just dealing with such a distinct complexity set over there. And they have such expertise on that that I'm happy to accept the overhead of the fact that that service lives outside of my core application, and I need to deal with synchronizing state and all of that. I will take on that complexity, but it's not worth it for everything, and it's not a silver bullet. Again, to reference the name of Josh's blog post there, Services are Not a Silver Bullet. And so, coming back to Edward's original question, I would say that having a monolithic codebase works for a really long time, but there is probably a breaking point somewhere well along, but fight it for as long as you can. I think. STEPH: I really like how you touched on coupling because it really helps ask those questions to get to the heart of what are the pain points that you are feeling? And it is less of a decision that is based on people and process but more if you're going to split out a portion of your architecture. It is in response to an actual business need and a business value versus some other pain points that you're trying to fix. A particular example might be like maybe you have a portion of your application that really just needs to spend a lot of time crunching data. And it's really not as specific to your application; it's something that can happen on its own. And then it's beneficial to move that outside so it can scale and relate it to the work that it needs to perform versus keeping it in-house with the application. I do want to circle back to another question that Edward included which is what's a process that is resilient at all sizes? And the ones that really come to mind for me...and these are a bit amorphous intentionally because it will look different for each company. But three areas that are very resilient at all sizes, whether you are 1 to 2 employees versus you've got hundreds or thousands it's communication, testing, and accountability. So communication, where are we headed, and how do we know what we're working on? For testing, it's how do we test our changes? Do we write tests? Do we use QA? Do we have a staging environment? What does that look like? What's our parity between staging and production? And then how do we know what's in progress, and how do we know when it's done? Those are three core areas that, regardless of your team size,,I think are very crucial to the team success. What do you think? What are some of the processes that are resilient at all sizes? CHRIS: I actually really like the list that you just provided. That is a wonderful trifecta, and I think it will take you very far, so probably not much to add from me. But I guess on that note, should we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeeee! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
313: Forty-Seven Percent

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 19, 2021 42:05


Steph talks about binging a few Things Worth Learning podcast episodes and particularly enjoyed an episode that featured one of thoughtbot's design directors, Sameera Kapila. Sam shared her expertise about management and inclusion, and Steph shares her favorite parts. Chris shares the story of a surprising error and the resulting journey through database transactions and Sidekiq that eventually resolved the issue. He also shares some follow up on the broken build and the merging process changes they introduced (spoiler, the process changes have been rolled back). Leading Inclusively, with Sameera Kapila - Things Worth Learning Podcast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiV6_3pZFc0) How to Skim a Pull Request (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/a-smelly-list) Isolator (https://github.com/palkan/isolator) aftercommiteverywhere (https://github.com/Envek/after_commit_everywhere) timefora_boolean (https://github.com/calebhearth/time_for_a_boolean) Transcript: STEPH: Oh man, I'm about to stop eating my pop-tart. I'll put it away. It's within distance. I'm going to eat it. CHRIS: Your high-fat content unfrosted pop-tart. STEPH: You know, surprise Sunday twist: it has icing on it. CHRIS: Steph, who even are you? STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: There are a few canonical anchor facts that one knows about other people, and when one of those... STEPH: I like to keep everyone, including myself, on their toes. CHRIS: Or you've just secretly accepted that the icing adds another textural flavor adventure component. It's just better with icing. STEPH: All right, all right, all right. There's a complicated answer to this. And the complicated [chuckles] answer to this is that the more organic ingredients that I recognize when reading about pop-tarts are by a particular company, and they all have frosting on them. And the more generic pop-tarts that don't have frosting on them, I don't know how to pronounce a lot of those ingredients. So I'm like, no, but okay, I still eat them. But I prefer the ingredients I can pronounce. So I either go with the ingredients I can't pronounce or have a little bit of frosting on my pop-tart. And I'm going with the non-cancer route for today. CHRIS: For today, in this moment, and accepting the frosting. Okay, all right. Well, that is complicated. [laughs] It's tricky out there. Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. So the weather, I'm going to talk about the weather for a little bit. [chuckles] It's been almost non-stop rain for the past several days, which is fine. I'm sure it's great for plant life. But it's really hard on my dog Utah because then we can't go outside for our normal walks and playtime. Although he is my four-legged water baby because he absolutely loves water, and puddles, and playing in the rain. So he's very fine with going outside and playing for a long time. But then I have to essentially give him a full-on bath before I want to bring him back in. So not wanting to have to give him a bath each time, in the spirit of improvising, we started finding more indoor games to play. And I've started teaching him to play hide and seek. And he's not great at it mainly because he will only stay until I'm out of eyesight, and then he will come and find me. And so I have to be really, really fast at finding a hiding spot to like dash around a corner or hide behind the door. But I think he enjoys it because he will find me and then he seems very excited. And we go back, and we play again. And so I just have to work on teaching him to wait a bit longer so I can find better hiding spots. CHRIS: When you said that, at first, I was like, how did you teach him to hide? But I realize he's only playing the seek part of the game, and you're only playing the hide part of the game. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: I'm just so used to you exchange roles back and forth. First, you hide, then you seek, and then you switch it up. That would be a lot to get your dog to be like, now I'm going to secretly hide. STEPH: [laughs] I'd be very impressed. Yes, we have very distinct roles in this game. I am the one that always counts and hides. But he's a very good seeker. So that's been fun. We just got to work on getting a little better at it. But on a more tech-related note, one of the design directors at thoughtbot, Sameera Kapila, who also goes by Sam, was a guest on the podcast Things Worth Learning, which is hosted by Matt Stauffer. And Matt is also the host of The Five-Minute Geek Show and The Laravel Podcast. And in the show Things Worth Learning, Matt meets with individuals that are excited to share something that they're deeply passionate about; maybe it's tech, maybe it's not. And I've binged a couple of those episodes. And I really like how you can choose between the podcast format or the YouTube format. So then you can really watch the conversation unfold, which I know you and I a couple of times have thought it would be fun if people could see us because there are so many facial emotions and gestures that go along with conversations. So it was really delightful. And speaking of delightful, Sam shared her expertise about management and inclusion. And I definitely recommend listening to the episode because I can't share everything that Sam shared. But a couple of the topics that Sam mentioned that I really enjoyed and would love to chat about, so the first one is about helping someone, in this case, someone that you manage that comes to you with a concern. So there's often a presumption that just because someone comes to you with a concern or an issue that they've experienced at work, that they're the ones that will also want to work to address that concern, and that's often not true. It can be true; maybe that person wants to be involved. But they're often coming to you in the leadership or management role to say, "Hey, I've had this issue," and they really want help with that instead of walking away with homework for it. Because then that trains people to essentially be in this mindset of well, if I bring up this concern, then I'm going to be the one that has to address it, even if I'm the one that's most negatively impacted by this. And addressing this concern could be actively harmful to me. And she shared a really great real-world example from her own experience where her and another co-worker had noticed a concern about the hiring process. And her and that co-worker got together, and they talked about the concerns. They even rehearsed for the meeting because they were trained by the tech industry to say, "Hey, if you bring up a concern, you're going to be responsible for addressing and then resolving that concern." And so they had that meeting with the person in leadership. And they were pretty nervous about how it was going to go. And that person in leadership said to them, "Thank you both so much for sharing that. That must have been such a burden. And this is my responsibility to fix. And here are what my next steps are." And that was amazing because it allowed Sam and the other person to go back to client work. And they also received follow-up conversations about how that issue was being addressed. So there was even that feedback loop as to how things were going to change. And I have a personal example that...I really resonated with the example that Sam provided because I remember there are different teams that I've been a part of, where often I was one of the few women engineers on the team. And so we often have conversations about how do we get more women engineers into the company? And they're wonderful conversations. But there's a part of me that always felt resentful about, like, why am I here? Why am I the one fixing this? I understand I have some more insight and expertise, and experience in this area. But I was also frustrated by the fact that I was the one that was in that meeting often with other women, and it felt like our responsibility to fix this. And I used to feel bad about feeling resentful towards that. Because I was like, shouldn't I want to help other people? And I do. But Sam's example really helped remind me and clarify that yes, just because there's a concern doesn't necessarily mean you should be the one to address it. And it really takes everybody involved, or it takes leadership to step up and address that concern. CHRIS: Oh, that's really interesting the way Sam is framing that and describing the situation of not having any problem that you bring in be now your work to solve. Like, oh, I found the issue, and now we've got to go do this. But the idea that you can bring something to light and then be able to walk away from it. And the particular thing that you were saying that if your interaction is always that when you reference something when you bring in a concern that then your manager works with you to figure out how you can solve it, then you get this mental block of like, well, do I even want to say anything? Because I don't want to try and deal with big, amorphous unclear issues. So maybe I just won't even say anything. And so this as a way to make sure that there's room for all of the conversation is a really interesting framing that I hadn't really thought about, frankly, but it's very interesting. I haven't seen this interview either. So I'm definitely excited to give this a look because Sam is wonderful. And the topic that you're describing here sounds fantastic as well. STEPH: Yeah. There was an important moment for me where...one of my managers is Matt Sumner, who's been on the show. And when Matt was my manager, at one point, we were having a one on one, and we would often go for walks for our one on one. And I mentioned something about "I have this concern, or I have this problem, but I don't really know how to fix it. So I'm not sure I'm ready to talk about it." And Matt, in his delightful way, was like, "We can still talk about it. You don't have to have an answer or a solution." I'm like, "Yeah, but I feel like I should be able to fix it. Like, if you have a concern, or if you have something that you want to gripe about, then you should come to the table with solutions for it." And Matt was like, "No, you don't need to do that at all. We can totally gripe about stuff or talk about concerns and then either figure out the solutions together or go to other people for ideas." And that was really important to me because, like you'd mentioned, otherwise, it felt like this mental block where then it feels like you can't air out some of the things that you're worried about or have concerns about because then you think you're the only one responsible. And you may not be able to come up with the best solution. You may need other people to then help you strategize and come up with ideas. And I just love, love, love that part of Sam's discussion. And oh, there was one other part about the conversation. Well, there are lots of parts that were amazing. But another one in particular that blew my mind is about Comic Sans, the font, the font that everyone loves to hate. [chuckles] And I learned that it's one of the most legible fonts for kids. And it's one of the more accessible fonts for people with dyslexia. And it's actually recommended...I think there are still more academic studies that need to be done to really classify fonts that are best for people that have dyslexia. But Comic Sans is recommended by The British Dyslexia Association and the Dyslexia Association of Ireland. And there are some other really great posts that talk about the benefits of using a font like Comic Sans because the typeface has long ascenders and descenders and generous letter spacing and asymmetrical lowercase b and d to then help distinguish those letters. And I just thought that was so cool. This font that everybody wants to rip apart because it seems whimsical, unprofessional gets overused. There are lots of reasons, I suppose. [laughs] But there's a really big benefit to it, and it can help others. And I just found that very whimsical in itself. CHRIS: I love the idea that there are multiple levels of knowing about Comic Sans. First, you're just like, I don't even know the name, but it's that comic book-looking font. And then obviously, the next step is to be like Comic Sans? How could you ever use that? It's an atrocity. And then it's like, but actually, Comic Sans has some things going for it. And it is a really interesting consideration and something that you wouldn't necessarily think of. But then once you learn it, you're like, okay. Man, I wonder how many other things in the world have this interesting shape to them? Hmm. STEPH: Do you know the history behind Comic Sans? CHRIS: I do not. STEPH: I read about it fairly recently, but I'm probably going to botch some of the details. But I believe it was designed or created by Vincent Connare. And it was created for Microsoft. And Vincent was working on a project where I think there was a dog that was essentially going to have these bubbles that would then show you different parts of the application and walk you through the different features. And the dog had a very comic book feel to the character. And so then Vincent designed a font to go along with that comic book character, this dog and came up with Comic Sans. I don't think the dog actually launched with that particular font. But since the font was still developed, it was released as part of the available fonts. And there we go, there is the birth of Comic Sans. And then it just received so much love and ire all throughout history. [chuckles] CHRIS: There's something that you said there that I want to loop back on when you were talking about chatting with Matt Sumner and saying, "Here's this thing, but I don't know how to solve it. So I don't even want to bring it up." I really liked the framing that you gave and the fact that Matt was like, "No, no, we can still talk about it. We can at least explore this thing, have a conversation." I think that's really wonderful. There's a very similar thing that I experience a lot when doing code review, particularly when I'm in more of a leadership role within a team, which is I often want to highlight something that feels a little bit off to me in the code, but I may not have a specific solution. Like, I may see a variable name, or I may see a controller action that feels like it's the wrong shape or something. And I'll often name it but explicitly say, "I actually don't have a better idea here. So feel free to continue on with this, but I want to name it. So in case that sparks something in you, if you were also feeling some incongruousness, maybe it's worth you spending another minute to think about it, but I want to make sure my comment isn't blocking or otherwise making you feel uncomfortable." If I just come to you and I'm like, "This feels wrong," and that's all I say, that to me is unacceptable code review. Because now I want all of my code review feedback to be very actionable, it's either here's the thing that I feel strongly I think we should definitely change this. If you disagree, let's have a conversation. But yeah, this one definitely needs to change. Here's the thing that, like, I don't know, maybe we could break this into two lines and split it up. But if you don't like that, that's fine. Do whatever. And so then it's I've given the person my thoughts but given them clarity and a free rein to do whatever they want with that information. And then there are ones where I'm like, I don't even know what I think we should do here, but I think something. But if you don't have any ideas...like, I don't have any ideas specifically. If you don't have any ideas, it's fine. We'll continue on with this and maybe revisit it down the road. But I want to make sure each of those different tiers is actionable for the other person, and I'm not just giving them homework or something to be sad about because that would be bad code review. STEPH: I'm just imagining a PR comment that says, "I don't know what we should do here. But I don't think this is it," [laughs] and that just creating sadness. That's so interesting to me because I have flip-flopped with that opinion in regards to there are times that I very much resonate and do what you just said where I will point out to someone where I'm like, "I'm not sure why, but I just have concerns about this. And I don't know if you also ran into anything that was weird about this and would like to talk about it. I don't have any really great ideas, so I think this is good for now. And we should keep moving forward, so we're not blocked on it," but just wanted to, as you mentioned, highlight it in case it sparks something for the other person or for someone else that's reviewing the code. And then there are other times where I'll look at something, and I'm like, "Yeah, it's not great. There's something that feels brittle or potentially maybe hard to maintain or things like that. But I don't have a better idea." And I don't comment on it because I'm like, I don't want to distract that person or block them. And I do think it's good enough, and I don't have anything to add to the conversation, so I just leave it out. So it's interesting to me where is that line of when I feel like it's important enough to comment to then potentially spark some conversation versus just letting it go so then I don't add any distraction to their work? CHRIS: I think it's when the spidey-sense gets past 47%. It's a very specific number. I do the same thing where there's something, and I'm like, you know what? I can't even clearly express what about this makes me feel something off, and so I won't even comment on it, and I agree. And then there are things that trip past some magical line in the sand. And I'm like, you know what? I think I'm going to say something here, but I don't even have a recommendation. And then there's a whole spectrum of the nature of code review and, again, 47% being the specific number. STEPH: There's actually a thoughtbot blog post that correlates nicely to that concept of spidey sense. It's written by Mike Burns, and it's titled How to Skim a Pull Request. But essentially, grabbing from one of the lines here is where Mike presents an unexplained, incomplete, and arbitrarily grouped list of keywords that will cause us thoughtboters to read your code with more care and suspicion. [laughs] That feels perfectly aligned with that idea of spidey sense, spidey-sense 101. I'll be sure to include a link in the show notes. Or, you know, 40%. CHRIS: I think it was 47%. It's a very precise number. [chuckles] STEPH: Very precise nonsensical number. Got it. [laughs] CHRIS: If I'm making up fake statistics, I'm not going to have them round to an even 10. [laughter] STEPH: Makes it seem more legit somehow. CHRIS: Exactly. STEPH: But that's really the novelties that I wanted to chat about. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: What's new in your world? CHRIS: I have some follow up on a recent topic that we talked about. So we had a kerfuffle which I described where we had a branch that got merged and the rebase some stuff got out of hand. And so we introduced some process, the protected branch configuration within GitHub that required the branches to be up-to-date before they can be merged and CI to be passing. And everybody was happy. It was like, this is great. Turns out it was never turned on. That's actually the day I was like, man; this is really straightforward. There's been no annoyance here. And then I got to the point where it was like; this seems weird because we just merged a lot of things in rapid succession. I went and checked, and it turns out what I thought was the name of the branch protection rule in GitHub's UI is, in fact, a regular expression pattern. It might not be a full regular expression but like a wildcard pattern for the branch name to match to, and so it's specific. I created this rule, and in small, gray text underneath, it said, "This applies to zero branches." I missed that the first time but then the second time going back, I was like, oh, I actually wanted it to apply to more than zero branches. So I went back in and changed that. It's a great example of very subtle UI that just slipped past me. STEPH: I was going to say in your defense, the very subtle gray font to say, "This applies to zero," feels tricky. CHRIS: That...also, going through the work of creating this thing and if that results in zero branches that would match, maybe that's the thing to emphasize on creation. I would love that. Because in my case, I was trying very specifically to target an existing branch. There is the ability to say, "Oh, any bugfix-* named branch," if you're using branch naming strategies like that, you can use this for that sort of thing. So it may be that currently, there are no branches with that name. But in my case, I was just like, please, main, anytime anything is happening on main, that is what we want to do. I just needed to put the word main there. But anyway, once I actually turned it on, insufferable, absolutely not, cannot survive in this world. We have a relatively small team. There are three of us, and not everyone is even full-time, and my time is pulled in a lot of different directions. So I'm actually not pushing as much code as I might otherwise. Even with that, nope, absolutely not. Our CI is like; I don't know, five-ish minutes per run. Turns out, especially Monday mornings, we have a volley of things that will have been reviewed and trickled in through Friday afternoon. And then there's a bunch of work we want to land Monday morning. And then, just at any point, it turns out, yes, this was untenable. So we have turned it off. I would like to revisit this down the road and introduce the MergeQueue functionality, so the idea of being able to say, "Yeah, you just name when you want something to go in, and then the system will manage the annoying finicky work there." But for now, I had to give up on my dream of everything running on CI, on a feature branch, before it gets merged. STEPH: Ooph, that phrase, "I had to give up on my dream," that breaks my heart for you. [laughs] CHRIS: I may be going a little bit fanciful with my language but, like, a little. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: I liked this thing. I want to exist in that world. But it is not feasible given the current state of the world. And that will only get worse over time, is my expectation. So I get to revisit this when I have the time to more thoroughly figure a thing out. But for now, I don't know, merge whatever; it will be fun. STEPH: There's a small part of me that feels a little reassured that it was a terrible time, although I hate that it was a terrible time. But I have felt that pain on so many other projects where I am constantly waiting, and I'm constantly checking to be like, can I merge? Can I merge? Can I merge? And then I can merge, but then someone beats me to it. And I'm like, oh, then I got to restart. And I got to wait, and I'm constantly checking. So that feels like it helps validate my experience. [chuckles] I am excited for that MergeQueue. I would be super excited to try that out and hear about how it goes just because that seems more like the dream where you can just say, hey, I want this PR to go whenever it can go. Just take care of it. I want it to be rebased, whatever the flow is, and have it be merged, so I don't ever have to check on it again. CHRIS: But once we configured this, there was a new thing that appeared in the GitHub UI, which was auto-merge. And so that was a button where I could say like, "Hey, merge this whenever CI passes," which was a nice upgrade, but it didn't have the additional logic of and rebase as necessary. Or the more subtle logic of like, you don't actually want to rebase where you have five different branches that are all trying to merge, and they keep rebasing. You want to have the idea of a queue, and so you get in line. And you rebase when it's your turn, and then you run the CI. And you try and be as smart as possible about that. If anyone at GitHub is listening, I would love if you all threw this into your platform, and then you could ping Slack if anything went wrong. But otherwise, there are, like I said, existing tools. At some point, I will probably, I don't know, over a long weekend or something like that, sit down with a large cup of coffee and explore these. But today is not that day. STEPH: I'm excited to hear about that day. CHRIS: So that is a tale of woe and sadness. But luckily, I get to balance it out with a tale of happiness and good outcomes. So that's good. The happiness and good outcome story does start with trouble, as they always do. So we had a bug that occurred in the application where something was supposed to have happened. And then there was an email that needed to go out to tell the user that this thing had happened. And the bug popped up within AppSignal and said something was nil that shouldn't have been nil. Particularly, we're using a gem called Time For a Boolean, which is by Caleb Hearth. And he's a former thoughtboter and maintains this wonderful gem that instead of having a Boolean for like, is this thing approved, or is it paid? Or is it processed? You use a timestamp. And then this gem gives you nice Boolean-like methods on top of that timestamp. Because it turns out, very often just having the Boolean of like, this was paid, it turns out you really want to know when it was paid. That would be a really useful piece of information. And so, while you're still in Postgres land, it's nice to be able to reach for this and have the affordances of the Boolean-like interface but also have the timestamp where available. So anyway, the email was trying to process but that timestamp...let's pretend that it was paid as the one that matters here so paid at was nil, which was very concerning. Because this was the email that's like, hey, that thing was processed. Or let's say it was processed, actually, because that's closer to what it was. Hey, this thing was processed, and here's an email notification to tell you that. But the process timestamp was nil. I was like, oh no. Oh no. And so when I saw this pop up, I was like, this is very bad. Everything is very bad. Oh goodness. Turns out what had happened was...because I very quickly chased after this, looked in the background job queue, looked in Sidekiq's UI, and the job was gone. So it had been processed. I was like, wait a minute, how? How did this fix itself? Like, that's not the kind of bug that resolves itself, except, in this case, it was. This was an interaction that I'd run into many times before. Sidekiq was immediately processing the job. But the job was being enqueued from within the context of a database transaction. And the database transaction had not been committed yet. But Sidekiq was already off to the races trying to process. So the record that was being worked on, the database record, had local changes within the context of that transaction, but that hadn't been committed. Sidekiq then reads that record from the database, but it's now out of sync because that tiny bit of Sidekiq is apparently very fast off to the races immediately. And so there's just this tiny little bit of time that can occur. And this is also a fun one where this isn't going to happen every time. It's only going to happen sometimes. Like, if the queue had a couple of other things in it, Sidekiq probably would have not gotten to this until the database transaction had fully closed. So the failure mode here is super annoying. But the solution is pretty easy. You just have to make sure that you enqueue outside of the database transaction. But I'm going to be honest, that's difficult to always do right. STEPH: That's a gnarly bug or something to investigate that I don't think I have run into before. Could you talk a little bit more about enqueueing the job outside the database transaction? CHRIS: Sure. And I think I've talked about this on a previous episode a while back because I have run into this one a few times. But I think it is sufficiently rare; like, you need almost a perfect storm because the database transaction is going to close very quickly. Sidekiq needs to be all that much more speedy in picking up the job in order for this to happen. But basically, the idea is within some processing logic that we have in our system; we find a record, we do some work. And then we need to update that record to assign this timestamp or whatever it is. And then we also want to inform the user, so we're going to enqueue a job to send the email notification. But for all of the database work, we are wrapping it in a transaction because we want it to either succeed or fail atomically. So there are three different records that we need to update. We want all of them to be updated or none of them to be updated. So, therefore, we wrap it in a transaction. And the way we had written, this was to also enqueue the job from within the transaction. That wasn't something we were actively intentionally doing because those are different systems. It doesn't really mean anything. But we were still within the block of ApplicationRecord.transaction do. We're now inside of that block. We're doing all of the record updates. And then the last piece of work that we want to think about is enqueueing the job to send the email. The problem is if we're still within that database transaction if it's yet to be committed, then when Sidekiq picks up that job to run it, it will see the prior state of the world. And it's only if the Sidekiq job waits a little bit that then the database transaction will have been committed. The record is now updated and available to be read by Sidekiq in the correct updated state. And so there's this tiny little bit of inconsistency that can happen. It's basically because Sidekiq is going out to Redis, which is a distinct system. It doesn't have any knowledge of the database transaction at play. That's why I sometimes consider using a Postgres-backed background job system because then actually the job can be as part of the database transaction. STEPH: Cool. That's helpful. That makes a lot of sense the way you explained the whole you're actually enqueueing the job from inside that transaction. I'm curious, that prompts another question. In the case where you mentioned you're using a transaction because you want to make sure that if something fails to update so, everything gets updated together, in the event that something does fail to update because you were previously enqueueing that job from the transaction, does that mean that the update could have failed but that email would still have gone out? CHRIS: That does not. And the reason for that is because we're within dry-monad world. And so dry-monad will implicitly capture the ActiveRecord rollback, which I think is an exception that gets raised or somehow...But basically, if that database transaction fails for any reason and ends up getting rolled back, then dry-monads will not continue processing through the rest of the sequential operation. And so, therefore, even if we move the enqueuing of the email outside of the database transaction, the sequential nature of that processing and the dry-monad stuff that we have in play will handle that. And I think that would more generally be true because I think Rails raises an exception on rollback. Not certain there. But I know in our case, we're fine on that. And we have actually explicitly checked7 for that sort of thing. STEPH: So I meant a slightly different question because that makes sense to me everything that you just said where if it's outside of the transaction, then that sequential order won't fire because of that ActiveRecord migration error. But when you have the enqueuing inside of the transaction because then that's going to be inside of the sequential order, maybe before the rollback error gets raised. Does that make sense? CHRIS: Yes. I think what you're asking is basically like, do we make sure to not send the job if the rest of the stuff didn't succeed? STEPH: I'm just wondering from a transaction perspective, actually. If you have a transaction wrapped block and then you have in there, like, update this record, send email, end block, let's say update...well, I guess it's going raise because you've got probably like an update bank. Okay, so then yeah, you won't get to the next line. Got it. Got it. Got it. I just had to walk myself through that because I forgot that you probably...I have to visualize [laughs] as to what that code probably looks like. All right, that answered my question. CHRIS: Okay. So back up to the top level then, this is the problem that we have. And looking through the codebase, we actually have it in a bunch of different places. So the solution in any one of those cases is to just take the line of code where we're saying enqueue UserMailer.deliver_later take that line of code, move it outside of the database transaction, and make sure it only happens if the database transaction succeeds. That's very easy to do in one case. But my concern was this is a very easy failure mode to end up in. And this is a very easy incorrect version of the code to write. As far as I can tell, we never want to write the code where this is happening inside of the transaction because it has this failure mode. But how do we enforce that? That was the thing that came to mind. So I immediately did a quick look of like, is there a RuboCop thing I can do here or something? And I actually found something even more specific, which was so exciting to find. It's a gem called Isolator. And its job is to detect non-atomic interactions within database transactions. And so it's fantastic. I was like, wait, really? Is this going to do the thing? And so I just installed the gem, configured it where I wanted, and then ran the test suite. And it showed me every place throughout the app right now where we were doing this pattern of behavior like enqueueing work from within a database transaction, which was great. STEPH: Ooh, that's really nifty. I kind of want to install that and just run it on my current client's codebase and see what I find. CHRIS: This feels like something like strong migrations where it's like, yeah, this is great. I kind of want to have this as part of my core toolset now. This one feels even perhaps slightly more so because sometimes I look at strong migrations, and I'm like, no, no, no, strong migrations, I get why you would say that, but for reasons, this is actually fine. And they have configurations within it to say, like, no, this is okay. Isolator feels like it's always telling me something I want to know. So this, very quickly, I'm like, I think this might be part of my toolset moving forward on every single app forever. And actually, there's another gem that I used. It's made by the same team. So this is from the folks over at Evil Martians, which is another Rails consultancy out there in the world. And the Isolator gem is one thing that they've produced. And then I think the same author of it who is an Evil Martian's employee created the aftercommiteverywhere gem. So aftercommit is one of Rails' ActiveRecord callbacks. But in this case, it allows you to use it everywhere, as the name implies. And so rather than actually having to take that line of code out of the database transaction block, which is naturally where we would write it because that's how we think about the code and how we want to express it, you can just use this aftercommit method, wrap the call in that, so it's after_commit, and then a block. So either braces or do..end. That enqueueing of the email now just gets wrapped in that. And so what that does is it says, "Defer this until after the transaction commits. If the transaction does not commit, if we roll it back, then don't run it." And what was nice is the actual code change when I finally submitted all of this was add the gem to the gem file. And then everywhere that we're doing the wrong thing, which running the test suite told me, I just went in, and I wrapped that line in after_commit and a block. And it was such a nice, clean...like, I didn't have to move the code around or actually shift the lines, which was my first attempt at this. I was able to just annotate each of those lines and say, "You're special, you're special, you're special," And then I'm done. And again, the first gem told me every case where I needed to do that. It's like, well, this is a wonderful little outcome here. STEPH: That's really nice, yeah, how you can make the changes and then, like you said, re-run the test or re-run that gem, and it lets you know what else still needs to be updated. I'm intrigued where you mentioned you didn't have to move any lines, though. Maybe I just need to look at the gem and see it, but I'm still envisioning that you have your transaction do block. And then you're doing some things; you're updating records, and then you have your end. And then after that, it's when you want to enqueue the email. And with this after_commit, you actually added that method call inside of the transaction but then wrapped the call to Sidekiq to send the email inside of that block. CHRIS: Correct. Yeah. So it's basically like saying, "Here's almost an anonymous function." If you think about a Ruby block in that nomenclature, you're saying, like, here's some work to do when and if the transaction succeeds. And so it meant that I was able to keep the code in the way that we as humans would talk about it but deal with the murky details, and edge cases of database transactions, and Sidekiq, and whatnot. Sort of just handle it by saying like...it almost feels like an annotation or a decoration or something like that. But it was this, in my mind, almost like a perfect melding of I don't want to think about this. Oh, cool. Okay, here's a quick, easy way to deal with it but to not have to fundamentally change how I write the code. STEPH: Interesting. So I like all the things you're saying. I'll be honest, I'm not totally sold, and I'm trying to think of why. I think the benefits...one, as you mentioned, it's something you don't have to think about or at least signals to others that hey, maybe you should think about this to the extent that you use after_commit. And so that way, you don't have these asynchronous events taking place inside the transaction. So I like that visibility and communication to the rest of the team. Putting it inside of the transaction feels interesting. I don't know why; I feel a little weird about this. [laughs] I'm bringing my true self. CHRIS: That's fair. So if we're being honest, I solved this first by finding the Isolator gem. Well, I solved it first by just doing it manually. I went through the app, and I found all the places. And I was like, you know what? I'm worried that the next person authoring code like this, it's so easy to fall into this trap. Like, this is such a subtle little thing that our brains are not thinking about. And so I had first fixed it, and so I had a diff that involved moving lots of lines of code, every instance of this moved from being in the database transaction out of it. And that was fine. I was fine with that as a solution. But it was a little bit noisy because I was moving a bunch of lines. So then I brought in the Isolator gem. I actually reset that, and I went back to before I had made the fix, ran the test just to make sure Isolator was actually finding every instance. They did; that was great. So I was like, all right, cool. This is better because now I have this thing that will tell anyone when this happens. So I'm very happy about that. Because frankly, this is some hard-earned knowledge that I had to read Sidekiq and remember how database transactions work and convince myself of what was going on here and finally come to what I believe the solution is. And now Isolator is just like, cool, that's encapsulated. And it gives a very nice failure message in the test suite. So it's like, excellent. I really like this. But still looking at it, the diff, the amount of code that I had to change, it's like, well, naturally, this is how we want to write this code, but for reasons, we can't. And it's appeasing the computer more than it's appeasing the reader or the author of the code. And so then I happen to be reading through the Isolator gem's README, and they mention the aftercommiteverywhere gem. And I was like, oh, that's interesting. So one more time, I reset. And then I really tried fixing it with after_commit. And the look of the diff there felt nice to me because the lines got a little more on them, but they didn't move. And so it's like, this is how we naturally would have authored it, and now it works correctly. And I liked that. But I understand your hesitation because you're like, but the thing is, it's wrong. And so you've made the wrong not wrong anymore, but you didn't...and so I get your hesitation. I still like the fancy version. STEPH: Yeah, I think you just helped me figure out my grumpiness with it or why I'm not totally sold on it. And it was in regards to adding a dependency to avoid a noisy diff is the oversimplified version that I was processing or the reason that I was a bit grumpy about adding this other gem for that. But then you also just brought a lot of other really good reasons. One thing that you said that I do really like is adding tools that help us author code in a more natural style, the way that we want to highlight this process, and how this application does work, and how this business logic flows. So given in that light, that makes me feel better about it. But yeah, I think that was my initial grumpiness. I was like, it'll be a noisy diff. It's okay. CHRIS: I think I definitely share your hesitation, or you're like, hmm, that's an interesting reason to bring more code into the application. But at the same time, I think the counterpoint that comes to mind for me is we're using Ruby because of its expressiveness; at least, that's why I'm using Ruby. I really want the code that I write to be as close as possible to the thing that I would say to another human about like, oh okay, when a user signs up for the application, we need to create a record in our system, and then we need to send them an email. And then we need to do this other thing. And so, the closer that our code is to those words that I would use to describe to another human, the happier I am. And I will put in some pretty significant effort to hold that line as long as the code can also be correct. And so, the Isolator gem here does a great job of enforcing that correctness. And then after_commit allows me to still maintain that expressiveness and not have to think about the murky details as much or not have to reshape my code to match the murky realities of different persistence engines. But I do agree. I think it's a good thing to look at and ask, like, is it worth it? Are you sure? And in this case, I will say, "Yeah, I think so," but with that amount of certainty in my voice, [chuckles] which is not a ton. STEPH: I think this is going back to my days of working with dependency bot PRs where every time there was an upgrade for a gem, I always ask, what do you do here? [chuckles] Do we need to upgrade you? Can we just remove you from the codebase? So I'm fairly...I don't know, resistant is a strong word. I'm skeptical of when we're adding stuff in, and I just want to question the value that it's adding. But I want to circle back to something that you said, and that is hard-earned knowledge. And that part I understand so much where when you have gone through a fair amount of work to uncover an issue, and then you want to make sure that others don't have to go through that. This is a really nice way to highlight; hey, there's something that's tricky about computers and software here, and we need to watch out for that. And I want to help you lookout for that. Versus this is just inherit information where this needs to happen outside or after that transaction. And so that makes a really nice entry point where someone can look to say, "Why did we add this gem?" And then there's a commit message that goes with it that explains this is why we use this after_commit gem because we're specifically looking to avoid this type of bug. And I love that. CHRIS: Yeah, I think more lines of git commit message than diff on this one. So yeah, I wrote a short novel describing all of the features, describing the different pieces that are coming together. And then it's actually a +28 -6 diff. So it's a very small code change. But yeah, lots of story captured there. STEPH: And if you had just moved the lines, you could still have that commit message. But it's not likely that someone's going to look up that git commit change or that message that went along with it because they're not going to know to blame that one. But if they look at that particular edition of after_commit, they're more likely to find that historical context. So long story short, I think you have walked me through my initial grumpiness and provided some really good ways to avoid that really tricky failure mode for other developers. CHRIS: Well, thank you. I'm getting Steph's seal of approval starting from grumpy places. [laughs] I feel good. All right. STEPH: I'll have some special Stephanie's approval stickers designed and printed for you. CHRIS: I hope you're not joking because I very much want a yellow heart that says, "Steph-approved." STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And I can put it on PRs, and I can put it on the wall. [laughs] STEPH: Well, now I have to find a sticker designer and make a...well, it's just a yellow heart. I can probably handle this. I'm going to use Comic Sans. That will be the approved part. [laughs] Yellow hearts and Comic Sans for everybody. CHRIS: Well, with that absolutely fantastic call back to earlier parts of the episode, shall we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeee! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
312: Spooky Stories

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 12, 2021 38:50


Chris evaluates the pros and cons between using Sidekiq or Active Job with Sidekiq. He sees exceptions everywhere. Steph talks about an SSL error that she encountered recently. It's officially spooky season, y'all! sidekiq-symbols (https://github.com/aprescott/sidekiq-symbols) Transcript: CHRIS: Additional radiation just makes Spider-Man more powerful. STEPH: [laughs] Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. Hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: Fall is in the air. It's one of those, like, came out of nowhere. I knew it was coming. I knew it was going to happen. But now it's time for pumpkin beer and pumpkin spice lattes, and exclusively watching the movie Hocus Pocus for the next month or so or some variation of those themes. But unrelated to that, I did a thing that I do once, let's call it every year or so, where I had to make the evaluation between Sidekiq or Active Job with Sidekiq, as the actual implementation as the background job engine that is running. And I just keep running through this same cycle. To highlight it, Active Job is the background job system within Rails. It is a nice abstraction that allows you to connect to any of a number of them, so I think Delayed Job is one. Sidekiq is one. Resque is probably another. I'm sure there's a bunch of others. But historically, I've almost always used Sidekiq. Every project I've worked on has used Sidekiq. But the question is do you use Active Job with the adapter set to Sidekiq and then you're sort of living in both worlds, or do you lean in entirely and you use Sidekiq? And so that would mean that your jobs are defined to include Sidekiq::Worker because that's the actual thing that provides the magic as opposed to inheriting from Application Job. And then do you accept all of the trade-offs therein? And every time I go back and forth. And I'm like, well, but I want this feature, but I don't want that feature. But I want these things. So I've made a decision, but I want to talk ever so briefly through the decision points that were part of it. Have you done this back and forth? Are you familiar with the annoying choice that exists here? STEPH: It's been a while since I've had the opportunity to make that choice. I'm usually joining projects where that decision has already been made. So I can't think of a recent time that I've thought through it. And my current project is using that combination of where we are using Active Job and Sidekiq. CHRIS: So I think there's even a middle ground there where that was the configuration that I'd set up on the project that I'm working on. But you can exist in both worlds. And you can selectively opt for certain background jobs to be fully Sidekiq. And if you do that, then instead of saying, "Performlater," You say, "Performasync." And there are a couple of other configurations. It gives you access to the full Sidekiq API. And you can do things like hey, Sidekiq, here's the maximum number of retries or a handful of other things. But then you have to trade away a bunch of the niceties that Active Job gives. So as an example, one thing that Active Job provides that's really nice is the use of GlobalID. So GlobalID is a feature that they added to Rails a while back. And it's a way to uniquely identify a given record within your system such that when you say performlater, you can say, InvitationMailer.performlater and then pass it a user record so like an instance of a user model. And what will happen in the background is that gets serialized, but instead of serializing the whole user object because we don't actually want that, it will do the GlobalID magic. And so it'll turn into, I think it's GID:// so almost like a URL. But then it'll be, I think, your application name/model name down the road. And the Perform method actually gets invoked via the background system. Then you will just get handed that user record back, but it's not the same instance of the user record. It sort of freezes and thaws it. It's really nice. It's a wonderful little feature. Sidekiq wants nothing to do with that. STEPH: I'm so glad that you highlighted that feature because that was on my mind; I think this week where I was reviewing...somebody had made the comment where they were concerned about passing a record to a job and saying how that wouldn't play nicely with Sidekiq. And in the back of my mind, I'm like, yeah, that's right. But then I was also I'm pretty sure this got addressed, though. And I couldn't recall specifically if it was a Sidekiq enhancement or if it was a Rails enhancement. So you just cleared something up for me that I had not had time to confirm myself. So thanks. CHRIS: Well, to be clear, this works if you are using Active Job with Sidekiq as the adapter, but not if you are using a true Sidekiq worker. So if you opt-out of the Active Job flow, then you have to say, "Perform_async," and if you pass it a record, that's not going to work out particularly nicely. The other similar thing is that Sidekiq does not allow the use of keyword args, which, I'm going, to be honest, I really like keyword arguments, especially for background jobs or shuttling data through your system. And there's almost a lazy evaluation. I want some nicety to make sure that when I am putting something into a background job that I'm actually using the correct call signature, essentially passing the correct data in the correct shape. Am I passing a record, or am I passing the ID? Am I passing a list of options or a single option? Those sort of trade-offs that are really easy to subtly get wrong. I came around on this one because I realized although Active Job does support keyword arguments, the way it does that is it just has a JSON serialization format for them. So a keyword argument turns into a positional array with an associated hash that allows for the lookup or whatever. Basically, again, they handle the details. You get to use keyword args, which is great, with the exception that when you're actually calling performlater, that method performlater is a method missing type magic method. So it does not actually check the keyword arguments at that point. You're basically just passing an options hash as opposed to true keyword arguments that would error because they don't match up. And so when I figured that out, I was like, oh, never mind. This doesn't actually do the thing that I care about. It's a little bit nicer in terms of the signature of the method when you're defining your background job itself, but it doesn't actually do any logical checking. It doesn't give me any safety or robustness within my system. So I don't care about that. I did find a project called sidekiq-symbols, which does some things under the hood to how Sidekiq serializes and deserializes jobs, which I think gives largely the same behavior as Active Job. So I can now define my Sidekiq jobs with keyword arguments. Things will work. I can't use GlobalID. That's still out. But that's fine. I can do a little helper method that basically does the same thing as GlobalID or at least close approximation. But sidekiq-symbols lets me have keyword arg-like signatures in my methods; basically, it is. But again, it doesn't actually do any check-in when I'm enqueueing a job, and I am sad about that. STEPH: Yeah, that's another interesting distinction. And I'm unsurprisingly with you that I would favor having keyword args and having that additional safety in place. Okay, so I've been keeping track. And so far, it sounds like we have two points because I'm doing a little scorecard here between Active Job and Sidekiq. And we have two points in favor of Active Job because they offer a GlobalID, which then allows us to pass in a record, and then it takes care of the serialization for us. And then also, keyword args, which I agree with you that's a really nice feature to have in place as well. So I'm curious, so it sounded like you're leaning towards Active Job, but I don't want to spoil the ending. CHRIS: Yes, I could see why that's what you would be taking away from the conversation thus far. So again, just to reiterate, Active Job and Sidekiq with this sidekiq-symbols extension they both support keyword args, kind of. They support defining your job with keyword args and then enqueueing a job passing something that looks like keyword args. But it ends up...nobody's actually checking anything, so it's mostly like a syntactic nicety as opposed to any sort of correctness, which is still nicer, but it's not the thing that I actually want. Either way, nobody supports it, so it is not available to me. Therefore, it is not a consideration point. The GlobalID thing is nice, but it is really, again, it's a nicety more than anything. I have gone, and I'm leaning in the direction of full Sidekiq and Sidekiq everywhere as opposed to Active Job in most cases, but then Sidekiq when we need it. And that's because Sidekiq just has a lot more power and a lot more functionality. So, in particular, Sidekiq has a feature which allows you to say...it's a block that you put at the top of your Sidekiq job that says retries exhausted or something. I think Sidekiq retries exhausted is the actual full name of that at that point, which is really unfortunate in my mind, but anyway, I'll deal. At that point, you know that Sidekiq has exhausted all of the retries, and you can treat it as failed. I'm going, to be honest, I went on a quest to find a way to say, hey, I'm going to put some work into the background. It's really important for me to know if this work succeeds or if it fails. It's very easy to know if it succeeds because that just happens in-line in the method. But we can have an exception raised at basically any point; Sidekiq does a great job of catching those, of retrying, of having fundamental mechanisms there. But this is the best that I can get for this job failed. And so Active Job, as far as I can tell, does not have anything for this in order to say, yep, we are done. We are not going to keep working on this. This work has failed. It is dead. Dead is; actually, I think the more correct term for where we're at because failed is a temporary state, and then you retry after a failure. Whereas dead is, this has gone through all of its retries, and it will never be run again. Therefore, we should treat this as not having run. And in my case, the thing that I want to do is inform the user that this operation that we were trying to do on their behalf has not succeeded, will not succeed. And please reach out or otherwise deal with the fact that we were unable to do the thing that they asked us to do. That feels like a really important thing for me to be able to do, to be able to communicate back to my users. This is one of those situations where I'm looking at the available options, and I'm like, I feel like I can't be the only one who wants to know when something goes wrong. This feels like a thing that's important. But this is the best example that I've found, the Sidekiq retries exhausted block. And unfortunately, when I'm using it, it gets yielded the Sidekiq JSON blob deserialized, so it's like Ruby hash. But it's still like this blob of data. It's not the same data that gets passed into perform. And so, as a result, when I want to look up the record that was associated with it, I have to do this nested dig into the available hash of data. And it just feels like this is not a well-paved path. This is not something that is a deeply thought about or recommended use case. But again, I don't feel like I'm doing something weird here. Am I doing something weird, Steph, wanting to tell my users when I was unable to do the thing they asked me to do? [chuckles] STEPH: That feels like a very rhetorical question. [laughs] CHRIS: It does. I apologize. I'm leading the witness. But in your sincere heart of hearts, what do you think? STEPH: No, that certainly doesn't sound weird. I'm actually thinking back to some of the jobs that cause me stress in regards to knowing when they failed and then having that communication of knowing that we've exhausted all the retries. And, of course, knowing when those retries are exhausted is incredibly helpful. I am intrigued, though,, because you're highlighting that Active Job doesn't have the same option around setting the retry. And I'm trying to recall exactly how it's set. But I feel like I have set the retry count for Active Job. And maybe, as you mentioned before, that's because it's an abstraction, or I'm not sure if Active Job actually has that native support. So I feel a little confused there where I think my default instinct would have been Active Job does have that retry capability. But it sounds like you've discovered otherwise. CHRIS: I'm not actually sure what Active Jobs core retry logic or option looks like. So fundamentally, as far as I understand it, Active Job is an abstraction. And under the hood, you're always connecting an adapter. So it's either going to be Sidekiq, or Resque, or Delayed Job, or other. And each of those systems, whichever system you have as the adapter, is the one that's actually going to be managing retries. And so I know Sidekiq happens to have as a default 25 retries. And that spans, I think it's a two-week exponential back off. And Sidekiq has some very robust logic that they have implemented as the way retries exist within Sidekiq. I'm not sure what that would look like if you're trying to express it abstractly because it is slightly different. I know there was some good work that was done on Sidekiq to allow the Sidekiq options that's a method at the top level of the job, even if it's an Active Job job to express the retries. So that may be what you've seen, or there may be truly an abstraction that exists within Active Job, and then each adapter needs to know how to handle retries. But frankly, the what can Sidekiq do that Active Job can't? There's a whole bunch of stuff around limiting when you would retry limiting, enqueuing a job if there already exists one, when and how do those records get locked. There's a whole bunch of stuff. Sidekiq has a lot of power under the hood. And so if we want to be leaning into that, that's why I'm leaning towards let's just be Sidekiq all the time. Let's become Sidekiq experts. Let's accept that as a deep architectural decision within the app as opposed to just relying on the abstraction. Because fundamentally, if we're just using Active Job, we're not going to have access to the full power of Sidekiq or whatever the underlying system is, so sort of that decision that I'm making, but I don't know specifically around the retries. STEPH: Okay, thanks. That's really helpful. It's been a while since I've had to make this decision. I'm really enjoying you sharing your adventure because I'm trying to think what's the risk? If you don't use Active Job, what are the trade-offs? And you'd mentioned some of them around the GlobalID and keyword args, which are some niceties. But overall, if you don't go with the abstraction, if you lean into Sidekiq, the risk is then you want to migrate to a different enqueuing service. And something that we talk about is mitigating that risk, so then you can swap it out. That's also something I have never done or encountered where we've had to make that change. And it feels like a very low risk in my mind. CHRIS: Sidekiq feels like the thing you would migrate to, not a thing you would migrate from. It feels like it is the most powerful. And if anything, I expect at some point we'll be upgrading to Sidekiq pro or enterprise or whatever the higher versions that you pay for, but you get more features there. So in that sense, that is the calculation. That's the risk trade-off in my mind is that we're leaning into this technology and coupling ourselves more closely to it. But I don't see that as one that will reassess in the same way that people talk about Active Record and it being an ORM. And it's like, oh, we're abstracting the database underneath, and I'm like, no, I'm not. I'm always using Postgres. Please do not take Postgres. I'm not going to switch over to MySQL next week. That's totally fine if you start on MySQL. It's unlikely you're going to port over to Postgres. We may port to an entirely…like it's a Cassandra column store with a Kafka queue, I don't know, something weird down the road. But it's not going to be swapping out Postgres for MySQL or vice versa. Like you said, that's probably not a change that's going to happen. But that I think is the consideration. The other consideration I have in my mind is Active Job is the abstraction that exists within Rails. And so I can treat it as the lowest common denominator, and folks joining the project, it's nice to have that familiarity. So perform_later is the method on the Active Job jobs, and it has a certain shape to it. People may be familiar with that. Mailers will automatically use Active Job just implicitly under the hood. And so there's a familiarity, a discoverability. It's just kind of up the middle choice. And so if I can stick with that, I think there's a nicety there. But in this case, I think I'm choosing I would like the power and consistency on the Sidekiq side, and so I'm leaning into that. STEPH: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me. And I liked the other example you provided around things that were not likely to swap out and Postgres, MySQL, your database being one of them. And in favor of an example that I do have for something that...I do enjoy wrapping. It's not something that I adhere to strictly, but I do enjoy it when I have the space to make this choice. So I do enjoy wrapping HTTPClients, not just because then I can swap it out for a different HTTPClient, which frankly, that's also rare that I do that. Once I choose an HTTPClient, I'm probably pretty happy, and I don't need to swap it out. But I really like being able to extend to the API specifically if they don't handle error responses in a way that I would like to or if they raise, and then I want to change the API to have a more thoughtful interface and where I don't have to rescue those errors. But instead, I can interact with this object that then represents an error state. So that was just one example that came to mind for things that I do enjoy having an abstraction around and not just so I can swap it out because that feels like a very low risk, but more frankly, so I can extend the API. CHRIS: I definitely share the I almost always wrap APIs, or I try and hide whatever the implementation detail whether it be HTTPParty, or Faraday or whatever it is that I'm using and trying to hide that deeply within the system. And then I have whatever API client that we define. And that's what we're interacting with. It's interesting that you bring up errors and exceptions there because that's the one other thing that has caused me this...what I'm describing now seems perhaps like, oh, here's just a list of pros and cons, a simple decision was made, and there we are. This represents some real soul searching on my part, if we will. And one of the last things that I ran into that was just so frustrating is that Sidekiq is explicitly built around the idea of exceptions; Sidekiq retries if there is an exception raised in the job, otherwise, it treats it as success, and that's it. That is the entirety of it. That is the story. But if you raise an exception in a job, then you can't test that job because now it's raising an exception. You can't test retries or this retry exhausted block that I'm trying to lean into. I'm like, I want to put that in a feature spec and say, oh, this job goes in the background, but it's in a failure state, and therefore, the user sees the failure message. Sorry, I can't do that because the only way to actually fail a job is via an exception. And I've actually gone to some links in this application to try to introduce more structured data flow. I've talked a bunch about the command objects and the dry-monads and all those things. And I've really loved them where I've gotten to use them. But then I run into one of these edge cases where Sidekiq is like, no, no, no, you can't do that. And so now I have parts of my system that very purposefully return data as opposed to raising an exception. And I just have to turn around and directly raise that failure as an exception, and it just feels less expressive. I actually just ran into the identical thing with Pundit. They have a little bit better control over it; I can choose whether or not I want the raising version or not. But I see exceptions everywhere, and I want a little more discrete data flow. [chuckles] That is my dream. So anyway, I chose Sidekiq is the summary here. And slowly, we're going to migrate entirely to Sidekiq. And I'm going to be totally fine with it. And I'm done griping now. STEPH: This is your own little October Halloween movie, that I see exceptions everywhere. CHRIS: They're so spooky. STEPH: [laughs] That's cool about Pundit. I'm not sure I knew that, that you get to essentially turn on or off that exception flow behavior. On one hand, I'm like, that's nice. You get the option. On the other hand, I'm like, well, let's just not do it. Let's just never raise on people. But at least they give people options; that seems really cool. CHRIS: They do give the option. I think you can choose different strategies there. And also, if we're being honest, I'm newer to Pundit. And I used a different thing, which was to get the Policy Object and ask it a question. I wanted to ask, is this enabled or not? Can a user do this or not? That should not raise an exception. I'm just asking a question. We're just being real chill about this. I just want to know some information. Let's flow some data through our system. We don't need exceptions for that. STEPH: Why are you yelling at me? I just have a question. [laughs] CHRIS: Yeah. I figured out how to be easy on that front. Sidekiq apparently has no be easy mode, but that's fine. You know what? We're going to make it work, and it's going to be fine. But it is interesting deciding which of these facets of the system that I'm building do I really care about? Which are the ones where I'm like, whatever, just pick something, and we'll move forward, it's not a big deal? Versus, we're actually going to be doing a lot of work in the background. This is the thing that I care about deeply. I want to know about failure and success. I want to really understand that and have a robust answer to what our architecture looks like there. Similarly, Pundit for authorization. I believe that authorization will be a critical aspect of our system. It's typically a pretty important thing. But for us, I think we're going to have different types of users who can log in and see different subsets of data and having a consistent and concrete way that we have chosen to implement that we are able to test, that we're able to verify. I think that's another core competency within the app. But you only get to have so many of those. You can only be really good at a couple of things. And so I'm in that place where I'm like, which are our top five when I say are the things that I care a lot about? And then which are the things where I'm like, I don't know, whatever, just run with it? STEPH: Just a little bit ago, I came so close to singing because you said the I want to know phrase again. And that, I'm realizing, [laughs] is a trigger for me and a song where I want to sing. I held it back this time. CHRIS: It's smart. You got to learn anytime you sing on mic that is part of the permanent record. STEPH: Edward Loveall at thoughtbot, since I sang in a recent episode, did the delightful thing where then he grabbed that clip of where you talk a little bit, and then I sing and then encouraged everyone to go listen to it. And in which I responded, like, I would highly recommend that you save your ears and don't listen to it. But yes, singing on the mic is a thing. I do it from time to time. I can't hold it back. CHRIS: We all do. But since it doesn't seem that you're going to sing in this moment, I think I can probably wrap up my Odyssey of choosing between Sidekiq and Active Job. I hope those details were useful to anyone other than me. It was an adventure, so I figured I'd share it. But yeah, that about wraps it up on my side. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: So, I would love to talk about an SSL error that I encountered recently. So one of the important processes in our application is sending data to another system. And while sending data to that other system, we started seeing the following error that the read "Certificate verify failed." And then in parens, it states, "Unable to get local issuer certificate." So upon seeing that error, I initially thought, okay, something is wrong with their SSL certificate or their SSL configuration. And that's not something that I have control over and can fix. So we should reach out and let them know to take a look at their SSL config. But it turns out that their team already knew about the issue. They had recently updated or renewed their SSL cert, and they saw our messages were no longer being processed, and they were reaching out to us for help. So at that point, I'm still pretty sure that it's related to something on their end, and it's not something that I can really fix on our end. But we can help them troubleshoot. Maybe there's a workaround that we can add to still get messages processing while they're looking into their SSL config. It seemed like they still just needed help. So it was something that was still worth diving into. So going back to the first error, I want to talk a little bit about it because I realized that I understand SSL just enough, just the surface to get by as a developer. But then, every time that I run into a specific error with it, then I really have to refresh my understanding as to what could be wrong, so then I can troubleshoot more effectively. So for anyone that could use a refresher on that certificate verification process, when your browser or your server is connecting to a site that uses SSL, then your browser server, whichever one you're using, is going to download that site certificate and verify a couple of things. So it's going to check does the certificate contain the domain name of the website? So essentially, you gave us a certificate. Is this your certificate? Does it match the site that we're connecting to? Is this cert issued by a trusted certificate authority? So did someone that we trust give you this certificate? And is the cert still valid, or has it expired? So that part is pretty straightforward. The second part, "Unable to get local issuer certificate," so that's the part I was less certain about. And I took this to mean that they had passed two of those three checks that their cert included the site's name, and it had not expired. But for some reason, we aren't able to determine if their cert was issued by someone that we should trust. So following that journey, my next question was, so what are they giving us? So this is a tool that I don't get to use very often, but I reached for OpenSSL and, specifically, the s_client command, which connects to a specified domain and prints all certificates in the certificate chain. You may already know this, but the certificate chain is basically a fancy way of saying, show me all the certificates necessary to prove your site certificate was authorized by a trusted certificate authority. CHRIS: I did not know that. STEPH: Okay, I honestly didn't either. [laughs] CHRIS: I liked that you thought I would, though. So thank you, but no. [chuckles] STEPH: Yeah, it's one of those areas of SSL where I know just enough. But that was something that was new to me. I thought there was a site certificate, and I didn't realize that there is this chain of certificates that has to be honored. So going back and looking through that output of the certificate chain, that's what highlighted to me that their server was giving us their certificate and saying, hey, you should trust our site certificate. It's legit because it was authorized by, let's say, XYZ certificate. And so if it were a proper certificate chain, then they would give us that XYZ cert. And essentially, we can use this chain of certificates to get back to a trusted authority that then everybody knows that we can trust. However, they weren't actually giving us a reference certificate; they were giving us something else. So essentially, they were saying, "Hey, look at our certificate and look at this very trustworthy reference that we have." But they're actually failing to give us that reference. So to bring it all home, we can download that intermediate certificate that they reference; that is something that is publicly accessible. That's why we're able to then verify each certificate that's provided in that chain. We could go and download that intermediate certificate from that certificate authority. We could combine that with their site-specific certificate, include that in our request to their system, and then complete the certificate chain. And boom, we're back in business. But it was quite a journey. CHRIS: That is quite the journey. And yeah, I definitely knew very little of that, although everything you're saying makes sense. And I have a bunch of cubbyholes in my brain for SSL knowledge. And the words you said all fit into the spaces that I have in my brain, but I didn't know a bunch of those pieces. So thank you for sharing that. SSL and cryptography, more generally or password hashing or things like that, occupy this special place in my brain where I'm both really interested in them. And I will occasionally research them. If I see a blog article, I'll be like, oh yeah, I want to read more about this password hashing. And what's a Salt? And what's a Pepper? And what are we doing there? And what is BCrypt versus SCrypt? What are all these things? This is cool. And almost the arms race on the two sides of how do we demonstrate trust in a secure manner on the internet? But at the same time, I am not allowed to do anything with this information. I outsource this as much as humanly possible because it's one of those things that you just should not do yourself and SSL perhaps even more so. So I have configured aspects of my password hashing. But I 100% just lean on the fact that Let's Encrypt exists in the world. And prior to that, it was a little more work. But frankly, earlier on in my career, I wasn't dealing with the SSL parts of things. But I'm so grateful to Let's Encrypt as a project that exists. And now, on almost every platform that I work with, there's just a checkbox for please do the SSL work for me, make it good, make it work, and then I will be happy. And I'm so glad that that organization exists and really pushed the envelope also. I forget what it was, but it was only like three years ago where SSL was not actually nearly as common as it is now. And now it is pervasive and everywhere. And all of the sites have it, and so that is a wonderful thing. But I don't actually know much. I know that I should have it. I must have it. I should force it. That's true. So I push that out… STEPH: Hello. CHRIS: Are you trying to get me to sing? [chuckles] STEPH: [laughs] No, but I did want to know if you get the reference, the Salt-N-Pepa. CHRIS: Push It Real Good the song? Yeah, okay. STEPH: Yeah, you got it. [chuckles] CHRIS: I will just say the lyrics. I shall not sing the lyrics. I would say that, though, that yes, yes, they do that. STEPH: Thank you for acknowledging my very terrible reference. Circling back just a little bit too in regards to...I'm with you; this is a world that is not one that I am very deeply technical in and something that I learned a fair amount while troubleshooting this particular SSL error. And it was very interesting. But there's also that concern where it's like, that was interesting. And we worked around the issue, but this also feels very fragile. So we still haven't fixed it on their end where they are sending the wrong certificate. So then that's why we had to do more investigative work, and then download the certificate that they meant to send us, and then send back a complete certificate chain so that we don't have this error anymore. But should they change anything about their certificate, should they renew anything like that, then suddenly, we're going to break again. And then, the next developer is going to have to go through the same journey. And this wasn't a light journey. This was a good half-day journey to figure out what was going on and to spend the time, and then to also get that fix out to production. So it's a meaningful task that I don't want anyone else to have to go through. But we are relying on someone else updating their configuration. So, on one hand, we're in a good spot until they are able to update. But on the other hand, I wrote a heck of a commit message for the next person just describing like, friend, just grab some coffee if we're going to chat. It's a very small code change, but you need to know the scoop. So should you need to replicate this because they've changed something, or if this happens…because we work with a number of systems that we send data to. So if someone else should run into a similar issue, they will understand some of the troubleshooting techniques that I used and be able to look up that chain and find out if there's a missing cert or something else they need to provide. So it feels like a win, but I'm also nervous for future selves, future developers. So there's another approach that I haven't mentioned yet, but it was often a top recommendation for when dealing with SSL errors. And specifically, it was turning off SSL verification. And I saw that, and I was like, well, that won't work. I'm definitely sending sensitive, important data. And I need to verify that who I'm sending this to is really the person that I want to send this data to. So that was not an option for me. But it made me very nervous how often that was an approach that people would recommend and be like, oh, it's okay, just turn off SSL. You'll be fine. Like, don't worry about it. CHRIS: I feel like this so perfectly fits into the...some of our work is finding the information and connecting the pieces together and making it work. But some of it is that heuristic sense, that voice in the back of your head that is like, wait, I'm sorry, what? You want me to just turn off the security perimeter and hope that the velociraptors won't come in? That doesn't seem like it's going to end well. I get that that's an easy option that we have available to us right now and will solve the immediate problem but then let's play this out. There are four or five Jurassic Park movies now that tell the story of that. So let's be careful. STEPH: It always ends super well, though, right? Like, it's totally fine. [laughs] CHRIS: [laughs] Exclusively. Although it's funny that you mentioned OpenSSL no verify because just this past week, I used that very same configuration. I think it was okay in my case; I'm pretty sure. But it is interesting because when I saw it, I was like, oh no, can't do that. Certainly not that. Don't turn off the security feature. That's the wrong way to deal with the issue. But in the particular case that I'm working with, I'm using Redis, Heroku Redis, in particular, in a Heroku configuration. And the nature of how Heroku configures the Redis instances and the connectivity to our app into our dyno...I forget why. I read an article. They wrote it; Heroku wrote it. I trust them; they're good. I've outsourced my trust to people that I do trust. The trust chain actually maps really well to the certificate trust chain. I trust that Heroku has taken security deeply seriously. And for some reason, their configuration of Redis requires that I turn on OpenSSL no verify mode. So I'm using this now both in Sidekiq, and then we're using our Redis instance for our Rails cache as well. So in both cases, I said, "It's fine. Don't worry about it." I used the Don't worry about it configuration. And I didn't love it but I think it's okay. And partly, I'm trying to say this into the internet radio right now just in case anyone's listening who's like, no, no, no, you can't do that. That's bad. So I'm willing to be deeply wrong on the internet in favor of someone telling me and then I get to get out in front of it. But I think it's fine. Pretty sure it's fine. It should be fine. STEPH: I love love love that you gave a very visual example of velociraptors, and then you're like, oh, but I turned it off. [laughs] So I'm going to start sending you a velociraptor gif each day. CHRIS: I hope you do. I hope the internet holds you accountable to that. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And I really look forward to [laughs] moving forward because that's a great way to start the day. Well, it doesn't need to start the day, but I look forward to them. STEPH: [laughs] I am really intrigued because I'm with you. Like you said, there are certain entities that are in our trust chain where it's like, hey, you are running this for us, and so I do have faith and trust in you that you wouldn't steer me wrong and provide a bad recommendation. Someone on Stack Overflow telling me to turn off SSL verify uh; that's not my trust chain. Heroku or someone else telling me I'm going to take it a little more seriously. And so I'm also interested in hearing from...what'd you say? You're speaking into the internet phone. [laughs] What'd you say? CHRIS: I think I said internet radio. But yeah, in a way. I mean, we're recording over Skype right now. So in a manner of speaking, we're on the internet phone to make our internet radio show. STEPH: [laughs] Oh goodness, the internet radio. I'm also intrigued to hear if other people are like, oh, no, no, no. Yeah, that sounds like an interesting scenario. Because I would think you'd still want your connection to...you said it's for Redis. So you still want that connection to be verified. But then if Redis itself can't have a specific...yeah, we're testing the boundaries of my SSL knowledge here as to how the heck you would even establish that SSL connection or the verification process. CHRIS: Me too. And it also exists in an interesting space where Heroku is rather clear in their documentation about this. And it was a surprising claim when I saw it. And so, I don't expect them to be flippant about a thing that is important. Like, if they're like, "No, no, no, it is okay. You can turn off the security thing, don't worry." I trust that they're not just like, oh, we didn't think about it too much. But we figured why not? It's not a big deal. I'm sure that they have thought about it deeply because it is an important thing. And so in a weird way, my trust of them and the severity of what this thing represents, I'm like, oh yeah, I super trust that because you're not going to get a major thing wrong. You might get a minor, small, subtle thing wrong. But this is a pretty major configuration change. As I say it, I'm now getting more worried. I'm now like, I feel fine about this. This doesn't seem like a problem at all. But then I keep saying stuff, and I'm like, oh no. That's why I love having a podcast; I find out things about myself as I talk into a microphone to you. STEPH: We come here to share our deep, dark developer secrets. Chris: Spooky developer therapy. STEPH: But just to clarify, even though you've turned off the SSL verify, you're still connecting over SSL. CHRIS: Yes, I believe that's the case. And if I'm remembering, I think the nature of how this works is they're using a self-signed certificate because of shared infrastructure or something, something that made sense when I read it. But it was the idea that they are doing a self-signed certificate. Therefore, to what you were talking about earlier, there isn't the certificate authority in the chain of those because it's self-signed. And so, they are not a trusted certificate authority. Therefore, that certificate that they have generated would not be trusted. But it does still allow for the SSL handshake and then communication to happen over SSL. It's just that fundamental question of trust. I'm saying, in this case, for reasons, it's okay. Trust me that I trust them. We're good. Which, again, I don't feel great about, but I think yes, it is still SSL, but it is a self-signed certificate. So we have to make this configuration change. STEPH: Yeah, all of that makes sense. And it certainly sounds like you have been very thoughtful about that change and put in some investigative work. So on that note, I have a very unrelated bad joke for you. CHRIS: I'm very excited. STEPH: All right, here we go. All right, so what do you call an alligator wearing a vest? CHRIS: I don't know. What do you call an alligator wearing a vest? STEPH: An investigator. [laughter] On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Oh, let's wrap up. We should also include a link in the show notes to the episode where you told the joke about the elephant hiding in the trees because that's one of my favorite jokes. You slayed me with that one. [laughs] But on that note, yes, let us wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes,,as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeee!!! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
309: Naming the Change

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 21, 2021 35:28


Steph talks about a new GitHub feature and Twitter account (@RubyCards (https://twitter.com/RubyCards)) she's really excited about and Chris talks about his new job as a CTO of a startup and shifting away from writing code regularly. GitHub (https://docs.github.com/en/codespaces/developing-in-codespaces/web-based-editor) RubyCards (https://twitter.com/RubyCards) Resilient Management (https://resilient-management.com/) The Manager's Path (https://www.amazon.com/Managers-Path-Leaders-Navigating-Growth/dp/1491973897) Transcript: CHRIS: Oh God, my computer is so stupid slow. I need a new computer. STEPH: Come on, little computer, you can do it. You know you could just buy a new one. You don't have to wait for the fancy-schmancy M1. CHRIS: I want to wait for the fancy. I want it so bad. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Do you know how long I've had this computer? And if I can hold out one more month, I want the fancy stuff. I've waited this long. Why would I give in now when I'm right on the cusp of victory? STEPH: One more month. I'm going to send you...as a kid, did you ever make those construction… CHRIS: Oh yeah. STEPH: They look like chain links bow construction paper. So we would make those for a countdown to special days. I'm going to send you one that's all crumpled and folded in the mail. It would be delightful. And you'll be able to snip off a little chain each day as your countdown to your new fancy-schmancy. [laughs] CHRIS: I love it. Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey. Well, I just got back from vacation. So getting back to work is what's new in my world. And vacation is nice. I miss it already. But it's also nice to be back, and see everybody, and see what they've been up to. CHRIS: I've heard wonderful things about vacation. STEPH: Yeah. Have you had one recently? I know you've been quite busy. CHRIS: I have. I think it's hard to tell, especially because everything just kind of blends together these days. But I think I took off a few days recently. I haven't had an extended vacation since much earlier on in the summer, I think. And so I think I'm due for one of those sometime in the not too distant future. But it's one of those things where you got to plan it. And you got to think ahead, and I haven't been doing that of late really with anything. So kind of living for the moment, but that's not how you take a vacation. So I got to rethink some strategies here. [chuckles] STEPH: Yeah, I've been trying to schedule more vacation time just further out. Because then if I don't want to take it, like if I decide that I don't want the staycation or I don't need the day off, then I can just change my mind, and that's pretty easy to do. But I'm like you; if I don't plan it, then I don't feel like I have the energy to plan a vacation, and then it just doesn't happen. So I know that's one thing that I've been doing. I've also been mentoring or coaching others, just checking in with them to say, "Hey, when's your next vacation? Have you scheduled any days off? Do you want to schedule a day off next month?" And saying that to other people has also been a very helpful reminder to me to do so. CHRIS: Oh, I like that a lot as a recurring one-on-one question of, so what can you tell me about vacation? What do you got in the works there? Because that's the most important thing, [chuckles] which it kind of is. It's the way that we keep doing the work that we do. STEPH: And I think so many people just haven't been taking a vacation. I mean, in 2020, we were all locked in and going through a pandemic, so then a lot of people weren't taking those breaks. And so part of it is just reminding people that even if you can't go somewhere, still please take some downtime and just know that you can step away from work and should step away from work. But for us, we did go somewhere. So we went out to Seattle, which I've never...I've been out to the West Coast, but it's more like I've been out to L.A., Santa Monica. But this time, we went to the Northwest region. We went to Seattle, and we explored and did a lot of hiking and camping around the Northern Cascades and then Mount Rainier. And both of those are amazing. And I've never flown with camping gear, but that went really well. It worked out nice. We had an Airbnb every so often just for showers and having a roof over your head. That's really nice. But for most of the trip, we did a lot of camping and hiking. CHRIS: That sounds like an awesome trip. STEPH: Yeah, it was really cool. I'd love to go back to the Olympic National Park because there are just so many national parks that are around Seattle and in Washington that we couldn't begin to do it all. But Olympic National Park is still on my list. And I'm really grateful to have also seen the Northern Cascades and Mount Rainier. But switching gears a bit, I have something that I'm really excited to share with you because I don't think you've seen it yet. I'm excited to find out if you have. But it's a new GitHub feature that came out, I think about a month ago, but there doesn't seem to have been much fanfare from GitHub about announcing this new feature. And I happened to find out through Twitter because someone else found it, and then they were really excited. And so now I think it's really gaining some more traction. But it still seems like one of those sneaky feature releases, but it's really cool. So GitHub has added the ability to open up a web-based editor that allows you to view the source code for a repo, view it in syntax, highlighting, make a code change, and commit the change. And it's free for everybody. And there's a couple of ways to get there, but I'll pause there. Have you seen this yet? Have you interacted with it? CHRIS: I think I've seen it and poked around ever so gently with it. I want to say this is GitHub Codespaces. Is that the name of this feature? STEPH: Yep. That's it? CHRIS: Yes. I poked around with it just a tiny bit, and I'm very excited about it. But it's very much in the like, huh, okay, cool; I'll look at that someday down the road and figure out what I want to do with it. But have you actually dug into it particularly deeply? STEPH: I used it to make a change for a personal project, just because I wanted to see the whole flow. So I went to a personal project, and there are two ways that you can open it up for anyone that hasn't seen this yet. So you can either press the period button that's on your keyboard, and that will open it up, or you can just alter the URL. So instead of github.com, replace that .com with .dev, and then that will also open up the browser. And so I made a change to a personal project, and it worked really well, and it commits the change to main. And it was nice. It was easy. In my case, I was just making a change to make a change. I think I actually went to an older project where I was still using the underscore target to force users that when they clicked on a link that it opened a new tab, and I was like, perfect. This is a good thing to just change. And I could do it from my iPad. I didn't have to be at my computer. And it was really nifty. I was very impressed with it. And they also mentioned that it's very easy to integrate your own VS Code settings and environment. I'm not a heavy VS Code user, so I haven't tried that. But I've heard really positive things about how easy it is to sync your settings between your local VS Code and then GitHub's editor. But overall, it was really easy to use. CHRIS: That's super cool. My very limited understanding of it is like GitHub has had the ability to edit files and things like that for a while. But it was very much like a simple web editor where it's a big text box that happens to contain the code. And they've added some stuff for like browsing with syntax highlighting and even some context-aware show usage and things like that. But as far as I understand it, this is like a whole VS Code instance in the cloud that is running it. And then I think what you're saying about you can have your VS Code settings in there, but even your project settings and the ability to run the tests, I'm not sure where the edges of it are. But my understanding with Codespaces it's like this is how your team can develop. Everyone gets one of these Codespaces. You're developing in the cloud. But it does VS Code remote sync type stuff. I'm very intrigued to see where it goes and that idea of...obviously, I like Vim. That's the thing that's probably known and true about me. So I will probably be one of the later adopters of this. But the idea of being able to bottle up the development environment for your projects and have those settings, and the ability to run the test and all of that packaged up as part of the repository, and then allow people to run with that, especially in the cloud, and be able to carry that with them as they move around, that's really intriguing. And the idea of having this very easy on-ramp, especially for open-source projects and things like that. If you want people to be able to contribute easily but with the linting, and the configuration, and the settings, and all the stuff, well, now you can have that packaged up. And that is very interesting to me. So I'm super intrigued to see where it goes. Again, I will probably be one of the later adopters of this platform for reasons. But I am super interested, and I continue to like...the work with VS Code is so interesting in the way it keeps expanding out and the language server stuff and now the Codespaces stuff. And it's super interesting developments across the board. STEPH: Yeah, I'm with you. I don't actually see this replacing my current development that I do day-to-day, but it's more generally nice to have access. So if I needed to make a change and I don't have my laptop or if it's just something small and I don't want to have to go through…I guess essentially, if I don't have my laptop, but I wanted to make a change, then I could do this realistically from something that doesn't have my full local dev setup. I don't know if you have the ability to run tests. I didn't explore that far as to whether you can actually have access to run those types of commands or processes. I did see some additional notes while reading through GitHub's documentation about this new editor. And they included some notes that talk about how the editor runs entirely in your browser's sandbox. So it doesn't actually clone the repo, but instead, it loads your code by invoking the services API directly from the browser. So then your work is saved in the browser's local storage until you commit it, and then you can persist your changes by then committing it back to the repo. And because there's no associated compute, you won't be able to build and run your code or use the integrated terminal. Ah, I think that actually answers the question about running tests. So only a subset of extensions can run in the web will appear in the extensions panel and can be installed. So this does impose certain limitations for particular programming languages and full functionality, things that we may need like running tests. CHRIS: Interesting. That now puts it back more on the uncanny valley for me where it's like, oh, it's just VS Code, except it can't do a bunch of the stuff. So yeah, I'll probably be hanging out in Vim for a while. But again, I'm super interested to see where they can push this and what the browser platform allows, and then how they're able to leverage that and so on and so forth. STEPH: There is one flow that I was testing out because I was reading someone else mentioned that not only can you use this for looking at source code and then changing that source code but also for a pull request. And so I went to a pull request and changed the URL to dev. And I do have the ability to make changes, but I'm not quite sure if I could commit my changes and if that would go to the branch or how that would work. It wasn't obvious to me how I could save my changes. But it was obvious to me that I could make changes. [laughs] So that part feels weird to me, and I will have to test that out. But I'm going to wait until I have my own PR before I start fooling around [laughs] so I don't ruin somebody else's PR. CHRIS: Ideally, the worst case is you just push commit to a branch, and commits are reversible. You can throw them away. You can reset, and you can do all sorts of stuff. But I agree with you that maybe I'll do this on my home turf first before I start messing around with somebody's PR. STEPH: That way, someone doesn't reach out to me and say, "Steph, what is this commit that I have on my PR?" And I'm like, "Oh, I'm just testing." [laughs] But that's something that I was excited to talk about and share with you. What's new in your world? CHRIS: Well, what's new in my world? I think we've talked about this a little bit, but to give a little bit of context on what's new in my world, I joined a startup. I am now engineer number one. I'm also CTO, a very fancy title, but again, I'm the team of one, so count it as you will. But we do have some consultants working with us. So there is a small team that I am managing, and very quickly, I found myself shifting away from the code or having to balance that trade-off of maker versus manager time. Like, how much of the time am I actually coding and shipping features versus managing and communicating, and trying to figure out the work to be done and triaging the backlog? And all of those sorts of things. I've also just been coding less, and I think that's a trend that will almost certainly continue, and I'm intrigued by that. And that's a thing that I want to poke at just a little bit. And then I've also noticed that my work has become much more reactive than it used to be, where there are lots of things in Slack. And there's stuff that I'm kind of the only person that can do certain things because I have certain access levels and yadda yadda. And I want to make sure other folks aren't blocked. So I'm trying to be as responsive as possible in those moments. But I'm also struggling with that that trade-off between reactive versus proactive. My ideal version I think of the work is gather all of the information, all of the different permutations, and what are all the features we want? And then I think about them holistically, and then I respond once solidly as opposed to little one-off interactions and things like that. So there are just a lot of subtle differences. And I think there are trends that will continue. And so I'm trying to just take a step back, observe them from a distance and say, "How do I feel about these?" But probably most interesting to me is the moving away from code. Have you noticed that at all in your work? Or is that something you've thought about, something you'd be interested in, opposed to? How do you feel about that space in the coding world? STEPH: That is a wonderful question. It's one that I have wrestled with for a while because I really love my current position. I love being a team lead because I feel like there's this wonderful balance between where I get to code a lot of the time, but then I also get to learn how to be a manager, and help those around me, and provide some coaching or mentoring or just help people find the resources that they need essentially. And I really like that balance. That feels like the right balance to me, where I still get to grow in both areas. But then, as you'd mentioned, it still feels like one tries to take over the other with time. Like you find that more responsibilities are growing as CTO of the company. And so you feel more responsible to do more of the managerial task or unblocking others and taking on that role, and then that reduces your time for coding. And I often find myself in that space where I think it's just how I'm wired. I'm very interested and empathetic towards how people are doing and how they're feeling. So I'm always looking for ways to support others and to help unblock them and make sure that they're having a very positive experience with our project. And so then that may mean I'm coding less because then I'm more focused on that. But then, it's still also a very valid part of my job to code. So finding the right balance between those is frankly hard. To answer your other question, I don't think I want to give that up. I've considered for myself if I'm going to head towards more of a manager path, and I'm going to reserve the right to change my mind. But currently, I still like maintaining most of my individual contributor status with a dash of management sprinkled in there and then some responsibilities for making sure that the team is doing well and that people are enjoying their work. Along that line, as I've been having conversations with others around, tell me more about your job as a manager, and what does that look like? What responsibilities do you have? How much coding do you still get to do? There have been a couple of books that have been recommended to me that really help someone define are you interested in management? Is that a place that you see yourself going? This is really an honest look at what it means to be a manager. The fact that a lot of your fulfilling work isn't necessarily work that you get to produce, but it's actually helping someone else produce that work and then getting to see them succeed. That is your new fulfillment or a big part of it. So you are losing that closeness of being a maker,, but instead, you are empowering someone else to be the maker, and then that becomes your win. And that becomes an indication of your success. Versus as an individual contributor, it's really easy to see our wins in a different light: how many tickets have we addressed? How many PRs have we reviewed? That type of work. So there is an interesting dichotomy there, and I can't remember the books off the top of my head, but I will find them and I'll add a link to them in the show notes. CHRIS: Yeah, definitely interested to see the book recommendations. And generally, yeah, everything you're saying makes sense to me. I think I'm somewhat on the adventure right now. I very much intentionally chose this, and I want to lean into it and explore this facet of the work and doing more of the management and leading a team. But I have to accept that that comes with letting go of some of the individual contributor parts. And I was coding a bit over the weekend. I was just rediscovering the flow of that. And I was like, oh yeah, I really like this. Huh, that's interesting. What am I going to do with that? But I think, again, it's an exploration. And there are facets of both sides that I really like. And I've spent a lot of time deeper in the individual contributor side. And I've explored the manager side somewhat but not quite as much. And so this is very much about that I want to push on those edges and try and find what feels true to me. So the moving away from code and then moving more into management, I think I like that overall. Although I know there's the small amount in the back of my head that I'm like, I know there's a cost there. That is a trade-off. And so do I find more time in my evenings and weekends to do personal coding projects and things like that just to have that enjoyable work for myself? The maker versus manager stuff is interesting, though, where my day is now split up into smaller pieces. And even if I'm not coding, there's still writing up docs, or there are things that still require structured blocks of time. And my day is now just sprinkled with other things. And so trying to find that heads down of I want to just do the work right now, and I want to think hard about something is just fundamentally harder to do with more meetings and things speckled throughout the day. So that's one that I think I just don't like overall. But it's sort of a trade-off inherent to the situation. So I think there's also a version of trying to be intentional about that and saying, you know what? I need some heads-down time. And so Tuesday and Thursday afternoons those are going to be mine. I'm going to wall those off on my calendar and try and protect that time so that whatever necessary heads-down work that I need to do this week fits into those blocks of time and then fit the rest of things around that. But I think I have to make that intentional choice to do that. Mid-roll Ad And now we're going to take a quick break to tell you about today's sponsor, Orbit. Orbit is mission control for community builders. Orbit offers data analytics, reporting, and insights across all the places your community exists in a single location. Orbit's origins are in the open-source and developer relations communities. And that continues today with an active open-source culture in an accessible and documented API. With thousands of communities currently relying on Orbit, they are rapidly growing their engineering team. The company is entirely remote-first with team members around the world. You can work from home, from an Orbit outpost in San Francisco or Paris, or find yourself a coworking spot in your city. The tech stack of the main orbit app is Ruby on Rails with JavaScript on the front end. If you're looking for your next role with an empathetic product-driven team that prides itself on work-life balance, professional development, and giving back to the larger community, then consider checking out the Orbit careers page for more information. Bonus points if working in a Ruby codebase with a Ruby-oriented team gives you a lot of joy. Find out more at orbit.love/weloveruby. STEPH: Your mention of having more meetings really resonates with me. And it also made me think of a recent episode of a new TV show I just started watching. Have you seen the TV show called Schmigadoon!? CHRIS: I have indeed. STEPH: Okay. We need to have a whole conversation about Schmigadoon! in an upcoming episode. I'm very excited about this show. It's delightful. [laughs] There's a particular line that Keegan-Michael Key says that I just love so much where he says that he became a surgeon because he wanted to help people without talking to people. And I was like, oh, that's a developer. [laughs] I'm the same way. And I really enjoyed that. Although I do like talking to people but still, it just made me think about when you're talking about more meetings and then increasing the amount of talking that needs to be done as you progress into more of a management role. Also, circling back, I really like what you said earlier about you're noticing the changes that are happening. You're letting those changes happen, and then you're reflecting on how you feel about it. I really like that approach. Do you think that's working well for you? Does it feel too loose because then you don't feel in control enough of those changes? Or do you actually feel like that's a really good way to explore a new role and then find out if you like those changes? CHRIS: Now that you are restating it back to me, I'm like, oh yeah, I guess that is a good way to do things. But to clarify, I'm not doing nothing with it. I am trying to proactively, where I can, structure my days and do things like that or recognize that right now, I'm probably not the right person to be moving code along. And so I'm saying okay, that is true. And I'm actively choosing to not pick up the bigger pieces of work or to pair with someone else so that they can then run with it but not having me being the person that owns it. So it's not completely letting it happen, but it is almost like meditation to invoke that idea of I'm observing that I'm having these thoughts, and I'm just going to let them go. And it's more about the thinking and the response to it. So I'm trying to name the thing and be like, oh, this is interesting that this is happening. And I'm noticing an immediate visceral reaction to it where it's like, you're taking away my coding? And I'm like, well, hey, it's not them, it's you; you chose to do this. But let's just spend a minute there. That's okay. How do we feel about this? And so it's trying to not have it be a purely reactive response to it but have it be a more intentional, more thoughtful, and more observing, and then giving it a little bit of time to ruminate and then see a little bit more what I think. And also, some of it is purposefully pushing myself out of my comfort zone. I think I'm happy, and I do a reasonable job when I'm the person moving the code along. But I also have really enjoyed being at the edge of an engineering team and working with sales or working with other groups and facilitating the work that's happening. And so, if I explore that a little bit more, what's that going to look like for me? So this period of my career, I'm very intentionally trying to do stuff that I'm like, well, this is a little bit different for me, or this is stretching a little bit, but that is the goal. And I hope good things will come out of it across the board. But it may be that I find like, you know what? Actually, I really miss coding, and I need to find a way to restructure that. And I have seen examples of individuals who are even in CEO positions that are like, no, no, no, I still make some time to code. Like Amir, the founder of Todoist talks regularly about the fact that he is a CEO who still codes. And that organization has a very particular approach to work. And they're very much about async remote, et cetera. So having these blocks of times and being intentional about how they work. So it's not surprising that he's been able to do that and a purposeful thing that he's structured. I don't think that will make sense for me immediately. But I could see a version down the road where I'm like, this is who I am. I need to get this thing back. But for now, I'm purposefully letting it happen and seeing how I feel from there. Also, as I'm saying all of this, it sounds like I'm totally on top of this and really thinking it through. I'm like, no, no, no, this is in the moment. I'm noticing some stuff and being like, oh, okay, well, that's interesting. And some of it I intentionally chose. Again, intentionally chose to get out of my comfort zone. So I think I'm just actively out of my comfort zone right now and saying things about it. And then I think I'm telling the story of how I want to respond to it moving forward but not necessarily perfectly achieving that goal immediately. STEPH: I think that's a nice representation of essentially how you and I have processed things. We've highlighted before that you and I...it's funny, I just made the joke about not talking to people, but it's how I actually process stuff. And the best is when I'm talking out loud to somebody else. And so it totally makes sense that as you were noticing this and reflecting on it, that then this is another way that you are then processing those changes and reflecting on it and thinking through is this a good change? Is it something that I'm going to enjoy? Or am I really going to miss my street coding creds? I need to get back to the editor. CHRIS: I just need that precious flow state that comes from drinking some Mountain Dew and coding for hours. STEPH: Do you drink Mountain Dew? CHRIS: No, I gave it up years ago. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: I don't drink soda broadly. But if I'm going to drink soda, it's going to be Mountain Dew because if we're going to do it, let's do this thing. I'm pretty sure that stuff is like thermonuclear, but that's fine. STEPH: [laughs] That's funny. I know we've had this conversation before also around Pop-Tarts where you're like, hey, if I'm going to have a Pop-Tart, I'm going to have the sugariest (Is that a word - sugariest?) Pop-Tart possible. CHRIS: To be clear, that means it has icing on it because some people in the world, namely you, would prefer the ones without icing. Although we recently learned that the ones without icing have a higher fat and calorie content, so I don't know. The world's murky. I wish it were all just clear, and we could just work with it. But it turns out even Pop-Tarts icing versus not is not a simple question. STEPH: It's a very simple question. You just need to be on the right side, which is the non-frosted side. [laughs] I can simplify this for you because fat is delicious. Fat trumps sugar; that's my stance. That's my hot take. CHRIS: I'm saying both, a little from column A, a little from column B. You got yourself a stew. STEPH: [laughs] You got a fat sugar stew. CHRIS: Yeah. That was in Arrested Development. All right, we're veering way off course now. [laughter] To bring it back, what you were highlighting of I'm definitely someone who thinks through stuff by talking out loud, and so it's been wonderful. I've learned so much about myself while talking to you on this podcast. I'll say something, and I'll be like, wait, I actually believe that thing I just said. This is fantastic. Now I can move forward with the knowledge that I've just gained for myself by talking about it on a podcast. So highly recommended: everybody should get a podcast. STEPH: Plus one. I also have a very real, maybe silly, follow-up question for you as we are, like you just said, exploring the things that we believe or not. My question for you is part of the transition to management and moving away from coding. Isere some fear in the back of your mind where you're like, if I stopped coding, I'm going to lose this skill? CHRIS: Honestly, no. And I feel kind of bad saying that because I feel like I should say, "Yeah, I feel like it'll fade away and whatnot." But I think I have an aptitude and an interest towards this work. And if I were to ignore it for two years, then frankly, I also know myself. And I'm still going to keep an eye on everything for a while. So I think I'll be aware of what's going on and maybe just haven't spent as much time with it. But I think if I need to two years from now, I'm like, all right, I got to rebuild my coding muscle. I'll skip a couple of JavaScript frameworks, which will be nice, and I'll be on to the 15th iteration that's new now. But I hope that I could revisit that not trivially, not with no effort. It's the wonderful nature of coding. It's one of the things that I love about it so much is that there are blog posts and YouTube tutorials. And it's so individually discoverable that I'm not really worried about that aspect. My concern, if anything, isn't so much that I'm going to lose my skills or not be able to code anymore; it's that I really enjoy coding. It's a practice that I find very enjoyable. A workweek is enjoyable when it contains big blocks of me putting on my headphones, listening to music, and digging into a problem, and then coding and producing a solution. And those tiny little feedback loops of test-driven development or running something and then going to the browser and clicking around like that, there's a directness there that has always really worked well for me. And so the more I'm abstracted away from that sort of thing, and the more of my work is I'm helping a team, and I'm directing strategy, or whatever it is, that just feels so indirect. And so I'm very interested to find out how I respond to that sort of thing. I've definitely enjoyed it in the past, and so that's why I'm intentionally leaning into it. But I know that I'm giving up a part of the work that I really love, and giving up is too strong of a word as well. I'm going to find what shape makes sense moving forward. And I expect I'll still be pairing with the other developers on the team and helping to define architecture and things like that. So it's not like it's 100% gone. But for now, I think the world where most of my week was spent coding is no longer the case. And so just naming that and being intentional about it. And yeah, that's the game. STEPH: Cool. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I was mainly interested in that question because that is a question that I've asked myself from time to time that I think I do have that worry that if I step away from coding for too long, then it won't be easy to jump back into. And I've talked myself out of that many times because I don't think it's true for all the reasons that you just said. But it is something that I have considered as like, well, if I take this leap of faith into this other direction, how easy is it for me to get back if I decide to change my mind and go back to being more of an individual contributor? And one other thing that weighs on me as I'm splitting my time between two areas that I really want to grow…So I'm constantly trying to grow as a developer. I'm also trying to grow as a manager, and I don't want to do a bad job at either. I want to do a great job at both, and that's frankly not always possible. And at times, I have to make trade-offs with myself around okay, I'm going to focus a little heavier this day or this week on being a really great manager or focus a little bit more on being a developer and to pick and choose those topics. And then that sometimes means doing like B+ work in one area, and that's really hard for me. I'm an A-work person. So even downgrading to a B+ level of effort is challenging. But I have found that that's a really great space to be because then I'm doing well in both areas, not perfect, but doing well enough. And often, that's really what counts is that we're doing well enough and still pursuing growth in the areas that are important to us. CHRIS: Yeah, I think that intentional switching back and forth between them is the space that I'm in. I expect my work will remain very technical, and I hope that that's true. And I think to a certain extent; I get to shape it and determine that. And so how much of it is strategy and planning and things like that? Versus how much of it is helping the team with architecture and defining processes as to how we code, and what are our standards, and what are our languages and frameworks and all of that? I expect I'm still going to be involved in the latter. And again, I think to a certain extent; I get to choose that. So I am actually interested to see the shape that both naturally the organization needs out of the role that I'm in. But also, what sort of back pressure I can apply and be like, but this is how I want it to be. Is there room for that, or is there not? And it's all an experiment, and we're going to find out. But personally, for me, I'm going to keep reading Twitter and blog posts every day, and I'm probably going to code on the weekends and things. So the idea of my coding muscle atrophying, I don't know, that one doesn't feel true. But we'll see what I have to say a year from now or after what that looks like. But I expect...this has been true of me for so long, even when I had an entirely different career that I was just reading blogs and other things all the time because this is a thing that deeply interests me. So we will see. STEPH: Yeah, I'm excited to hear how it goes. And I think there's something to be said for the fact that you are also a CTO that's very close to the work that's being done. So being someone that is very involved in the technical decisions and the code that's being written but then also taking on more of the management responsibilities. And that feels more of a shift where you still have a lot of your coding skills. And you are writing code day-to-day at least based on what you're saying, but then you are also acquiring a lot of these management skills to go along with it. Versus if someone were going into management and maybe they're at a really large company and then they are very far away from the development team. And they're focused on higher-level themes and discussions, at least that's my guess. But I'm very excited to hear more about your updates and how this experiment is going and to find out who is the true Chris? CHRIS: Who's the true Chris? That feels complicated. I feel like I contain multitudes. But yeah, you know what? I'm excited to find out as well. Let's see what's going on there. But yeah, so that's a grand summary of the things that are going on in my head. And I expect these are topics that will be continuing to evolve for me. So I think we'll probably have more conversations like this in the future but also some tech stuff. Because like I said, I don't know, I can't stop. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: Yeah, that's actually the perfect segue as we were talking earlier about just ways that we're looking to grow as developers. And I saw something that I really enjoyed, and it's published by another thoughtboter. Their name is Matheus Richard. And Matheus runs a Twitter account that's called @RubyCards. And I don't recall the exact cadence, but every so often, Matheus will share a new snippet of either Ruby or Rails code and then will often present the information as a question. So I'll give you an example, but the highlight is that it teaches you something, either about Ruby or Rails. Maybe you already knew it, maybe you didn't. But it's a really nice exercise to think through okay, I'm reading this code. What do I think it's going to return? And then respond to this poll and then see how other people did as well. Because once the poll closes, then Matheus shares the actual answer for the question. So one example that I saw recently highlights Ruby's endless method definition, which was introduced in Ruby 3. So that would be something like def, and then let's say the method name is message. And then you have closing, but empty parenthes equals a string of "Hello, World." And so then the question is if you call that method message, what would that return? And then the poll often has options around; it would return "Hello World," or it's going to return a syntax error. It's going to return nil. And then it highlights, well, because of Ruby's endless method definition, this would return "Hello, World." And then I also saw a new method that I hadn't used before that's defined in Ruby's Hash class that's called store. And so you can use it calling it on a Hash. So if you have your hash equals and then curly brackets, let's say foo is equal to an integer of zero, then you can call hash.store and then pass in two arguments. The first argument's going to be the key. The second argument is the value. And then, that would essentially be the same syntax that we use for assigning a value to a hash. But I just hadn't actually seen the method store before. So there are fun snippets of Ruby or Rails code. A little bit of a brain teaser helps you think through how that code works, what it's going to execute, what it's going to return. And I really enjoy it. I'll be sure to include a link to it in the show notes so other people can check it out. CHRIS: Oh, that sounds fun. I hadn't seen that, but I will definitely be following. That's the word on Twitter, right? You have subscribing, subscribe and follow, smash that like button, all of the things. I will do all of the things that we do here on the internet. But I do like that model of the question and answer, and it's slightly more engaging than just sharing the information. So yeah, super interested to see that. STEPH: Yeah, I like the format of here's some code, and then we're going to ask you what does it return? So that way, you get a moment to think it through. Because if I read something and it just shows me the answer, my brain just doesn't absorb it. And I'm like, okay, that makes sense, and my brain quickly moves on. But if I actually have to think about it and then respond with my answer, then it'll likely stick with me a lot longer. At least we'll find out; that's the dream. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes,; maybe as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeeee! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

The Bike Shed
299: Is Agile Over?

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 6, 2021 46:15


Let's talk about Agile! What is it, what do we like, we do we not like? In this episode, Steph and Chris discuss: Broadly, are they fans? What makes this practice work well? What makes this practice work poorly? And also, hit specific topics and practices like Scrum, Kanban, and Extreme Programming. Twitter Poll re: Gotime Podcast - Is Agile's Time Over? (https://twitter.com/gotimefm/status/1388126124299878412?s=21) The Mortifying Ordeal of Pairing All Day (https://www.simplermachines.com/the-mortifying-ordeal-of-pairing-all-day/) The Real Story Behind Story Points (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/the-real-story-behind-story-points) Agile Manifesto (https://agilemanifesto.org/) & Agile Manifesto -- Principles (https://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html) Extreme Programming Introduction (http://www.extremeprogramming.org/index.html) Extreme Programming Explained (https://www.amazon.com/Extreme-Programming-Explained-Embrace-Change/dp/0321278658/) Ron Jeffries - What is Extreme Programming (https://ronjeffries.com/xprog/what-is-extreme-programming/) Transcript: CHRIS: I feel like we should try a couple of different byes just so we have sort of a smorgasbord of options, and then we can pick the best one. STEPH: With countdowns, [laughter] because I do so well with countdowns. CHRIS: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, I thought we would try maybe something a little bit different this week, a little bit more of a structured topic. In particular, I've been gathering little tidbits of information. I've been seeing conversations happen all around the topic of Agile, things that people like about Agile, things that people hate, mostly it's things that people hate about Agile. Lots of ire on the internet about Agile, but I think also some disagreement about what it actually means. And I think; generally, you and I are probably fans, so I want to talk about that. What parts do we like? What parts do we not like? What do we think Agile actually means or, at its best, maybe what it means? But yeah, let's start at the very top stuff. Steph, what do you think about Agile? STEPH: I am generally a fan. I'm with you. And yeah, the internet being full of more negative remarks and ire, that sounds very true. But generally, I am very much a fan of Agile, and the very broad scope of this is how we work, and this is how we plan our work, and this is how we collaborate as a team, and then how we reflect on the work that we have completed. I can also pick apart some of the things I don't like about Agile, but in the broad umbrella definition, I'm a big fan. I've enjoyed that approach. Granted, I've also only ever used Agile. I haven't written software using a Waterfall style, at least not purposefully. And then if I have encountered a team that was using more of a Waterfall style, then we changed it quickly. I really only have known the more Agile approach to writing software. CHRIS: I think that's largely true of me as well, where most of my work would fit somewhere under the umbrella of lowercase "a" agile, although I've tried variants of Scrum and Kanban and a bunch of other things that we'll probably chat about today. But I think in general, I find that things are most effective; things seem to move the most smoothly. And I think the software that we come out with is the best one. It's closest to those very simple ideals of Agile. And every layer of process that gets added on even though, like you, I've not done true Waterfall where it's like six months requirements gathering and then it gets handed off, and no one talks for a while. I've never done that. STEPH: I have to interject because I actually think you have in a previous life when you were an engineer. You have done the more Waterfall. Like, you have to plan very far in advance. CHRIS: I think this is one of those cases where people think "engineering" quote, unquote like mechanical engineering is one thing and it's actually...there is a little more structure, and there's a little more necessity of sequencing where you've got to figure out what you need to buy first because sometimes it takes a while to find the particular piece of metal that you need in the world. But it also has a lot of figuring out as you go and being like, well, we've got a bunch of stuff, and we're just going to figure it out. And also, this is something that as I was studying software while working as a mechanical engineer, I started to hear about this whole Agile thing, and I was like, huh, I wonder how I can bring more of that? Because I definitely saw cases where a more Waterfall-centric approach to engineering projects was leading to bad outcomes. It's like we decided upfront what we're going to do, and then we went away for six months, and we did it. And then we came back, and it turned out it was wrong. So that was solvable along the way. There were ways to build prototypes and things like that. So that is definitely a part of the mechanical engineering world. Although I think there are some true constraints, but I think there are also some occasionally self-imposed constraints, but again, I see sort of the same thing in software. Anytime that we can shorten feedback loops, that's what I like. And I think that for me, that's the core of Agile. Specifically, to come to the Agile Manifesto, to start at the very top, the thing that kicked it all off is a very simple document that the first line of it is "We prioritize individuals and interactions over processes and tools." It's like, yeah, that seems like a great thing, having more regular conversations about the things that we're building rather than having those initial conversations. And everybody goes away for a while and tries to build that thing, and then they come back, and hopefully, the thing that they've produced actually solves the problem. But I think almost always there are some deviations like, oh, actually, it would have been better if it was like this or now that we're actually trying it in the field, it's fundamentally different. So in that way, I think there's actually a lot of commonality between mechanical engineering and software development. STEPH: Okay, that makes sense. Yeah, I was thinking around the process of where you'd have to order stuff in advance versus for us; we can describe everything that we need as we need it unless we're having to procure some specific software or licensing. But otherwise, we don't have to wait on that shipment flow to then have our goods. And then, if we also mess something up, then we don't have to reorder more pieces. But I like how you started talking about that agile with lowercase "a" and then talking about the manifesto because I suspect most people are familiar with Agile, but it wouldn't hurt just to read off some of those top things about what Agile is so that way we're all on the same page together for this conversation. So you already covered the first one that talks about individuals and interactions over processes and tools, and then the others are working software over comprehensive documentation, customer collaboration over contract negotiation, and responding to change over following a plan. And that's it; those are the aspects of Agile. And so then, circling back to what you were saying earlier where people are having more criticisms around Agile, it sounds that it's less about Agile, and it's often more about the implementation of these ideas and then how you're approaching them. Because, boy, do we have several ways to implement Agile. We have Scrum; we have Kanban; there's Extreme Programming. Does that fall within the Agile umbrella? I think it does. CHRIS: I believe so. And I think a lot of the things that people take issue with particularly come from Scrum and Extreme Programming. We're taken to their extremes. Yeah, it's right there in the name, so you should probably know that it's going to be a little out there. But taken to the extreme and especially where it becomes rigid and dogmatic, then it becomes a problem. But again, so we listed out now the four items that are the core of the manifesto. There is a separate part of the manifesto, which is the principles, which digs in a little bit deeper, but it's still very much in that same ethos. But I do want to highlight because there's a subtext to the Agile Manifesto that I really love, which is given there are things on the left and then things on the right when the Agile Manifesto was presented. And so it's like we like individuals and interactions, that's the thing on the left, over processes and tools. And so the subtext below it is that is while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more. And that's one of the things that I love about the Agile Manifesto is it's not this very rigid thing that says, "This is good, and that is bad," it is a statement of a preference of well, yeah, it's definitely good to have comprehensive documentation. That's a really nice thing to have, but it's incredibly difficult. And if we have to choose, we're going to choose working software. We're going to prioritize that well before we have comprehensive documentation. So I really love the juxtaposition, and the emphasis on it's not that one is good and one is bad of these two things that we're comparing but that we have a preference, and that we want to orient our work around the items on the left rather than the items on the right, which I think the items on the right are more traditional or were more traditional to the Waterfall approach. STEPH: I like how you highlighted how those statements are presented to the reader. So then that way, as you mentioned, we still value what's on the right, but we favor more what's on the left. So one of the things that I saw recently was something that you shared with me in regards to where you're bringing up the idea of, like, hey, let's talk about Agile. And you shared with me a clip or a specific tweet that linked to a clip from the Go Time Podcast, which is a podcast that I hadn't listened to before. But I listened to that episode or at least part of it, and it's really delightful. I enjoyed listening to them very much. And they had Kris Brandow on the episode. And at the end of the episode...and they do something really fun where they ask the guests, "Do you have an unpopular opinion that you'd like to share?" And one thing that I like about their unpopular opinions is they often have polls afterwards, and they want to see was this truly an unpopular opinion? And if most people agree with you, then they actually consider it nope, he didn't win. I don't know if they use the word win if you didn't achieve the unpopular opinion. And in this instance, Kris shared the opinion that Agile is done and over with and that we should move on, which is a big thing to say. Everyone on the podcast reacted in a similar way that I would where it's like, well, how do we track things? And there are still things that we need to care about. But then also, there's a part of me that's just like, yes. I am not sure where Kris has heard it just yet when I heard that, but I'm already tuned in and very interested. And one of the things that Kris said that also really resonated with me is he mentioned that "I've never worked on a team where Scrum specifically like sprint and story points functions well," and I absolutely agree. There are parts of Scrum, we can get to the specifics that I think are fine that I've certainly used in the past and that have worked. Story points resonate deeply. I very much agree that story points are something that I do not enjoy using, and I do not find that they really lead to building software. There's even a blog post that I published along with Matt Sumner, a former thoughtboter and guest on this show, where we talk specifically about story points and some of the concerns and issues that we have with using story points. CHRIS: It was actually also the first episode where you came on as a guest to Bike Shed; that that was the topic that we dove into because it was so near and dear to our respective hearts. STEPH: That's right. I forgot about that. So yeah, story points are certainly up there on my don't list. I feel like we're doing a fashion do and don't, but we're doing the Agile do and don't list. [laughs] CHRIS: I kind of like that. Yeah, we should lean into that vibe. But yeah, continuing on with the poll there, it was interesting to see also, like you said, they tweeted out, and then there's the poll that comes after. And it was 64-ish percent of folks agreed that Agile's time is over and done with, and we need to move. Granted, it wasn't a huge sample size. It was like 85 people that took the poll but still, seeing both the statement and then also the general support from folks on the Twitter, it was interesting to see. So I do have the question of like, well, okay, if not, what else? And I share your sentiment of we should be able to ask questions and iterate. And nothing is so precious that it can't be replaced by something else that's better. So we always need to be trying to find the best ways to work. But again, I think there are still kernels of good stuff in the Agile. So I found this and I was like, oh, this is interesting. What's going on here? STEPH: So I'd love to dive into some of the specifics around Agile to understand what are the bits and pieces that work for you and the bits and pieces that don't. So if we are taking our Agile approach and reviewing the things that do and don't work and changing that process, what are the things that you would keep, and what are the things that you would throw out? CHRIS: Yeah, well, we can dig in, and we can bounce back and forth, I think, on this. But again, there are sort of a few different camps. So I collected together some of the lists of practices associated with some of the different approaches to Agile. So starting with Scrum, which I think perhaps is one of the most rigid, most structured, and perhaps most ire-deserving of the approaches to Agile, one of the first things is sprints or iterations, so the idea of starting...before you begin the work, you sit down, you define how much work you think you're going to take on. There's often an estimation process. Actually, we'll say that because that's maybe a separate idea, but even just broadly the idea of sprints and iterations, which often involve the idea of committing to a certain body of work. And that commitment is always handwavy and loose. No, no, no, we won't hold you to it, but then it's a constraint that's placed on the team. It's an expectation that's set, but it's wildly difficult to estimate software, as we all know. So sprints and iterations, personally, I am not a fan of. I really like a more continuous flow where we're constantly reprioritizing the work to be done. We're constantly measuring against what we built, what we think we need to get out there. How can we get something out in front of users as quickly as possible? But I've not found a ton of utility in the sprint or iteration workflow. But what do you think of that one? STEPH: Yeah, I'm generally not a fan of sprints, and it has taken me a while to get there. And I feel like I can admit that openly because it is something that I feel like when I first started doing software development, sprints were life. It was how you planned everything. It was how you committed to work. It's how you measured your work. It's how you then looked back to see what you could and couldn't accomplish in two weeks' time or maybe a week's time, depending on how long your sprint is. But over time, I have realized that I don't like the mentality of sprinting, and that may just be a nitpick on my part, but that is something that I don't enjoy because we write better software when we have breaks. And with the sprint methodology, there's really never that break unless you're going to plan that into your sprint. And then there's the idea of the upfront commitment, as you'd mentioned, it's one of those, don't worry, we're not going to hold you to this, but can we all commit to this work? And it's one of those you just feel compelled to say, "Yes," to the person who's asking because then you feel like a jerk if you push back and you say, "Well, actually, I don't know if I can, so I'm going to commit to way less." And then that's the approach that I started taking of, well, I don't know. So I'm going to always commit to a little bit because I'd rather overachieve and then deliver more than come in under because I could work really hard, but I've over-committed and then still feel like I didn't reach my goals, and that's a rough feeling. So I found that I was already lowering my commitment there. So then, it felt more appropriate to be in line with that sort of continuous workflow instead of trying to commit to all these features or all these tickets that needed to get done. I think those are the two areas for sprint where it doesn't align with me and where it can work for teams. But I feel like there's always that underlining unhappiness that a lot of us just don't want to talk about because we don't know what else to do other than to keep sprinting. CHRIS: Yeah, I think you said something about the specific, like nitpicking the word sprint, but I do think that's actually meaningful. It's The Bike Shed, after all; if we're not going to Bike Shed about some words, what are we doing here? But I do think that we're using that word...it's obviously the wrong word; this thing's a marathon. You can't have 26 2-week sprints back to back throughout a year. That's not going to work. That's not how humans work. But any amount that we let that thinking into our head, I think, is problematic. If I'm understanding correctly, it sounds like you've come to a place of comfort around committing to a smaller body of work and then ideally overdelivering. But in my experience, many developers, perhaps even most developers, don't feel comfortable. It's so difficult to say, "Yeah, I know that the login form should take a day. That's what I feel in my heart. But let's be honest, every other time we've done a form, it's taken a week. So I'm going to say a week." It's so hard to do that. And so I think continuously, we end up in a mode where we are failing to meet the collective commitment that we made, and that's demoralizing. That's going to constantly just be a drag on the team, even if they're fake, made-up deadlines that we're constantly setting, that we're constantly not hitting. Just doing that over and over, I think, is really detrimental to the morale of the team, to the cohesions, and the feelings of are we actually doing this work? So perhaps pedantic, but I definitely share all of that. STEPH: I do want to highlight, as I mentioned earlier, I'm feeling more comfortable that I can under commit and then I can overdeliver, and that is hard. That is something that still in the moment, even today, is very hard for me to do. And it's like how you said, in my heart, I feel like this should take a day, and the heart lies. But on top of that, it's often it's also my ego that's driving me all the time. And with that, it feels like a competitive environment to me where someone's saying, "Hey, can you get this done?" And in the moment, that brings out my more competitive side where I want to say, "Yes, I can get all this done, and I can deliver all the things." When, in truth, that's often not how it's going to work out. There is one thing I do like about sprints that I want to reflect on, or perhaps it's actually two. And one of them is that we are getting together every so often, and we're agreeing on the important work to be done. And I really like that planning process that is typically coupled with a sprint. So you get together, you review the work, you address any concerns or raise any concerns. And then you could say, "Yes, we all agree this feels like important work." And essentially, we're buying into the work that's getting done, and I really like that process. And then, as an extension of that, I really like how we often then pick themes. So as we are agreeing to the work, we're often grouping together work that makes sense where it's either the most cross-functional or collaborative. We're already going to be in that space together. We're aware of what everybody is working on. And those are the aspects that I really do like about sprint and some of the other styles, that more continuous workflow of where we're always pulling from a backlog. It feels more of a grab bag in terms of I don't really know what I'm going to get next. I don't know how this work has been reviewed or vetted. I haven't really gotten to talk to anybody, perhaps. I'm making some broad statements here. But I haven't really gotten to talk to anybody from the product side to understand this change. And I also don't really know what the rest of the team is working on, so I feel more disconnected from them. CHRIS: Yeah, I definitely share that, the planning or the meeting where we discuss the work that's coming up and shape it a little bit; I love that. Although it's interesting within the context of Scrum, I think like truly to the letter Scrum; my understanding is there are very discrete meetings, and they each have a distinct purpose. And so there's the sprint planning meeting, there's a backlog grooming, there's a sprint review and the sprint retrospective. And each of those are these four distinct meetings that are happening once every two weeks or so or whatever your sprint cadence happens to be. And the splitting of those becomes interesting. And some of the practices in there, I think, are...I think you and I share not being interested in doing them or not finding them to be super valuable. But I think broadly having some version of hey, let's sit down and talk about the work before we have to do the work, definitely a fan of that. For me, it often can be let's collapse four of those meetings into one sort of thing and maybe have it more regularly or something to that effect. But actually, we'll touch on the rest of those. But if you're good with bouncing from sprint/iteration, I think we've covered that topic well. Let's move on to one that I think we can do pretty quickly because I'm pretty sure I know how we feel, but sprint planning/planning poker/estimation. How do you feel about this one, Steph? STEPH: We grouped a couple of things in there. There's sprint planning, and then there's sprint poker, and those are different to me. CHRIS: Yeah. So let's go specific to the planning poker as the most pointed version of it but also generally estimation and sizing of stories. STEPH: Nope. Throw it out. I don't know how to play poker. Let's just get rid of it. [laughs] I was never a good poker player. CHRIS: Playing poker can be fun, but planning poker...Well, so actually, to ask a slightly different question, I think in the past we've talked about keeping aspects of it, definitely not keeping the let's figure it out, let's hash it out. Let's get down to an exact point value, and then we know we can have 34 story points a week, and that's what we're going to do. But the version of using planning poker, using this numerical communication tool to see if we're aligned, that one I think we've talked about liking that. I have enjoyed that, but under the strict guidelines that we throw the numbers out. The numbers are only a communication tool. They get thrown out after the fact. We do not commit to a set amount of work or anything like that. We just use it to say, "I think it's an eight. I think it's a one. Oh, we should talk," just for that. That's when it's useful. STEPH: I agree. Yeah, in my previous answer I was being flippant about it, but I do agree very much where I don't like the specificity of where you're trying to plan exactly what numbers are these. But I do find it very helpful for the reasons that you just said where the team agrees with the estimation around how long they expect something to take. Because then that is really great where you have someone who's never touched the codebase, and they're like, "I think it's a five or whatever system we're using here." It's an elephant...whatever scale you're using. And then someone else is like, "Well, I think it's a doughnut size." I'm making up silly stuff because it's more fun for me. And then those two people can talk and reconcile. So I do like discussing the estimation of work for that purpose but then not actually writing it down or maybe going with t-shirt sizes, something that's more simple, and then doesn't have anything with points, really. Anything with points can then be gamified and also brings out people's more competitive side. So, if you can make it something that's more fun, maybe around t-shirt sizes or a bunch of cute animals, various sizes, whatever works for your team. I'm trying to think of other fun measurements now [laughs] that we could use instead of t-shirt sizes. CHRIS: There are the sizes of bottles of wine as you go past. So there's a regular bottle of wine, and then there's a magnum. And then it gets to weird names like a Nebuchadnezzar and other things. These are big performative champagne bottles. So I think we should use that kind of sizing because I think they also have a geometric progression type thing, not quite Fibonacci but something like that. So I'm going to make that push for Nebuchadnezzar as being my go-to [chuckles] sizing in story points. STEPH: I have never heard of that, and I love it. That's great. CHRIS: Okay. We'll find a relevant link to the wine bottle sizing, and we'll put that into the show notes. We will also, of course, include a link to your wonderful blog post. What's the story with story points that you wrote with Matt Sumner? Because I think that really does dial into this topic really well. And again, coming back to that core idea around Agile, while we see value in the item on the...which side is it? While we see potential value in story points, I have worked with countless teams who desperately wanted to make this thing work. So it would be great if we could quantify the work and then numerically understand the work that we had ahead of us and sequence things and talk about deadlines and whatnot. Man, that would be amazing. I would really love to do that. So with every other developer and every manager of a team of developers in the world, I have not seen it done. I am still looking for that day. When that day shows up, then I think this will be a wonderful practice. But unfortunately, my experience has been that this doesn't work, and trying to do it causes more harm than good. STEPH: I agree that I certainly understand the reason that people want story points to work because it's very nice to then say, "We can calculate, and we can measure, and then we can have delivery dates." And that's really nice from a management perspective. But that does blend in nicely to the next topic, which I think fits nicely underneath the Agile umbrella, our daily syncs. Because that does bring us closer to that goal of where we can't give real valid updates on how something is going and provide a more real estimate as to when we think something is going to get delivered. That doesn't have the same effect of where we think we're able to plan and then promise delivery dates a week in advance because we're getting those updates in real-time, but they're going to be more reliable. And that is, we're so much more than where we try to over commit to work or if we try to say how much time something is going to take. And that is so much more valuable to have that reliable update and estimate versus trying to trick ourselves into thinking that we know when something is going to get delivered. CHRIS: Yeah, I think the daily sync or sometimes called the daily Scrum, or standup, or otherwise morning meeting often in the morning, this is one that I see lots of folks really hate, and I'm personally a big fan of. This is one that I would definitely hold onto. But I think you have to be very, very purposeful with how you structure it. It really should be as short as possible. And there's one particular thing that I see very regularly in teams, which is almost a performative version of what I did yesterday. It's trying to demonstrate to the team that yes, I, in fact, did work yesterday. I was a valuable team member. Please don't let me go from the team. And I think that's the sort of thing that we should try and just get rid of. There are definitely times where what you did yesterday is relevant to the team, or you worked on something, and now you have a bunch of questions, and bringing that to the team is useful. But that version of everyone needs to prove that they did work yesterday or...it's the sort of thing like if anyone says that sort of thing, then everyone else is like if you don't say what you did yesterday, then it sounds like you did nothing because everyone else is saying what they did. So you have to, I think, get a team buy-in to do this, say, "We're not going to talk about sort of bullet-list what we did yesterday. That's not going to get us anywhere as a team." But what's useful are those little magical moments of connection where I say, "Yep, I'm working on this. I'm going to implement it in this way." And someone's like, "Wait, wait, that way? Oh, we shouldn't implement it that way." And then ideally, what happens there is okay; let's connect after this meeting. You've now made this connection, but you don't need to hold up the rest of the meeting for that. You can just say, "Cool, this connection has been made. That's an incredibly valuable little point in time, but now let's continue on with the flow of the meeting," so that it keeps that rapid pace. And so times where you're blocked, times where you have questions, times where you're just describing what you think you're going to be working on. So if anyone's like, "Oh wait, no, we needed to stop that work because we actually made a decision yesterday that impacts whether or not we actually wanted to build that feature at all." If you can head off incorrect work at the pass, there's so much potential value in that meeting that it is interruptive. And it does take up some time, but I find that it is so, so worth it if you're able to really keep it focused, keep it concise, and keep that end goal of those little connections. When those happen, they're so valuable. So I think it's really worth the input. STEPH: I'm still smiling from where you said performative of what I did yesterday because that is something that took me a while to understand, one of the things that I did not like about the daily sync or daily meeting whenever your team gets together to talk about the work that's being done. And it was finally when I realized we're just going through a list of who has the longest list of the things that they accomplished yesterday. And again, it felt like it was bringing out more of that competitive mode in folks to talk about what they did, and it didn't feel very useful. Every now and then, maybe there was one thing that was interesting that someone did. But most of the time, it was always more helpful to hear what the person was working on that day for all the reasons that you just highlighted. There is one practical concern that I have with these types of meetings or with these types of events. And it's where you'd mentioned where if we can keep it concise…and someone brings something up, and it starts to devolve into a conversation right there. So then whoever was up next is now waiting while that conversation is happening. And that part gets awkward because then there's usually one person who is then willing or no one frankly is willing to then say, "Hey, so sorry to interrupt, but let's actually table this discussion and let everybody else go, and then we'll come back to this." And if you have people on the team that have been there for a long time with that culture, then that will just work because everyone will keep each other in check. But otherwise, if you're starting that new process, or if you start to notice there's always that one person who's doing that awkward thing of trying to then set that culture of this is how we do our daily chat, and these are the things that then we wait for later, it's really hard. And I say that because I have often been that person that's in that space where then I encourage people to table a conversation. And it always just feels awkward to interrupt someone and ask them to please wait until everybody else has gone. CHRIS: I share your hesitations around that, but it is very important. And it's that sort of ideally someone in a more senior position will model that behavior and model it in a positive, friendly way. Where I have done that often it's in the form of a question, so it's, "Actually, do you think maybe we could take this offline?" or something like that. Not a command, not taking over or shutting people down because it is somewhat interjective, and you're sort of correcting course. And so, being as friendly and empathetic in that moment as possible, but that's a hard note to strike. And again, if it's something that only one person is like the taskmaster, the Hermione Granger of the team who's trying to keep everyone focused and doing their homework sort of thing, nobody wants to be that. Well, Hermione did, but otherwise, nobody wants to be. STEPH: I love all the Harry Potter-themed references that have been coming through in the last couple of episodes. And I agree it is something that's hard to help teams course-correct, but it's important, and it's very much something worth doing. I just recognized that I think that's why these roles get implemented, why there's this concept of a Scrum Master, and then why we designate these tasks to specific people because then you have someone who can do it. And then when they do interject, it feels more appropriate because that is their role, and that's one of the things that they're supposed to do versus putting it more on the social pressure of whoever is comfortable speaking up to then course-correct. So I do understand where that implementation of Agile has then tried to create those roles, which I've been on teams that have a Scrum Master. And my experience is it's often been a very positive experience because the person that is in that role is often very kind and caring about that team. And so they are a wonderful person to work with, but it's also one of those...I've also been on teams without them, and things have been fine. So I have mixed feelings about that one. It's one of those; it feels like an extra heavy process, but I've also been on teams, and it worked. CHRIS: It's interesting the way you frame it, of the utility of that role. Like, having a role where we've now all bought into the idea that this person may take these actions say, "Hey, can we take that conversation offline?" and rather than one individual choosing to do that. I like that framing. I share what you're saying about the rest of the baggage that comes along with having this formal position, and often, that person is otherwise removed from the work. That can often be an aspect of Scrum. I think that gets complicated. But now I'm wondering can we make a software solution to do this? Because, of course, that's where my head goes. Can we have a standup bot that is listening and is like, "Hmm, it seems like you two people have been talking for the past two minutes. I'm just going to interject like my little bot self that I am and ask maybe take this conversation offline," in the way that we've sort of automated a lot of code formatting things, and that's been really wonderful, so that's not a part of PR review. Can we do the same for standup? I don't know. STEPH: I think all the award ceremonies have these where they start to play the music, and that's your cue to move off stage. CHRIS: Oh, I like it. STEPH: I think that's it. [laughs] So you cue the music whenever someone has been going for quite some time. On a slightly separate note but still related to this, some conversations that have been bubbling up around me have been related specifically to this idea around stepping in to say, "Hey, I'll take on that thing that you need a volunteer for," or "Hey, I will help the team stay on track," will often fall on people with a specific personality and then they will often be the one that continues to do that. And so they will end up taking on additional work or taking on additional roles just because they may be in a more empathetic spot where they feel that's the kind, helpful thing to do. And so, we've been looking for more ways to make sure that those tasks are being distributed evenly across the team. So we're not just waiting on someone to say, "Who would volunteer for this?" And then typically being the same handful of people that are always speaking up and then volunteering for it. And then trying to shift to more of a purposeful approach of having a queue of people and then cycling through that queue, and then if someone can't do it at a certain time, then we move on and then we just put them back in the queue. But this way, we don't have people that are typically just always taking on these responsibilities. And that's something that is a new consideration for me but one that I have found really helpful to be aware of and notice on your team who's the one that's always volunteering for these roles and checking in with them to see if they're comfortable with this, or if they're feeling compelled to volunteer for stuff because they may feel more inclined to speak up versus others are okay with staying quiet. But circling back to some of the Agile discussions earlier, you'd mentioned a handful of meetings and that you have some feelings about those meetings. What are those meetings that you have feelings about? CHRIS: Yes, the meetings. So again, this is somewhat contextual to Scrum, but the structure of Scrum has a handful of meetings that sort of define the sprint. So you have some at the beginning, the middle, and the end. So there's sprint planning, there's backlog grooming, there's sprint review, which typically includes a demo for stakeholders, and then there's sprint retrospective. And these, as far as I understand it, are four distinct meetings and are intended to be kept distinct so that their purpose stays purified in each of those meetings. And I think my feelings would be that again; I don't really find a ton of value in the sprint structure or in the two-week cadence or things like that. And so I think it can make sense in those contexts to be like, we need to make sure we have space for these things. But in a more continuous context, I think the backlog grooming or, more generally, let's talk about the work that's coming up. Let's make sure that we're all unified in how we're thinking about that work, what we think matters, what's prioritized. I think that is an incredibly valuable meeting. I think sprint review and specifically demo for stakeholders I'm really intrigued by that one. I don't know that I feel like that needs to be a distinct meeting. And in fact, more and more these days, almost every feature I deliver has either screenshots or a screen recording of what that workflow looks like. So we're continuously demonstrating to the stakeholders what does this look like now that it's a real thing? What does an end-user see? What's that experience like? And in retrospect, I think we'll probably spend a minute on that one. I like retros; some people hate retros. Yeah, let's loop back to that. But of those, what are your thoughts? What do you like? What do you not like about those meetings? STEPH: I think grooming is a very helpful meeting that can help a product manager and a technical team have discussions about the upcoming work. I don't necessarily think it needs to be the whole team. I think it can be a couple of engineers from the team; maybe those people rotate, maybe it's the team lead. And they get together with the product manager, and they essentially answer any technical questions about upcoming work. So then it can be refined. So then, as we get closer to that planning session, whatever we want to call it, then it feels more in a ready state for folks to react to and then have opinions on. So I do like grooming, but I wouldn't necessarily advocate that the whole team needs to be present for those. For a demo, I'm with you; it really depends. I've worked on projects where the stakeholders are less close to GitHub and Slack and areas that we could demo some of the work that's being done, and maybe they weren't poking around on staging as much. So it was really helpful to then have a more formal demo to then show them the work that's being done. And then I've also worked on plenty of teams where a demo was something that we used as a fun internal event where we have all these different teams, and we get together. And then we get to show off all the great work that we have done across all the different products. So then us, as fellow teammates, can then celebrate what the other teams are working on. Retros, you know I love retros. I think retros are a microcosm of your team's culture and process. And if your team is struggling to have a productive retro, your team is struggling. Because I think that is representative of your team's ability to get together, and reflect, share concerns, celebrate wins, agree on what's important, and run measured experiments. And if you're not having a retro, then I think you're not going to know how your team's doing until it's too late, and it's going to be harder to course-correct. CHRIS: #HottakeswithSteph. I like it. I like the intensity that you came in with there, but I know retro is near and dear to your heart. So I'm unsurprised that that is the line that you've drawn. I definitely share all of those feelings, particularly around retro, because I think much like the daily sync, I've seen many people who are just like, "This is a bad meeting. It's useless. Nothing ever happens. I don't like it." And I'm often surprised by that because I've found so much value in it. Retro similarly is this magical meeting that can just regularly change the course of how we're working as a team. But I also have come into plenty of teams where it definitely did not have that shape, where it was basically a place that everyone sits down, and somewhat downtrodden restates their list of grievances, their airing of grievances, and then nothing changes. And much like the sprint iteration thing where you're constantly missing the commitments, and that's just going to wear a team down. I think if you constantly have retro and nothing changes and it's that same list of concerns, then that is going to be bad, but that, like you said, is not the reason not to do it. [chuckles] Oh, we just keep saying the same things in retro, so I don't think it's even that valuable. I would say that maybe we should change the things. But I've definitely been on plenty of teams where retro was just so valuable. And it's definitely one where I feel like having a facilitator, having someone who is in that particular seat trying to guide the conversation without necessarily being in the conversation, can be incredibly valuable. There are also structures that I've seen work particularly well. We have a video on Upcase that we can link to. That's a format that I've found; it's a very lightweight format, but it basically involves getting everyone's input on a positive note, on a more critical note, and then revisiting and sort of sorting and waiting, and then digging into topics that need a little bit more focus. But I think a lot of different formats can work as long as retro is a way for people to sincerely meet up, safely talk about the things that they are feeling about the work, and then ideally, some change comes about as a result of that. You mentioned having measured experiments, and I love that as a framing or like something that retro can do for us. STEPH: I really do think that retros are so important because they're the health check of the team. As you'd mentioned, if people are having a very negative retro experience, which I understand, I've had very negative retro experiences as well, and I've walked away feeling like that was not a productive use of my time. But then that is our warning. That is our signal that's saying, "Something is not right, and something's not great, and we're not working together as we really want to be working together." And this retro is just that reminder that is right in our face, that is making this so uncomfortable and feel like a waste of our time because it is informing us that something needs to be improved upon. And we can feel like retros are not productive when we feel powerless to make that change. And that again is then another discussion to have with the team, to have with management, leadership, to talk about how do we get the power to then make the changes that we need to then have productive, happy retros? Because that's going to be a reflection that you have a happy, productive team. CHRIS: Love it, love the framing, love the symmetry there between team happiness and retro happiness. So to summarize, I think we've gone through most of Scrum now. So just to...correct me if I'm wrong on any of these, but I believe sprints and iterations, nah, we'll leave it. Planning poker, definitely not. That doesn't seem good, although maybe just to bring up conversations, but not as an artifact that we save in any way. And then otherwise, daily sync, we're fans. Retro, definitely fans. Sprint review, backlog grooming, some version of those, a lightweight version of a bunch of the meetings seems may be good, but a couple of things definitely are going to leave on the cutting-room floor. Does that sound about right to you for Scrum specifically? We've got other topics to cover. STEPH: Yep. All of that list sounds really good. CHRIS: All right. So we've now found our refined version of Scrum, re-Scrum as we'll call it. But now there's a couple of other pieces...So Scrum is very focused on the ceremonies and the team activities, but there's another facet of the Agile umbrella, which is Extreme Programming, which that's a book. I believe Extreme Programming Explained is the name of the book. And there are various different links that we'll include to point at those. But there are two particular practices that stand out that I have heard some people love, some people do not. So we'll go into both of them. The first is pair programming. What do you think, Steph? Do you like pair programming? STEPH: I do. I'm a huge fan. [laughs] Yes, I very much like pair programming, although it still has its limitations. I definitely want time on my own, and I can get exhausted from pair programming. It is a very vulnerable experience, too, where you have to share with someone: this is what I know, this is how I work, this is how I think. And I think that is incredibly challenging. I find that I am typically more productive when I'm pairing with someone or when I have the opportunity to pair with someone at least every couple of days. CHRIS: Yep. I'm definitely a huge fan of pairing. Although I think specifically to Extreme Programming, I think the idea is 100% pairing. I think you already spoke to this, but pairing is exhausting. And the idea of 100% pairing is I can't really even imagine that; even 50% pairing feels like an incredibly high bar to hold for any extended period of time. There's a recent article that was going around the mortifying ordeal of pairing all day, which spoke of one person's experiences getting deeply burnt out just going through that process. And so, as valuable as pairing is, it's definitely a tool to be used not all the time. That feels like a lot. STEPH: That's a lot of Stephanie singing because I tend to sing a lot whenever I'm stuck or thinking through things. So that's a lot of singing that I don't know if the world wants. CHRIS: I mean, based on all of the various Bike Shed intros that involve you singing, I think the world wants it. That's maybe one person's take. But definitely, something that you said of there's a vulnerability to it. And so many pairing sessions I've either been the one saying this or someone else that I was pairing with has said this to me, but they're like, "I swear I know how to type, just now that someone's looking, my hands don't work." It's like you're in a dream, and your legs don't work. You're like, I know how to run, I swear. But for some reason, my legs are made of jelly right now. Or you can't remember a particular method, or there's just something that happens, and so getting over that hump, getting comfortable with it, I think it is a skill and something to become accustomed to. And so, again, being conscious of that when you start doing it is super important. STEPH: I don't know if this is true because I only have access to people's thoughts when I'm pairing with them, and then they're sharing their thoughts with me. But I do feel like people tend to beat themselves up more when they have someone watching because then you feel the need to say, "Oh, I normally can type, but because someone's watching..." which is so true; that definitely happens. But those moments are some of those really great moments to then reflect on the fact that just because someone's watching us doesn't mean that then we suddenly need to beat ourselves up. And I don't know how philosophical that I want to get with this, but I feel like there are so many opportunities while pair programming to then encourage other people around us to be kind to themselves. That is one of the things that I have really benefited from pair programming is learning to be more kind to myself. And even if I don't know exactly what's happening or what I'm doing and I may not be as confident with someone else, I can still be positive and kind. Just because you're in a vulnerable space doesn't mean that you then need to be unkind to yourself. CHRIS: Yeah. I definitely agree with the idea of being kind to yourself also, where you can, be kind to someone else who you're pairing with, especially if they're finding that they're like, "Ah, suddenly my hands don't quite work." But I have pretty uniformly seen that a pairing session may start out that way. And then as everybody kind of just relaxes into it, suddenly you'll see someone just kind of flying around their editor. And you're like, wait, what just happened there? That was so fast. I don't even know. And so there's just this comfort level that sometimes it takes a little bit of time to ease into. But yeah, so pair programming, broadly yes. 100%, oh, that's going to be a no, no, thank you, not that. All right, so one other practice that comes from Extreme Programming, which is Test-Driven Development AKA TDD. What do you think about that one, Steph? STEPH: I feel like you're giving me lay-up questions here. For anyone that's familiar with us, [laughs] I feel like this is an easy one. Test-Driven Development is a thing. It's a thing that I enjoy. I don't always write tests first, though, so I don't always follow TDD, but I am definitely a fan of tests. So, I guess in that light, it's not so much that I adhere always to TDD. I don't feel the need that I have to write tests first, but I have found that with practice, that often helps me write code where I have tests then help me write out the logic for my code. So generally, yes, thumbs up on TDD, but I'm also not terribly strict about it where if you want to write some code first, write some code first. CHRIS: Yeah, I think I'm definitely in the mode where I like testing. I like Test-Driven Development. I can't always pull it off, frankly. It's hard. It is hard to know how to write a test in advance of the implementation that you're going to write such that the test will correctly constrain the system that you're about to write. That takes a couple of levels of knowledge that if I'm writing a Rail's controller action form sequence, I can probably TDD that because I've done it so many times. But if I'm doing something that's a little bit more new, novel, less familiar to me, then likely I won't be able to pull it off. TDD is like a fancy move that I don't always have available to me. But I consider that whenever I'm in that mode like that's not oh, it's fine to just write the thing before the test. Like, I want to be able to do TDD 100% of the time. I'm just not a good enough developer, frankly. And I don't know that I ever will be because I always want to be working a little bit past the edge of my comfort. So it's a delicate line of when I will not use TDD, but wherever I can, wherever I do have that level of knowledge of the system and the frameworks and whatnot built up, I find it is a vastly more effective way to work. It's not that I feel cool when I do it. It's like I feel much more effective. It helps me stay focused and on task and get the thing done. So it's very utilitarian in that way but also not something I can always pull off. STEPH: So, circling back to when we first started chatting, you were asking about Agile and then my thoughts about it. And having this conversation with you, I'm realizing, or I think I was already aware, but it's helping me re-solidify I'm very much a fan of Agile. There are specific implementations of Agile that I don't find enjoyable, and I don't find helpful to writing software, and I don't find helpful from the project management side either. But broadly speaking, I'm still very much a fan of the approach that we use generally for Agile, where we want to work in small deliverable increments, and then we also want to have the ability to change any moment what is the most important thing to work on? To me, that is the heart of following the Agile process. And I don't think that's going anywhere. Like, I don't think Agile's going to disappear. But I wouldn't be surprised if we see another implementation of an Agile variety of the things that you and I just shared and the things that we like. And so, I feel like most teams that I work with follow Agile within their own unique bespoke version. And we don't have to give it names because everybody's going to have their own custom version where they decide which process works for them and which one doesn't work for them. And that's what retros are for so then you can figure out which process works for you. CHRIS: Once more, Steph on the record about her love of retro. I think the core of Agile, the Manifesto, those core ideas about small iterations, delivering value, staying close to stakeholders, all of that feels deeply true to me. And I would be really surprised if a year from now or two years from now I was doing something that was wildly different from that. But then each of the layers of practices on top of that to varying degrees I like or don't like. And I wouldn't be surprised if aspects of that were swapped out down the road. But that core, that idea of this is how we think about building software. I like that thing; that seems like a good thing. So I'm going to hold on to Agile for a little bit longer personally. STEPH: Same. I still see Agile in my future. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. STEPH: Show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. CHRIS: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. STEPH: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or a review in iTunes as it helps other people find the show. CHRIS: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us @_bikeshed on Twitter. And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: And I'm @SViccari. CHRIS: Or you can email us at hosts@bikeshed.fm. STEPH: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeee. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Todd: OK, Chris, Friday the 13th is coming up. So, first of all, are you superstitious?Chris: Yes. When I play sports I'm superstitious. I have a lucky shirt and stuff like that.Todd: Oh, really!Chris: Yeah.Todd: So what's your lucky shirt?Chris: It's a bungy jumping shirt that I got about 10 years ago. It's all falling apart but it's still my lucky shirt.Todd: OK, So you don't wash it or anything?Chris: If I have a good game I don't wash it until I have a bad game and then I wash the badness out.Todd: OK. What sport are we talking about?Chris: I play ice hockey.Todd: Oh, really.Chris: Yeah.Todd: Oh, so your a hockey player! Your a pretty solid guy.Chris: Yeah, I'm a goalie. Being a goalie it's a lot to being comfortable in the position, so if you have a good game you don't touch anything. You do the same routine. Goalies are known to be a little strange.Todd: Wow. So that's cool. Are you still playing in Japan?Chris: I've played a few times but it's just too much trouble to drag my equipment on three trains and a taxi and about a 800-meter walk. It's just not worth it right now. If I had a car I'd try for sure.Todd: Oh, that's too bad. Alright, well, good luck and...so right now is your shirt dirty of clean? Your unlucky shirt?Chris: It's just been washed. Yeah, it needed a good washing this time.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Todd: OK, Chris, Friday the 13th is coming up. So, first of all, are you superstitious?Chris: Yes. When I play sports I'm superstitious. I have a lucky shirt and stuff like that.Todd: Oh, really!Chris: Yeah.Todd: So what's your lucky shirt?Chris: It's a bungy jumping shirt that I got about 10 years ago. It's all falling apart but it's still my lucky shirt.Todd: OK, So you don't wash it or anything?Chris: If I have a good game I don't wash it until I have a bad game and then I wash the badness out.Todd: OK. What sport are we talking about?Chris: I play ice hockey.Todd: Oh, really.Chris: Yeah.Todd: Oh, so your a hockey player! Your a pretty solid guy.Chris: Yeah, I'm a goalie. Being a goalie it's a lot to being comfortable in the position, so if you have a good game you don't touch anything. You do the same routine. Goalies are known to be a little strange.Todd: Wow. So that's cool. Are you still playing in Japan?Chris: I've played a few times but it's just too much trouble to drag my equipment on three trains and a taxi and about a 800-meter walk. It's just not worth it right now. If I had a car I'd try for sure.Todd: Oh, that's too bad. Alright, well, good luck and...so right now is your shirt dirty of clean? Your unlucky shirt?Chris: It's just been washed. Yeah, it needed a good washing this time.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Todd: OK, Chris, Friday the 13th is coming up. So, first of all, are you superstitious?Chris: Yes. When I play sports I'm superstitious. I have a lucky shirt and stuff like that.Todd: Oh, really!Chris: Yeah.Todd: So what's your lucky shirt?Chris: It's a bungy jumping shirt that I got about 10 years ago. It's all falling apart but it's still my lucky shirt.Todd: OK, So you don't wash it or anything?Chris: If I have a good game I don't wash it until I have a bad game and then I wash the badness out.Todd: OK. What sport are we talking about?Chris: I play ice hockey.Todd: Oh, really.Chris: Yeah.Todd: Oh, so your a hockey player! Your a pretty solid guy.Chris: Yeah, I'm a goalie. Being a goalie it's a lot to being comfortable in the position, so if you have a good game you don't touch anything. You do the same routine. Goalies are known to be a little strange.Todd: Wow. So that's cool. Are you still playing in Japan?Chris: I've played a few times but it's just too much trouble to drag my equipment on three trains and a taxi and about a 800-meter walk. It's just not worth it right now. If I had a car I'd try for sure.Todd: Oh, that's too bad. Alright, well, good luck and...so right now is your shirt dirty of clean? Your unlucky shirt?Chris: It's just been washed. Yeah, it needed a good washing this time.

The Bike Shed
295: To the Left, to the Left

The Bike Shed

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 7, 2021 35:33


After the last episode where database switching was discussed, a number of listeners reached out with thoughts. In particular, one listener gave a reproducible example of how to make things better. Chris talks about why he always moves errors to the left, and Steph gives a hot take where she admits that she is not a fan of hackathons and explains why. Steph and Chris also share exciting Bike Shed show news in that we now have transcripts for each episode, and tackle another listener question asking, "How do you properly implement a multi-step form in a boring Rails way?” Chris talks about his experiences with multi-step forms and gives his own hot take on refactoring: he doesn't until he feels pain! Database Switching in Dev Mode Gist (https://gist.github.com/danott/e698435bb4e1d34bc70853514ba681a7) In Relentless Pursuit of REST – Derek Prior (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HctYHe-YjnE) Transcript: CHRIS: Happy Friday or whatever day it happens to be in your future situation. STEPH: Happy day. [chuckles] CHRIS: Happy day or night. I'm sorry, I'm done. [laughter] STEPH: Shut up. [laughs] Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. Hey, Chris, happy Friday. How's your week been? CHRIS: Happy Friday to you as well. My week's been good. It's been busy. I am taking next week off for a quick vacation. So it's that…I think I've talked about this every time before I go on a vacation on the podcast, that focusing lens that going on vacation gives you. I want to make sure everything's buttoned up and ready to hand off, and I'm not going to be blocking anyone. And so, I always like the clarity that that brings. Because a lot of times I can look at well, there are infinity things to do, how do I pick? And now I'm like, no, but really, if I'm going to be gone for a week, I must pick. And so yeah, I'm now very excited to lean into vacation mode and relax for a bit. STEPH: Yeah, that's awesome. I hear you. I always go into that same mode pre-vacation. CHRIS: But in tech news, after the most recent episode that was released where we talked about the database switching stuff, a number of listeners were very kind and reached out with some thoughts. In particular, Dan Ott is one listener who reached out not only with just some generic thoughts, but he also gave a reproducible example of how to make things slightly better. So the particular thing that a few folks honed in on was the idea that I was describing the feeling of in production; we can occasionally run into these ActiveRecord read-only errors, which is a case where you have a GET request that happens to try to create or update a record. And as a result, you're going to get this ActiveRecord read-only because you're using the follower database, which has a read-only connection. All of that is fine, but ideally, we would want to catch those before production. We want to catch them in development. And broadly, the issue that we have here is that in production, our system is running in a different way. It's running with two different database connections, one for read-only, one for writing, and that's different than in development, where we're running with a single connection. As an interesting thing, a lot of the stuff that I see on the internet is about using SQLite in development and then Postgres in production. And so that's an example of development production parity that we've really...I think thoughtbot is definitely a place that I internalize this very strongly. But you've got to have the same database, and especially because it's relatively straightforward to run Postgres locally, I'm always going to be running the same version of the database locally as in production. But in this case, I'm now getting this differentiation. And so what Dan and a handful of other folks highlighted was you can actually reproduce this functionality in development mode with a fun little trick where you end up creating a secondary connection to your development database, but you mark it as replica:true. And so, by doing that, Rails will establish a read-only connection. And then, all of the behavior that you configure for production can also be run in development. So now, as you're building out a new feature, and if you happen to implement a GET request that does some side effect in the database, that'll blow up in development as opposed to production, which is very exciting. STEPH: Yeah, that's awesome. I love that Dan reached out and shared this example with us. I actually haven't read through all of the details just yet. In fact, I just opened it up, and I started going through it, and there's a lot of really...it looks like a lot of great notes here and a really nice example that walks you through how to have that production parity locally. So this is really neat. I appreciate Dan sending this to us. CHRIS: Yeah, this is a wonderful little artifact actually that's interesting just in and of itself. We'll certainly include a link in the show notes to the gist that Dan shared. What's interesting...I think I knew of this, but I've never actually seen it before. This is a single-file Rails application, which is a very novel concept, but it's got a bundler/inline call at the very top. And then there's an inline gemfile block, and then a set of requires to pull in the relevant Rails stuff. And then it configures the database connection, configures a single controller or actually a handful of controllers, it looks like, and then it renders inline HTML. And so it has all of the pieces. And I didn't realize that at first, but then I pulled it down and I just ran it locally. So it's just Ruby and then the file that this just represents, and suddenly I had a reproducible Rails app. I believe this is used in reporting issues to Rails so you can get the minimum reproducible test case. And that's why this works is, I think, the Rails core team, over time, has pushed on any of the edges that wouldn't have worked and made it so that this is possible. But it's a really neat little thing where it's this self-contained example. And so running this file just via Ruby does all of this stuff, installs everything that's necessary. And then, you can click around in the very minimal HTML page that it provides and see the examples of the edges that it's hitting. And again, this is in development mode, so it's pushing on that. But yeah, it's both a really interesting tip as to how to work with this and a really interesting way to communicate that tip—so double points to Gryffindor, aka Dan Ott. STEPH: Double points to Gryffindor. I love it. CHRIS: I'm cool. [laughs] STEPH: That's very charming. [laughs] I've never seen anything like this either, in terms of one file that then can reproduce and run in a Rails app. Agreed, double points to Gryffindor, aka Dan. CHRIS: Aka Dan. STEPH: [chuckles] I hope Dan's a Harry Potter fan. CHRIS: I hope so. And I hope he's a Gryffindor, who knows? Maybe Ravenclaw. It's really up in the air. But the other thing that is interesting that I haven't yet figured out here is this works for development mode. I've tested it in development. It's great. I was able to remove the fix line that I had in my code where I had one of these breaking controller actions and run with this configuration in development mode. And then boom, it blew up in development, and I was like, yay, this is great. Move those errors to the left, as they say. But I realized there are some other edge cases, known ones actually. Another developer on the team mentioned something where he knows of a place that this is happening, but that code path isn't running right now just because it's a seasonal thing within the app. And I was like, oh, that's really interesting. I wish there were a way to test all the behavior. Oh, tests, that's what I need here. And so I tried to configure this in test mode, but I wasn't exactly clear on what was failing. But at a minimum, I know that the tests run in transaction, so I think that might make this more complicated because if you have two connections to the same database, but you have transactions, I feel like that might be conflating things, and it wouldn't necessarily map perfectly in. But if we could get that, that would be really great. Moving forward, any new development the development configuration will cover what I need. But retroactively, as I'm introducing the database switching to the application, it would be great if the test suite were a way to find these edge cases. So that's still an open question in my mind. But overall, the development fix is such a nice little addition to this world. And again, thank you so much to Dan for sending this in. STEPH: Yeah, I agree; having this in tests would be wonderful. I am intrigued not having read through the full example that's been provided. But I'm wondering if this is one of those we default to read-only mode, although that feels like too much because we're often creating data for each test. So maybe we default to...yeah, you have to have both because you have to have your test set up where you're going to write data. So you can't default to just being in read-only mode. But then say you want to run a controller action or something else in a read-only mode. So then you would have to change your database connection for that action, and that sounds complicated. You also said something else I'm intrigued by. You said, “Move errors to the left.” CHRIS: Yes. Now that you're asking me, I'm trying to remember the exact context. But it's the idea that there are different phases in your development and eventually getting to production life cycle, and so a bug that a user sees that's all the way to the right. That's as far along the development pipeline as it can be, and that's the worst case. You don't want a user to see a bug. So QA would be a step right before that. And if you can catch it in QA, you've moved it to the left, which is a good thing. But even better than that would be to catch it in your automated tests, and maybe even better than that would be static analysis that's running in your editor, and maybe even better than that is a type system or something like that. So the idea of moving to the left is to push those errors or when you're catching the errors closer to the point where you're actually introducing them. And that's just a general theme that I like or a Beyoncé song. STEPH: I was just going to say, all right, move over, Beyoncé. There's another phrase in town, moving to the left. [laughs] CHRIS: I'm really going for a lot of topical pop culture references today. That's what I'm about. STEPH: We've got Harry Potter, Beyoncé. We've got to pull out one more at some point. CHRIS: We'll see. I don't want to stretch myself too thin right before vacation. But yeah, thanks again to Dan and the handful of other folks that reached out either on Twitter or via email to point me in the right direction on the database switching stuff. At some point, I should definitely do a write-up on this because I've now collected together just about enough information that it feels like it's worthy of a blog post, or at least that's the story in the back of my head. I got to cross a certain threshold before I'm probably going to write a blog post. But yeah, that's a bit of what's up in my world. What's going on in your world? STEPH: I love it. You're saying write a blog post into the mic, so then that way you know it's going to encourage you to write it later. CHRIS: That's the trick right there. [chuckles] STEPH: Let's see, today's been a lovely day. It's been a lovely week in general. Today is especially lovely because it is thoughtbot's Summit, and Summit is where we all gather. We do this once a year. So the whole team, all of us across all of our...I was going to say offices but now just across all of our home offices. And we get together, and we have a day filled with events, and we usually have a wonderful team that helps organize a bunch of events that then we get together for. So a number of those fun events are like paired chats, which is one of my favorites because I often talk to people that I haven't talked to in a long time or perhaps people that I haven't even met yet that have just recently joined the company. We also have lightning talks, and I know I'm very biased, but I think we have some of the best lightning talks. They are just hilarious. So I love our lightning talks. We're also doing escape rooms. Oh, speaking of which, there's a Harry Potter-themed murder mystery that's happening. We have Nintendo Switch parties and a professional tarot card reading, which I've never done, but I'm actually doing that later today after we're done chatting. CHRIS: Wow, that is an adventurous day. And I like that it's fun, and it's connecting people and getting to know your teammates and all those nice things. STEPH: Very much. I also have a hot take. I don't know if I've shared this with you, so I'm going to share it here with you on the mic in regards to this. So previous years, for Summit, we used to have more coding projects, too. They were often opt-in, but that's something that happened. And specifically, we have Ralphapalooza, which is our hackathon. And it recently came up where a number of us were talking about Ralphapalooza, and I have come to the potentially contentious point of view that I don't like hackathons. I'm not a fan of them. CHRIS: Hot take. I like that you led in calling it a hot take, and then you provided said hot take, so I have to respond as if it's a very hot take. STEPH: That's true. Maybe it's not a hot take. Maybe people disagree. What do you think? Do you like hackathons? CHRIS: I have enjoyed them in the past. But I will say, particularly within the context of Summit or Ralphapalooza, I always felt a ton of pressure. It's so hard to right-size a project to that space, to that amount of time. You want to do something that's not trivial. You want to do something that at the end of it you're like, oh cool, I did that. Either it's like a novel thing that you're creating, or you're learning something new or whatever, but it's so hard to really do something meaningful in that amount of time. And often, people are shooting for the moon, and then they're just like, “Ah, so it's just a blank page right now. But behind the scenes, there's a machine learning algorithm that is generating the blank page. And we think with enough inputs to the model that it'll…” and it is actually super interesting work they did. But there's the wonderful pressure at the end to present, which I think is really useful. I like constraints. I like the presentations; they're always enjoyable, even in a case where it's like, this project did not go well, let's talk about that. That's even fun. But it really is so hard to get right. I've never gone to a hackathon outside of thoughtbot, so I can't speak to that, but I know that I have heard folks having a negative opinion of them. And I don't know that I'm quite at the hot take level that you are, but it's complicated, if nothing else. It's a lot of fun sometimes. I particularly remember the Elm project that you and I worked on. Well, we worked in the same group. We didn't actually work together, but same idea. That was a lot of fun. I liked that. STEPH: That's a good point. Even within the context of Ralphapalooza, our hackathons are more...I'm going to use the word sustainable because they're nine-to-five hackathons where we are showing up; we are putting in the work. There is pressure, and we do want to present. But it's not one of those stay up all night and completely leave your family for a day or two to hack on some code. [laughs] Sorry, I'm throwing some shade right now. But even with that sustainable approach, I've always felt so much pressure. I enjoyed that green space and then getting to collaborate with people I don't typically collaborate with, but it still felt like there was a lot of pressure there, especially that presentation mode always made me nervous. Even if it is welcoming to say, “Hey, this didn't go well,” that doesn't necessarily feel great to present unless you are comfortable presenting that scenario. And I also really look forward to these company events as a way to connect and have some downtime and to just relax because then the rest of our days are often more stressful. So I want more company time for me to connect with colleagues but then also feel relaxed. So I was always, in the beginning, I was like, yeah, Ralphapalooza, woo, let's go. And now I'm just like, nah, I'm good. I'd really just want a chill day with my colleagues. CHRIS: Is there an option to go for a walk with friends? Because if so, I will be taking door number two. STEPH: Cool. Well, I feel better having gotten that out into the ether now. But switching just a bit, there is something that I'm very excited about where we now have transcripts for each episode. This is something that you and I have been very excited about for a while and wanted to make happen but just weren't able to, but we now have them. And so people may have noticed them as we're adding them to the show notes. And I'm just so excited for a number of reasons, one, because there are a number of times that I have really wanted to search the shows or an episode for a particular topic and couldn't do so. So I'm just sitting there listening, trying to find a particular topic. There's also the fact that it will make the episodes more accessible. So for anyone that is hearing impaired or maybe if English isn't their first language, having it written down can make the episode more accessible. And there's the massive SEO boost that's always a win. And then I don't know if this is going to happen, but I'm excited that transcripts may help us repurpose content because there's a number of our topics that I would love to see turned into blog posts, and I think having the transcript will make that easier. CHRIS: Yeah. I'm equally super excited about the addition of transcripts, and across the line, SEO is cool, I think. Yeah, that sounds nice. Being able to reuse the content is very interesting to me because this is definitely my preferred medium. I find that I can just show up on the microphone, and it turns out I have opinions about a lot of stuff but trying to write a blog post is incredibly difficult for me. The small handful of good things that we might have collectively said over the years if we can turn those into more stuff that sounds great and honestly, just the ability to search for and find older episodes now based on like, I know we talked about inbox zero. I remember that was an episode, but I don't know which one, now that's searchable, and that's a thing that we can find. I actually still use the Upcase search for…I know I said something. I know there was a weekly iteration where I talked about some topic. And I built the search on Upcase for me as the primary user because one, I'm often referencing content on Upcase, and I want to be able to find it more easily, so I made the search. I also put a SQL injection vulnerability into the search in my first implementation so, go me. But then I got rid of it shortly after. STEPH: I love when people bring that energy of “I introduced this issue, go me,” because I find that very fun and also just very healthy in terms of we're going to make mistakes. And I have noticed a number of times at thoughtbot standup that whenever we make a mistake, or it's like, I accidentally sent out real emails on production for a job that I thought I was testing on staging. Sharing those mistakes in a very positive light is a very honest way to approach it. So I just had to comment on that because I'm a big fan of that. CHRIS: I'm glad you enjoyed my framing of it. I really enjoy that type of approach or way to communicate, although I think it is a delicate line. Like, I don't want to celebrate these sorts of things because an SQL injection vulnerability is a non-trivial thing. It shows up in tons of applications, and we need to take security seriously and all of that sort of stuff. But I think the version that I think is good for that type of thinking or communication is the psychological safety. If we're scared of admitting that we introduced a bug, that's bad. That's going to lead to worse outcomes longer term. And so having the shared communication style openness to like, yep, that happened yesterday. And there should be a certain amount of contrite in this where it's like, I feel bad that I did that. I even feel worse because when it happened, I recognized that it happened, and then I tried to exploit it in development mode to prove it to myself, and I couldn't exploit it. So I was like, I feel doubly bad as a programmer today. I both introduced a bug, and I'm not even smart enough to exploit it. But I know that an uber lead hacker out there could, and so I got to fix it. But that sort of story is part of the game. It's a delicate equilibrium, but having the ability to talk about that and having a group that can have a conversation, I do think that's very important. STEPH: Yeah, well said. I do think there's an important balance to strike there. Pivoting just a bit, we have a listener question, and this question comes from Benoit. Benoit wrote in to the show, “How do you properly implement a multi-step form in a boring Rails way?” I'm very interested in this question because I am working on a project that has a multi-step form. There are probably about maybe six, seven steps, and those steps can change based on different configurations. And our form is not implemented in a boring way at all. It's a very intricate, confusing design, I would say, which I think is fairly common when it comes to multi-step forms. I'm curious, what experience do you have with multi-step forms, and what's your general feeling with them? CHRIS: Well, I happen to be working on one right now. So generally, I don't have an oh, I got this, I know the answer. This is one of those that I'm like; I feel like each time I reinvent it a little bit. But the version that I'm working on right now is an onboarding flow. So we create a user record, which at this point I only have email associated with, and then from there, when a user lands, they need to provide a bunch of profile information, and it is a requirement. They have to fill it out. We need to have all of it before we can actually start doing the real stuff of the application. And so, the way that I've ended up modeling it is interesting. I'm going to use the word Interesting. I think I like it, but I'm not sure. So I have this model; let's call it a profile that we're going to associate with the user. And the profile has a bunch of fields: first name, last name, address, phone number, and a handful of other things. And again, I need to have these pieces of information. So I want those to be non-nullable columns. But as someone is walking through this form, I'm not going to have all the information. So there's going to be a progression. We'll get first name, then we get last name, and then we get the next piece of information. So I need a nullable storage, but I don't want to just put it into the session or something like that, which I think would be an option. So what I've done is I've introduced a secondary model. So this is a full ApplicationRecord database-backed model called partial profile. And it is almost identically the same interface as the profile, but each field is nullable. There's also a slight difference in that the profile field has an additional status column that talks about once we've gone through all of this, we can add some status and track other things. But yeah, that main difference of in the profile, everything is non-nullable, and the partial profile is nullable. So then there's a workflowy object, a command object, as I like to have in my systems these days that handles the once they've gathered all their information, turn the partial profile into a profile, send it out to an external system that does some verification and some other lookups and things like that. And then, based on the status of that, mark the status of the profile. But one of the things that I was able to do is make that transition from partial profile to full profile. I'm doing that within a transaction. So if at any point anything fails within all of this, I can roll the whole thing back, and I'll be back to only having the partial profile, which was a very important thing. I would not want to have a partial profile and a profile because that's a bad state. But a lot of this for me is about data modeling and wanting to tell truths with the database and constrain what are the valid states of my application? So one solution would be to just have a profile model that has nullable columns for all of these fields. But man, do I hate that answer. So I went what feels like an extreme take of having two fundamentally different models, but that's where it's actually working out well. I'm able to share validations across them. So as new data is added, I can conditionally validate as new things are shared, and I'm able to share that via concern in the two models. So it's progressively getting more constrained as I add data to this thing. And then, in the background, there is a single controller that skips through all of the steps and has an update action that just keeps pushing data into this partial profile until, eventually, it becomes a profile. So that's focused specifically on the data model stuff. I think there are other aspects of a more workflowy type thing in Rails, but that's our thing. What do you think, good idea, bad idea, terrible idea? STEPH: [chuckles] One, I love that you have this concrete example because I have some higher-level ideas around this particular question, but I didn't have a great example that I wanted to share. So I love that you have that, that we can talk through. I really, really like how you have found a way to represent the fact that each valid state of your application as you refer to it….so you have this concept of someone's going through the flow and their address can be nullable at this stage, but by the end of this flow, it shouldn't be nullable anymore. So you have that concept of a partial profile, and then it gets converted into a profile. I am intrigued by the fact that it's one controller because that is where I am feeling pain with the multi-step form that I'm working on where we have one very large controller that handles this entire...I'm going to call it a wizard since that's how it's referred to, and there are seven or eight different steps in this wizard. And the job of this controller is each time someone goes to a new step; this controller is trying to figure out okay; what step are you on based on the parameters that you have, based on some of the model attributes that are set? What step are you on, and what should we show you? And that has led to a very large method and then also complex, lots of conditional-based code. And instead, I would really like to flip that question around or essentially remove the what step am I on? And instead, ask what step is next? So instead, take the approach that each step of the form should have a one-to-one mapping to another controller. And that can get really hard because we're often conditioned to the idea that we should have a one-to-one correlation between each controller and an ActiveRecord model, but that's not necessarily what happens in our form. You have the concept of a partial profile versus being able to map to a full profile. So I am very much in favor of the idea of trying to map each step of the form to a controller. So that, to me, makes the code more boring. It makes it more understandable. I can see what's happening for each step. But then it's not boring in terms that it requires creativity to say, okay, I don't have a perfect ActiveRecord model that maps to this controller, but what resourceful controller can I make instead? What is the domain object that I can put here instead? Maybe it's an ActiveModel object instead. So that way, we can apply ActiveRecord-like behavior to plain old Ruby objects, or maybe it's using a form object. That way, we can still validate all the fields that the user is providing to us, but that doesn't necessarily map directly to a full profile just yet. So I really like all the things that you've said. But I am intrigued by the approach of using a single controller. How's that feeling so far? CHRIS: That part is actually feeling fine. So a couple of things you said in there stand out to me, one, where it's a very big controller. That is something that I would definitely avoid. And so, I have extracted other pieces. There is an object that I created, which at this point is just in-app models because I didn't know where else to put it, but it's called onboarding. And so the workflow that I'm trying to introduce, the resource maybe is what we would call it, is the idea of onboarding, but it's not an ActiveRecord level thing. At the ActiveRecord level, I have a profile and a partial profile, and then there's an account, and there's also a user. There are four different database level models that I want to think about. But fundamentally, from a user perspective, we're talking about onboarding. And so I have an object that is called onboarding, and it contains the logic around given the data that we have now, what step comes next? Is this a valid step? Should the user go back? Et cetera, et cetera. So that extraction is one piece that definitely makes sense. Also, thus far, mine is relatively straightforward in terms of I get data in, and I just need to update my partial profile record each time. So the update action is very straightforward. But I've done different versions of this where there are more complex things that happen. And so what I've done is basically make a splat route. So it's like onboarding/ and then the step name and that gets posted or gets put, I guess, along with everything else for the update. And so now the update says, “Well, if I'm updating for this, then handle it this way; otherwise, just update the profile record.” And so then I can extract maybe another command object that handles like, “Oh, when we're doing the address stuff, we actually have to do a little bit of a lookup and a cross-reference and some other things, but everything else is just throwing data into a database record.” And so that's another place where I would probably make an extraction, which is this specialized case of handling the update of the address is special. So I want to extract that, be able to test around that, et cetera. But fundamentally, the controller thing actually works out pretty well. The single controller with those sorts of extractions has worked out well for me. STEPH: Okay, cool. Yeah, I can see how depending on how complex your multi-step form is, having it all in one controller and then extracting those smaller objects to then handle each step makes a lot of sense and feels very friendly to read, and is very testable. For the form that I'm working in, there are enough steps and enough complexity. I'd really love to break it out. In fact, that's something that we're working on right now is taking each of those chunks, each state of the form, and introducing a controller for it. So let's say if you are filling out an appointment and we need to get your consent for something, then we actually have a consent controller that's going to handle that part, that portion of it. And I'd be intrigued for your form if things got complicated enough that it's the concept of onboarding or a wizard that leads us to having one controller because then we think of this one concept. But there are often four or five concepts that are then hiding within that general idea of an onboarding flow. So then maybe you get to the point that you have an onboarding address or something like that. So then you could break it out into something that still feels RESTful but then lets you have that very boring controller that does just enough and essentially behaves like a bi-directional linked list. So it knows, based on the route, it knows the step that it's on, and it knows where to go back, and then it knows the next step to go forward. And then that's all it's responsible for, so it doesn't have to also figure out what step am I currently on? CHRIS: I like the bi-directional link list, dropping knowledge bombs right there. STEPH: Pew-pew. CHRIS: It's interesting. I don't necessarily feel...right now; I don't feel that pressure. I feel fine with the shape of the singular controller. This is perhaps not necessarily even a good thing, but I think my bias is always to think a lot about the URL structure and really strongly embrace the user point of view. I'm going through the workflow. I don't care if I'm picking from a calendar and setting up a date versus filling in an address field or how you're storing those on the back end; that's your job, developer people. And I try as hard as I can to put myself in that mindset. And so the idea that there's this sequential thing that knows how to go back and forward and shows like, show which page we're on, that feels like it belongs in one controller in my mind, or I guess I'm fine with it being in one controller. And splitting it out feels almost more complicated in that I then need to share some of that logic across them, which is very doable by extracting some object that contains a logic of what goes back, what goes forward. But I think I like to align URL structure to how many controllers as opposed to anything else. And because I'm keeping a consistent URL structure where it's /onboarding/name /onboarding/address, and I'm stepping through in that way for all of those things, then it makes sense to me that those go to my onboardings controller. But I'm interested to see if I start to feel pain somewhere down the road because I expect this onboarding to get more complicated as time goes on. And will I bump my head on the ceiling? Probably. It seems likely. But for now, I'm liking it. STEPH: Yeah, it certainly makes sense. It's one of those areas that you want to start small and then build out as it feels reasonable. But in regard to the URLs, I'm with you, where I very much want there to be a clean, nice URL for the user to see. And then we handle out any of those details on the back end since that is our work to do. But I am still envisioning that there is a clean URL. So it may be you have an onboarding/address and then onboarding/consent, borrowing from my previous example, but then that maps to where you have an onboarding namespaced controller that is then for an address or for consent. So you don't necessarily have an object that's having to be passed along that stores the state and the next step that the person is on. But that way, you do definitively know from the route okay, I am on this step. And so then that's how you get away from that question of what step am I on? Because that's already given to us based on the URL and then the controller. So then you only have to care about validating the input that's provided on that page, but then also being able to calculate dynamically okay, if this person needs to go back, what's the previous step and if they go forward, what's the next step? CHRIS: What you're saying totally makes sense. And I'm now worried that I'm going to wake up a few days from now and look at my controllers and be like, I hate this. Why did I ever do this? I think the hesitation that I had, and this feels like a terrible reason, but in terms of what the config/routes.rb setup would be for this, it's namespace onboardings. And then within that, a bunch of singular routes and inside of that, inside that namespace, would be a bunch of singular resources so like, resource address, resource blah, blah. And I don't know why, but I don't like that. I don't like that. I don't like that. Now that I'm saying it out loud, I'm like, yeah, that actually would be a pretty clean mapping. And right now, I have implicitly what those available routes are but not explicitly. It also feels like there would be a real explosion of controllers there because there's a bunch of steps and growing in this controller or in this namespace. And they're all going to do the same thing, in my case at least, of just adding data in. But that's not a reason to not make...like, controllers are cheap; I should make controllers so, hmm. STEPH: Yeah. So I think that's the part in my mind that maps to the boring part is because we are creating controllers. There's maybe an explosion of them, and it's boring. Like, the controllers don't do very much. And then that feels a little bit wrong to us because we're like, okay, I created this controller, it does very little. So maybe I should actually group this logic somewhere else. But I think that is the heart of it and how you stay boring is where you have just that code be so simple that it almost feels wrong. CHRIS: That right there, that sound bite that we just had, that was a knowledge bomb drop, and I liked it. Now I've got to go back and refactor to the form that you're talking about because I am sold. STEPH: Oh, I'm glad you like it. I am intrigued if you do refactor then what that would look like and how it feels. But I also totally understand you're busy, so if you don't, that's cool too, no pressure. CHRIS: My honest answer is that I almost certainly won't refactor until I feel the pain. It's one of those things where like, okay, maybe I've now decided that this code is not the best, but the time to refactor it isn't when that code is just humming along working fine. It's a general thing that I think we share in terms of how we think about it. But the preemptive refactoring, I guess broadly speaking, I'm not a fan of preemptive factoring. I'm a fan of refactoring just in time or as we're feeling the pain, which is the counterpoint to that is let's not extract tech debt tickets because then they turn into preemptive refactoring again. It's like, ah, I'm not really feeling...I'm not in there right now. But the version of the code that I have now is probably fine. I don't think it's a problem although I am convinced now of the boring way. I want to go back to the boring way, but it will feel like it's worth changing down the road when I feel any pressure in that system or need to revisit it. So it's like that. That's how I think about that sort of thing. STEPH: Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree. It's one of those if you refactor...if this is a side project, if you want to refactor just for testing new software theories and then reflecting on what that new refactor looks like, that's awesome. In terms of any other refactors, then I wholeheartedly favor waiting until you feel that pain and it feels like the right thing to do; otherwise, it's unnecessary code turn. And while I strongly believe in experiments, I don't believe in putting teams through those personal experiments. CHRIS: More hot takes from Steph. I like it. STEPH: Circling back just a bit and talking about having one controller for each step of the form, that part I struggle with it frankly because it is hard to think about this is a concept, but what do I call this? Because it doesn't necessarily map to something necessarily in my database. There's a really great talk by Derek Prior that's called In Relentless Pursuit of REST, where Derek does a great job of providing some inspiration around how to create routes that don't necessarily feel like they could be RESTful, or maybe they're following that more RPC format. And he does a great job of then turning around and saying, “Well, this is how we could think about, or this is how we could shift our thinking in turning this into a more RESTful route.” So then it does map to something that's meaningful in our domain. Because we have thoughtfully, or likely very thoughtfully, grouped this form together in a meaningful way to the user. So then that's inspiration right there to give us a way to name this thing because we are showing it to the user in a meaningful way. So then that means we can also give it a meaningful name. That's all I got on multi-step forms. [laughs] CHRIS: That feels like it was a lot. We've covered data models. We've covered controller structures. We fundamentally reoriented my thinking on the matter. I feel like we covered it. STEPH: Yeah, I agree. Well, Benoit, thank you for sending in this question. I hope you found our discussion very helpful. And on that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up STEPH: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. CHRIS: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. STEPH: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or review in iTunes as it helps other people find the show. CHRIS: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @bikeshed on Twitter. And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: And I'm at @SViccari. CHRIS: Or you can email us at hosts@bikeshed.fm. Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeee. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Up Next In Commerce
An Ecommerce Strategy (and Product) To Make You Feel Good

Up Next In Commerce

Play Episode Listen Later May 27, 2021 34:36


It seems like selling a product that is designed to make you feel good should be a cake walk. But as we all know, business is never easy, especially when you’re breaking into the supplement and nutritional bar space, which is overcrowded with industry giants such as Clif bars and KIND. So what’s an upstart company with a solid product and good intentions to do?On this episode of Up Next in Commerce, we found out when we talked to Chris Bernard, the co-founder, CEO and Chief Mood Officer for Mindright, the good mood superfood. As it turns out, there are a few ways that a small new company can make a splash, especially in the digital space. Chris explains how organic reach outs and authentic connections formed through his partnership with Rob Dyrdek has helped Mindright create an influencer and ambassador community that wins against influencer fatigue. Plus Chris, he digs into why a content strategy that blends humor and education is what gets the attention of the digital audience. Enjoy this episode.Main Takeaways:Be Serious… But Have A Laugh: Fun and funny content is a great way to build a relationship with consumers and to sell the lifestyle that you want your brand to be about. But you also have to balance real education and sales tactics into your content along with the comedic elements so that customers can get the full picture of what a brand is, why they should buy it, and to convince them to complete the purchase.Can I Get A Sample?: Free samples used to be a staple at grocery stores and markets everywhere, and those samples were a key way that new companies created buy-in with potential customers. Now that the industry has shifted away from that model, finding a new way to hyper-target customers with influencers, deals, and content is the best way to bring customers into the fold.Influencer Fatigue: Consumers are wise to the influencer strategy these days, and their fatigue is real when it comes to consuming influencer content. In order for brands to fight that fatigue and win engagement, building buzz around future products rather than current offerings is one of the best ways to do it.For an in-depth look at this episode, check out the full transcript below. Quotes have been edited for clarity and length.---Up Next in Commerce is brought to you by Salesforce Commerce Cloud. Respond quickly to changing customer needs with flexible Ecommerce connected to marketing, sales, and service. Deliver intelligent commerce experiences your customers can trust, across every channel. Together, we’re ready for what’s next in commerce. Learn more at salesforce.com/commerce---Transcript:Stephanie:Hey, everyone and welcome back to Up Next In Commerce. This is your host, Stephanie Postles, CEO at mission.org. Today on the show we have Chris Bernard, the co-founder and CEO and Chief Mood Officer at Mindright. Chris, welcome to the show.Chris:Thank you for having me. Appreciate it.Stephanie:It's good to have you. Would you rather have me call you Bernie? Which one do you want?Chris:My friends and my coworkers call me Bernie, but whatever you're comfortable with.Stephanie:I'm your friend.Chris:Okay, call me Bernie.Stephanie:All right. I like it. So in the beginning, I like to always hear about your background, your journey and how you got to Mindright. So maybe if we could start there. What did you do before Mindright, we'd like to hear.Chris:What I did before Mindright was I was in action sports for a little over 15 years. I represented brands like Burton Snowboards in their sales and marketing channels as an independent contractor. I left that business in 2015 and I invested in a company called, Buff Bake which was protein snacks and protein cookies, nut butters and I came on board with them as part of that investment as the CEO and I helped them run that company for a few years until I was ready to try something new and had an idea and ended up launching this Mindright.Stephanie:So did you have the idea for Mindright right after Buff Bake or was there something in between there?Chris:It was something in between and it just evolved very quickly into what it is today.Stephanie:Okay. What was your original idea? And then what is it today?Chris:Vegan cookie dough.Stephanie:Well that sounds good. I dig that.Chris:It was okay. It wasn't great and that's why I kept it out of the vine and I think we'll probably get into it. But one of the things that dismissed the idea was it really for me, I was looking for something condition specific. Functional foods are really driving the category right now and it's all about condition specific. Foods that drive beauty from within, through collagen, immune support, sleep support.Chris:It's really how we came to Mindright. We started to see this trend in supplements and when you're looking for trends that are going to be shifting to food and beverage, you always start with supplements and you see this rise of adaptogens and nootropics and brain supplements and anti-aging and it's just skyrocketing growth in supplements. It was this idea of how do we support our lifestyle through our mindset, our long hours, our drive, our energy levels through ingredients that support cognitive function. And that's where we started was this idea of cognitive food support and I came to my partner with this idea, he absolutely loved it. At the time the working name was Feed Your Brain.Stephanie:Cool. I like that name.Chris:And it was just really focused on brain health.Stephanie:Do you have a background in this world? How would you even know? When I'm thinking about brain health, I'm like, "Feels like there's so many things. I should be doing facial or I should be doing this. I should be doing so many things." Did you have a background in this where you already knew this makes me feel good? Or did you have to learn all about it?Chris:No, I just knew I wasn't feeling good. I always feel this brain fog and slow and besides this fact that you just hit 40, things start to slow down a little bit and you're looking for ways to support your lifestyle and just keep your edge and just keep moving forward and you start researching and there's a lot of great information around brain health, mental wellbeing, nutrition and other things that support those functions.Stephanie:Okay. And so what were some of the ingredients that you started finding that you're like, "We need to have this in some kind of bar."Chris:It was like lion's mane, Gingko biloba, both of which didn't make the cut at the end.Stephanie:Oh, how come?Chris:Well this is where I was going was, as we started with Brain Health, my partner who is a very big advocate of testing and research pushed to really go out and survey a group around 350 people. And while cognitive function was important to them, what indexed the highest was, "Do you have foods and ingredients that help me feel good? Happy, good mood. I want to be focused and feeling good." And this theme of feel good, just kept popping up and popping up and we took a step back and it was indexed so high. Like, "Why don't we just lean into good mood?" We've got a set of ingredients. We've got some data behind some of the ingredients we're using to really support enhancing your mood, decreasing your stress and giving you energy. All the things you need to feel good. So we need to do it. And that's how Good Mood Superfood was born.Stephanie:Cool. And did you always know that it would turn into a bar or did you have other thoughts early on?Chris:We had many thoughts and we still have many thoughts. This was our way of really standing up the brand, getting a feel for our branding, our message, bars is just the starting point. We have a really dynamic innovation pipeline of other snacks, drink blends, hydration drink. Things that will help support other areas of brain health.Stephanie:Very cool. So let's talk a bit about your partner and how that working relationship is and how you even landed him as your partner.Chris:So I was introduced to Rob Dyrdek, legendary TV personality, former skateboard, a professional athlete. Rob has a show on MTV right now called Ridiculousness. I grew up watching his other shows, Rob & Big and Fantasy Factory, as many of us did.Stephanie:Rob & Big, that's a good show.Chris:It was amazing. So then we just look forward to every week watching. He's just such a character and dynamic human being. But what people don't know is he runs a really diverse, exciting venture creation studio. He refers to himself and the people around him as do or diers, people that are interested in investing in themselves, growing businesses from the idea stage to the exit. And he's invested in several brands, primarily at the startup stage. And when I came to him, I was in the transition period in my life. I didn't know why I was meeting him.Chris:I was going to go in and just introduce myself. And I brought Buff Bake with me just in case he was interested in investing because always looking for investors and he made me tell him my life story from the day I was born until the day I ended up sitting in the chair in front of him.Stephanie:Wow. I should have done that.Chris:It's not that interesting. But he really liked it. And I spent 55 of my 60 minutes talking about myself and then he's like, "Okay. So what's up with these cookies? What's up with this Buff Bake? He's like, "Okay. Those are really good. I like them but I really like you. If you have some ideas or you want to do something, come back and let's talk about it."Chris:I left and I got a call two weeks later from him, wanted me to come back again. Again, didn't really know why I was going there. He wanted to pitch me on some ideas. And it just flew over my head. I went home, I called his COO and I was like, "What's he looking for?" He wanted an idea from me. He wanted to work on something. So I had been in the background working on these cognitive ingredients, paired with superfoods and brought it back to him as a whole package. I came in with fully developed samples around bars and coffee creamers and bites to really articulate what this could look like. And he was so excited about the presentation. He just sealed the deal with me on the spot and we were off to the races.Stephanie:That's amazing. What does the partnership look like with him? How's he involved?Chris:He is very, very involved. He wants to be very involved in the creative process, but also through all the funding, the financial rounds, building the infrastructure of the company. He has built a really strong team around him. Managing the finance arm, managing the marketing project teams. So it's an extension of my team. We are true co-founders, he's very, very involved in the business and he and I are either working together on the daily basis or he and his team are fully integrated in.Stephanie:That's really cool. And it seems like once you get access to him and then you had his network, it brings in other investors as well.Chris:Yeah. So that's the next thing that happened. So we stand this thing up and we start to go out to bring in some strategic capital to help push things along. We started with some traditional resources and private equity and some strategics within the space. And then we started talking to his network a little bit and all of a sudden we saw how excited they were and one conversation led to the next, led to the next, the next thing you know it's Marcus Lemonus from the profits. Jonas was extremely excited about the project. He now sits on the board with myself and Rob. Joe brought his brothers on as well. Jordan McGraw, Travis Barker, Ken Roxanne. It's just this star-studded list of really great mindset celebrities and athletes. Very, very exciting.Stephanie:It seems like you have your own portfolio of influencers. You can get the word out there. While most people you're trying to even think about, "How do I even tap into one of those?" You've got this whole little Rolodex just working for you.Chris:Right. So it's exciting. I think that being able to have that leverage and that advantage really puts us in a unique position to tell the story.Stephanie:Awesome. So tell me a bit about, you said that you were getting samples when you were going to go and show him what you could do. What did that process look like? Because to me thinking about even making any kind of food and then getting the packaging and then getting ingredients that maybe some people aren't the most comfortable with. If you hear some of the words you'd be like, "Well, what is that like? Is that even safe?" Tell me what that process looked like to even find someone who could make the bar that you wanted to taste good and have all that ready for the sample day.Chris:It's funny. You start with the manufacturers. Every manufacturer has a food scientist, R&D, most of them do. Food scientists and R&D department. And most of the time, if they're excited about your project, they will help your R&D. It comes with strings attached and not always do you end up owning your IP, which is important if you're interested in exiting your company at some point, but you learn the process of what goes into R&D products.Chris:And I came in, you come in with a brief and your core tenants for, "These are the ingredients that I would like to use as superfoods. These are the outputs that we'd like to achieve, enhance mood, stress, energy. These are the functional ingredients we're thinking about." And then you work with the ingredient suppliers to understand efficacy and transparency around their ingredients. And you let these guys do their job and you like what you like and you don't when you don't. And I think we did about 13 rounds of this bar until we landed in a place that we felt really good about.Stephanie:That wasn't just you testing it or were there other people trying it?Chris:It was Rob and the entire team. His close team is a team of five.Stephanie:That is awesome. What kind of lessons did you learn when going through that process? Anything that you would maybe do different?Chris:Well, I'll tell you one thing. We tried to be everything but the kitchen sink. We wanted to be keto, we wanted to be paleo, we wanted to be zero sugar. We wanted to be everything. Vegan, dairy-free, gluten-free and have functional ingredients that support incredible, feel, good vibes and decrease your stress. And we were realistic that not all of that was going to work and our guiding light really became taste. If it doesn't taste good, I don't care if it has all those things, it's just not going to work for us. So we planted a flag and it was about taste. And we want this thing that tastes good. And if it has five or six or seven grams of sugar, we use a coconut Palm sugar, which we felt really good about. It was therapeutic. It was like, "Okay, great. We don't have to use sugar, alcohol, or stevia or erythritol or anything. We're going to use coconut Palm sugar. It's a low-glycemic sugar. It tastes great. The bar still has 50% less sugar than an RXBAR or competitor. And we felt really great about that.Stephanie:That's awesome. How do you view the landscape right now? Because I know when I go into certain grocery stores, I'm like, "Wow, there's so many bars." There's the original type RXBARS but now it feels like there's so many offshoots. Everyone's trying to do lower sugar. Maybe not what you're doing, but how do you make sure that you're staying ahead of them and also differentiating yourself where people are like, "Oh, obviously we can see why they're different than all these other bars."Chris:I think again, it came down to taste, great amount of protein, our base values of, it is plant-based vegan, it is dairy free, it is protein packed and low sugar were really important to us. But I think we'll continue to stand out with what our functional message around supporting mood through these super foods and ingredients. And we are just sticking with that.Stephanie:How do you get in front of new people though? I'm thinking about back in the day, samples where you're like, "Oh, I would never have thought to buy that, but now I can see it's healthy for me and good." How do you approach that now trying to get in front of new people and have them try it for the first time?Chris:It's difficult, especially through a global pandemic of people at home and not having opportunities sample in the markets or elsewhere. And for us, it's just leaning into our influencers, our investment community, paid ads, really important. Finding unique ways to drive trial, pinpointing and targeting specific communities. It'd be really great to be everything to everyone but if we could just focus on this core group that's committed to their mindset. They're coaches, they're hustlers, they're the boss, they're the mom and they're focused on what it takes for them to be successful every day. We call them the happy hustlers. That's where we're starting. Our initial reaction was the right one. They're really resonating with the product. They're speaking about the product for us organically. And we're just going to continue to focus on that community right now. And then it'll just hopefully grow from there.Stephanie:It also seems like you have a really good idea around your social presence and how you want to present yourself. It's like a fun whimsical looking, at least your Instagram feed and it's not overly product driven, but it's more selling the lifestyle behind it which I really liked.Chris:Exactly. That's exactly right. And that's what's resonated the most is people are realizing that Mindright is a lifestyle. It's not just about the products. We want to support you beyond that. And as you'll see over the next couple months, we're really going to lean into what it takes to have a better mood, to put the work into your mental wellbeing and really drive home this good mood movement. And being approachable and fun, makes it just easier to pay attention and watch and fun and funny is part of feeling good. And that's the message that we want out there.Stephanie:It sounds like your content strategy you're about to ramp up around those areas. How are you going to keep it balanced between educational, which I feel like a lot of people need education around the ingredients and why they're added and how they need to be mixed together and then the other side around even outside of the product. Like you said, just good mood and how to feel happy and mindfulness and it's like a whole different business over there. How are you thinking about balancing that and connecting with the right audience?Chris:It's just that. It's balancing, trying different things. It's balancing being funny with incorporating lifestyle and people enjoying the product. You're going to just start to see more direct response and testimonials. We are looking to partner with therapy based apps and other entities that help make mental health and wellness really accessible. We're going to have our investment team and our influencers talking about the work that it takes to get Mindright. It's not just, this bar is not going to solve your problems, it's not. But if you focus on your nutrition and you incorporate things like the importance of sleep and getting exercise and some type of a meditation routine, all of these things combined bring you to that next place.Stephanie:Yep. Yeah. It's not just try one thing and all of a sudden everything will be solved, like many things and there's no magic potion.Chris:I think that that's where other companies that are trying, mood or all of these other cognitive functional ingredients, they could fall short because they're making it just about that. And I think that we'll go along for the ride and we'll be there to support our customers along the way.Stephanie:That's great. So you just mentioned influencers. I'm going to go and I want to hear how you view working with influencers because we've had quite a few brands on the show and they talked about it. Some people, amazing experiences if you find the right person who is all in, it's not just sharing a quick message of like, "Here's my teeth whitener and it works great for me go buy it." Versus maybe the ones that are really in they're even part the product development. How do you view a good working relationship with influencers? And more than one, since you have many that you have to balance.Chris:I think for us, it's about being authentic. If it's not something you enjoy and you truly believe in it comes through. You see it and you feel it. And I think having our influencers part of our ambassador program, which we're just at the early stages of building out, is a really important part around building the authenticity of their message. Our influencer program is very small right now, we're still identifying how they're speaking about the brand and what are the best ways to do that. But what we've gotten so far comes from a really organic place. We haven't paid for any influencers yet. All organic because people are enjoying the product and sharing the message with their community.Stephanie:Are you sending them free samples or is it more your investors giving it to their friends who are other influencers probably. And then it's organically happening through that way?Chris:A little bit of both. We identified people that live within our community that we would like to target and say, "Hey, we'd love your feedback. No expectations. You don't need to post. We just ask you tell us how you enjoyed the product. How'd you feel? What do you think about the packaging?" And then it just happens organically.Stephanie:How do you view the longterm strategy around influencers? Because sometimes it feels like they'll have this excitement and a big blip where their network sees it. And then there's maybe diminishing returns and people are either hit over the head with it too much. Or like, "I bought it. It's good." Or the person's not as excited anymore as they were maybe in month one. How do you keep them engaged or be like, "Okay. We're kind of good for now."Chris:We see that fatigue all the time. And I think for us, it's the excitement around what's coming. It's creating community around the lifestyle and the future launch of our new products. The bar is here today. It might not be here in three years from now. It's about continuing to evolve and supporting our needs today.Stephanie:Makes sense. So tell me a bit more about this ambassador program that you're building.Chris:We're at the early stages where we're leaning into this mindset community from happy hustlers. We have three investors on the team that live and breathe in that space. And that's Chris and Lori Harder, their lifestyle coaches and then Lewis Howes who also has a podcast, The School of Greatness. And just really leaning into what they do and how they do it and their communities coming to us and we're setting them up and they're incentivized by product. One of the angles that we're working on right now is charity. When they post, we will support a soon to be identified a mental health charity with an investment.Stephanie:When they're posting about the bar or the company, something like that, then it's like, "Okay, that's a point towards this charity or effect."Chris:Exactly. Those are the early stages. We're still in development. It's still being worked out. We're less than two months old in the market, so we're close.Stephanie:Are there other ambassador programs that you look at where you're maybe taking some key learnings from where you're like, "I know this one works well and I want to implement some of those strategies into Mindright as well."Chris:Yes. A lot of them are custom built though. There's a lot of really great app solutions that work really well and incentivize through product or discount or payment. We want to try to be more organic. I've seen some great custom ones that are gamified, that built community around this excitement around this app itself and the message. So work in progress.Stephanie:That'd be cool to circle back and hear what you ended up building and how it's working and the results. So tell me about your distribution strategy and where you're thinking about selling. Are you on Amazon? Is it just your website and how do you think about where you actually want your bars to be sold right now?Chris:It's everything digitally native. So we are alive on our website getmindright.com. We're on Amazon. We're looking at a various array of subscription box companies. But the really big one right now is all of the delivery convenience guys. So this new evolution of convenience, prime is not good enough. It can't be there the next day. It needs to be there in 20 minutes. So we're looking at partnerships with goPuff, FastAF, Dot. We're in the process of vetting those guys out right now and seeing which one makes the most sense. And I think that can meet format. It's just growing and exploding right now. Through COVID people were forced to adapt to Amazon and delivery service and it's here to stay. It's here to stay. Those conveniences will never change.Stephanie:Are you worried about maybe your brand and the story not being told correctly when you're starting to have many outlets for your products going out and you can't fully control the messaging or?Chris:Yeah. I think that's why picking the right partner for these delivery services is key because we want to make sure that we have the ability to tell a story, whether it's this big or in a banner. It's really partnering with the right team to help make that happen. And then we have a lot of work to do on our end. And I think that our community will help push people to these services. Amazon, getmindright, goPuff, that's where we go and they'll really rely on on that. It's challenging.Stephanie:Yeah, no. Especially when you have so many different people you're vetting right now and thinking about all of the control that you could be losing but also all the access that you're going to be gaining. It's tricky. Because this is a commerce show, I want to hear about your ecommerce strategy around what's working. What do you think that you're doing on your website that maybe is unique and others haven't tried out yet or that you're like, "This is a good tip that more people need to know about."Chris:I think it being less templated and more just an experience where it just feels fun. It makes you dive a little bit deeper to find out what's going on. What works for some people doesn't always work for others and I think this format is working well for us right now.Stephanie:Do you find yourself being able to look back at maybe your experiences at Burton and other places and pulling some lessons from there? Or is it such a different market that you're like, "That probably wouldn't work for this product."Chris:I think it's very similar. I think at the end of the day, you're selling an item that you're passionate and excited about and what is the best way to share that with your friends or your customers? It's very similar in that sense.Stephanie:Yeah. That's cool. So where do you guys want to be in one to three years? What are you hoping to achieve?Chris:We're looking to achieve this just amazing platform of good mood foods that span across really great retailers, Whole Foods, all the natural channels. It would be really great to see it everywhere obviously, but this really accessible approach to foods that help support your mood.Stephanie:Have you started talking to Whole Foods and other retailers like that?Chris:We've had some early conversations, but we really want to stay firm on this digitally native approach. I think that one thing that I'll add is testing is worth spending money on. Just test landing pages, AB testing, digital testing, customer testing. It has opened my eyes to this completely different world. And it is a true science. And when you understand that word that works, that picture that works, that landing page that just converted, it's a science. And then you can continue to really invest towards those things that are working because you know there's turn on that.Stephanie:Yeah. I agree. What is a finding that maybe came out of some of those tests where you were like, "We would have never changed this, changed the product, change the website, but now that so many people are saying this, we're definitely moving forward with that.Chris:I would go back to the beginning where Rob and I, Mindright. There was two different names before Mindright. And now I look back, I'm like, "Neither of those would have worked. Mindright should have always been number one." We tested Mindright. Mindright worked really well but We wanted to brand the ingredients themselves. And we were like the unstoppable blend. We're unstoppable. This mentality of you cannot be stopped, masculine. And we were so sure of it and it failed miserably.Stephanie:They were like, "I don't like that."Chris:No, no. So now at the happy brain blend.Stephanie:That makes me feel happy. That's more on brand.Chris:Yeah. And then from that moment on we're like, "That's our guiding light." It makes me feel happy. Does it? Yes Or no. Okay. It's in.Stephanie:And how are you doing these tests? How are you going about trying to get this feedback? Are they surveys or what are you all doing behind the scenes?Chris:Yeah. Surveys. Right now, we've moved to more surveys. We're surveying around our current database of growing email subscriptions and then we're going to start doing some stuff through Instagram, social media. But the original testing went through a market research firm.Stephanie:All right. Well, let's shift over to the lightning round. The lightning round is brought to you by Salesforce Commerce Cloud. This is where I ask a question and you have a minute or less to answer. Are you ready?Chris:No.Stephanie:Nope. Be right back. Need to go get some more tea. Get In the right mood here. All right. Well, we will move on anyways. If you had a podcast, what would it be about and who would your first guest be?Chris:Oh my gosh. My podcast would be about thinking big. My whole life I never thought big. I thought pretty small and I put roadblocks up in front of myself and I think that now as I sit on a board with Rob Dyrdek and Joe Jonas, literally anything is possible and it would be about stories and ways to help open up your mind to anything is really possible. And I think as cheesy as that sounds, it really is. And I feel like here in my home with my kids and now that we're talking about getting Mindright and this positive growth mindset and to hear them talking about it, it's a real thing. I don't have a title yet. I'll let you name the podcast.Stephanie:There you go. I'll help you name it. Who would you bring on for your first guest?Chris:I bring in Rob. He is an amazing person to talk to about all of this stuff. His mindset is just next level with what he does to keep his energy and his success where it is. It's remarkable.Stephanie:Awesome. What does your mindfulness practice look like?Chris:I'm sorry.Stephanie:What does your mindfulness practice look like? How do you stay centered and balanced and not getting pulled everywhere when doing a startup?Chris:I think for me, I committed to getting up early every morning. I have to be up by 5:00,5:15 or else I can't do the things that I want to do for myself, which is exercise or just have a moment of meditation. Whether it's a minute or five minutes or 20 minutes. I try to do that every morning. I have four kids so life is really hard sometimes. Here they are.Stephanie:I feel that.Chris:So it's get up early, it's a few minutes of meditating and just understanding where I'm at and being really grateful for that. Exercise, 30 minutes. That is my non-negotiable. I have to get 30 minutes in, if I don't my day is just off and once in a blue moon we have a sauna that was gifted to us by-Stephanie:Wow.Chris:It was miracle. That's another podcast.Stephanie:Yeah. Okay. I want that friend. Gift me a sauna.Chris:It was some local guy just giving it away. He was moving.Stephanie:What area of California do you live in because I don't know about many local areas being like, "Here's a sauna. Do you want ice staff as well?"Chris:I'm on the hunt for one of those. So, if you know one. I started fasting, so I intermittent fast. I don't eat my first meal until 12:00 or 1:00. And I found it's really helped with inflammation and energy and I feel great. I also stop thinking through COVID I just-Stephanie:So impressive.Chris:30 days and then you felt great and 60 days, I'm like, "Wow, I feel awesome." And it just stuck.Stephanie:All right. Last question. Two more questions. What's one thing that you don't understand today that you wish you did?Chris:What don't I understand. I don't understand a lot of things let's be honest.Stephanie:Good answer. Just everything. Lots of things.Chris:No. I think for me, part of the reason why we're starting digitally native is almost a personal challenge to myself. I know retail really well, I know relationships, building brands, building distribution, working with brokers. I don't understand digital that well. And it can be frustrating at times because the learning curve is pretty steep and it's always changing every day because you're learning something new and I think digital marketing I don't know very well.Stephanie:Well, you'll be learning it with this company. So that's great.Chris:It'd be great to hire the right people to help you.Stephanie:Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah. 1,000% to that one. All right. And then the last one, what one thing will have the biggest impact on ecommerce in the next year?Chris:I think it's these convenience delivery guys. I think they're going to change the game for a lot of people. FastAF is a really good example of what's happening with commerce outside of food and beverage, because they're delivering unique gifts. You need a gift and you're going to a party in an hour, they'll be there in 20 minutes with this beautiful candle or gift item which is just changing the way that we do everything.Stephanie:Yeah. Oh, I completely agree. All right. Well, this has been such a blast. I feel like my mind is really in the right place now after this interview. Where can people find out more about you and Mindright?Chris:Check us out at getmindright.com or on Amazon.Stephanie:All right. Cool. Well, thanks so much for coming on the show.Chris:I really appreciate it. Thanks so much.

Marketing BS with Edward Nevraumont
Interview: Chris Chapo, Amperity, Part 2

Marketing BS with Edward Nevraumont

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 5, 2021 17:41


This is part 2 of my interview with Chris Chapo. Chris has never been a CMO but he has overseen analytics at a number of organizations including Apple Retail, JCPenny and now Amperity. In this part we explore Chris's take on analytics and what he feels CMOs need to know.This is the free edition of Marketing BS. Part 1 was available to subscribers on Wednesday.TranscriptEdward: This is part two of my interview with Chris Chapo. Today we're going to dive into his data analytics insights and how they can help CMOs. Chris, let's start with this question, is data science the future of business?Chris: I personally don't believe it is, which is kind of funny given the fact that I am a data person, and I self-proclaimed “data scientist”. I'd say taking an evidence-based approach to understanding business problems and solving business problems, to me, that's the future of business if you want to be scalable and sustainable in the future. Data science is just one of the methods you might use to achieve that vision. Edward: What's another example? What are examples of evidence that's not data science?Chris: Sometimes people look at data science as the fancy statistical model which will say let me predict the future and the outcome of what's going to happen, which could be one approach. But I'd say another simple approach to creating evidence is doing experimentation. If you've got two different potential marketing treatments that you may want to show to consumers and you're not sure which one is going to be the most effective, try it out. The confidence you'll have in that will overcome any sort of doubt you may have and a statistical model which says, well, this person should get message A with 0.76 accuracies, and this person should get message A with 0.72% accuracy. You're like, how do you interpret that? Oftentimes, experimentation is a great example of how to do that. Another one that I find really helpful is bringing consumer insights and what you would call traditional research to bear and combining that with data analytics and data science methods. An example of something where I've seen these people really successful is creating behavioral-based segmentations where you talk to your consumer base about attitudes and beliefs. But at the same time, build statistical models to predict which segment a person may be a member of. That's useful when you want to personalize two people based on their segments versus just create personas that are interesting but not necessarily actionable. Edward: Why is that not data science? Is it data science only when you look at purchase data? But as soon as you do external research data, it stops becoming data science and it starts becoming something else?Chris: I think data science by itself, honestly, is a very overloaded term. It can mean a lot of things to different people, and as such, then it means nothing per se because there's nothing that's specific. But one of the methods that I think most people traditionally think about for data science is the more purchase-based activity drives it or signals such as do I click on something, what did I do on a website? Thinking about it, more focused on propensities and predictions about activities versus understanding someone's core beliefs. One could say—and there are some examples where people I was training—try to approach and model people's emotional states and understand some of those few more “data science” methods. But it's usually not the mainstream when people talk about data science. Edward: Chris, what do you do for long feedback cycles? In short feedback cycles, you can run experiments; or you have the results, you can look at the inputs and the results, and you can run all sorts of data models. What about things that have long feedback cycles? Things around hey, I influence you now and you buy a car two years from now based on the stuff I'm doing for you now. Is there anything that data science can help in trying to understand those long feedback cycles?Chris: I'll give you a couple of thoughts. Of course, data science is not a panacea. It doesn't solve all problems. But one thought of how to approach some of those long feedback cycle problems are creating leading indicators. Actually, doing some analysis understand, yes—to your point—maybe this outcome I want to predict is something which will take a couple of years for it to play out. Customer lifetime value is a great example of that. It takes a while to actually observe it or even products where there's a long purchase cycle. But is there something where we can do an analysis first off to say, usually, people who have higher lifetime value—or in the case you just mentioned—who do go on to buy a car? These are some of the behaviors they exhibit first. While it won't necessarily be 100% predictive, but focusing on experimentation on those leading indicators and using that to help (to your point) to take your best guess using data on if I continue doing more of this thing, this will help us drive something in the future. I'll give you an example of this that wasn't a team that I lead, but it is something I learned when I was in Intuit. One of the things that they wanted to do was get people to go from trial members of QuickBooks online to full paying members. That usually takes a period of time to actually show up. It takes 30, 45, or 60 days. What the team did when they did some analysis is realize, if I can get people to do this one little action within their first seven days, that has a high correlation to someone converting to being a full paying member. They had teams who were focused on driving that little behavior, which was connecting to your bank account. Again, they would have entire teams focused on experimentation to drive that, and how can I get that rate higher? What are the things I could do? Because they knew that it would pay off in the future.Edward: Do you run into selection effect problems? You do that correlation, not causation. I imagine that 100% of people who are paying members connected it to their bank account, but that does not necessarily mean that connecting your bank account leads to payments. It could be that it's the other way around. Chris: Yeah. I think that's one of the challenges with this. This is why an example of that, the team would go back and validate that. Those people who did that action did have a higher spend than people who didn't. But to your point, the question selection buys come in. There are a couple of different methods that one could do to help address that. In this example, because we're selecting who gets this potential treatment versus those who don't because this is an online product, you can validate that in a true AB test fashion. Now, this scenario is not quite as easy. One of the things that I'd seen teams apply are things like propensity analysis where you may not necessarily be able to have a control group, but can look statistically to say this person who does an action that we hope is a positive one or experience is something different, can we find somebody who's very similar to them in terms their past purchase history and use that as a pseudo control group.But it's still not necessarily (I would say) as solid as a lot of the statisticians in the world would like. That comes to one of the pieces that back to this concept of data science is important is not getting super caught up in just the 100% accurate solution, but what is good enough to drive a better business result than we've seen in the past? And how can I make sure that this is not that we want to have random chance to spare only success measures, but how is this better than our other approaches, and can we get better over time? Those are a couple of examples. Edward: I definitely buy that. I think that a lot of the issues with academia is they're trying to get to the right answer. Whereas in a business, the right answer is not what you need. You don't need to know the exact right answer, you just need to know a better answer than what you were doing before. You spend a lot of your time in retail. Let's talk a little bit about retail loyalty. How do you measure loyalty in retail?Chris: That's a great question because most people will measure loyalty based on how much people spend or likely to spend. Honestly, I'll protect the guilty here. There's a cable company that I use, which I spend a lot of money with but I do not like the cable company. I am not loyal to them. And if I had another choice that provided the same level of service in terms of speed, bandwidth, and all those things, I would in a heartbeat choose something else. Oftentimes, how I think about loyalty—particularly in the retail sense—is when you're able to build a strong emotional connection between the consumer and the brand. That connection where people—you've heard the net promoter scores, one surrogate of an example of how to measure that. But if you're so connected, I love this brand so much. I will choose them above others. There's something specific about them that makes me want to buy from them. That to me is an example of when you've got that loyalty. The hard part is how do I measure that? How do I create a system to instrument that? But to me, if you can do that, that to me is a north star for retail analytics. Edward: The finding loyalty as a positive emotion rather than the lack of a negative, you're splitting out the loyalty that is I'm going and searching for this thing versus the loyalty that comes from lock-in. Chris: Yes. I would say it's loyalty, I'm going out to search for what I love in this thing. If I had a choice, I would choose this over others. That to me is that connection. You see it, oftentimes, anecdotally when people talk about their favorite brands, they talk about how it makes them feel. I'll give you an example, I used to love Virgin America. That was my favorite airline. I would choose them over others because of how they treated me as a flyer.For certain people, that emotion isn't important. They may choose something else. They may choose Southwest because they want to feel like a smart savvy flyer, not an emotional connection on what they feel when they experience the brand. To me, it's really around that emotional feeling that, quite honestly, can be difficult to measure, but it is really important, and you know when you've got it. Edward: Can you measure with the price premium? I imagine most people when they fly, find the airline that's going to take them to the place they need to go, at the time they need to go, and then they choose based on price. Whether it's $100 or $99, they end up going with the $99 one. You imagine the more they're willing to pay to go to that $100 one, $110 one, or $200 one. Is that the measurement of how much loyalty there is?Chris: It might actually broaden it. Instead of it being a price point, it's just general friction. One area of friction could be paying more. Another could be—in this example we're talking about the flights—I'm willing to take a connection even if the prices are the same. I'm willing to have a layover because I love this brand, and I want to be part of the experience. Even though I know that there is someone who flies there directly. There could be other pieces as well. You think about the friction side of things if you have a bad experience with a company. Going back to this flight example, say that your connection flight was canceled and you're sitting there at the airport. You may be more willing to forgive that bad experience if you have loyalty to the brand versus if you don't.I actually broaden it to the friction or the discretionary friction you may be able to deal with. The more you're able to deal with it potentially, the higher you have loyalty to the certain brand. Edward: Can you quantify that? Because I imagine things like willingness to do a stopover on a flight, there's a dollar value you can calculate. Someone is willing to accept that stopover versus going direct. Most of those friction things, things that you can put a dollar value on until you eventually get to the point where hey, there's a number that we can put on the loyalty of any given customer?Chris: That's an interesting question. I haven't thought about it in the macro sense. But I think in very specific examples, one could do this. I'll give you an example back in my Apple retail days. One of the big challenges that people face—particularly in the 2007–2011 timeframe—was the stores were busy and getting help could take a long time. We were able to quantify the impact that having to wait for help, whether it be the genius bar or whether it being for help to purchase, actually had on someone's—we used the net promoter score methodology—likelihood to recommend the store experience. For those people who had prior great experiences, the negative effect didn't impact as much as people who were either newer to the store experience or had prior negative experiences.Edward: First impressions matter. If you make a great first impression on your customer, that first impression can be sticky and get you through some bad experiences down the line. Chris: Oftentimes, the people remember how you ended the experience first, then how you began the experience, and then everything in between. There's some research done—and I feel bad I don't have it off the top of my head—by some folks who were studying the impact of lines and how people had the experiences. But the ending mattered more than the beginning in individual experience. Edward: In terms of multiple experiences, are you always better than to invest in those early customers rather than a customer that's been around loyally? It's almost like if a customer's loyalty, that's the one that you'd least need to invest in?Chris: I'd thought about this in three buckets. There are your best customers, your almost best, and then everyone else. Oftentimes, I advocate spending enough on the best customers to keep them there. That is because if you have enough bad experiences, they're going to fall down. We've all probably experienced things like that company used to be great, but they're not great anymore. Enough to keep in there, but it's that next year, the next best that I personally would say you should invest more in. Edward: Chris, is it the best though, or is it the new customers? Because it sounds like you're saying before is that first impression really, really matters. Chris: Next best could be (to your point) the first impression for folks. We know that based on the channel of acquisition, the profile of this customer that they are likely to be, they would be on the path toward best customers. Treat them at the very beginning really well. Or could be people who've been around with you for a while who are starting to increase their purchase frequency, but they haven't necessarily got to that loyalty phase. I wouldn't say that I would choose either over the other. Going back to this concept experimentation, to actually try it, you don't know which one you're going to have the most leverage with. Honestly, I would say—at least my experience from most retailers—you're going to need to balance the acquisition component and your first impression with customers and so forth with those who are buying from you but aren't necessarily up at the top. You'll need to invest in doing both of those. Edward: What are those key metrics? You mentioned NPS, but other metrics that retailers should be using to predict or to be optimizing against to make sure their customers are loyal?Chris: I think the net promoter score is definitely a simplistic measure to use and it's fairly effective. Particularly in driving closed-loop operational improvements around customer experience. That's definitely a key one. Another one that I am a big proponent of is predictive customer lifetime value. Although it can be difficult to understand and interpret. It's really helpful and a barometer to say here's what we think at least the future spend will be. One area that takes a little bit of time to suss out, but if you can actually—for an individual brand—understand those emotional benefits that someone gets in your brand and find a way to measure that. That's another great way to experience this. Edward: What's an example of that?Chris: An example would be—going back to my Virgin example because they're the longer around. Imagine one of their things—the emotional benefit is—makes me feel special and welcomed. Maybe that's the emotional benefit. I'm just supposing that.Edward: Is it market research then? It's a matter of asking your customers survey questions and figuring out which of those answers matter?Chris: Which are the answers that matter, and there's an approach where you can figure that quantitatively through stated importance versus derived importance on these emotional benefits. You can either ask them (to your point) on an ongoing basis or if there's a way to actually—going back to leading indicators—measure that in a different fashion. That can be interesting. The question would be I don't know necessarily how to genericize that because a lot of that has to do with each individual customer and brand. That's why I would think through that. Edward: But it's a matter of the generalized way to ask a bunch of questions, run correlations, and which of those questions end up being leading indicators of the left-hand value of success in the future and then optimizing towards those questions. Chris, this has been great. Can you talk a little bit before you go about what your quake book is and how that changed the way you thought about the world?Chris: The book that stands out for me is a book called Tribal Leadership. Why that's important is it goes back to the example I shared with JCPenney and a few other examples I've had. The team that you're working with—the tribe that's trying to drive change in a company or drive success—matters probably more than the actual strategy of what the company is, at least in my opinion. Because I'm a big believer that teams that are motivated and work well together can solve any problem. Again, that's kind of [...], to some degree. It's something that I‘ve actually experienced personally in my life. What I love about this book Tribal Leadership is it talks about different levels of organizations. Starting with what they call level one, which is like prison gangs and tribes that happen there where they say things like, all lives sucks. All the way up to the very top level words like nirvana and flow. It's that one group you work with where everybody is just completing out their sentences, understand how to work together effectively. It's that once in a lifetime opportunity. What I love about this book is it gives you concrete examples of—if you're in a level two or three group—how do you get to the next level. And what are some tips and tricks to help you as an organization grow? I read this book first when I was in Intuit, it helped me as a leader understand that the craft of my work—which is analytics and data—is important. But what was more important is how to create a tribe or team that is successful and can drive the future. That's my quake book. Edward: Thank you so much, Chris. This has been fantastic. I really appreciate your time today. Chris: You're welcome. Thank you very much too. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit marketingbs.substack.com

The HSE Podcast
After UK Transition: Working with Chemicals - Episode - 5 - CLP, REACH, PIC and Industry voices

The HSE Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 9, 2021 20:44


After UK Transition: Working with Chemicals - Episode - 5 - CLP, REACH, PIC and Industry voices   In this instalment, we invite two industry voices to discuss changes to Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP), Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and Prior Informed Consent (PIC) regulations. We also explore the actions they have taken to keep their businesses moving following the end of the UK transition period.   If you have any concerns regarding UK Transition and the changes to REACH and CLP regulations, contact HSE at the earliest opportunity via ukreach.clp@hse.gov.uk.   If you have any questions regarding UK REACH enforcement, please contact the HSE at the earliest opportunity via CRDEnforcement@hse.gov.uk.   Podcast Transcript   Good day and welcome to episode 6 of the HSE podcast with me Mick Ord. Over the past few months we've been discussing the key regulatory changes which have been implemented now that the UK has left the European Union.  In the last episode we heard from businesses about how they had been preparing for changes to PPP (Plant Protection Products) and BPR – Biocides Products Regulations, in the run up to 2021.   This time round we're looking at how people have been preparing for the changes to CLP, that's the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of substances and mixtures, REACH – that's the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation & Restriction of Chemicals, and PIC – Prior Informed Consent, now known as GB PIC, which concerns the import and export of hazardous chemicals.   John Mackenzie, Head of Regulatory Affairs at Thomas Swan in County Durham, is back with us I'm pleased to say, as is a new guest on the podcast Dr Chris Howick from Inovyn Chlorvinyls in Runcorn.  They produce mainly chlorine, caustic soda and chlorinated derivatives from plants in the UK and all over Europe. They employ a total of 750 people.  I started by firstly asking Chris about the challenges his company faced in the run up to 2021 as they prepared for the new GB regulations.   Chris: Well I think it's been an interesting journey from the very announcement of the referendum result.  It caused a lot of discussion in the early days but I think bit by bit as regulations started to come in the UK and preparedness from the regulatory agencies in the EU progressed, it was a little easier to see exactly what we had to do.  I think we had a few stop start processes with the no deal scenarios because we had to get ready to transfer REACH registrations and Biocides registrations across to a European entity or an ongoing European entity for the initial leaving dates and of course we had two or three leaving dates in the end and so we then had to cancel those transfers to bring them back to ensure that they didn't transfer.  So it's been quite eventful in that respect but I think to a certain extent it didn't matter whether there was a free trade deal or not because we were going  to have to go through these actions anyway, so I think it gave us a little bit of extra time preparing it and I think now that that is done we can concentrate on the actions for ensuring that we are compliant with the new UK regimes where there's a little bit of a grace period before the first sets of deadlines come up with that.     Mick: John Mackenzie, was that a similar scenario at your company, in terms of ensuring that your products are REACH compliant?   John: Indeed it was, yes very similar.  I remember contacting some of our suppliers, the smaller guys especially and kind of like the rabbit in the headlights reaction from them like – what you mean we've got to change and do things that we didn't do before, but now it's gone from there to their saying yes, that's fine no problem.  So we've come on a huge journey from the referendum in 2016 wasn't it – to now by the time this comes out – we will have left and it's come from not knowing very much at all about what we are going to have to do to being pretty comfortable that we are on top of things. So yes, it's been quite a journey.   Mick: Chris, for you in terms of Classification, Labelling and Packaging, CLP, any observations about how the transition period has gone in that particular section?   Chris: I think it's been a little more straight forward, than the REACH situation, the advantage is although we now have two regulatory regimes, we manufacture at sites throughout the EU but we have a significant presence in the UK and so as far the UK manufacturing assets is concerned, we now have two regulatory regimes, one in the UK and one in the EU.  The advantage is, of course, that we start with the same situation for classification and labelling  because clearly on the 31 of December 2020, the UK had the European CLP regulation and this now transfers to the UK one.  It remains to be seen whether there is differentiation and whether it happens and then to what extent it happens but there are some subtleties in that clearly when we supply companies in the EU from our UK site, those companies often become the importer and so they carry some additional responsibilities by importing material from outside of the EU into the EU and it works the other way round as well.  If we import from one of our sites on the Continent, we now have to ensure that there's reference to the UK or I should say GB classification regulation there as well and as I say at the moment, we start with the same classification so it's a technical or administrative task, but we just need to see how that develops in the future and whether the UK will deviate or have a different opinion on a case by case or chemical by chemical basis.     Mick: And how did you know that the various actions you describe were required?  Where did you go for that information? Chris: Well, we're very fortunate in that we play an active role in the Chemical Industries Association and also on the polymers side from the British Plastics Federation, so we're active in those two trade associations for the chemicals and polymers side of our business.  They've both been a very good source of information so the regular meetings and organisations of webinars with input from the UK regulators.  On the European side actions, there has been some good, detailed guidance documents on the European Chemicals Agency website as well as the change in obligations from companies and the particular guidance on how you had to navigate through what's termed the REACH IT, which is the Agency's submission portal for chemicals as well as what the obligations for companies were for that, particularly on the REACH side rather than the CLP side.  And then, of course, we did get the statutory instruments which of course are phenomenally difficult to read because they refer to the original European legislation.  They only really highlight what  changes by making them a UK regulation.  I think companies, particularly on the continent that found the UK Statutory Instrument thinking they were going to find how they had to comply and it's  very, very difficult to read even if English is your first language.   I think it's the guidance that goes with it now and certainly the Government website has got a lot more information on and the HSE and Defra have done some very good roadshows over the last two or three years that have been very informative and I think recordings of those are still available on the internet if companies want to catch up with those.  Those were particularly useful and I would say a lot more informative in the early stages than the initial guidance, but certainly we've now got some good documents from the UK regulators as well.    Mick: What about the situation in terms of the export and import of hazardous chemicals – PIC?   Chris: The Prior Informed Consent side has taken us a little longer to set the systems up because we weren't sure exactly how the UK was going to do it but with materials transferring between our sites in the EU and our UK sites and vice versa, of course what would just be a seamless transportation before the end of the transition period, now has to be licensed and because the UK is now out, we did have to essentially apply for licenses before the end of the transition period in order to ensure that we had the necessary licenses for export.  ECHA, the European Chemicals Agency work on a 35 day lead time for PIC applications, so those all had to be submitted well in time for the end of the year to ensure that they were in place.  Going the other way, the UK system is more based on seeking permission and authorisation via email.  The UK has a system which is fit for purpose because of the smaller size of the market.  I don't think it's gone for this extensive IT system that there is on the European side, but I think we'll see how that goes in the HSE and the Competent Authorities in the UK, I think we'll keep that under review as to whether it needs to be expanded, but again we had to set those up to be ready for the exports to go in January.  We are confident that things are in place and we'll review it as the New Year progresses.   Mick: John, PIC doesn't necessarily apply to you does it?  What about CLP and REACH – have you got anything to add?   John: In terms of preparations we've made do you mean?  Technically, we are a medium sized enterprise and we don't have any footprint in the EU, we don't have an office or another site so what we had to do was to set up a relationship with what's called an Only Representative or OR for short in the EU so we've done that with a German company and it's a consultants again and what's going to have to happen is – we transfer our REACH registrations to them first and they then accept them (in the New Year) and that will be our registrations transferred into the EU and then we'll have to grandfather those into the UK system so it will end up with is REACH registrations in the UK and the EU.  Of course we will only need those in the EU for chemicals that we supply (or products we supply) into the EU.   But we'll end up with two sets of registrations instead of one and also potentially, two sets of costs instead of one because every time you set up a REACH registration, you have to buy into the dossier of data that exists and it can be very expensive, tens of thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds or euros, so potentially you will have to pay twice.  Now I don't expect that our costs are going to be doubled, but they will be significantly greater than they were before.   Mick: I was just going to ask you John, whether you think that that situation is replicated among other businesses of a similar size to yours?   John: I'm sure it will be.  Chris can comment on this as well.  I am sure that every single chemical company who wants to supply into the EU will have increased costs because of the fact that we are having to deal in two jurisdictions now, the UK and the EU. Mick: Chris, do you just want to add to what John said there?   Chris: Yes, I think there clearly will be increased costs on what's termed the sweat equity side which is the amount of time and effort that companies have to put in to actually doing all the administrative side work and submission of dossiers etc.  I think industry is generally trying to come up with a pragmatic solution on the data sharing issues.  Companies set up consortia between themselves to initially develop the EU REACH dossier and that was all based on sharing and each company in the same volume band essentially paying the same amount of money.  We are hoping that some pragmatism will come out of that with their approach to granting data to UK companies registering for UK REACH, but it will be a sort of consortium by consortium approach.  Some companies may take a different view, but clearly companies may have to pay for data access whereas at the moment they don't have to and I think that the biggest, most significant change by the introduction of the UK system is companies that are today buying from suppliers in the EU, sort of change from being a downstream user in the EU system, to an importer in the UK system.  So, as a downstream user in the EU system there's no obligation to register but as an importer there is an obligation to register if your supplier hasn't registered or isn't going to register so I think that remains something of an unknown situation.  We don't know how many companies will be caught by that, we just need to see how many EU manufacturers are prepared to register their substances on the UK market and under the UK system.    John: I think that's a really good point.  I think the biggest impact in the chemicals industry is on those people who are distributors who have never had to register their chemicals up to now, but now they will have to every time they import from the EU.  One of the things that we did as a company was we did a survey of all our suppliers globally, every single one.  We sent them out some information a couple of years ago, just so they were aware of what was going to be going on and to ask them a few questions and I got some positive answers.  The bigger companies that you would expect, knew what they were doing, were fine with it, it was the smaller companies who didn't realise that they were  going to have to now register for their imports -and maybe import relatively small amounts - … they didn't realise they were going to have to register them now.  That's a couple of years ago and now it's turned around so we went from about half a dozen, maybe a few more than that, were on what we call the critical list of raw materials that we buy from suppliers, now down to just one, which is a fairly small, minor component in something, and so there has been a big shift in knowledge and information in the industry, so you know it's changed a lot in the last few years I think.    Chris: It's clearly getting better I think but the concern is maybe on the SME side where particularly the import I think of chemical mixtures and this particular one in the polymers sector where quite a common ingredient would be what's termed as either a stabilizer master batch or a pigment master batch which sort of blends of various stabilisers, anti-oxidants, pigments and a lot of companies would all buy these additives in one formulation, in a formulated product, you know sort of Blue 29 or something and if they are buying those from an EU supplier, in theory each substance in that mixture, will need to be registered or you would need to know it's been registered and for the supplier of that material, if the ingredient isn't  hazardous, it's not classified as hazardous, there is no sort of compulsion to declare exactly what the components are so these materials are being imported with good safety data sheets for the mixture, but it's very difficult to ascertain what the chemical components are.  As an importer, you have to do a downstream notification and then a registration.  It's a particular challenge, but I think companies certainly have welcomed the change in the timeline of registrations now to this post two year, four year, six year periods, because particularly those SME's now have got some time to resolve these issues with their supply chain and I think that's been very welcome.   Mick: What actions would you recommend Chris for those businesses who don't feel prepared and maybe fall into the SME category that you've just been talking about?   Chris: I think for SME companies in the UK it's just - have a think and check with your suppliers. Just try and understand what it is you are importing - are you importing a mixture or a pure substance?  And the most important question probably I think that you would need to know ideally in advance of the 27th of October, but certainly by the 27th of October, is whether your supplier is registering that or is somewhere up the supply chain? Are the substances in that mixture, or is that substance, going to be notified and registered under the UK system?   So, there's a deadline for notifications for those importers by the 27th of October, 2021 .  That's not a registration, but it's a notification and ideally check with your suppliers before then that you know that you don't have the registration obligation, it's all being taken care of further up the supply chain.  I think that's the first and probably perhaps the most important aspect and just engage with your supply chain – just say what are you preparing to do?  Is the substance grandfathered into UK REACH or if not is it going to be notified and registered under UK REACH either by your supplier or your supplier's supplier.  Just ensure that that information is flowing up and down the supply chains.     Mick: John, have you got anything to add to that?   John: No, that's really well covered by Chris.  If anything I would say check with your trade bodies, get some advice from them, see what they say.  They'll no doubt have information ready to send to you if you need it and check the gov.uk website because they've got really good check lists, they're really rough and ready but they are really good to point you in the right direction.  Of course, the HSE website has got good information on it as well.   (Music interlude)   Mick: A big thank you to John Mackenzie and Chris Howick for their thoughts and observations which I hope you found useful. If there are still any areas where you feel you need some more information then log onto the HSE website which is regularly updated – there is a link in the notes accompanying this podcast.  Remember too that you can contact our helpdesk directly. Just email your question to EU-exitchemicals@hse.gov.uk and we'll respond as soon as possible. Again, the email is in the notes that come with the podcast.   And please subscribe to our eBulletin newsletters too.  You do this by popping your email address into the subscription boxes which you'll find on the HSE website.  We'll keep you informed of news and updates as they affect the chemicals industry.   So many thanks for joining us, good luck with your business for this year.  From me, Mick Ord and the rest of the team….it's good bye until next time.                  

Path to Well-Being in Law
Path To Well-Being In Law Podcast: Episode 10 - Terry Harrell

Path to Well-Being in Law

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 27, 2021 45:00


CHRIS NEWBOLD: Hello, and welcome to the National Taskforce on Lawyer Wellbeing Podcast Series, the Path to Wellbeing in Law. I'm your co-host, Chris Newbold, Executive Vice President of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. As you know, our goal here on the podcast is simple, to introduce you to interesting leaders doing incredible work in the space of wellbeing within the legal profession. In the process, build and nurture a national network of wellbeing advocates, intent on creating a culture shift within our profession.CHRIS: Once again, I'm joined by my friend, Bree Buchanan. Bree, we're 10 episodes into the podcast. They said it couldn't, it would never happen, but we are here, what a milestone. I'm curious what your impressions have been thus far within the podcast experience.BREE BUCHANAN: Yeah, hello, everybody. I think it's been great. One of the things I've enjoyed so much is being able to really get to know and dive with some of these people who are really leaders in the wellbeing space, and get to know them a little bit more. We get to interact with them by Zoom or email, but this is a really unique opportunity, so it's been great. I can't believe we already have 10 episodes in the can, so to speak. Time flies, so this has been great.CHRIS: It has, and like you, I like the fact that we get to have more in depth conversations with what I would call the movers and shakers of the wellbeing movement. It really allows us to delve into some issues a little bit deeper than we could probably do through CLEs or some other forums.CHRIS: So, well let's shift to our topic today. We shift the conversation a bit to one of the foundational bedrocks of the wellbeing movement, and that's our lawyers assistance programs. We're very excited to welcome our friend and fellow taskforce on lawyer wellbeing member, Terry Harrell, who resides in the Hoosier state of Indiana. Bree, I'm going to pass the baton to you because you've known Terry for a considerable amount of time and have worked with her on a variety of different issues. So if you could introduce Terry, we'll get the conversation started.BREE:I would love to. Terry occupies a very special place in my life because she was really the person who was responsible for getting me into this. I'll say a little bit more about that in just a minute, but Terry Harrow is a lawyer and a licensed therapist. She's been the Executive Director of the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program, might refer to it as JLAP, for 20 years, following a decade of work in the mental health field.BREE:Terry is the past Chair of the ABA's commission on Lawyers' Assistance Program. She served in that role from 2014 to 27, and then at some point near the end of that, she snookered me into taking the reigns for the next three years. So yeah, she was really instrumental in getting me and she was, you are, Terry, the person who got me into this. So thank you.TERRY HARRELL: You're welcome, Bree. I do remember with the taskforce saying, "You've got to come do this, you have to come to this meeting. We're going to form this national taskforce."BREE:That's right.TERRY:I'm wondering whether you'd kill me later or thank me.BREE:Yeah, well here's the thank you. So as Terry became a leader in this space, that was certainly recognized in the ABA President at that time, appointed. It was Hillary Bass out of Florida, appointed Terry to lead the working group to advance wellbeing in the legal profession, which was an all-star group of people who were responsible for launching the ABA's Employer Wellbeing Pledge two years ago, which has been wildly successful. We have now about 200 signatories of some of the largest legal employers on the planet. Terry continues to be very involved in that. She's been a key partner within the national taskforce since its inception back in 2016.BREE:So, Terry, what did I miss? Welcome to the program.TERRY:You did a wonderful job, thank you, Bree. Happy to be here and I need to tell both you, I hadn't realized you'd done 10 already. I was aware of your podcast but I'm impressed, I'm impressed.BREE:So Terry I'm going to start off by asking you the question that we ask everybody is, what brought you to the lawyer wellbeing movement? What experiences in your life are behind your passion in this work? We found that people who really get involved and in the center of the circle of what we're doing, tend to have some real passion that's driving what they do. So, what's yours?TERRY:Yeah, that question makes you think back and I think it started young because my dad was a lawyer. I remember running with my dad and one of his partners in high school, I loved doing that. Of course we called it jogging, I won't tell you how old I am, but that gives it away. We'd go jogging and they would talk about how that helped them to stay more focused at work and improve their mood. As a child of a lawyer, I can testify that evenings when better when my dad went, stopped by the YMCA on his way home and exercised first before he came home. He was a trial lawyer, I think that I learned early that transition from work to home can be really helpful.TERRY:Then in high school, I had a friend who died by suicide, and then the father of a good friend also died by suicide. So I think that sparked my interest in mental health and my decision to major in psychology in undergrad. But then I went to law school, and actually, I loved law school. I'm probably a geek, there aren't many people who will say that but I made really good friends, I enjoyed it. Went to work in big law where I saw both some examples of probably good wellbeing practices and then some very bad practices, but I also learned that for me that work was not where my passion was. I learned what a burden it is to try and work that hard about something that you're not really passionate about.TERRY:Bree, I know you understand this, because you and I have spent our Christmas break working on policies before. You have spent I know, breaks working on tax documents and you only do that if you really, really care about what you're working on. To do that about something that isn't terribly meaningful to you is torture, to me at least.TERRY:So then I went back, after I worked in law for a couple of years, went back, got my MSW, worked in mental health in a variety of positions which was great. Loved it, but then I heard about this Lawyer Assistance Program and I thought, wow, I'd always wondered if I would get back to my legal roots somehow. Started working at the Lawyer Assistance Program, absolutely loved it. First as the Clinical Director, then as the... I became the Executive Director. Then it was really through the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs, that I started thinking more broadly about lawyer wellbeing. At the LAP we were already thinking, and we can talk more later, but we were thinking about ways to talk about prevention with lawyers a little bit. Didn't have a lot of capacity and bandwidth to do that. But it was really through the commission that I started thinking about structures, the fishbowl in which we are swimming, as opposed to just dealing with each individual lawyer himself or herself, if that makes sense.BREE:Absolutely, yeah. At some point you want to go, get tired of pulling people out of the stream and you want to go upstream and stop what the real problem is, yeah.TERRY:Yeah, exactly, exactly.CHRIS: Terry, many people attribute the start of the wellbeing movement around the report that the National Taskforce released back in, surprisingly, 2016. The 44 recommendations and that, but we all know that the forerunner to that was the work of the Lawyer Assistance Programs. So I was hoping that you could give our listeners some perspective of just that history of the Lawyer Assistance Programs and how wellbeing has played a role and what you do. While it's probably taken on a more prominent role of late, but still being a centerpiece of what ultimately the programs were designed to do.TERRY:Yeah, I would love to do that. Begins to make me feel like I'm an old timer, but when you've been doing it for 20 years that happens, I guess.TERRY:Yeah, the LAP idea of lawyers helping lawyers, which is originally what we called a lot of the LAPs. Lawyers helping lawyers has been around for many decades, at least since the '70s. I believe much earlier than that, but it was a very informal, just volunteer, and it was mostly lawyers in recovery from addictions trying to help other lawyers who were struggling with addictions, and primarily alcohol, that's what they were. But then in the '80s, staff programs starting popping up, people started realizing, this could be a lot more helpful if there was a phone number, one phone number to call, one person who is the point person because it was hit and miss with the volunteer network on who found them and who didn't find them.TERRY:So states around the country started creating Lawyer Assistance Programs where they'd have an office with a phone number and a person assigned there. At that time, the ABA formed a commission, it was called the Commission on Impaired Lawyers. Tells you how far we've come. It was about helping impaired lawyers. It was very basic and the primary goal was to help states create a formal program to do this work. I forget exactly when, somewhere in the '80s I believe or early '90s, we changed it to the Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs, which I think is a much better name. I don't know exactly the timing, but by 1997 when Indiana created our program, the stronger programs all over the country were what we called broad brushed, in that they dealt with mental health issues, including substance use issues but much broader. I think the earlier programs probably did assist a few lawyers with mental health problems, but that's not what they were known for.TERRY:Over the '90s I would say, and early 2000, almost I think all of the LAPs today are broad brushed, in that they will help lawyers with almost any problem that they come against, not just substance abuse problems but that myth still persists today. Even though Indiana, for an example, we've been a broad brushed program since 1997 and yet I will go out and speak and some lawyer will walk up to me and say, "Wow, I wish last year I'd known that you dealt with problems other than alcohol because Wilma Flintstone was grieving her husband's death and we thought she was really depressed, but because we know she didn't drink, we never thought to call the Lawyer Assistance Program." So that kills me and I want to get that word out there. I'm sure Bree has heard those stories as well.BREE:Absolutely, yeah.TERRY:So the LAP was doing our work, helping lawyers that were either brought to our attention or came to us voluntarily wanting help. All along, I kept thinking, we should also be doing some more prevention work. I'd like to offer some lawyer's running group or do some more education, get some more education out there. I couldn't believe how many years I've been doing JLAP 101 presentations.TERRY:One of our state bar presidents said, "Terry, what if we create a wellness committee at the state bar, will that upset the LAP? Would we be taking your turf?" I said, "Absolutely not. You can help us because you can do more of those proactive things, like have healthy eating seminar for lawyers or sponsor 5Ks and do some more of that front end work than what the LAP has the bandwidth to do." We work together very closely. I mean, I was a Co-Chair that first year, I'm back being Chair again, Co-Chair again this year. In fact, the way it works is the wellness committee supports a 5K run but you know who's there at 6:30 in the morning to organize the whole thing? It's always staff from the Lawyer Assistance Program. So we really worked hand-in-hand and we're still having discussions about, how do we work together to be able to do more and not duplicate efforts and not cause each other any hard but actually do more? Because there's certainly lots more work to do, tons more work.BREE:Yeah, and Terry, I'm interested in... because you've been so central in this space and know all the players and people. Particularly since the report has come out, what do you see in the area of, I think of it as prevention work, but a lot of times it comes under the heading of wellbeing or wellness. What are some of the things that you're seeing that the LAPs are doing now?TERRY:I think we're offering, we're increasing the breadth of our programming, which is good. We're focusing our marketing efforts, if you will, on those things. I know in our LAP, we found that our care for the caregivers support group is one of the more popular groups, that and our grief group have been more popular. They've helped people to understand that there are certain issues that may impact everyone or at least any one of us can encounter. By being part of some of these wellness efforts with the state bar, I think people started to perceive us more as wellbeing people and it's a good thing to be seen hanging out with those people, as opposed to in the past when they saw us as the alcohol police. They really didn't want to be seen with us, or I'd walk into a cocktail party and someone would put his drink behind his back. It's like, we're not the alcohol police, we're all about wellbeing. I think that has started to come through, and it's helped with collaborations.TERRY:With the report coming out with these very specific recommendations, I was able to talk to the state bar and the LAP and the state bar put on a symposium for legal employers talking specifically about the recommendations for legal employers and what they can do to improve wellbeing. That was fabulous, actually, we had wonderful speakers from a lot of the law firms and corporate council groups around the state. That was just great. We're still getting our normal referrals, and of course those remain confidential, but we're doing so much more that doesn't have to be confidential, like offering yoga and offering a mindfulness session, that I think we're more visible to. We're not this mysterious hidden group any longer.TERRY:With more emphasis on wellbeing and the taskforce report coming out, and the pledge from the ABA. Even my own supreme court decided to create a wellbeing committee specifically for supreme court employees. So we're a 250-person group ourselves, so we've added that. So I mean, I just think raising the visibility and the emphasis on wellbeing has had incredible results for us.CHRIS:Terry, as you think about... I mean I'm not as familiar with the Lawyer Assistance Programs, although being on the malpractice prevention side, we certainly have partnered with... I mean, we work a lot in rural states, so we were aware of certain states that still did not have a Lawyer Assistance Program. My sense is now that I think all 50 states actually have one. Not knowing when you started with the Indiana program, I would just love to hear your perspective on where we were then versus where we are now from an evolution perspective. You got to be pretty excited because this feels like there's a lot more with the innovations going on in the wellbeing side, I like to always think of the Lawyer Assistance Programs as, you guys are the heroes in the trenches every day. I think that there's a great appreciation for the work that you do but it's been a lot of work to get to the point where the issue has become back on the front burner as a national topic of discussion.TERRY:Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah, I mean even when we created our program in '97, there was still a lot of states that did not have a program at all. Now, there were a lot that did. Indiana is rarely first, but we're rarely last. There were also states that only served lawyers, they didn't serve law students, they didn't serve judges. So I'll make a plug for my state, I was very proud of my state that they looked around and said, "Looks like the better programs serve law students, lawyers and judges, the entire legal community, and they're broad brushed." We made that decision but it took a while, into the 2000s I'd say. Now we're at the point where I think almost every state... let me phrase it this way. I think every state has a Lawyer Assistance Program, some are more robust than others. There's a fair number that still have only one employee and there might be one that's still voluntary, but there's definitely someone we could get a hold of at every state that is concerned with Lawyers' Assistance. So we've come so, so far.TERRY:I remember in the day when it was hard. I mean, we knocked on doors to get... we wanted to get our message out at various lawyer conferences, and we really had to work at that. Today, everyone wants a wellbeing program at their conference, whether it's prosecutors or defenders or trial attorneys, judges, everyone wants a wellbeing program. So now, I mean I talk to my staff about we may have to start to get selective because we're doing so many presentations throughout the year that we've got to make sure we have time to take care of our clients as well. That's the most important part of what a LAP does, but it's a great problem to have to work at. I think a lot of that credit goes to the wellbeing movement, that it's on people's radar. So organizations that I wasn't even aware of who never thought to contact are now contacting us.BREE:That's great.TERRY:That's huge.BREE:Yeah, that is.CHRIS: Yeah, and let's take a quick break because one of the things I'd love to come back and talk about is just how the demand has evolved over time, because I've got to think with COVID and other things, the demand was already high but we're at an even more interesting place with the pandemic.CHRIS: So, let's hear from one of our sponsors, take a quick break, and we'll be back.—Advertisement: Your law firm is worth protecting and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and find coverage all in about 20 minutes.Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.—BREE:Welcome back, everybody. We are so honored today to have Terry Harrell, who is really a leader, the leader, one of the leaders in the Lawyers' Assistance Program world. She has worked at every level of that experience. Terry has been the Executive Director of the Indiana JLAP for the past 20 years, so brings a wealth of experience.BREE:So I'm guessing, Terry, that you have a finger on the pulse of how things are going with the LAPs during COVID? The level of demand and how they're meeting and what they're seeing. I mean, early on in the pandemic, what I knew in talking to the LAP programs is that they felt that people were hesitating to call. The demand went down at first, but I don't think that's the case now. What are you seeing?TERRY:I think you're right on spot, Bree. I think when... My experience, and I think I heard this echoed correct with the other LAPs is that last spring, calls dropped off. I think two reasons. One, all the law students got sent home from law school. We couldn't do our onsite support groups for law students any longer or meeting one-on-one with law students. Those calls, I mean they went dead silent. We heard nothing from the law students for months.TERRY:But the lawyers and judges also dropped off. I don't know, my thinking is, and this is just Terry Harrell speaking. I think the lawyers and judges were busy trying to help others, trying to help their firm or their court staff deal with what was going on at work, trying to help their families, trying to help their communities figure out what had to happen. As usual, as lawyers will do, they put themselves last and they just sucked it up and did the work they had to do because as the pandemic continued, and I think this is true for all the LAPs, I know it's true for us, the calls began to come back. Lawyers and judges are calling us, we're starting to have our normal calls again, as well as, it's funny, the COVID stress calls don't come in directly. Someone will call me, concerned about another person, say, another lawyer in the firm.TERRY:Then next thing I know, we're talking. Well, how is this isolation and the pandemic, how's that affecting you? Next thing I'm talking to that lawyer about their stressors. To where we've all noticed, they come in sideways because lawyers as usual, are busy trying to help other people, but they're getting to us now. I'm really pleased with that, that our normals are back up to normal.TERRY:What I would say, I hate to say there's a bright spot in a pandemic because there's nothing good about this pandemic, but one of the things, I guess a silver lining of a bad experience, has been our support groups. We had before pandemic, we had, I don't know, eight maybe support groups going around the state, but if you lived in a smaller community, there wasn't one close to you. We just couldn't justify having support groups in some of those communities that had few lawyers in them. Even if you go into Indianapolis, to get to the downtown support group, if you work on the north side to get done with your work day and drive 45 minutes to downtown Indianapolis for a support group wasn't real. Then 45 minutes home, wasn't realistic.TERRY:So when the pandemic hit, we moved everything to Zoom. We talked about it but we'd never done it. We just did it because we didn't have any choice. It's been great because we've been able to include people from more rural areas. It no longer matters geographically and so people have come to groups that normally wouldn't have. They've been much more effective than I would've guessed.TERRY:We also added a group, that just called our Connection Group. So everyone who is practicing law or going to law school or serving as a judge during the pandemic is eligible. We're all eligible, it's just to connect with other members of the legal community. It's robust and people get on there and talk about the challenges that they're facing. They also laugh as most support groups, they also laugh and have a good time.TERRY:So I think when it's over, we'll go back to having some in person, I mean because doggone it, sometimes there's nothing like a hug or an arm on your shoulder, but I think we'll continue with the Zoom support group meetings because they are more effective than I ever would've guessed. It allows us to get to those people in rural communities. I mean, this may be something, Chris, for those states like North Dakota and Montana, where you just don't have big populations of lawyers. If they can do things by Zoom, I have been shocked at how well that has gone.CHRIS:Yeah, I think you raise a good point, because I think that in some ways the legal profession is now more connected because of the necessity of having to utilize technology to connect with one another. One of the things that I've seen in the bar association world is that fairly significant rise in participation in CLE program. Obviously that all went virtual, but they're seeing, particularly in rural states, record numbers of people sitting in on getting their CLEs and connecting in an entirely different way. So that's going to be really interesting to see how that plays out from a support perspective in the longterm, but like you said, I'd be rather optimistic that we feel like people are not as far away even though we're physically not together. There's connection points that we can certainly rely on as we move forward.TERRY:Absolutely.BREE:Terry, I know the... and just to emphasize and reemphasize this as those in the LAP world always do, that everything is confidential about the calls, 100%. But of course abiding by confidentiality, can you talk about maybe any trends that you have seen in the kind of calls that you're getting? I mean since they've started to pick back up, do you see more extreme situations? Have the type of calls changed, or just going back to what they were before?TERRY:I would say it's really, it's amazing but I think they're going back to the mix we had before, which has tended to be more heavy on mental health recently than addiction, which is interesting. Although, sometimes we find out there's also an addiction issue there, of course, but it's in the same mix of lawyer with dementia, demeanor issues, depression, alcohol. We have had two... again, thinking about confidentiality, I have to think what I saw but we've had two pretty dramatic relapse situations and I don't know if those were due to COVID or not. It's too new but they were two people that we thought had a really solid recovery. So I will be over time I'm sure, we'll figure some of that out and see if that played into it or it was just the course of addiction itself.BREE:Sure.TERRY:But yeah, I haven't seen a big change in the type of calls we get, other than it's almost like the pandemic is just one more layer. It's one more stressor on top of everything else.CHRIS:Terry, I'm curious that the pandemic I think for a lot of people has been an opportunity to reflect on their current state of life. I'm just curious particularly with your social work background, just your perspective on... people are evaluating all parts of their family and their professional life, their relationships, and how that ultimately... I'm sure there will be books and book written post pandemic about the impacts of that as a reflection point. We're just curious on your perspective of lawyers in particular and as they had to work from home and not be as connected. I've heard some lawyers say, "I really never want to go back to an office again." So I'm just curious on that, on your perspective on that.TERRY:Yeah, I mean like you say, it'll be years before we know the total impact, but I definitely think it has caused people to think about, what do I really need to do? Do I need to be going this hard? Do I need to travel that much? Maybe I want to take a job where I can, if my employers let me continue to stay at home, maybe I'll quit that job and find a job that allows me to work from home. I'm aware of at least one retirement that was, not caused by the pandemic, but hastened by having that time to reflect on what's really important in life. The lawyer decided, you know what? I was going to wait two more years but why? Why am I doing that? I want to spend this time with my family, I'm going to go ahead and retire. So I think there'll be changes in workplace policies, and I don't know how that will all fold out.TERRY:Yeah, and I think there'll be some career changes because I think there will be some people who have decided what's most important to them, that there may be some shuffling around. People may make some career decisions because they've had time to sit with themselves and decide what's really meaningful and what works for them, instead of just jumping into the daily grind thoughtlessly every day. I think we'll see some changes.CHRIS:Yeah, and employers may need to adapt as well. Again, I think it's going to be very interesting to see that if nothing else, the work-life balance has been called into question. As we think about wellbeing as wanting people to feel like they've made a good decision in are professionally satisfied in the practice of law. Having a pandemic in the midst of a career has an opportunity for you to rethink your position in that world.TERRY:It really does. I mean, there's some dramatic instances. I've heard of lawyers who went into the courtroom and the judge said, "I won't let you go forward unless you take your mask off," where they thought it was... something like that can make you think, well, is this really worth risking my life to do big things? Then maybe employers will change. It's turned out there's some people who are very rigid about, I want you at your desk working 8:30 to 4:30 or whatever, very rigid hours. They may have learned that actually if you tell people, "This is the work you need to get done but you can be flexible about when you do it," and it still gets done, that may open up some possibilities for people. Yeah, it will be very interesting to see what happens.CHRIS:Terry, you've been very involved in the work to create systemic change in the legal profession, both as it relates to wellbeing and both in Indiana and on the national front. Could you talk with us about some of the projects that you're currently involved with? Again, both at home and on a national level?TERRY:I would love to. Bree mentioned earlier that Hillary Bass created the working group to advance wellbeing in the legal profession, but that was a working group that was sunset a couple years ago, but one of the major initiatives of that group was the ABA Wellbeing Pledge. That pledge was meant to continue and to continue to be there to encourage and support employers to make changes in the workplace to benefit lawyer wellbeing. So CoLAP took that under their umbrella and created a wellbeing committee at CoLAP, which I'm still involved in.TERRY:I'm particularly involved in our subcommittee that's working on that pledge. We have, I don't have a current number, it's approximately 200 people have signed the pledge. That's a very rough number, but more people are signing on. We're starting to get feedback on what the legal employers are doing. I want to stop, it's easy to say firm, we mean legal employers. This is for anyone who employs lawyers in their workplace, whether it's a government agency, law school, law firm, in-house council. It's broad, broader than just law firms, I want to be clear about that.TERRY:We've seen some big changes, we have seen law firms are updating their policies to be respectful of mental health and encourage people to get the help they need when they need it. I've seen law firms hire wellbeing directors and I've seen them go a different way and hire an actual in-house therapist to be available to their staff. There's just been explosion of wellbeing activities and programs in the law school, that go on and on about that. Now, I do think most of those are aimed at the students, which is great, but I think we need to circle back and remind the law schools that they also employ a whole lot of lawyers on staff and make sure that those wellbeing initiatives are also including their own employees, because I'm not sure it's been interpreted that way at the law schools.TERRY:Legal employers are doing things to reduce the emphasis on alcohol, either by having events that are not built around alcohol or by having more options available or limiting the amount of alcohol served. I think there's still a lot of thought going into how to do that by the legal employers. All legal employers are offering some sort of wellbeing training, whether that's learning about mindfulness, financial wellness, nutrition, learning about your Lawyer Assistance Program and your EAP. A fair number are offering some fitness coaching kind of alternatives, there's a lot of creative work being done. I know Bree's been following some of those signatories as well. She's also on that wellbeing committee. It's fun to see and I just can't wait to see what else comes out of those initiatives with the legal employers.TERRY:I'm going to talk about the policy committee briefly, but did you all have anything you wanted to say about the pledge? I know Bree, you've been really involved in that as well.BREE:No, but I think that it really is beginning to change the way things are done. It also, we're creating opportunities for these pledge signatories to come together and share information and strategies. So it's a great project and one that's just getting started.TERRY:Right, in fact I should mention, in March we're going to have a virtual event for those law firm signatories. So if anybody's thinking about joining, I would suggest you join before March so you can take part in the March virtual, of course, event.TERRY:I'm also on the ABA policy committee today, and that group is looking at the taskforce recommendations, particularly ones on what the regulators should do, because the taskforce report asked that regulators take action to communicate that lawyer wellbeing is a priority. I think that means getting it into written policies and rules so that it's there for the long term, not just something we talk about at one CLE and move on. So policy committees looking at the model rules of professional responsibility, with an eye on how can we emphasize wellbeing as an aspect of competence. I'm not going to go into more detail on that yet because I think there's a lot of moving parts there, but I hope that we will be able to make some change in the model rules that institutionalizes wellbeing so it doesn't go away. So that law professors can talk about it in their professional responsibility classes, so that CLE ethics can tie to it. I think there'll be all sorts of benefits to institutionalizing the idea in the model rules. We're watching other policies where there's an opportunity to add that in.BREE:Yep, so foundational. [crosstalk 00:35:23] about what's going on in Indiana. You guys have taken the lead in some initiatives. The character and fitness questions.TERRY:Yeah, in terms of systemic change, I think this is a really important one. For those who don't know, most bar examiners historically ask... years ago, they asked a really intrusive question about, have you ever been diagnosed with or treated for a variety of mental health conditions? I think the question had been narrowed by most states but it was still there. CoLAP has continued to push and I've not been directly involved in those efforts, but to tell states that the question needs to come off the bar application. It's okay to ask about misconduct or behavior that's concerning or problems with performance, but it's inappropriate to ask whether someone has a diagnosis or has sought treatment for something.TERRY:We went to our Chief Justice, I guess it was six months ago now maybe. Once we explained it to her, she said, "You're absolutely right, we should not be asking that question, period. Let's take it off starting today. Let's just remove it." We even had had a few applications come in and she said, "Just strike it from the few applications that have come in. We are not using that question anymore-BREE:Wow.TERRY:... starting today," which was fabulous.BREE:I didn't know that, that's great, Terry.TERRY:She did it, because we thought we'd have to wait until the next round because it had still been on the application. She's like, "No, we'll just mark it out on this one and then take it off the next one and we're done with that question right now." That was fabulous, and we're not the first state. I know New York for sure has done that. I think there's a couple others that I can't recall, but I'm hoping that the snowball is rolling and that more and more... because that's something that sends a message to law students, it sends a message to lawyers, that getting treatment is a good thing. That's a positive thing, not a weakness. It's so important.BREE:So essential before they join the legal profession. So Terry, this the capstone question. So, are you ready?TERRY:Okay.BREE:So pull out your crystal ball and tell us, I think you're one of the best people I the country to talk about this. What does the Lawyers' Assistance Program of the future look like? I mean, what would be ideal? Then talk about it if you can, what it takes to get there.TERRY:Well what's in my head is more of a picture, it may not have the details in it yet, maybe you two can help me flesh it out, but one of our volunteers for years has always said that her vision for JLAP, for our LAP, is that it's a coffee shop. It's this friendly, open coffee shop where lawyers can stop in, get a cup of coffee, connect to others, talk over their challenges. There's no stigma to coming in, it's a very welcoming and encouraging place. I really think that idea, that is the LAP's role, it's helping lawyers to connect, whether it's to a volunteer, another lawyer, a support group, or to professional treatment of some kind, or just reconnect with themselves. That's the key, I think, underlying LAPs.TERRY:Wellbeing is very individual, so it's maybe the LAPs are helping all lawyers to stay on track with their own wellbeing, whatever that means. Thriving and performing at their highest level. I can envision, what is LAPs, every lawyer did an annual checkup just like you do with your primary doctor?BREE:Great.TERRY:Let's pause, push the pause button, sit down with someone from LAP and just say, "Am I taking care of myself? Am I thriving, or am I merely getting by, or am I really sinking here?" Wouldn't that be great, to just pause once a year and meet with somebody and have that discussion? That would obviously probably take a few more staff, so maybe a little more funding, but that's my big vision.BREE:Great, and in the report, one of the recommendations under that, the LAP section, was to make sure that there adequate funding for the programs to be able to meet the need. A part of that need, it's the calls and it's also be able to get out and do all of this public education that is now being requested. We've seen some successes in that around the country, particularly we had the podcast from Virginia and how they got an increase in funding that, I don't know, tripled?CHRIS:Yes.BREE:What they were able to do and able to hire full-time professional staff, and that's really made all the difference. So there's always that piece too.TERRY:There really is. Two things about that. I need to give a shout out to my Supreme Court for supporting us, fully supporting us with funding, helping us with staff, but also during the pandemic with laptops and speaker or headsets and cameras and all that's necessary to do our work. The other piece is, yes, you have to have a LAP that's well funded because we have people that are out doing these presentations, which you can't just walk away in the middle of a presentation. We have calls coming in and we also have these crisis situations that come in where suddenly one or two staff people may have to just take off and go deal with a crisis situation. Whoever's left has to pick up whatever they were supposed to do that day. So the funding is a tricky... funding and staffing is a sticky, interesting issue.BREE:Yeah, absolutely.CHRIS:I think it's interesting, Terry, that first of all, I love your coffee shop analogy because I do think that we're ultimately trying to create a space that's a very welcoming space. I know how much you have been emboldened in your mission because of the support of your Supreme Court. I almost think of the judiciary as being the baristas in those coffee shops because if they are offering us a wide menu of options and also helping with the systemic change and being supportive, I think so much of what we've been able to achieve in the wellbeing movement has been because of the support of the judiciary. Most notably the state Supreme Courts.TERRY:Absolutely.CHRIS:... and the development of the taskforces. We struck a nerve with a group of individuals who, let's be honest, are the leaders in our profession. The more that they're sitting at the table in that coffee shop as our baristas, I think the more effective we will ultimately be, not just in the success of the Lawyer Assistance Programs but in engineering this culture shift that ultimately is our longterm goal.TERRY:That's absolutely right. We've had such good support institutionally from our court and from our Chief Justice. We also have two of our justices are actually JLAP volunteers. One justice in particular, he goes around and will speak with us and say flat out, "It is okay not to be okay. It happens to everyone from time to time, it is okay to ask for help. We don't expect perfection from you, we expect excellence and that means taking care of yourself." It's fabulous when lawyers here that from that level, that kind of leadership.BREE:What a great message, yeah.TERRY:It is, truly is.CHRIS:Well, this has been... this again, Terry, you are one of the pioneers in our space here, working in the trenches. You've been so giving of your time, talent, resources, expertise. We're thrilled to have you in our midst, we're thrilled to have you on the podcast. We just can't say enough.CHRIS:Bree and I both served on the ABA working group and the amount of work product that came out of that group under your leadership in that short period of time was really impressive.TERRY:Well, thank you to the two of you for taking that ball and then running with it. It's been fabulous and I'm really excited to see where we go in the future with the wellbeing.CHRIS:Awesome, Bree, any closing thoughts?BREE:Just to echo what you've said, Chris. We are so appreciative, Terry. It's great to spend some time with you.CHRIS:All right, so we will be back in a couple weeks with our next podcast. A lot of great things, I think, on the horizon, in the wellbeing movement. Bree and I think, as we think about the long term sustainability of our movement, there's some real exciting things happening. A considerable amount of outreach and conferences on the horizon. So there's just a lot of good stuff happening out there, both at the state level and the national level. So we certainly hope to be a part of being able to promote those things that are on the horizon because it just feels like more and more things are cropping up on the calendar and that's good for ultimately where we're trying to take it.CHRIS:So, for everyone out there, be good, be safe, be well. We will see you on the next podcast. Thanks for joining us. 

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第953期:Life in Another Land

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 25, 2020 3:33


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Adelina: We are sitting here together in Spain but you are far away from your home country. Are you often abroad?Chris: I'm actually all the time abroad, I'm living abroad.Adelina: Oh, so you live in Spain for how long?Chris: Yes, now I'm living in Spain. As I said before, I'm 31 and when I was 18 I finished school and I didn't know exactly which direction to go, what to study, so my mom said as well, "Go to Spain, be there for two/three months, do a summer season and when you're back you will know what to do."Adelina: And what happened?Chris: Well, I guess the typical story. No, I liked the country and I liked the job that I was doing, I wasn't that bad at it so they offered me an extension and in the end I did the whole season.Adelina: Oh, nice. But what this experience make you feel if you go back in time , tell us like a resume about how you feel.Chris: Well, it's the whole learning experience, I mean I was a teen, I mean, I was an adult but still, you come from your mom who does everything for you, does your washing, your everyday life and all of a sudden you have to do that yourself. But on the one hand you like it, but on the other hand the responsibilities all come to you and you might not be all that prepared for it. But then I was in Spain, decided to finish the season. Then they offered me a replacement on another island to do winter season as well so in the end I stayed and stayed and stayed and had to learn myself, to do everything myself, cooking, washing, paperwork, actually everything.Adelina: Well, that's nice. No, that means become an adult.Chris: Yes, it's true but maybe that's not the time that you want to become an adult. I mean, when you're 18 it's the time maybe to enjoy life, to do things you wouldn't do as an adult, but I came to that age quite early and took all the responsibilities so maybe, I'm not going to say I miss that step but I was responsible on an early age, let's say.Adelina: Oh, okay. Well, I don't know, how will you see your life if you will have stayed in Belgium instead?Chris: It probably would have been totally different. I mean, I can't see myself now living in Belgium. I do go once or twice a year to see family and friends but life is different there. I mean, all my friends of my age, they're married, they have their children and going back is still neat and you go out and have a drink but that's it, maybe you see them once or twice a month because they all have their lives so I feel that now my life is going to be here, it'll probably be here for the future.Adelina: Well, that's not bad either, right?Chris: No, no, it's not too bad. So, that's why I'm saying, I mean, if you ask me for a learning experience, this was all complete learning experience from now the last 13 years from when I was 18 and of course there are ups and downs, you fall, you get up. But the good thing is you make your own decisions so whatever happens it's because of you. You fall because it's your fault and you get up because it's your merit. So in the end it's good that you experience this for yourself.Adelina: So with luck, good luck.Chris: Thank you.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第953期:Life in Another Land

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 25, 2020 3:33


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Adelina: We are sitting here together in Spain but you are far away from your home country. Are you often abroad?Chris: I'm actually all the time abroad, I'm living abroad.Adelina: Oh, so you live in Spain for how long?Chris: Yes, now I'm living in Spain. As I said before, I'm 31 and when I was 18 I finished school and I didn't know exactly which direction to go, what to study, so my mom said as well, "Go to Spain, be there for two/three months, do a summer season and when you're back you will know what to do."Adelina: And what happened?Chris: Well, I guess the typical story. No, I liked the country and I liked the job that I was doing, I wasn't that bad at it so they offered me an extension and in the end I did the whole season.Adelina: Oh, nice. But what this experience make you feel if you go back in time , tell us like a resume about how you feel.Chris: Well, it's the whole learning experience, I mean I was a teen, I mean, I was an adult but still, you come from your mom who does everything for you, does your washing, your everyday life and all of a sudden you have to do that yourself. But on the one hand you like it, but on the other hand the responsibilities all come to you and you might not be all that prepared for it. But then I was in Spain, decided to finish the season. Then they offered me a replacement on another island to do winter season as well so in the end I stayed and stayed and stayed and had to learn myself, to do everything myself, cooking, washing, paperwork, actually everything.Adelina: Well, that's nice. No, that means become an adult.Chris: Yes, it's true but maybe that's not the time that you want to become an adult. I mean, when you're 18 it's the time maybe to enjoy life, to do things you wouldn't do as an adult, but I came to that age quite early and took all the responsibilities so maybe, I'm not going to say I miss that step but I was responsible on an early age, let's say.Adelina: Oh, okay. Well, I don't know, how will you see your life if you will have stayed in Belgium instead?Chris: It probably would have been totally different. I mean, I can't see myself now living in Belgium. I do go once or twice a year to see family and friends but life is different there. I mean, all my friends of my age, they're married, they have their children and going back is still neat and you go out and have a drink but that's it, maybe you see them once or twice a month because they all have their lives so I feel that now my life is going to be here, it'll probably be here for the future.Adelina: Well, that's not bad either, right?Chris: No, no, it's not too bad. So, that's why I'm saying, I mean, if you ask me for a learning experience, this was all complete learning experience from now the last 13 years from when I was 18 and of course there are ups and downs, you fall, you get up. But the good thing is you make your own decisions so whatever happens it's because of you. You fall because it's your fault and you get up because it's your merit. So in the end it's good that you experience this for yourself.Adelina: So with luck, good luck.Chris: Thank you.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第953期:Life in Another Land

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 25, 2020 3:33


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Adelina: We are sitting here together in Spain but you are far away from your home country. Are you often abroad?Chris: I'm actually all the time abroad, I'm living abroad.Adelina: Oh, so you live in Spain for how long?Chris: Yes, now I'm living in Spain. As I said before, I'm 31 and when I was 18 I finished school and I didn't know exactly which direction to go, what to study, so my mom said as well, "Go to Spain, be there for two/three months, do a summer season and when you're back you will know what to do."Adelina: And what happened?Chris: Well, I guess the typical story. No, I liked the country and I liked the job that I was doing, I wasn't that bad at it so they offered me an extension and in the end I did the whole season.Adelina: Oh, nice. But what this experience make you feel if you go back in time , tell us like a resume about how you feel.Chris: Well, it's the whole learning experience, I mean I was a teen, I mean, I was an adult but still, you come from your mom who does everything for you, does your washing, your everyday life and all of a sudden you have to do that yourself. But on the one hand you like it, but on the other hand the responsibilities all come to you and you might not be all that prepared for it. But then I was in Spain, decided to finish the season. Then they offered me a replacement on another island to do winter season as well so in the end I stayed and stayed and stayed and had to learn myself, to do everything myself, cooking, washing, paperwork, actually everything.Adelina: Well, that's nice. No, that means become an adult.Chris: Yes, it's true but maybe that's not the time that you want to become an adult. I mean, when you're 18 it's the time maybe to enjoy life, to do things you wouldn't do as an adult, but I came to that age quite early and took all the responsibilities so maybe, I'm not going to say I miss that step but I was responsible on an early age, let's say.Adelina: Oh, okay. Well, I don't know, how will you see your life if you will have stayed in Belgium instead?Chris: It probably would have been totally different. I mean, I can't see myself now living in Belgium. I do go once or twice a year to see family and friends but life is different there. I mean, all my friends of my age, they're married, they have their children and going back is still neat and you go out and have a drink but that's it, maybe you see them once or twice a month because they all have their lives so I feel that now my life is going to be here, it'll probably be here for the future.Adelina: Well, that's not bad either, right?Chris: No, no, it's not too bad. So, that's why I'm saying, I mean, if you ask me for a learning experience, this was all complete learning experience from now the last 13 years from when I was 18 and of course there are ups and downs, you fall, you get up. But the good thing is you make your own decisions so whatever happens it's because of you. You fall because it's your fault and you get up because it's your merit. So in the end it's good that you experience this for yourself.Adelina: So with luck, good luck.Chris: Thank you.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第947期:Evaluating the Euro

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 19, 2020 4:00


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Ade: Good morning Chris. Tell us, where do you come from?Chris: I'm from Antwerp in Belgium.Ade: Wow! I've never met anyone from Belgium, tell me something about it.Chris: You've never met anyone from Belgium? Well it's just actually a pretty small country in Western Europe, about 11 million inhabitants and very famous for its chocolate. You must have heard about Belgian chocolate. And of course most famous cities, I would say Antwerp, Brugge and of course the capital, Brussels.Ade: Oh yeah, Brussels, yes, the heart of Europe.Chris: Yes indeed, that's what they say, the heart of Europe. It's also the capital of Europe and where all the ministers come together like ... have you ever heard of the NATO?Ade: Of course I did, I'm a translator.Chris: So what do you mean, you translated for them?Ade: No, I wish, there you can make a lot of money. But oh yes, a lot of big decisions are made there regarding Europe.Chris: Oh yes, that's right, a lot of big decisions, some good decisions but also some not that good decisions, let's say.Ade: Tell me what's your opinion about the euro and how does affect on the economy?Chris: The euro, well that's a big question. I mean I think there's a lot of different opinions about the euro and also not all countries have agreed on that. There are still a few missing, like the big ... how you say it ... the big United Kingdom, I mean they still didn't join it and I don't think they will ever join. It's now 12 or, yeah, 11 years ago it started, in 2002, the 1st January with only 12 countries agreeing, then a year later, 13. Today there are 17, so there are still 10 missings. And they haven't decided yet whether to join the euro or not. And then, on the other hand, there's countries that are in the Eurozone that are about to collapse, so many people think the euro would eventually collapse. The more troubled Eurozone like Greece, they will have to leave the euro and eventually go back to their own currency. Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, eventually they'll have to leave the euro and go back to their own currency. I mean the stronger countries, they will get tired of standing up for the weaker ones that are bringing the economy down. It will be in the end too much to bear and citizens will end up insisting they leave. So as to have more control over their own finances. I mean what's going on now in Greece, paying, this cannot go on for much longer. For the northern countries, the euro does work. And the euro would be even stronger with full-federalization. The northern countries will survive, but the southern countries will have to go back to their own original currency and rely on tourism for their growth. And then you have the Eastern countries who wanted to join the euro, but they will have to think twice before doing that.Ade: So what do you think about the UK, do you think they should join us or stay the way they are?Chris: The UK, they never had any plans to join the euro. The UK is a big powerhouse and if eventually, the euro collapses, they will benefit from it. I mean the euro has caused job destruction, recession, the UK were smart and they shouldn't join the euro, they should stay with their pound the way they are doing.Ade: Yes, that's true. Thanks for sharing your opinions with us today Chris.Chris: Sure, no problem.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第947期:Evaluating the Euro

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 19, 2020 4:00


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Ade: Good morning Chris. Tell us, where do you come from?Chris: I'm from Antwerp in Belgium.Ade: Wow! I've never met anyone from Belgium, tell me something about it.Chris: You've never met anyone from Belgium? Well it's just actually a pretty small country in Western Europe, about 11 million inhabitants and very famous for its chocolate. You must have heard about Belgian chocolate. And of course most famous cities, I would say Antwerp, Brugge and of course the capital, Brussels.Ade: Oh yeah, Brussels, yes, the heart of Europe.Chris: Yes indeed, that's what they say, the heart of Europe. It's also the capital of Europe and where all the ministers come together like ... have you ever heard of the NATO?Ade: Of course I did, I'm a translator.Chris: So what do you mean, you translated for them?Ade: No, I wish, there you can make a lot of money. But oh yes, a lot of big decisions are made there regarding Europe.Chris: Oh yes, that's right, a lot of big decisions, some good decisions but also some not that good decisions, let's say.Ade: Tell me what's your opinion about the euro and how does affect on the economy?Chris: The euro, well that's a big question. I mean I think there's a lot of different opinions about the euro and also not all countries have agreed on that. There are still a few missing, like the big ... how you say it ... the big United Kingdom, I mean they still didn't join it and I don't think they will ever join. It's now 12 or, yeah, 11 years ago it started, in 2002, the 1st January with only 12 countries agreeing, then a year later, 13. Today there are 17, so there are still 10 missings. And they haven't decided yet whether to join the euro or not. And then, on the other hand, there's countries that are in the Eurozone that are about to collapse, so many people think the euro would eventually collapse. The more troubled Eurozone like Greece, they will have to leave the euro and eventually go back to their own currency. Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, eventually they'll have to leave the euro and go back to their own currency. I mean the stronger countries, they will get tired of standing up for the weaker ones that are bringing the economy down. It will be in the end too much to bear and citizens will end up insisting they leave. So as to have more control over their own finances. I mean what's going on now in Greece, paying, this cannot go on for much longer. For the northern countries, the euro does work. And the euro would be even stronger with full-federalization. The northern countries will survive, but the southern countries will have to go back to their own original currency and rely on tourism for their growth. And then you have the Eastern countries who wanted to join the euro, but they will have to think twice before doing that.Ade: So what do you think about the UK, do you think they should join us or stay the way they are?Chris: The UK, they never had any plans to join the euro. The UK is a big powerhouse and if eventually, the euro collapses, they will benefit from it. I mean the euro has caused job destruction, recession, the UK were smart and they shouldn't join the euro, they should stay with their pound the way they are doing.Ade: Yes, that's true. Thanks for sharing your opinions with us today Chris.Chris: Sure, no problem.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第947期:Evaluating the Euro

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 19, 2020 4:00


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Ade: Good morning Chris. Tell us, where do you come from?Chris: I'm from Antwerp in Belgium.Ade: Wow! I've never met anyone from Belgium, tell me something about it.Chris: You've never met anyone from Belgium? Well it's just actually a pretty small country in Western Europe, about 11 million inhabitants and very famous for its chocolate. You must have heard about Belgian chocolate. And of course most famous cities, I would say Antwerp, Brugge and of course the capital, Brussels.Ade: Oh yeah, Brussels, yes, the heart of Europe.Chris: Yes indeed, that's what they say, the heart of Europe. It's also the capital of Europe and where all the ministers come together like ... have you ever heard of the NATO?Ade: Of course I did, I'm a translator.Chris: So what do you mean, you translated for them?Ade: No, I wish, there you can make a lot of money. But oh yes, a lot of big decisions are made there regarding Europe.Chris: Oh yes, that's right, a lot of big decisions, some good decisions but also some not that good decisions, let's say.Ade: Tell me what's your opinion about the euro and how does affect on the economy?Chris: The euro, well that's a big question. I mean I think there's a lot of different opinions about the euro and also not all countries have agreed on that. There are still a few missing, like the big ... how you say it ... the big United Kingdom, I mean they still didn't join it and I don't think they will ever join. It's now 12 or, yeah, 11 years ago it started, in 2002, the 1st January with only 12 countries agreeing, then a year later, 13. Today there are 17, so there are still 10 missings. And they haven't decided yet whether to join the euro or not. And then, on the other hand, there's countries that are in the Eurozone that are about to collapse, so many people think the euro would eventually collapse. The more troubled Eurozone like Greece, they will have to leave the euro and eventually go back to their own currency. Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, eventually they'll have to leave the euro and go back to their own currency. I mean the stronger countries, they will get tired of standing up for the weaker ones that are bringing the economy down. It will be in the end too much to bear and citizens will end up insisting they leave. So as to have more control over their own finances. I mean what's going on now in Greece, paying, this cannot go on for much longer. For the northern countries, the euro does work. And the euro would be even stronger with full-federalization. The northern countries will survive, but the southern countries will have to go back to their own original currency and rely on tourism for their growth. And then you have the Eastern countries who wanted to join the euro, but they will have to think twice before doing that.Ade: So what do you think about the UK, do you think they should join us or stay the way they are?Chris: The UK, they never had any plans to join the euro. The UK is a big powerhouse and if eventually, the euro collapses, they will benefit from it. I mean the euro has caused job destruction, recession, the UK were smart and they shouldn't join the euro, they should stay with their pound the way they are doing.Ade: Yes, that's true. Thanks for sharing your opinions with us today Chris.Chris: Sure, no problem.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第946期:European Cities

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 18, 2020 5:27


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Chris: So Adelina, that's how you say, right, Adelina?Ade: Actually everybody calls me Ade.Chris: Well that's fine. So Ade, tell me what are your favorite cities in Europe?Ade: Well, first of all, I have to say I like other continents a lot more than Europe. But if I have to choose one city I will say definitely London.Chris: Actually I don't see you as a London girl.Ade: And why not? I was living in London four years and actually it's a city full of life. You can find whatever you want in there, clubbing, shopping, culture, it's a melting pot.Chris: A melting pot?Ade: Yes, melting pot. It's a very common expression, all British use it. They refer to London as a melting pot because of all the nationalities living there. There are so many people for all around the world that actually is weird if you find an English person living in London.Chris: Okay, interesting. I actually never heard of that expression. So you just said you lived there for four years, but then tell me, what was the purpose of that, did you live there for work, maybe a boyfriend?Ade: Boyfriend? No, no boyfriend. I don't like English guys. But the thing is that I just went there to spend a summer and improve my English. But after a while, I fell in love with the city and I decided to stay there a little bit longer. And then I thought, why not profit some time there and do something. So I started MA in audiovisual translation. And that was one year long. So actually I was living there for four years and I did also some waitressing jobs, just to get some extra money and do a living there, because actually London is a very expensive city, so.Chris: Oh yes, I totally understand you. I was there on holidays as well. So actually now do you think you could live there again?Ade: Not at all, that was a chapter of my life that has completely ended. Now I just chase the sun.Chris: Oh yes, also not a bad idea. So tell me, what about other cities, are there other cities that you specially like in Europe?Ade: Yes, Ibiza in Spain is one of my favorites.Chris: Wow, Ibiza! Well actually when you talk about Ibiza the first thing that comes up in my mind is partying, clubbing. Was that the idea of going to Ibiza?Ade: No, not at all. Everybody is so wrong about Ibiza. Ibiza is worldwide known about clubbing and parties and DJs. But actually Ibiza is a tiny island but it has so much to offer, for example, the sunsets, there are these amazing sunsets and these hiding places where you can just relax and enjoy the nature.Chris: Oh yes, it's true, sunsets, I heard of its famous sunsets on Ibiza. So actually I think of going to Mallorca this summer and I might go a few days to see Ibiza. Can you tell me some famous places to see one of the best sunsets there?Ade: Don't go to Cafe del Mar, for example, it's a popular one but you don't have the best sunset there. There is a place named Cala Conta and there is a bar there called Sunset Ashram, that is the best place.Chris: Sounds great. Thanks for the tip. I will tell you about my experience when I'm back again. By the way, should I start going to the gym and buy me one of these little swim shorts like the Italians all at the beach in Ibiza?Ade: Don't be a fool. But well, you just said, Italy is also a great place and I love Italy. Actually Florence is also one of my favorite cities in Europe.Chris: Oh yes, that's true, I hear a lot of people talking so good about Florence. But as well another city I never went to.Ade: You should, actually Florence is like going back in time 100 years. It's full of art and the duomo is the greatest part. And also you can find Michelangelo and of course the food, it's very nice food like in Spain, you can really enjoy there. It's a small city but it's very, very authentic.Chris: Wow! It seems you've been to quite a lot of places already in Europe.Ade: Not only in Europe, I'm a traveler, I'm a nomad. The more I travel the wiser I get.Chris: Yes indeed, that's what they say at least. Well thank you very much Ade.Ade: Thanks to you, it was a pleasure.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第946期:European Cities

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 18, 2020 5:27


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Chris: So Adelina, that's how you say, right, Adelina?Ade: Actually everybody calls me Ade.Chris: Well that's fine. So Ade, tell me what are your favorite cities in Europe?Ade: Well, first of all, I have to say I like other continents a lot more than Europe. But if I have to choose one city I will say definitely London.Chris: Actually I don't see you as a London girl.Ade: And why not? I was living in London four years and actually it's a city full of life. You can find whatever you want in there, clubbing, shopping, culture, it's a melting pot.Chris: A melting pot?Ade: Yes, melting pot. It's a very common expression, all British use it. They refer to London as a melting pot because of all the nationalities living there. There are so many people for all around the world that actually is weird if you find an English person living in London.Chris: Okay, interesting. I actually never heard of that expression. So you just said you lived there for four years, but then tell me, what was the purpose of that, did you live there for work, maybe a boyfriend?Ade: Boyfriend? No, no boyfriend. I don't like English guys. But the thing is that I just went there to spend a summer and improve my English. But after a while, I fell in love with the city and I decided to stay there a little bit longer. And then I thought, why not profit some time there and do something. So I started MA in audiovisual translation. And that was one year long. So actually I was living there for four years and I did also some waitressing jobs, just to get some extra money and do a living there, because actually London is a very expensive city, so.Chris: Oh yes, I totally understand you. I was there on holidays as well. So actually now do you think you could live there again?Ade: Not at all, that was a chapter of my life that has completely ended. Now I just chase the sun.Chris: Oh yes, also not a bad idea. So tell me, what about other cities, are there other cities that you specially like in Europe?Ade: Yes, Ibiza in Spain is one of my favorites.Chris: Wow, Ibiza! Well actually when you talk about Ibiza the first thing that comes up in my mind is partying, clubbing. Was that the idea of going to Ibiza?Ade: No, not at all. Everybody is so wrong about Ibiza. Ibiza is worldwide known about clubbing and parties and DJs. But actually Ibiza is a tiny island but it has so much to offer, for example, the sunsets, there are these amazing sunsets and these hiding places where you can just relax and enjoy the nature.Chris: Oh yes, it's true, sunsets, I heard of its famous sunsets on Ibiza. So actually I think of going to Mallorca this summer and I might go a few days to see Ibiza. Can you tell me some famous places to see one of the best sunsets there?Ade: Don't go to Cafe del Mar, for example, it's a popular one but you don't have the best sunset there. There is a place named Cala Conta and there is a bar there called Sunset Ashram, that is the best place.Chris: Sounds great. Thanks for the tip. I will tell you about my experience when I'm back again. By the way, should I start going to the gym and buy me one of these little swim shorts like the Italians all at the beach in Ibiza?Ade: Don't be a fool. But well, you just said, Italy is also a great place and I love Italy. Actually Florence is also one of my favorite cities in Europe.Chris: Oh yes, that's true, I hear a lot of people talking so good about Florence. But as well another city I never went to.Ade: You should, actually Florence is like going back in time 100 years. It's full of art and the duomo is the greatest part. And also you can find Michelangelo and of course the food, it's very nice food like in Spain, you can really enjoy there. It's a small city but it's very, very authentic.Chris: Wow! It seems you've been to quite a lot of places already in Europe.Ade: Not only in Europe, I'm a traveler, I'm a nomad. The more I travel the wiser I get.Chris: Yes indeed, that's what they say at least. Well thank you very much Ade.Ade: Thanks to you, it was a pleasure.

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟
第946期:European Cities

英语每日一听 | 每天少于5分钟

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 18, 2020 5:27


》》》》》》一键领取入口《《《《《《更多英语知识,请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Chris: So Adelina, that's how you say, right, Adelina?Ade: Actually everybody calls me Ade.Chris: Well that's fine. So Ade, tell me what are your favorite cities in Europe?Ade: Well, first of all, I have to say I like other continents a lot more than Europe. But if I have to choose one city I will say definitely London.Chris: Actually I don't see you as a London girl.Ade: And why not? I was living in London four years and actually it's a city full of life. You can find whatever you want in there, clubbing, shopping, culture, it's a melting pot.Chris: A melting pot?Ade: Yes, melting pot. It's a very common expression, all British use it. They refer to London as a melting pot because of all the nationalities living there. There are so many people for all around the world that actually is weird if you find an English person living in London.Chris: Okay, interesting. I actually never heard of that expression. So you just said you lived there for four years, but then tell me, what was the purpose of that, did you live there for work, maybe a boyfriend?Ade: Boyfriend? No, no boyfriend. I don't like English guys. But the thing is that I just went there to spend a summer and improve my English. But after a while, I fell in love with the city and I decided to stay there a little bit longer. And then I thought, why not profit some time there and do something. So I started MA in audiovisual translation. And that was one year long. So actually I was living there for four years and I did also some waitressing jobs, just to get some extra money and do a living there, because actually London is a very expensive city, so.Chris: Oh yes, I totally understand you. I was there on holidays as well. So actually now do you think you could live there again?Ade: Not at all, that was a chapter of my life that has completely ended. Now I just chase the sun.Chris: Oh yes, also not a bad idea. So tell me, what about other cities, are there other cities that you specially like in Europe?Ade: Yes, Ibiza in Spain is one of my favorites.Chris: Wow, Ibiza! Well actually when you talk about Ibiza the first thing that comes up in my mind is partying, clubbing. Was that the idea of going to Ibiza?Ade: No, not at all. Everybody is so wrong about Ibiza. Ibiza is worldwide known about clubbing and parties and DJs. But actually Ibiza is a tiny island but it has so much to offer, for example, the sunsets, there are these amazing sunsets and these hiding places where you can just relax and enjoy the nature.Chris: Oh yes, it's true, sunsets, I heard of its famous sunsets on Ibiza. So actually I think of going to Mallorca this summer and I might go a few days to see Ibiza. Can you tell me some famous places to see one of the best sunsets there?Ade: Don't go to Cafe del Mar, for example, it's a popular one but you don't have the best sunset there. There is a place named Cala Conta and there is a bar there called Sunset Ashram, that is the best place.Chris: Sounds great. Thanks for the tip. I will tell you about my experience when I'm back again. By the way, should I start going to the gym and buy me one of these little swim shorts like the Italians all at the beach in Ibiza?Ade: Don't be a fool. But well, you just said, Italy is also a great place and I love Italy. Actually Florence is also one of my favorite cities in Europe.Chris: Oh yes, that's true, I hear a lot of people talking so good about Florence. But as well another city I never went to.Ade: You should, actually Florence is like going back in time 100 years. It's full of art and the duomo is the greatest part. And also you can find Michelangelo and of course the food, it's very nice food like in Spain, you can really enjoy there. It's a small city but it's very, very authentic.Chris: Wow! It seems you've been to quite a lot of places already in Europe.Ade: Not only in Europe, I'm a traveler, I'm a nomad. The more I travel the wiser I get.Chris: Yes indeed, that's what they say at least. Well thank you very much Ade.Ade: Thanks to you, it was a pleasure.

Happy Market Research Podcast
MrWeb Series – Chris Havemann on Insight in the Mobile Age

Happy Market Research Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 11, 2020 32:33


This episode is in partnership with MrWeb’s Insight in the Mobile Age segment.  My guest today is Chris Havemann, CEO of RealityMine. Founded in 2012, RealityMine is a passive metering technology, enabling the tracking of consumers on multiple devices—across all major platforms—providing a holistic view of their daily lives. Headquartered in Manchester, England, with offices in London and Sydney. Prior to joining RealityMine, Chris was the CEO of Rated People and the co-founder and CEO of Research Now. Find Chris Online: Website: https://www.realitymine.com/  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chris-havemann-19a04b8/ Find Jamin Online: Email: jamin@happymr.com  LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jaminbrazil  Twitter: www.twitter.com/jaminbrazil   Find Us Online:  Twitter: www.twitter.com/happymrxp   LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/happymarketresearch   Facebook: www.facebook.com/happymrxp   Website: www.happymr.com   Music:“Clap Along” by Auditionauti: https://audionautix.com [00:00:00] Jamin: Hi, I'm Jamin Brazil. You're listening to the Happy Market Research Podcast. My guest today is Chris Havemann, CEO of RealityMine. Founded in 2012, RealityMine is a passive metering technology enabling the tracking of consumers on multiple devices across all major platforms, providing a holistic view of their daily lives. RealityMine is headquartered in Manchester, England with offices in London and Sydney. Prior to joining RealityMine, Chris was the CEO of Rated People and the cofounder and CEO of Research Now. Chris, thank you so much for joining me on the Happy Market Research Podcast. [00:00:37] Chris: My pleasure, Jamin. Great to be here. [00:00:40] Jamin: So I'd like to start out with a little bit of context as usual. Maybe you could tell us a little bit about your parents and how they inform what you do today. [00:00:47] Chris: It's a really interesting question. Without wishing to disrespect my parents, just to give you an idea, my mom was a housewife and my stepdad was a university professor. And in fact, I don't think I do take much inspiration career-wise from what they did. If anything, I think my inspiration comes from my grandfather, who was a self-made entrepreneur. The only boss he ever had, he says - he used to say was the RAF during the second World War. And I think that seeded somewhere in me an entrepreneurial gene that led to me cofounding Research Now and other things in the world of market research. [00:01:24] Jamin: Did you spend a lot of time with your grandfather? [00:01:27] Chris: Yes, I did. I actually left my parents' home on my 15th birthday. At the time we were living in Canada, and I moved across the Atlantic back to where I was born in England. And I lived with my grandparents, so my sort of formative teenage years or late teenage years were living with my grandparents. [00:01:42] Jamin: That's super interesting because I have a similar story. It's not about me, sorry, but just from a connection perspective, I did a similar thing where I moved out of my parents' in my mid-teens and in with my grandparents. And my grandfather was instrumental in my life in a very similar way as an entrepreneur, and he had his hands in lots of different things from garden farming to farmers market-type things to dairies, importing and exporting and whatnot. And so is very - I think that the entrepreneurial gene for me really came from his mentorship, and yes. So was he part of or around when you started Research Now? [00:02:33] Chris: Yes, he was. He's dead now because we started Research Now, myself and Andrew Cooper way back in 2000 actually, or 2003 when we rebranded as Research Now. And he was alive for about another seven or eight years after that, so he saw the early struggle, which I think all entrepreneurs go through. But also, I'm very pleased to be conscious that he also saw the early successes,

/Film Daily
Cathy Yan on Birds of Prey, Plus: Best Picture Frontrunner, Chris Pratt Going Back to TV, and More

/Film Daily

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 4, 2020 35:16


On the February 4, 2020 episode of /Film Daily, /Film senior writer Ben Pearson is joined by /Film writer Hoai-Tran Bui to discuss the latest film and TV news, including the favorite to win Best Picture at the Oscars, Chris Pratt returning to television, AppleTV+ and Disney+ subscription numbers, and Chris Rock’s Saw reboot getting a title. And in our Feature Presentation, HT will tell us about her experience at the London premiere and junket for WB’s Birds of Prey.   Opening Banter:   In The News: HT: ‘1917’ is the Favorite to Win Best Picture at the 2020 Oscars, According to Oddsmakers Ben: ‘The Terminal List’: Chris Pratt Returning to Television for Director Antoine Fuqua HT: Only 10% of Eligible Apple Customers Have Signed Up for AppleTV+ Ben (og Brad): Disney+ Has Raked in Over 25 Million Subscribers Since Launching Last Fall, But Will They Stick Around? Ben (og Chris): Yes, Chris Rock’s ‘Saw’ Reboot Really is Titled ‘Spiral: From the Book of Saw’   In our Feature Presentation: How a Tiny Moment Between Harley Quinn and Black Canary Became a Defining Moment in ‘Birds of Prey’ Why ‘Birds of Prey’ Took Creative Liberties With Its Comic Book Characters How Jackie Chan and ‘John Wick’ Inspired the Action Sequences in ‘Birds of Prey’ Cathy Yan Interview   Other Articles Mentioned:   All the other stuff you need to know: You can find more about all the stories we mentioned on today’s show at slashfilm.com, and linked inside the show notes. /Film Daily is published every weekday, bringing you the most exciting news from the world of movies and television as well as deeper dives into the great features from slashfilm.com.  You can subscribe to /Film Daily on iTunes, Google Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the popular podcast apps (RSS).  Send your feedback, questions, comments and concerns to us at peter@slashfilm.com. Please leave your name and general geographic location in case we mention the e-mail on the air. Please rate and review the podcast on iTunes, tell your friends and spread the word!  Thanks to Sam Hume for our logo.

PROACTIVE Podcast with MeMedia
Why Gen x, y, z are Moving From Broadcast Media to Online - Get Fact Up Episode 62

PROACTIVE Podcast with MeMedia

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 29, 2020 21:44


Published Sep 29, 2017 Chris: Hey world, Chris Hogan coming to you live from MeMedia Studio here in Burleigh Heads for 'Get Fact Up'. The new and improved version, delivering more content to you regularly, is in our vodcasting studio or podcasting studio. You can hire it out at Burleigh Heads as well, just enquire on our website. So here we are. Hanging on, Andrew? Andrew: Yeah, I'm good. Just had a double strength decaf. Chris: That did nothing. Andrew: Sorry, I was sitting on that one for a bit, sorry. Keep going. Chris: As you can see, we're keeping it light and humorous. So today we want to talk about the transition that's happening from broadcast, or traditional media, to online media. Basically, the millennials are moving away from traditional media and moving to social channels and whatnot for entertainment. Andrew: Well, the interesting thing about that is how we're delivering this today which, in my opinion, is shifting more towards live and daily content, and those sorts of things are happening on social. So what better way to deliver 'Get Fact Up' than through live video? Chris: Cool. Andrew: And that's what we're trying. Chris: So what are the channels that are actually performing best when it comes to live video? Andrew: Well, it's Facebook, YouTube, and then you've got other things like Instagram, which is obviously Facebook as well. It's like Facebook in your pocket, I guess you could say. And then, what else have you got? You've got Periscope. No one really uses Periscope. Chris: And also LinkedIn is coming out with their new update to allow you to shoot live video through their mobile app, and upload videos through the desktop. Andrew: Yep, LinkedIn always liked to party. But they're doing their thing. And then you've got things like Snapchat and all that, but from what I've heard, Snapchat's not gonna be around much longer. So let's not worry about that too much. Chris: Yeah, but those stories that are up there for 24 hours, they just aren't that interesting to anybody anymore. Especially the brands, I think, because ... Andrew: Yeah, it was a toy. People are getting past it. I don't know anyone that's really using Snapchat in that way anymore. And now there's also Instagram which has the same feature. Facebook has the same feature. It's really devalued that whole disposable story thing quite a bit. Chris: So with Facebook owning Instagram, we've seen a lot of changes in Instagram as well. They've actually brought in a lot of the features, their filters and all those overlays that Snapchat ... someone invented. And Facebook have kind of integrated those into both Facebook and Instagram. And Instagram have also updated their app, or their algorithm, to decrease the organic reach that people are getting to grow their channels. What problems does that present to newcomers to Instagram, do you think? Andrew: Well, I think when it went at a really saturated ... I don't want to call it a marketplace, because Instagram's not a marketplace. Chris: Channel. Andrew: It's a really saturated channel now. When I first started using Instagram and things like that, you could really grow a channel. You could easily get to two thousand followers, is that what we call them on Instagram? Yeah? Two thousand followers, just through organic means. Just through interacting with other people, and stuff like that. You just can't do it now. You don't get that sort of traction with posts and things like that anymore. You used to be able to put a post up and get two hundred likes, just by getting the right hashtag. That just doesn't happen now. You don't get that increase of followers, or that sort of thing. It's really just a feed now, and it's so saturated that if you're coming in with a unique idea, everyone is sort of doing that same thing. Everyone's coming in with a razor-sharp unique idea. You know, like the yoga paddle boarders and stuff like that. Everyone's coming in with something like that, it's just hypersaturation in there now. That's just how I feel about Instagram. Chris: We've talked about this many times, but I'm challenged by using Instagram due to the fact that when you're actually posting something, you can't actually put a link in the post, therefore not being able to redirect people off the channel onto your own. And here at MeMedia, we do a lot of content creation. We do a lot of marketing for clients. We call it integrated digital marketing. So essentially what we're doing is we're creating that content, we're using the social channels to distribute that content, and get traffic back to the website. That's an awesome indicator to Google to boost your SEO, boost your Google rankings. If you can't do that post on Instagram and actually put a link in the post and get the traffic to your website, the only way you can do that now is through using their advertising. Andrew: Using it in the profile, which is not helpful. Yeah. Chris: Or tell people to click on the link in the profile. Exactly. Not helpful. So to me, Instagram's not a great thing to use for SEO, for promoting people to come to your website, which is the media that you own. Obviously, when you're on these channels, you're only renting space. You know? And with Facebook updating algorithms, it's ... Andrew: You can't really turn that into leads, per se. You can use Instagram to get direct messages and stuff like that, but who wants to be walking around with their phone all the time replying to messages and things like that as a form of inquiry? You can't get calls and things off Instagram the way you can, unless you're doing ads and things. It's not getting it back to your website. Not in a meaningful way, anyway. Chris: They're actually using ads. Andrew: But it is a brand tool. And the people that do it well, the industries that do it well, things like cafes and clothing and things like that. But you know, they're getting their brand out there, and people see this, and they're like "I want that," and then they can go and find it. That doesn't work for everyone, that sort of effect on brand awareness doesn't work for everyone. You can't see a picture on Instagram of, for example, laser eye surgery, and think "that looks good. I'll just go and get that today." It doesn't work for everyone. Chris: So let's talk about what's happening with the aspirational youth and the Gen X, Y, Z. Basically, how they're becoming disengaged with traditional advertising. 99% of millennials are actually disengaged with traditional advertising. So trying to replicate traditional advertising methods on social channels isn't really that effective. Given that 55% of people watch videos online every day, there is this huge, I guess, shift from everyone to produce videos. Once again, they're trying to take that traditional ad that they've done previously ... Andrew: Ah, we're talking about traditional media, yeah. Chris: Yeah. They've done in traditional media ... Andrew: They're failing so hard. It's like they're jumping on these social channels and they're like "Great. So we use the TV formula on social media." And everyone goes, "I don't want to watch TV on Facebook. Goodbye." Or "I don't want to watch TV ads on Facebook, see you later." Chris: I don't even want to watch ads! Andrew: Well, yeah. And that's the thing. You have to be very creative with these new formats now. You have to really think around, okay, the people that are watching these formats, they're escaping TV. So if we come at them with ads, they're not gonna react well to it. Because they're ignoring TV and they're going to Facebook or Instagram or YouTube or something like that. Last thing they want is TV ads coming at them, because that's what they've come from. Chris: So yeah, cutting to that "Proudly brought to you by your sponsor, let's listen to a message from our sponsors," all of that type of messaging just isn't gonna work. And the reason why we're focused on millennials and these aspirational youth is because the global workforce by 2025 is gonna have 8% baby boomers, 28% Gen X, 33% Gen Y, and 31% Gen Z. So that's our audience. Andrew: It's all social media generations now, from here on in. Chris: Absolutely. Andrew: They're not going to react to a straight up sponsorship message, or a straight up advert. But the thing that's happening now is like these online sponsorship messages that happen in podcasts and things, where they just say "hey look, our podcast is funded by Rode Microphones or something like that." And people expect that. They know that you have to be able to make money out of these things. Chris: That's right. Then it comes down to authenticity. And one thing that you'll notice when you, or that we definitely notice, is that with advertising that's used in podcasts, the host of the show is actually delivering the message from their point of view. So like Andrew just said, we are proudly brought to you by one of our sponsors, Rode Microphones. And this kit is Rode Microphones kit. And it's bloody awesome! So we can actually say that, because we've used the product. Andrew: And we're literally using it right now. Chris: That's right. And just out of nowhere, we actually have extra kit if you want to do more podcast from this studio and have more people sitting at this table. So where to now? We're seeing these massive shifts to video, massive shift to live video, and what do we want to see when we're doing that? What are some of the ... we want to see reach, we want to see video views, and we want to see engagement. Andrew: The funny thing there is where it comes back to promotion. So we already know that people like live video. But you don't get an awful lot of rich engagement when the live video's happening. So with everything, eventually, it inevitably comes down to the paid promotion. Facebook used to be great. You put something on your Facebook page, or your Facebook page, followers saw it. Now, what percentage is it now? Chris: One? Andrew: It's like 1%? Chris: Organic, yeah. 1% organic. Andrew: That's so weak. So all of these new formats, they're great while they're happening and people think they're exciting, but then it becomes commonplace, and we need to look at the promotion side of things. And that's where it's a real problem. The two big contenders right now are YouTube and Facebook for the live video, and both of them had terrible paid promotion. It doesn't even exist, really. They both kind of, in their help, I'll just bring it up now. YouTube, for example, says during your event, yeah, you can create a highlight clip after your event. Or before your event get your followers excited, etc. But there's nothing for promotion of a live stream. I think you said Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg mentioned something at their F8 conference? Chris: Don't quote me on this, but it is a rumour that promotion of live video during the live stream is going to be available sometime in the not too distant future. There's a whole realm of issues that could present. Andrew: Yeah! Like, obviously it needs to happen because it's what people are getting excited about. It's where they're moving, so we have to be able to promote it. But what happens then? Because Facebook are kind of liable. They review ads, so we put like 200 ads up and they'll go through them and sixty might get through because of various reasons. How do they monitor the live video? So if someone says "I'm gonna do a video about this," but then it's about something else and it offends everyone, it looks bad for, say, Facebook or YouTube, so. Chris: Well that's where I think their feature that they've got now for videos that are uploaded is that they do have the ability for Facebook to process your captions. So for those that don't know, captions mean subtitles that appear at the bottom. That's pretty amazing technology. Obviously, that's done by a machine. And it's not 100% accurate, in fact it needs a lot of work. But if they have the ability to do that live, then potentially they can kick out those profanities and ... Andrew: Flagging things, and then someone comes in and manually watches it. Because Facebook already do that. What I've had explained to me by someone that does the forums on Facebook, there's an automatic review process, and that's what determines if your ads go live or not. And then if things get flagged, someone manually reviews it, so it's like a two step process. I think it'll be something like that. They're looking for profanity or things like that, and then someone will come in and check out that stream, maybe they check what the reactions are because people can react as they go, they can say "Like this, hate this." Maybe if it's too many people disliking it or having negative reactions, then someone jumps in. They'll have to find a solution around that if they want to monetise it, but they will monetise it because they love, especially Facebook, love monetising things. Chris: Of course, of course they do. Andrew: YouTube I'm not sure exactly how they're gonna do it. Chris: One of the most amazing things is, when we're actually creating content for our clients, is the reach and engagement that we get, and the video views that we're getting for our clients here at MeMedia. But one thing that's been amazing, and that's in a new venture that we've co-founded with two other directors, Leigh Kelson and Scott Burke, for Beach City, is amazing reach. Which is 1.8 million reach, 434,000 video views, and 109,000 post engagements on those videos. Andrew: And that's mostly with live video? Chris: Yes. All live video. Truly spectacular engagement, and that's the key metric that we're looking at there. Supposedly, 10% is excellent engagement, and we're actually getting over 20%. Given the multitude of places where we can post video, which we spoke about before, Facebook's an awesome place to get reach and engagement. People are spending less time actually viewing the videos on Facebook than they are on YouTube. Andrew: Definitely, significantly less. But YouTube's a video platform, so people are expecting it. There's still this sort of interrupted feeling for the live video on Facebook, because you get that notification saying "so-and-so's live." Some people just don't react so well to it. Some people are into it. Facebook's a feed of the content you're interested in there. So sometimes, "so-and-so's live" could be disruptive to someone just wanting to look at memes or something like that. But YouTube? Definitely, people are ready for live video on YouTube. Chris: There's a huge reason to post on YouTube, as we've discussed many times, and the reason why we post on YouTube is that obviously, Google doesn't crawl through Facebook's content to list it in the search engine results pages, which is the Google listings when you do a search. Whereas when you do post on YouTube, then there's an opportunity for those videos to appear in the search. Andrew: And that's something we often say to clients, it's like if you can't get a page rank for something because your competitors have great content for something, do they have videos? Probably not. Google's gonna favour videos, because they own YouTube. So that's a good way to sneak past. It's always a good reason to be putting videos on YouTube. Chris: And there's so many different ways you can create videos, whether it's slideshows or chats or podcasts. Andrew: Exactly. The other thing that's good about YouTube is it's always been a video platform, so it's more like a library than Facebook. Facebook's a feed, so things get lost if you post a lot. Things'll just disappear back. And people don't really go backwards through your feed too much. They might see something they like, and then they'll think "okay, let's look at old videos." It's not as easy to do with Facebook, but if someone sees something they like on YouTube, they can subscribe to you. They can get all your new videos. They can look at all your archived videos. It's a lot more organised for that sort of thing. But, the connectivity of people's not there on YouTube. Chris: No, that's right. Because I mean, there's just not as many people there. With Facebook having two billion plus monthly users ... Andrew: Yes. Let's bring that up. Chris: Over two billion monthly active Facebook users, with ages 25 to 34 making up 29% of those users worldwide. Andrew: Yeah, so this is all the people we're talking about. They're Gen Y, X, and millennials. They're all there, and they're online all the time. Something like 28 times a day someone checks their Facebook, on average. Chris: Of course. Andrew: In these generations. Chris: We're highly addicted beings and we really had no chance when the smartphone came around, to not be addicted according to Simon Sinek, the famous author. Some other stats. Like we said, the decline of broadcast TV. 24% decline in live TV for 18 to 24 year olds since 2016. There's a clear shift to social. There's a clear shift to YouTube. There's a clear shift to online. There's a clear shift in your very home, watching multi devices being used in the same room while the TV is still on, but just playing some average stuff in the background, to put it nicely. Andrew: That's, yeah. That's on a timeline that you can't really control. Chris: Yeah, so everything's on demand. 65% of global media consumers choose video on demand. Far out. Andrew: We're not even considering things like Netflix, the actual streaming TV services. Half the time when someone's saying TV, they actually mean Netflix. "I watched TV last night." They watched Netflix last night. That's another thing. But I suppose what we're getting at here about all this shift is what can you do about it? How can you leverage this from a marketing perspective? And that's where it gets interesting, because everyone's still trying to figure it out. How does this work? We're still trying to figure it out. And we're finding things that work, but how far can you push that before people start to get annoyed because you're in their personal downtime? If you're annoying someone on Facebook, you're in their downtime and people don't like being annoyed in their downtime. That's where it's leading edge right now, we're trying to figure out how to make this work. But the thing is, the big difference between traditional media and this new type of media like Facebook and YouTube and all this live video stuff is, you've got analytics, you've got metrics, so you can actually see the data behind this. You can see publicly accessible data about what people are reacting to, the results you're getting, and all that sort of thing. You're never gonna get that with TV. If you approach a TV channel and say "I want to put ads up," they'll tell you "You're gonna get so-and-so people, this many people watching it today." Chris: This is what our reach is per month and how many people we're reaching, this demographic. But you don't actually know what your specific ad or mention in the show, how many eyeballs it hit and how many people actually liked it. Andrew: And even if a TV's on, if there's a TV on and there's a family of five watching the TV, four of those people are on Facebook at any given time. So they can't really prove that. You see those, cinema advertising, which is probably even a step down from TV. You're watching a movie and it says "Cinema advertising works!" And you'll be the only person in the cinema. There's something wrong there. How can they prove any of this anymore? Chris: So clearly we've got a shift to social media, online media, and on-demand media. And we can actually give valuable ROI in terms of statistics and metrics of who viewed your particular piece of content, brand, you know, ad. So there's no time like the present, obviously, to make these shifts. And there's plenty other ways that are happening right here right now that ... you know, like, influencing marketing is another way to ... Andrew: Ah yeah, that's a mince higher with your podcast. Chris: Yep. I think we're gonna have to talk about that another time. So thanks very much for listening. Like we said, we hope you like Get Fact Up. The new way we're delivering, it somewhat helps our production time, helps us produce more content, and you can hire this studio too. Simply inquire on memedia.com.au. Thanks, and thanks to Rode Microphones for helping deliver this vodcast.

Chris DeBlasio
Nick Carse has built a FROZEN empire! Find out how the King Of Pops Co-Founder did it... on C-Level

Chris DeBlasio

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 23, 2020 28:39


Nick Carse has built a FROZEN empire! Find out how the King Of Pops Co-Founder did it... on C-Level YouTube - Chris DeBlasio= http://bit.ly/ - Chris DeBlasio= : http://bit.ly/2Zi0fJH Instagram- Chris DeBlasio= : http://bit.ly/2Zirnsg IMDb- Chris DeBlasio= : https://imdb.to/2ZnBUm5 Twitter @Chris_DeBlasio = : http://bit.ly/2ZcDdUw Website- ChrisDeBlasio.com = : http://bit.ly/2Zepz3m LinkedIn- Chris DeBlasio = : http://bit.ly/2ZcxCh4 King of Pops: Facebook: @KingOfPops Instagram: @KingOfPops Instagram: @NickCarse - You know what's interesting. So you take your failures. - Yup. - Or what you think is a failure, right. Because I don't actually love all of our pops. - Right. - And you put that out there to the world and it is somebody's favorite pop. - [Chris] Yes. - And they're gonna remember it forever. - Yup. - And so, it's kind of like, I don't know, in your industry, a bad movie or a bad advertisement that you think, like, "We went the totally wrong way with that." - Right. - Someone is gonna remember it and quote it forever. - [Chris] On this episode of C Level, I'm chilling with the king himself, Nick Carse, co-founder of King of Pops. - I'm super excited about this episode, because it focuses on a lot of people that, they have a career already, and they have a business idea, and making that decision that, you know, making that decision to actually go after their passion. - Yeah. - But for the small people, the small amount of people that don't know who you guys are,

Dennis & Barbara's Top 25 All-Time Interviews
Rebuilding a Marriage Better Than New (Part 2) - Chris and Cindy Beall

Dennis & Barbara's Top 25 All-Time Interviews

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 3, 2020 25:18


Rebuilding a Marriage Better Than New (Part 1) - Chris and Cindy BeallRebuilding a Marriage Better Than New (Part 2) - Chris and Cindy BeallRebuilding a Marriage Better Than New (Part 3) - Chris and Cindy BeallFamilyLife Today® Radio Transcript  References to conferences, resources, or other special promotions may be obsolete. Gradually Rebuilding Trust Guests:                      Chris & Cindy Beall                                                  From the series:       Rebuilding a Marriage Better Than New (Day 2 of 3)  Bob: When Chris Beall was unfaithful to his wife Cindy, she faced a decision. Was she going to forgive him, or not? Here's how she thought that through. Cindy: I really do believe—with all my heart—he never wanted to hurt me. He still did—but he did not want that—so forgiving him, was really rather easy. Trusting him? That was something had to be earned for months—and years—to come.  Bob: This is FamilyLife Today for Tuesday, August 29th. Our host is the President of FamilyLife®, Dennis Rainey, and I'm Bob Lepine. What does the process of rebuilding trust in a broken marriage relationship look like? Chris and Cindy Beall join us today to talk about their experience. Stay with us.  And welcome to FamilyLife Today. Thanks for joining us. One of the things that we've talked with couples about over the years is the whole issue of how trust gets rebuilt in a relationship when that trust has been violated.  1:00 Usually the violator is hoping that that trust can get rebuilt—like really quickly. The violated person is going, “No, no, no, no, no—this is a much slower process than you imagine—or than it feels like it ought to be to you—because you're not the one who got kicked in the gut; right? Dennis: Yes. Usually the one who confesses the sin—especially in a marriage relationship where a betrayal is so personal—feels like they can empty the garbage can and it's like a dump truck comes and takes it away. Bob: And they feel free because they've become unburdened! Dennis: They've finally gotten rid of it and their spouse is left to know—what do I do with this— Bob: In the garbage! Dennis: —with this garbage? We've got a couple with us—first of all the author of the book Rebuilding a Marriage Better Than New, Cindy Beall—welcome back, Cindy. Cindy: Thank you. Dennis: And her husband Chris, joins us. Chris: Thank you. So excited to be here. Dennis: They've been married since 1993. They have three boys. 2:00 You shared earlier about how your marriage had to deal with Chris's deceit, betrayal, pornography, an affair, the birth of a child outside of marriage that you knew nothing about—and your world was shattered instantly. Yet, one of the great parts of your story is that you were part of a church—Life Church—where you now work— Chris: Correct. Dennis: —Chris. I actually love this part of the story, Bob, because many of us have heard a lot of couples, where things have gone wrong and they kind of drop off the face of the planet, and you never hear from them again. Well, that's not the case with Chris and Cindy Beall. They received forgiveness from one another—they have experienced healing. That's what I really want to explore here—and begin with you, Cindy, to just unpack.  After you initially responded with grace and forgiveness and a commitment to the marriage some three weeks into the discovery that your husband had been unfaithful for a number of years— 3:00 —not only with pornography but also with affairs with multiple women. How did you experience that healing on an ongoing basis—because there are a lot of listeners who are in the midst of their own deep trauma and trial right now—they need to know where to look for help and hope.  Cindy: Grief is not enjoyable. Nobody wants to grieve. We experienced grief when we lose something—it could be a job, it could be a relationship, it could be a person—so our marriage—I felt like—died that day. So I began a grief process. There's different stages—you can research and find about all that—but I didn't really experience a ton of anger or denial—I went straight into the ‘pit of despair', is what I call it.  For me, I tried for a little bit to kind of push it away when triggers would come. That's what I used the phrase a lot in my book and when I'm talking to women.  4:00 Triggers would come to remind me of something he had done or something he had said that would trigger back to that two and a half year period. I had an option—I could suppress it—push it aside—forget it—not think about it—or I could feel it and I could push through it and I could move through it. Dennis: Let's talk about one of those triggers. One of the ways would be when he came home late. Maybe a bit later than he had told you he would be home. Cindy: Oh, yes! And I'm thinking, “This reminds me of that time period and what am I going to do with it?” An even better trigger—I want to tell you about this—that I wrote about—I was in Walmart and I was grocery shopping.  I remember looking up on the shelf for a particular item for this recipe I was making. This was probably three months after confession. I see it and I'm reminded of something that I used to do when we lived in the other town and it reminded me of, “Oh, he often wasn't home when I did this.” “He was doing a ministry appointment.” 5:00 “Oh, he was—,“ and it triggered and I started thinking, “Oh my gosh!” and I began to cry. In the middle of the aisle in the Walmart. Totally crying—not like on the floor crying— but crying—and I cried for probably a good minute. Then all of a sudden, I just kind of stopped, and I wiped my tears, and I kept grocery shopping.  A lot of people would not have let that happen—they would have run out of the store—they would have stopped, they wouldn't have thought about it, but that's what I'm talking about. When these triggers come that remind you of the past, if we do not deal with them—if we do not face them—if we do not feelthem—they'll be there again! So that day I faced a trigger and my healing went a step further—I firmly believe that. I did a whole bunch of that—for a very long time. Bob: I want to make sure our listeners understand, it was three weeks after Chris's confession that you made the decision, “I'm going to stick this out.” Did you forgive him three weeks later?  6:00 Was grace extended in that moment? Or was it like, “I'm going to tough this out but we've still got a loooong road to hoe before you're back in my bed”?  Cindy: Forgiveness, for me, was rather quick. I have been forgiven of so much. I watched the actions of my broken, repentant, remorseful husband day after day after day, and I know how much he did not want to do that. I really do believe—with all my heart—he never wanted to hurt me. He still did, but he did not want that. So forgiving him was really rather easy. Trusting him? That was something that had to be earned for months—and years—to come.  Just because God called me to stay—and I knew after three weeks—it wasn't like, “Okay! We're good!” No, no. I had to deal with all the—the garbage that I was covered in at this point. He was freer and flying high. I mean, he was amazing and he did so many things to earn my trust back—that he still does 15 years later. 7:00 But, man, it still hurt. I still had to deal with the pain. Bob: Years to rebuild trust?  Cindy: Yes. Years. Chris: I would say this—people ask her to this day, “Do you trust Chris?” and this is her response, “I trust God in him.” Bob: Yes. Chris: “When he's walking empowered by the Holy Spirit, I trust that.” Honestly, is there anything trustworthy in any of us? Bob: Yes. Chris: Outside of God empowering us? Sometimes I feel like we emphasize this idea of human trust outside of God that I don't know that is actually real. When I—for the last 15 years of healing, that's been really my number one job is to live empowered by the Holy Spirit—humble and grateful that every day that I have with my boys and with my wife is an undeserved gift.  One thing about Cindy I will say—and this is probably not realistic so,—  8:00 —if you're listening, don't beat yourself up if you've done this but—in the last 15 years, Cindy has never once used what I did as ammunition to hurt me. I really believe that she—in a supernatural way—internalizes how much she's been forgiven by God. Her choosing not to use to wound— Dennis: —to punish. Chris: —to punish—is a choice of somebody that has been also forgiven much. I think that's a significant thing. Dennis: Cindy, I—this is—this may be off limits so, if you don't want to answer this question, it's fine.  Cindy: Okay. Dennis: I'm not a woman—I can't begin to imagine what it might be like to go to bed with my husband and in that moment of intimacy—more than a trigger—flashbacks. Cindy: —an onslaught. Dennis: Yes—a tsunami. How have you handled that? 9:00 Cindy: Obviously, it's part of the healing. It was very difficult—it was almost like, “Let's just get through this.” Chris: There was six weeks where there was no physical intimacy in our marriage. Our mentors, walking us through this, basically said, “Look, this is something that Cindy is going to set—it's going to be her decision.” Six weeks into the healing process there was a moment where Cindy was open to us being together. Cindy: And it was very challenging. My heart was thinking, “What's he thinking about?” “What does she look like?” “Does she have a better body than me?” All of these thoughts are going through and I just began to take thoughts captive—I mean I am literally taking thoughts captive in that moment. Dennis: For those who don't understand what that means, that's praying and actually just offering those thoughts before God. “God, take these thoughts.” Cindy: Yes. Dennis: “Cleanse them.”  Cindy: Yes. Dennis: “Wash them clean.” Cindy: “God help me—help me not think about this.” “I know that you have redeemed this—You've redeemed my marriage—You're making things new.”  10:00 “Please God just help me to make it through.” And then as things progressed in the months to come, there was just less and less of the onslaught of that happening. Bob: Did it take months before you being together was something that you could embrace and enjoy as a wife.  Cindy: Potentially closer to a year—maybe more—I can't really remember—but yes, it took a long time. Sadly, people see what we have 15 years later and they think, “I want that!” and I'm like, “Are you sure?”  Bob: Yes. Dennis: Yes. You're title of you book makes me emotional to think about it! It a tremendous hope-giving title: Rebuilding a Marriage Better Than New. So you wouldn't trade in what you have today? Cindy: I wouldn't. I wouldn't go back. I wouldn't go back—and have a faithful husband. I wouldn't go back—and not have my stepson, whom I adore. I wouldn't go back and trade all the pain to have what I have now. 11:00 I wouldn't go back. I wouldn't do it.  Bob: I think it's important for a wife—or even a husband—who's been a victim here. It took a year or more before you could fully be engaged in intimacy with your husband but that doesn't mean it was a year or more before you shared intimacy with your husband. You guys were together during that time with you having to process everything in those moments—but you also recognizing, “If our marriage is going to work, this is a part of what makes a marriage work.” Cindy: Yes. We were growing as a couple in that—let's just take the six week time period—we were growing and he was finally investing in our marriage—after two and a half years of not doing it. That's what happens with these people who start cheating—they're investing somewhere else. When you start investing where you're supposed to—and our intimacy was growing—Yes! We wanted to. 12:00 Dennis: So, Chris—as you were talking about the three weeks—the six weeks—the year—you're not a robot either. Chris: Right. Dennis: What were you learning? Chris: I think the—trying to understand—”How did I get here?” Because there was never a day that I said, “You know, I think I'm going to become a sex addict and I think I'm going to be addicted to pornography for the better part of my adult life.” Those thoughts never went through my head—it was just one—pushing one moral boundary after the other—just real subtle things.  Going through the healing process—learning how to be convicted of my sin so not to be ashamed, necessarily—but to be broken—personally—for what I've done and how that affected those that I love—including God—on one side—then truly and fully walking in the grace of Christ—that I am enough—just as I am. That—that was probably one of the most challenging and life-changing things.  13:00 I was working in retail at the time—there was an 18-month period where—almost two years—where I wasn't in ministry and really, ministry was not even on the radar—it's like, “We're done.” Dennis: Your church actually— Chris: Yes. Dennis: —took you off of the stage from leading worship— Chris: Correct. Dennis: —and put you to work at Home Depot and took away all your screens. Cindy: Yes. Chris: The leadership team—they came and took the computer. They said, “You're going to be under our covering”—which means you just have to do whatever we tell you to do. If you want to go on vacation—ask us first. If you want to get a job—which you're going to need a job—you can't travel, you can't have a computer and you can't have the ability to be alone with women. Dennis: You stayed in the church. Cindy: Yes. Chris: Absolutely! Yes. Cindy: We sat on the front row. Chris: —where people knew! Where people knew. Dennis: That took a lot of courage, too. Chris: Well, but here's the thing—so we went the weekend after the announcement and then Craig Groshell, my pastor, made the comment that, “Chris and Cindy's with us today.” It was in that moment that the church stood up [Emotion in voice]— 14:00 —and gave us a round of applause—and there was a line to hug our necks! This is a week after the confession! In that moment—that's really when I had just supernatural hope. It was this community of faith was going to be the hospital where we heal. God is planting the seeds for redemption. That weekend—that day in church—it changed us. Bob: Cindy, could your marriage have made it to where it is today if there had not been a community doing what this community of faith did? If it was just the two of you saying, “Okay, we'll try to rebuild. We'll see a counselor. We'll do our best.” You think your marriage would have survived that?  Cindy: I can't see how it would have.  15:00 There's just something special about telling people—like-minded believers—that are going to speak the truth and encourage you and build you up and hold your arms up when you can't hold them up anymore. We had that, not only from the church staff but from our people in the congregation.  Dennis: Cindy, as Chris was telling that story, I reached and gave you a Kleenex. I want to know what it was like to have people line up and come by and look you in the eyes and hug you. What was that like? Cindy: It was—peacefully difficult. There was some embarrassment—a little bit—kind of like…everybody knows your business now. [Emotion in voice] You're so vulnerable and so raw—but, man! To see them actually do what the church is supposed to do? How we're supposed to help other believers heal. That was a very profound thing—and it made me think, “I can stay here with these people. I can stay here.” Bob: These were not your lifelong friends. Cindy: I'd been there six weeks!  16:00 I didn't even really have a lot of friends! Bob: Right. Dennis: I don't know what it feels like at this level—I'm a broken person too, but—it has to be a little bit like a leper. Chris: Yes. Dennis: You had to feel like a leper at that moment and have people standing in line to hug you? Cindy: Yes. Chris: Yes. Dennis: What the flesh wants to do is run!  Cindy: Right. Dennis: In the other direction—the exit.  Chris: I think—Craig stood on stage the week before and said that the American church, unfortunately—more often than not—is one of the only institutions on the planet that shoot their wounded. That will not happen—we will be a hospital. Secondly, he said that gossip kills churches and if we all know the truth in love, then we're truly free to just love them and be a voice of healing.  I had one conversation—probably 18 months later—that I think really painted the picture of what—from the perspective of the church—the body of Christ—there was a 75 year old woman that came up to me.  17:00 I don't even remember meeting her—I didn't know who she was—but she walked up to me in church and she grabbed my collar and she said, “Son, are you still free?” I looked at her and I said, “Yes, ma'am.” And she smiled and she said, “We did it!”  She didn't say, “You did it!” She didn't say, “Good for your marriage,” she said, “We did it!” I really believe that there's a responsibility that's placed on a community that's of faith—to be environments of healing. She was so proud to be a part of a church that—in her mind—we did it right. Dennis: Your story reminds me of another one that Bob and I were told live on stage at the Christian Alliance for Orphans Summit where—I believe it was a foster care young lady who was cared for by a woman in the church—was never adopted by her, as I recall. She fell in love as a young lady in her 20's and when it came time [Emotion in voice] to give her away in the wedding to the man— 18:00 —the entire church stood up and said, “Who gives this woman to be married to this man?” You know, that's really what the church was expressing there when they said, “We did it! We really did it.” Cindy, I want you to comment on something. Earlier you said you became convicted that whatever you did, you need to give God the glory. What did that look like? Now, looking back on this, what does it mean to give God the glory—practically speaking? Cindy: It's probably different than what you might expect. We see people in the world where say something nice—“Dennis, great book. Oh, praise God, He's so good.” We give God the glory in that capacity—or we think we do—and we might. For me, giving God the glory is a heart condition. 19:00 I began—when people would come up—and they still do—and they say, “Oh! You're so amazing!” They'll say things like, “You saved my marriage!” and I'm thinking, “No I didn't. I'm a human—God saved it!” When I get all these compliments—whether it's speaking at an event and people are like, “Oh, you—that was so good!” I just—in the quiet of my heart—I just say, “God, if they only knew! I'm so wretched!” I'm thinking this to myself and I just—“Thank you God, that you're using me—this vessel.”  I just look at them and I say, “Thanks.” “Thank you.” Then I always turn it and I'll say, “What did God speak to you?” If I'm speaking…and they said something—“What did He say to you?” I'm trying to shift it to where I want to know what He spoke. At the same time, we're called to encourage as long as it is today—so that none of us will be hardened by sin's deceitfulness. So if I encourage you and you slam it back against me—you say, “Oh no, it wasn't me, it was just God.”  20:00 I'm trying to encourage you and if you don't allow me, I'm not using that gift—that command that I have. That was—for me—what I began to do—was…giving God glory. For me, giving Him glory was so internal—was so internal. Bob: I think it's evident in what you've done in two books now because you've written two books telling this story and it all keeps pointing back to how it's God at work in this. Nobody can read these books and go, “You're just so smart! You're just so clever! You came up with all kinds of solu—“ “Those tactics you had—where did you come up—“ This is just all about all about the healing power of God in the life of a couple. Dennis: For those of you who want to hear Chris's answer to a question I'm about to ask him, you're going to have to go to our website. Okay? Bob: Okay. Are we going to hear the question? Dennis: Oh, we're going to hear the question— Bob: —and then the answer will be online. [Laughter] Dennis: —and the answer will be online.  21:00 Chris, this wasn't your statement—whatever you did you wanted to give God the glory—that was your wife's statement. I'm just curious as to how you feel in the years that have past that has worked its way out in you. Bob: That's a good question. Again, we're not going to listen to the answer now—the answer will be online at FamilyLifeToday.com. Head over there to hear Chris's thoughts on how God has been glorified in the midst of the brokenness that has been a part of your marriage relationship.  We also have copies of the book that Cindy has written telling their story. It's called Rebuilding A Marriage Better Than New. While you're on our website at FamilyLifeToday.com, you can order a copy of the book or you can call to order if you'd like. Again the website is FamilyLifeToday.com. The number to call to order is 1-800-358-6329. 20:00 That's 1-800-FL-TODAY. 1-800-“F” as in family, “L” as in life, and then the word “TODAY”.  There's also a video on the website for those who would like to watch a short video where you guys share your story. There may be people that folks would want to pass that video along to. Again, you'll find it online at FamilyLifeToday.com.  As we're sharing your story this week I'm just reminded of our goal here at FamilyLife. We want to daily provide practical help and hope from the Bible so that husbands and wives, moms and dads know how to build a strong, healthy, godly marriage and family. Our goal is to effectively develop godly marriages and families—because we believe godly marriages and families change the world one home at a time.  Our desire—in the months ahead—is to expand the outreach. We've seen God do some great things this past year with more people attending our Weekend to Remember® marriage getaways.  23:00 More people coming to our website—FamilyLifeToday.com—more ways that this daily program is reaching people—on their smartphones, on their tablets, through the radio. Those of you who support this ministry—you're helping us expand the reach of FamilyLife Today.  At the beginning of this month we had a friend of the ministry who stepped forward and said, “I'd like to see it grow even more.” He offered to match every donation that we receive during the month of August—dollar for dollar—up to a total of $800,000. To take advantage of that matching gift, we need to hear from folks before this month ends—and this month ends in a couple of days.  Today is a good day to go online and make a donation—and when you do, your donation will be doubled. You can donate online at FamilyLifeToday.com or you can call to donate at 1-800-FL-TODAY. Or mail your donation to us at FamilyLife Today at P.O. Box 7111 Little Rock, AR. The zip code is 72223.  24:00 As long as your letter is postmarked before the end of the month, it will qualify for that matching gift opportunity for us. Again, please pray that we'll be able to take full advantage of this matching gift. Please join us back tomorrow when we're going to hear more from Chris and Cindy Beall as they tell us about the process God has taken them through in rebuilding their broken marriage, better than new. That comes up tomorrow—hope you can be with us for that.  I want to thank our engineer today, Keith Lynch, along with our entire broadcast production team. On behalf of our host, Dennis Rainey, I'm Bob Lepine. We will see you back next time for another edition of FamilyLife Today.  FamilyLife Today is a production of FamilyLife of Little Rock, Arkansas. A Cru® ministry.Help for today. Hope for tomorrow.  We are so happy to provide these transcripts to you. However, there is a cost to produce them for our website. If you've benefited from the broadcast transcripts, would you consider donating today to help defray the costs?   Copyright © 2017 FamilyLife. All rights reserved. www.FamilyLife.com    

Inbound Success Podcast
Ep. 117: Changing the flood insurance industry through content ft. Chris Greene

Inbound Success Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2019 28:48


How does a solopreneur take on the highly competitive insurance industry and win marketing mindshare? This week on The Inbound Success Podcast, Chris Greene of the Flood Insurance Guru shares his journey with content creation and why he's committed to creating 365 flood education videos, 150 flood blogs, and 100 flood podcasts this year. Chris proves that there is no excuse to NOT invest in content creation. As a business owner, he runs his company, invests in continuous learning, and still manages to create an insane amount of content every week. The results are pretty incredible. He's closing deals from his YouTube channel and other content on a regular basis, and says that today, 100% of his business comes from his digital marketing and content creation efforts. In this episode, he breaks down exactly how he does it - and how you can too. Highlights from my conversation with Chris include: Chris took a video course and realized there was no educational video on flood insurance. He saw that opportunity and began to create videos for his business. He then realized that his videos would have a greater chance of getting found if he also created written content, so he started blogging. Because he travels so much, he realized that podcasts would also be easy to create and would work well for his audience. Chris creates a new video every single day. He films them himself and keeps them to two minutes or less. Chris took a class called Made You Look Video that got him comfortable on camera and taught him video marketing essentials. Now he has a YouTube channel with separate playlists for each type of person in his audience (ex. realtors, lenders, property owners, business owners, etc.).  To free up more of his time for content creation, Chris hired a virtual assistant to help him run his insurance business and take care of the administrative work. He believes strongly that he needs to be the one creating content because he knows the subject matter best. To save time, Chris will often shoot a whole week's worth of content in one day. He uses Vidyard to create one to one vidoes and to host his marketing videos so that when he sends a video to someone, he can see if they've opened it. He keeps the entire production and editing process simple so that it takes him five minutes or less to edit a video. Chris generates a lot of inbound business from his Facebook presence, and uses his YouTube channel for sales enablement. One interesting benefit that Chris has seen from his content creation is new partnerships with other insurance agencies that don't want to sell flood insurance. They work with him because they see him as the expert on the topic, and that brings him a considerable amount of business. Chris spends about two hours every day creating written content and says that blogs don't necessarily need to be long to be effective - they just need to be as long as they should be to get the point across. In addition to his videos and written content, Chris is creating podcasts that are generally about 10 minutes long. He estimates that, in total, he spends thirty to forty percent of his day creating content. Chris says that 100% of his business comes from his digital marketing and content creation efforts. Resources from this episode: Visit the Flood Insurance Guru website Connect with Chris on LinkedIn Follow Chris on Twitter Connect with Chris on Facebook Email Chris at flood@communityfirstagency.com  Listen to the podcast to learn how committing to creating content can change your business - and your life. Transcript Kathleen Booth (Host): Welcome back to the Inbound Success Podcast. I'm your host Kathleen Booth and today my guest is Chris Greene, who is the president of the Flood Insurance Guru. I got a guru today. Welcome, Chris. Chris Greene (Guest): Thank you. Chris and Kathleen hamming it up while recording this episode. Kathleen: Yeah, thanks for being here. I was really excited to talk to you, because I think your story is exactly the example of what I love to highlight, which is just consistency, and putting in the work really pays off, because I had heard that you had decided to do a year of flood education videos and 150 flood blogs in 150 days. You're doing videos, you're doing blogs, now you're doing podcasts. It's like, man, you're rolling up your sleeves and getting it done. I can't wait to dig into it. Before we do, can you tell my audience a little bit about yourself, your background, and how you came to be doing what you're doing today? Meet Chris Greene Chris: Yeah. My name's Chris Greene, I'm president, owner of the Flood Insurance Guru. I've been in the insurance field for about 10 years. Actually hold a master's degree in emergency management with a focus in hazard and flood mitigation. I had a really bad experience buying a house about 10 years ago. I got about two weeks from buying it, found out I was in a really high risk flood zone. It was going to change my house payment by almost $3,000 a year, and the realtor said "Yeah, that happened on the foreclosure." For four years I just didn't bring it up, because I didn't want it to be an issue. And so what happened is, I discovered this really bad process and lack of education. So, over the next eight to 10 years I was working for Captive Insurance Agencies at the time. I kept getting my feet a little bit deeper and deeper. And when I started my own company about five years ago, I wanted a catchy website, so I came up with the Flood Insurance Guru, as a joke, but when people started learning what our educational background was then, they started saying, "Oh, you really have experience, you guys actually have an educational background on this," and it just kind of took off. And then that brought us to this year. Once you get outside the coast, there is no education on flood. We want to spend one full year where all we do is we provide education. It's not about selling, it's about what's currently going on. If we could just provide that, then I think we can compete with these bigger companies, and I think we can beat them because of the value that we provide. And it's just kind of taken off. I didn't know it would be the worst year in US history for flooding when we did it, but now not only do we do the education videos on flood insurance, we do them on disaster assistance, SBA loans, whatever, every single flood map across the country we do an update on. This morning, I just started a podcast for Houston, Texas on the recent disaster assistance that was approved by the president. What does it mean for the people there, who is it impacting and their resources. A year of flood education videos Kathleen: That is awesome. So, let's roll back a little bit. You decided this year to do a year of flood education videos. You started with videos? Is that correct? Chris: It is. I did. I'm in a video course that's been really good for me, and what we discovered as a community, there's no video, there's no resources on this. So it's like, we're just going to commit to video. And once you start committing to video, you realize, you know, Google is not seeing these videos unless it's YouTube. We need to get some text out there. Then I started blogging with it, but then everyone's like, "I'm always on the road. I wish you had a podcast," and we talked about it for a while and then we finally started one about six months ago. Kathleen: That's awesome. So, let's talk about the videos. You're not a huge company. So, the idea of making a video a day is very ambitious. How did you approach that? Do you have a videographer? Is this something you do yourself? Chris: I do it myself every single day. It's just me and I have a virtual assistant who helps us on the back end. Usually all of my videos are two minutes or less. I want it to be quick, I want it to be educational, and I want somebody to be able to take at least one thing away from our video every day. Kathleen: And how are you filming them? Chris: I was using my iPhone for a while, and actually bought a Canon DSLR, I set it up on location. I shoot all my videos on site. So I travel the entire country. If there's a flood issue going on a thousand miles away, I travel there, I talk to the people in that area and actually shoot my videos there. Kathleen: Okay. And did you have any special training for that? I mean, how did you- Chris: Well, I'm in a video course that has kind of taught me the psychological part of your buyer's, persona, you've got the education part, what people want, really learning to be on camera and things like that. And that's what's really helped me a lot. It was a course called Made You Look Video. What was funny was that the first 10 videos we had to do were, not really inappropriate videos, but they were just like, make you really uncomfortable. Like, "Hey, what's your favorite vacation?" Or, "What's the most embarrassing situation you've been in?" And the whole point was, "Hey, we're doing this because we want you to feel comfortable on video." Kathleen: Yeah, I was going to ask you about that because I think for people who haven't done a lot of video, I actually think that's harder than the whole technical, how to film and how to produce. Everybody I talk to tends to say, "I'm just not comfortable being on video." I'll be honest, I feel the same way. I feel very self conscious. So, was it doing those really kind of honest and as you said, almost embarrassing videos that broke the ice for you? Chris: That did break the ice. But then if you go back and look at some of our videos now they're like... That course has taught me to, "Hey you have to do something to separate yourself." So I've got one video where I'm actually spitting out spoiled milk. I've got another video where I'm dressed up as a grandfather, another video where I'm laying on a mattress. Stuff that catches people's attention and everyone's like, "Oh, I can't watch your videos because you look like an idiot." Everybody else seems to like them. And I said, "If you think I look like an idiot, means you're watching it, means I'm doing my job." Kathleen: Now, you're doing these as part of the flood education series? Chris: Yep. Kathleen: Oh that's so funny. Chris: I have them all broken down on my YouTube. I've built different lists for realtors, lenders, property owners, business owners where they can go exactly to that list and only watch the videos that pertain to them if they want. How Chris makes the time to create video content Kathleen: So you're uploading each of the two minute videos to YouTube. You said you're using a virtual assistant and what does that person do? Chris: Actually, the virtual assistant doesn't really help me at all in the video. They just help me on the insurance, out of the backend. Like they're helping me with the quoting, the paperwork and all that so that I can spend my time on the content because that's what separating us. I've tried to use other people for content, but it's very difficult in niche markets because they don't have your educational background. And you can tell sometimes when you read a blog that they may not know what they're talking about. Kathleen: Yeah, yeah. Now, are you- Chris: Here right now, how to do content creation for us and that's the big struggle. I'm actually having to teach him some stuff on the flood side first so that when he writes it, it makes sense. Kathleen: Are you doing all the editing and production of the videos too? Chris: Takes me less than five minutes to edit because I said they're all short. They're simple. They're easy. Kathleen: Yeah. I was going to say, what's involved in that or what kind of programs, platforms are you using? How complicated is it? Chris: It's fairly easy for me because I just use iMovie and everyone said, "Oh, you screwed up on this word." I said, "That's great, that means people know that I'm human." I will never shoot a video more than twice. Now there's certain situations I'll shoot it more than once, but I will never shoot it more twice because I want people to know that it's real. I want people know it's not a script and yeah I did screw up but that's what you want to see. Just like I use Vidyard for all of our one-on-one videos when I'm doing flood quotes, I send all of our customer's quotes through Vidyard because I want them... They might be 2000 miles away from me, but they feel like I'm next door because of video. Kathleen: I couldn't agree more and we've just had this conversation before I hit record for this podcast where I said, unless all hell breaks loose, we're going to keep going. And people ask me that all the time. Like, how much do you edit the podcast? And I really don't, unless there's some big terrible thing that happens in the middle of it. I believe that people prefer things that are less scripted. And so I leave in a lot, like if the dog barks or I've had podcasts where my 12 year old son walks in, in the middle of it and asked me for a snack, and I think you could see that as unprofessional or you could just see it as lending flavor and context to the life that's happening behind the content as it's getting made. So, I love that approach. All right, so you're spending, let's say, it sounds like less than half an hour a day on the videos. Chris: Like today, I'll actually shoot... This week is the first week I've actually been on a schedule all week. So, this afternoon we'll spend about two hours and I'll shoot the whole week. Kathleen: Oh, smart. So you're bundling it together. Chris: I do that in case somebody comes to me and says, "Hey, we're having a real issue with this." Then I will bump it up in the week. But the reason I do that, I always have a week there. If something comes up, if there's a lot of disastrous stuff going on it may take my time away from video and I like to have a few in my back pocket just in case. Kathleen: Yeah. Yeah. I feel the same way about podcasting. I need to have several in the can because you just never know what life is going to throw at you. So, you're putting these on YouTube. When you first started this year of flood education videos, did you already have a YouTube channel? Chris: I really had... Not for the Flood Insurance Guru, for our old company I did. I just set this up this year and everything in the course I went through, really taught me how to set it up. I use a tool called KeywordTool.io, that has really helped me with tags and seeing what people are searching for. And so we really haven't put any money to the YouTube channel yet because we've done so well with it organically. Chris's results Kathleen: So talk me through what "done so well" means, like what kind of results have you seen in this time that you've been posting? Chris: Honestly, most of our inbound market really has come from Facebook, not so much YouTube. YouTube, what we've done is we've built a knowledge base article for it now, that's using snippets with HubSpot. So our customer has a question, we'll send them the snippet and then they can click on it, takes them over to our YouTube channel. And so we've kind of done that. Kathleen: Oh interesting. Now are you also getting organic reach through YouTube? Chris: I am because we've actually sold a few policies last month actually off YouTube where people have searched our videos. Kathleen: Wow. And how much do your videos get viewed? Chris: Honestly, I don't have that many views. I have one video that has like 108 views on there and I have very low other views on it because I haven't really paid money on it because I'm really just using the YouTube part as a resource library. It's the Facebook organically. What we figured out, is how to use Facebook as a search engine optimization tool instead of like an ad. So everyone else is throwing this money at it. We're sharing it on our personal page, but what I've done with my personal page is I've been very strategic with who my friends, who's sharing and all that. A lot of people, what they do is they go search flood insurance on Facebook in Rhode Island and we come up in Georgia. The tags that we're consistently using is pulling our information up for them. Kathleen: I love what you're saying because I've had this conversation quite a bit with some of the folks that I've worked with over the years about how long should you expect it to take inbound marketing to work and to produce results for your business. And there's kind of two schools around that. One school says, "Oh, don't expect anything for six to 12 months. It's an investment in the long term." And I think that can be true if you're putting all of your eggs in the basket of getting found organically because it does take a little time. But there's this other school that says that inbound marketing should work right away if you're creating content that can be used for sales enablement. And if your sales team, which in this case is you, is actively sharing that content with the prospects they're talking to in the sales process because it can speed up the sales process, it can increase your close rate, et cetera. It sounds like that's what you've been doing. Is that correct? Chris: That's correct. And we knew it was going to be a longterm game, but honestly, I said 12, 18 months. I didn't think that we would build a national brand in six to nine months and not really put any money behind it. Because some of the unique information we were providing people just sharing it like crazy and we created a really cool partnership with some other insurance agencies who don't really know flood, don't want to know it. And that's all we do. And that part has just taken off for us because they keep seeing our content. 150 blogs in 150 days Kathleen: Now blogging. You committed to doing 150 blogs in 150 days. We got to talk about this, Chris, because I have been in this game a long time and I cannot begin to tell you how often I hear people complain about the amount of time it takes to blog. And these are marketers who do marketing for a living, complaining about having to blog. Very often they're complaining about having to do it once a month. That doesn't even get to the CEOs I talked to who think they just don't have the time for it. So we need to unpack this a little bit because I have a feeling you're going to just dispel all of this. Chris: Well someone once taught me, and actually it came from I think originally from Marcus Sheridan. From a company called Agency Nation. His name is Joe Giangola. And he said, "Look, it doesn't matter if you write a 3000 word article, or if you write a 500 word article, write as many words as it takes to get your point across." Kathleen: Oh, so true. So true. Chris: So, it's not, "Hey, I need 3000 words and put a bunch of crap in the article that's not value." I'd rather have a 300 word article to get straight to the point and give people what they need. Kathleen: Well and the truth is most people don't have the time to read long things anyway. Chris: And most of my articles are probably 500 words to a thousand words. Kathleen: Yeah. So, how long does it take you to write these articles? Chris: I would say it takes me about two hours a day and I do it at night, usually from about 10 to 12 at night. What I do is now I'm basically putting a blog out for every single one of my podcasts now, so I basically keep three separate blogs. I keep our podcast blog, I keep what's called a flood map updates, and that's if the flood map changes for an area, we do a blog just on that. And then I run a regular blog and so I mix it up, I write three to five blogs a week between the three. Kathleen: Now is your podcast a blog, is it like show notes or is it just a companion article? Chris: No, a lot of times I'll do a full detailed one. It's not like a breakdown. Here's what I try to do, I write an article, just a generic article on that subject matter, for the podcast and I like to come back with our regular blog and take that same blog, but now relate it to a particular area like Birmingham, Alabama and apply it there. And that's what I've kind of started to... Kind of taught myself that last couple of months. Now, Hey, let's just do it on this generic topic. Now let's come back and apply it to a particular city. First of all, it's for SEO, but now we could relate to that audience and we're giving that audience what they need. What is the ROI of content creation? Kathleen: So you're spending about two hours a night. I think a lot of business leaders listening to this might think, how could it possibly be worth my time? Like why wouldn't I either outsource for somebody to do that or hire somebody junior who gets paid less to do that. Talk me through for you, how you see the ROI of that two hours of your time. Chris: Well, the thing for me with the two hours of my time now, is through this whole inbound marketing and learning all this, what I've learned is that actually I have a passion for writing and I enjoy the blogging. I've actually handed off the other stuff so I could spend more time on the blog. Like the quoting, inside our company, our VA's handle all that. So I can handle the content and like someone goes, "Are you going to outsource the content?" I said, "Probably not. I enjoy it." I enjoy when someone comes to me with a question, I can break that question down and I can turn that question into maybe 10 different podcasts. 10 different blogs and apply to different areas because my educational background, it's very hard to outsource and have someone else do that. Kathleen: Do you find that it's getting easier over time? Chris: Yes. Kathleen: Is it getting quicker? Chris: But I'm also learning to build it out a better way. Like, "Hey, these are the five ways to do this." All right, let's build a pillar post on this subject matter. Now let's put 10 sub posts underneath that for different areas. Kathleen: Yeah, I mean the consistency part is what blows my mind. How do you stay on track? Because that is, that's a major commitment. Chris: It's tough. Now, the podcast actually is pretty easy. All of my podcasts are 10 minutes or less. So, I do a podcast that morning usually and I'll go out, shoot a video that kind of relates to the podcast that afternoon and then put the blog together that night. Kathleen: Wow. So what percentage of your day overall would you estimate that you're spending on creating content? Chris: Probably 30 to 40%. Kathleen: Wow. And- Chris: I'm also doing this... Now, I do have VA that helps me with some research, but also what I'm feeling is, I actually spend a lot of time driving around during the day though, looking at different locations to shoot certain things on. Like I had one the other day where a house was completely crumbled and so it wasn't a plan, but we ended up shooting a video on cracked foundations. Kathleen: Oh wow. Chris: And so that's where a lot of my content comes from as well. How Chris comes up with topics Kathleen: Yeah. So that was going to be my next question. Can you talk me through how you come up with your topics? Chris: Our topics come from every single question we get from our referral partner, a customer or prospect and what's also currently going on. Like last week, FEMA updates their manual every six months. So I broke down the new manual and made a podcast and a blog out of that. There’s disaster assistance that was approved for last week in Texas. I made a blog out of that because those are the things that people want to know what's going on. As I said, we walk them not just through the insurance process, the disaster assistance and all that because no one else will do it. So what happens though is when we do do that, when they do need something for a flood change, a flood insurance. They're going to remember us because we're providing so much education. I'm a terrible salesperson, I'm the worst salesperson in the world, but I'm really good at marketing and education. Kathleen: Do you have a particular system you use for capturing those questions? Because you're literally running around all the time. Chris: My iPhone. Kathleen: And what do you use on your iPhone? Chris: Notes. Like when they call me asking me, I take that question, I'll put it in there. Last night I was going through about 40 different questions over the last two weeks, I wanted to address this week. Kathleen: Wow, that's a great tip. Yeah. Answering questions, it's tried and true strategy. Chris: So, I would use a notepad and paper, but then I would lose the paper. I'd lose the question. Chris's results Kathleen: Yeah, you definitely have to do what works for you, right. So, let's talk about the results you've gotten from this, because we've talked a little bit about the traction you got with the videos, but now you've got videos, you've got blogs, you've got podcasts. As you mentioned, you are in an insanely competitive industry, insurance. That is one of, if not the most competitive industries from a marketing standpoint, from an SEO standpoint. Talk me through the results you've seen. Chris: Actually, we've seen really good results and everyone else says the exact same thing you do, but they don't realize it's actually the complete opposite. You see, once you get outside coastal areas, no one knows anything about flood. And no one's wasting their time on it. So when we can provide the content in areas like Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, we don't have a lot of competition. The other day when I looked at some of our keywords for Arkansas, Nebraska on YouTube, it was $1.12 And $1.50 because no one else is putting it out there or they're not going to waste their time on it. They're going to go to Houston, they're going to go to Miami or New Jersey, but what about all those areas in the middle where there's no resources and we can provide those resources. It doesn't matter how much competition we have, they can't keep up with us on the content. Kathleen: Now, do you find yourself competing against really, really large insurance companies and how does that play out? Chris: [crosstalk 00:19:46] the other day, because we picked up the phone and we called the customer back. Kathleen: Yeah. How does that play out from a digital marketing standpoint though? How do you take on, I can't think of one off hand, but all the big insurers, right? They have so much money to throw at their marketing. Chris: Because like you just said, they're throwing it at their marketing. They're not throwing it at their content. They're saying, "Hey, I can save you 40% on your flood insurance." That's great, but how do you change my floors out? How do you help me through this process? That's what the customer wants to know. Then yeah, I'd love to save money here, but I need you to get me point B before I get to point C. Kathleen: Now, are you spending money on paid ads now? Chris: A little bit, but I do it completely different than the companies you talk about. Kathleen: Okay, talk me through how you do it. Chris: What I do is these companies that said they'll spend all this money and "Hey, let me save you 50% on this." Well, I get a copy of every single flood map change across the country. Well, what happens is you can make a decision to buy insurance before that map changes and if you do, you get a preferred rate. So I target those areas six months before with content every single week through YouTube and walking them through the whole process. So when it does change or it's about to change, they remember seeing our content for six months. Not that we can save them money, but "Hey, here's what's going to happen, here's the process you need to follow whether you go through us or not." And that's how we've been able to beat a lot of them out. No one else wants to spend that time. They want to capture the sale. Kathleen: Now, what percentage of your business these days is coming in through organic and social and these digital efforts that you're undertaking? Chris: Honestly, from a strictly digital standpoint, pretty much a hundred percent of it now. Like even though the insurance companies we deal with, the process we built out for them is when they send us a customer, we actually build a link that's just for that insurance agent. And what happens is if they submit, a customer submits it, we redirect them. For that customer, leave them a review. We have a thank you card that goes to that customer in the mail with their information on there, not ours. We're here to help with a flood. But we're also here to make them look like a rock star so they have a customer for life. It's a win-win. And so we built all that in HubSpot, now. Kathleen: I mean intuitively you've landed on the best channel marketing strategy, which is make your channel partner look like a rock star and make their life as easy as possible. Yeah. I learned that after 13 years as a HubSpot partner, because HubSpot itself has one of the best channel programs around and they do that exact same thing. Chris: Yeah. And they're always like, "Why the link?" I said, "Because no matter where the customer is in the process, we can keep you involved." Kathleen: Yeah. That's great. Chris: And they like that. Kathleen: Yeah. Fascinating. So tell me about how your business is growing and what it's meant for you as a business owner. Chris: Well, I had this goal of, hey, I'd love to sell $1 million in flood insurance over the next five years. Well, I've had to adjust that goal because we've gotten to about 50% of it in our first year. But that was our whole goal, our five year goal. What happened is its just kind of taken off. We've spoken at a couple of conferences, we've been on a lot of different podcasts, not because we're just killing it on sales. But I guess because of the whole video thing, no one else was really doing that in our industry. No one's committing to it, particularly on flood, but no one's committing to it on anything else. And so what's happened is, being on those podcasts and things like that have helped us organically. People start reaching out to us, other insurance agents and we just walk them through and help them with their questions. And then before you know it, they're telling other people and it's just like a snowball going downhill then. Kathleen: Now how- Chris: Once you get going, if you get behind it. Kathleen: How important has it been to your success in doing this that you took on essentially a niche topic? Because you said that a little bit earlier how no one else was talking about flood. Could you do this same approach if it was a broader topic? Chris: Oh, easily. The reason I've done it though is because that's what my background is in and no one really has the background that I have in insurance. Like they've got some training, but they don't have that master's degree. I'm in the middle becoming a Certified Floodplain Manager. Probably less than 1% of insurance agents in the world have that certification as well. So you could do it with anything. But the reason I chose to do it and what I did it in is because of what my background is. I know people that are doing it in other areas as well. Now not the whole video thing, I mean you'd really have to commit, but the video course I'm in, a lot of people committing to two or three videos a week, which is great. My whole thing was, hey, if I can look back a year later, look at the knowledge base articles we've built, look at the library we've built just over a year. Look at the amount of questions we're going to be able to ask. Kathleen: Yeah. That's great. Well it's definitely inspiring and I think anybody who's ever thought, I don't have the time to invest in content or I couldn't possibly do it because I'm not an expert. I think that you provide a great example of somebody who's just taking the bull by the horns and is running with it and seeing great results. So, very cool. Chris: I've thought about starting a digital marketing agency next year, basically, what we're doing is taking the journey of this year we've been on and we're teaching other companies how to do it. Kathleen's two questions Kathleen: Love it. That's so cool. All right. Shifting gears for a minute. I have two questions I always ask my guests and you are a prolific inbound marketer so I want to hear what you have to say. Is there a particular company or person that you think is really killing it with inbound marketing right now? Chris: Yes. Nicholas Ayers, he's the one who actually runs Made You Look Video. I mean his video course, the whole psychological thing he puts behind it. He's got some of the silliest ads on Facebook with fanny packs, but what he's able to do with video, because he's been studying it for 30 years, it's just incredible. Kathleen: So Nicholas Ayers, Made You Look Video? Chris: But also his passion of, "Hey, I'm not going to keep this to myself. I'm going to help whoever I can with it." Now, we do a call every single week, he walks you through whatever you need. I mean, he's just awesome. Kathleen: That's great. Chris: And like I tell people, he's one of the main reasons, where we're at today is because of how they've been able to help us with video. And then Marcus Sheridan is another one. I was turned on to him about nine months ago. About the whole pool company experience. Kathleen: Yeah. Marcus's story is phenomenal. Yeah. And he is a great guy. All right, so things change fast. You are blogging, you're podcasting, you're making videos and putting things on YouTube and Facebook, what have you. How do you stay current and up to date on all of these developments around digital marketing with things changing so quickly? What's your strategy for that? Chris: Well, a lot of it actually is through HubSpot Academy. I spend a lot of my time in there and then I spend about an hour a day studying other things. I've got about 140 podcasts a week that I listen to. Kathleen: Oh my God. Chris: This being one of them, the HubCast, all these different digital marketing ones. Amy Porterfield is a big one. But I stay up to date because I travel so much during the week that I listen to all those. And honestly that's where I give all my content ideas from as well. How to connect with Chris Kathleen: That's amazing. I don't know how you find all the time. I mean, I love podcasts and I think I spend a lot of time self-educating but you make me look like an amateur. That's amazing. So, all right, Chris, you've totally blown me away. I can't wait to see what you do next. I'm betting some people are going to be listening to this and have questions. If they do, if they want to connect with you, reach out and chat with you. What's the best way for them to contact you? Chris: If you go to our website, just floodinsuranceguru.com, we've got our email address on there. It's flood@communityfirstagency.com. They can also find me on Facebook, which is just Chris Greene. They may have to send me a message because I think I am maxed out on friends. Kathleen: Oh no, we can't be friends. Chris: Well, I have to filter it out all the time. I've changed it and added a public image one on there, but I don't do much on there. You can also find me on LinkedIn. I do a lot on LinkedIn. Kathleen: Awesome. All right. You heard it here. I'll put those links in the show notes. If you want to find Chris head over to those show notes and his LinkedIn profile, his email address, his YouTube channel, all of it will be in there. He won't be your friend on Facebook until he clears out some other people, but you can ask him anyway. You know what to do next... Kathleen: That's awesome, Chris, thank you so much for joining me. And if you're listening and you like what you heard or you learned something new, please consider leaving the podcast a five star review on Apple podcasts. It makes a huge difference and helps us get found by other people. And if you know somebody else doing kick ass inbound marketing work, tweet me at workmommywork, because I would love to interview them. That's it for this week. Thank you so much, Chris. Chris: Thank you.

P100 Podcast
Ep. 5 - Learning How to Heal a Year After Tragedy

P100 Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 22, 2019 37:01


 As Pittsburgh prepares to mark one year since the attack on the Tree of Life synagogue, we invited Maggie Feinstein of the 10.27 Healing Partnership to discuss the new center’s mission and how Squirrel Hill has healed over time.Also in this episode, we talk about fear-based marketing, future modes of journalism with a guest who has a special connection to the podcast, and hear a track from a promising singer from Sewickley.----more----This Episode is sponsored by WordWriteCenturies before cell phones and social media, human connections were made around fires as we shared the stories that shaped our world. Today, stories are still the most powerful way to move hearts and minds and inspire action. At WordWrite, Pittsburgh's largest independent public relations agency, we understand that before you had a brand, before you sold any product or service, you had a story.WordWrite helps clients to uncover their own Capital S Story. The reason someone would want to buy, work, invest or partner with you through our patented story-crafting process. Visit wordwritepr.com to uncover your Capital S Story.The full transcript to this episode is here:Logan: You are listening to The P100 Podcast, the biweekly companion piece to The Pittsburgh 100, bringing you Pittsburgh news, culture, and more. Because sometimes 100 words just isn't enough for a great story.Dan: Hey, everyone. We're back. I'm Dan Stefano, host of The P100 Podcast. I'm here with Paul Furiga.Paul: Dan, how are you, my friend?Dan: And our other co-host, Logan Armstrong.Logan: How's it going, Dan?Dan: All right. Yeah, great to have you guys here, and we're happy for everybody to be listening today because it's a special episode. We're coming up to the one-year commemoration of the attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue in our Squirrel Hill neighborhood here. And there's a lot of interesting things going on this time of year. It's been a year of healing, and that's a highlight of the interview we're going to have this week. We're pretty happy to have that. Paul, what are your thoughts?Paul: I'm really looking forward to hearing from Maggie Feinstein, who's now leading the healing center. As you said, this one-year mark is really important for the community. Not just here in Pittsburgh, but beyond as well.Dan: That's right. That's Maggie Feinstein, the director of the 10.27 Healing Partnership and we're really happy to have her today. Also, we'll be talking with Erin Hogan. She's a fellow WordWriter and we'll be talking about fear-based PSA. It's kind of based on a blog she recently wrote. After that, we'll hear from Chris Schroder, the founder of The 100 Companies.Paul: The 100 Companies, right.Dan: Paul, you've met him. You have a pretty deep professional relationship.Paul: We do. And I think folks will enjoy the interview, three ex-journalists sitting around the table commiserating about journalism's past and talking about the future.Dan: Right? Yeah. That's always a lot of fun. And then we'll follow up with a Pittsburgh polyphony and Logan, you have somebody pretty exciting we're going to be talking to, correct?Logan: Yes, I do. We're going to be talking about a young neo soul artist coming out of the city. So I'm excited to talk about that.Dan: Right, yeah we're going to be really happy to hear from, well, we're not going to hear from her I guess, but we'll hear from her in her recording from one of her singles and we're really happy to hear that, and let's get to it.Dan: Okay, everybody. As we mentioned in the introduction, we are nearing the one year mark of the attack on the Tree of Life Synagogue. With us is Maggie Feinstein. She's the director of the newly named 10.27 Healing Partnership. 10.27 that being a reference to the date of the attack in which 11 worshipers were killed on a Saturday morning going to synagogue. It was an act of hate, but our city has responded with a lot of acts of love, including programs like this. So thank you for taking the time to be with us here Maggie.Maggie: Thanks for having me here.Dan: Absolutely. Can you tell us a little bit about your background and what you do with the healing center?Maggie: Absolutely. Thank you very much. My background is as a mental health clinician. I'm an LPC, a master's level clinician, and for the last 10 years or so, my work has really been around what we call brief interventions, working with medical doctors and working in medical environments and providing support to the doctors as well as to the patients when they come in for visits.Dan: Are you from Pittsburgh?Maggie: I'm from Pittsburgh. I grew up in Squirrel Hill. Yes.Dan: Oh wow.Maggie: I still live there and I'm currently raising my kids there.Dan: Being from there, can you tell us what that morning was like that Saturday?Maggie: Absolutely. I think that being from there – it is a very familiar place and it is actually somewhere where I've walked all those streets for many, many years. But that morning I was out for a run with a friend and usually we run through the park, but that morning because it was raining, we had run up and we weren't really paying attention. We ended up on Wilkins and we were running up Wilkins and remarked, Oh my gosh, we keep seeing people we know because that's sort of Squirrel Hill for you, people travel the same routes. And so people kept waving out the windows. So it was a morning unfortunately that I found myself outside of there, but was just about 20 minutes earlier and I was reminded of community really, which is what growing up in Squirrel Hill feels like, that it was hard to run down the street without having to stop and talk to lots of people. Which is a wonderful thing, though on that morning it did feel a little bit scary.Dan: That was an incredible day for all the wrong reasons. Can you tell us a little bit about the healing center then? When we talked previously, you'd mentioned being part of that community and now it's going to be a pretty integral piece I think.Maggie: So being from the neighborhood, it was this opportunity to try and serve the community that's been so great to me. And so after the shooting happened on October 27 there was a lot of amazing community activity going on, which I wasn't part of, but I'm really inspired by the community partners that stepped up to the plate. In Pittsburgh we have had such wonderful cooperation between the congregations, the nonprofits like the Jewish Community Center, Jewish Family and Community Services and the Jewish Federation. And so between the synagogues, those three major institutions as well as the Center for Victims, which is always ready and able to respond to community mental health needs, there was just this really amazing partnership that happened and then being able to eventually incorporate the voices of the victims and the survivors.Maggie: They all together created the 10.27 Healing Partnership. So I'm the director of it, but the truth was that it was the efforts that happened week in, week out afterwards of people really caring and people wanting to have their voices heard when it comes to what community recovery looks like since it was a community trauma.Dan: Right. And there is a level of a federal involvement with this?Maggie: Yes. And so immediately in the aftermath the federal government came, FBI, as well as the Office of Victims of Crime have offered a ton of support. They have people who were able to come in, help our community, help that group of people who were gathering to decide what to do next, help guide them through the process of creating what is generically known as a resiliency center. And those federal groups really were able to give perspective on how do we move forward, how do we gather, how do we anticipate what the community needs might look like, and then respond to those needs.Dan: Right.Logan: And so the, the healing centers recently opened, it opened on October 1st, correct?Maggie: It opened on October 2nd, yes.Logan: October 2nd, okay. And so it's been opened recently. Have you had a chance to gauge how they're responding to it now that it's open?Maggie: I think that opening our doors was a really awesome opportunity because what we say when people are feeling this sense of loss is that there's no wrong door and that the more doors that are open to people, the better. But I also think that before we opened our doors on October 2nd, a lot of people were accessing services through the Center for Victims or through JFCS. And so what we have seen in the last two weeks is that a lot of people are saying this is a relief to know this is here. It's good to know there's a door.Maggie: It doesn't mean that people were sitting and waiting to go just there because there are other places. But what a lot of people say is that I do have a therapist or I've been part of a support group and then there's just some days that feel really hard. And so knowing that I could come in here on those days that just feel hard to be with people, to gather, to maybe get some emotional support or maybe to practice some self-guided relaxation. People are saying, Oh that's really nice to know that's there.Logan: And going off that, I read that you guys actually have someone that will come to greet you when you get there and as you said, some days you're just feeling vulnerable or sad. How do you feel the importance of that is, just kind of having someone there to greet you and bring you in when you're going to the healing center?Maggie: I think it's so important. I think, I mean one functionally for the JCC, for people who are not members of the JCC, because that's where we are housed, we're using space within the JCC. For people who aren't members, it's helpful because they don't know their way around. But more importantly as humans it's nice to connect to people. And one of the things we know is that with trauma we kind of disconnect, we pull away. And so I think the earlier that people can connect and feel like somebody cares and feel like they're not alone, the better it is. And so the greeter role is a really important one where someone can come to the door and walk you up, make sure you have what you need and make sure you're comfortable.Dan: What do you see as a therapist, say the difference between an individual trauma and then traumas that might affect an entire community? I mean, there might be a guy who just works down the street who really, maybe he's not a Jewish person, but this tragedy, I mean, could greatly affect them.Maggie: Absolutely. And I think that's a really important point. And I think it's a good question because I've thought a lot about what is different than when something terrible happens to me and something terrible happens to the bigger community. And I think that there is a challenge because there are so many levels of grieving that can happen when there's a tragedy within the community and all of those different levels of grieving mean that people are hitting it at different moments and people are feeling different things. And so there's sort of these waves, but people aren't necessarily on the same wave as other people. And so that's one of the reasons that the federal government has thought through this, thought of having these resiliency centers and in Pittsburgh our resiliency center is the 10.27 Healing Partnership.Maggie: But to have these resiliency centers was thought out by Congress a long time ago after 9/11 when they realized that as communities continue to experience the losses that happened during a communal trauma, that it's very, the needs change and the needs need to be attended to. We have to keep ourselves aware of them. And one of the things that I would say is that the needs will evolve over time, that just like grief and like other experiences, that because it's a communal trauma, we want to evolve with the community's needs. We don't stay stuck. So the space that we created is meant to be as flexible as possible, but equally the services will be driven primarily by the people who come in and desire them. And the hope with that is that we can respond to what people are looking for rather than what I, with my mental health degree, believe people might be looking for because that's a lot less important than what it is that people are seeking.Dan: Maybe stepping outside of your professional role and just thinking of yourself as a Squirrel Hill resident. After this last year here, what do you see from the community and how do you see that either it has changed, good, bad, where people, where their heads might be and just where people are, how it feels there right now.Maggie: I think that this a high holiday season, Yom Kippur that just passed felt very different for most people. And I think that like most other grieving emotions, there's good and bad, they're complicated, they don't feel just one way. And the good part, I heard a lot of people say how relieving it was to go to synagogue this year and be around old friends, people that we haven't seen for a while and to feel that sense of connectedness. Like I was saying, that's one of the more important things. But for a number of the congregations there was also a sense of being displaced or the absence of the people who had been such wonderful community leaders in their congregations. And so I think that there is a lot of complicated emotions.Maggie: There's a lot of new relationships. There's also deepening of old relationships that are beautiful and wonderful to see and that people have connected not just within the Squirrel Hill community but within Greater Pittsburgh, like you were saying, there's a lot of people who've been affected from outside of Squirrel Hill of course, and a lot of them have come in to reconnect with old friends, to reconnect with community.Maggie: And so those are the moments that feel, we call that the mental health side, we call that the post traumatic growth. Those are opportunities where when something has been broken, there can be a new growth that comes out of it. But that at the same time there's just a big sense of loss. Like I was saying earlier with my morning that day when I came through Wilkins and it's just a small street, anybody from another city wouldn't consider it a major thoroughfare. But it is really hard to have the feeling of the change of the neighborhood with that building currently not being able to be occupied.Dan: What can you tell us with October 27th coming up here, what types of activities or events are going to be going on either at the center or just within the community?Maggie: There has been an effort by that same group of people that I'd mentioned earlier who helped to create the 10.27 Healing Partnership to create community events that happened on 10.27 this year, 10 27 2019. And that was something we learned from other communities was that it had to be owned by the community. And that there has to be something for people to do because there's often a lot of times where we have energy we want to give. So together that group's come up with the motto for the day is remember, repair, together. And those are lessons we've learned from other places. So there'll be community service, there's community service throughout the city. There's ways that people can sign up for slots, but there's also an encouragement that communities can gather on their own and create their own community service. It doesn't just have to be through organized community service.Maggie: And then also there'll be Torah study, which is really important in the Jewish tradition in terms of honoring people after death. And so the Torah study will be happening and there is a communal gathering at Soldiers and Sailors in the evening and throughout the day there'll be activities going on at the 10.27 Healing Partnership at the JCC, we'll be having for people who just don't really know what else they want to do that day. They're welcome to come and gather in community, sit together. The Highmark Caring Place will be there doing activities that are really geared towards being present with ourselves, being able to honor lives that were lost and also being able to support each other in this hard time.Dan: Right. And I'm not sure if we mentioned it earlier, but the Healing Partnership that's located, is that on Murray Avenue at the JCC?Maggie: Yeah, so the JCC sits at Forbes and Murray and Darlington.Dan: Okay, right.Maggie: It takes over that whole block. But yeah, so in Squirrel Hill, Forbes and Murray, and there will not be regularly scheduled activities that Sunday at the JCC. And the only real purpose for coming there will be people who want to gather in community. There won't be exercising or basketball or any of those other things that day.Dan: Right. Where can we find you online?Maggie: So the address is www.1027healingpartnership.org. And on the website we really tried to promote a lot of ways that people can do their own learning, exploration. Even some things that we can do on our own with apps and podcasts and things that people can do at home.Dan: Well Maggie, thank you so much for coming here and thank you so much for what you do in the community. We really appreciate you being here today.Maggie: Thank you so much for having me and thank you for highlighting the important things going on in Pittsburgh.Dan: Absolutely.Dan: All right, we're here with Erin Hogan, she's an account supervisor here at Word Write. And we wanted to talk with Erin here about one of her blogs that she just wrote for our storytellers blog. The title is fear based marketing campaigns are not always the right approach. A really interesting topic. It kind of sparked out of a conversation that we were having in the office and Erin, thanks for being with us and can you tell us a little bit about the blog?Erin: Yeah, thanks for having me. So really, this stemmed from a conversation I actually had with my husband. He sent me this video and asked for my opinion on it. I was, just had to be honest that I really didn't like it.Dan: Okay...Erin: I think it's from a-Dan: You didn't like the video. What's the video?Erin: So the Sandy Hook Promise PSA. It's basically this really dark play on a back to school supplies commercial. So it starts out with kids showing their folders and their backpacks and their skateboard and just general things that people and parents purchase their kids to go to school for the new year. And then it just starts to take a turn. You kind of see some shuffling happening in the background, and you start to notice that there's something happening at this school.Dan: There's an active shooter.Erin: There's an active shooter. And that's really what the video is supposed to get across, supposed to. The goal of this campaign is to show people, it's to encourage knowing the signs of gun violence before they happen. But the thing that really got me going with this video is that you're encouraging to know the signs about gun violence before they happen, when depicting an act of gun violence. That just seems to me counterintuitive to what they're trying to convey. Just in general, the whole concept of my blog, getting back to the point of this segment is fear based approach versus a positive tone of an ad. How do you, what's the best way to tell a story? I mean we're at WordWrite all about storytelling, finding the best way to tell a business story. But even in a general cause related marketing effort, what's the best way to tell a story?Dan: In advocacy, right.Erin: Right. And based on the evidence that I've found in the research, it really doesn't work. So sure everybody remembers the anti-drug PSAs in the ‘80s and ‘90s and 2000 that were funded by the Partnership for a Drug Free America. There was the your brain on drugs. That one was a big, everybody remembers that one. It was the guy in the kitchen saying this is your brain and he shows an egg. And then he hits it into a cast iron pan and says, this is your brain on drugs. And it's supposed to say your brain's fried on drugs. And basically over the years they had a bunch of variations, that it was basically saying if you do drugs, your parents won't approve. Well when was the last time a 14, 15 year old kid listened to what their parents do.Erin: They didn't work and in fact it caused the adverse effect. It encouraged kids to think that drugs were cool. There was something, it was the anti, going against my parents. Whereas they took a shift, a more encouraging shift in the mid 2000s, many of the younger generations will remember this, the above the influence campaigns. Which basically, instead of showing imagery of kids defying their parents and the consequences of their actions, it took a more positive tone, basically showing the positive ramifications of making an informed decision on their own and having the independence and the courage to say no without any oversight from their parents. Those actually performed far better.Erin: So it begs the question to me for a PSA like the Sandy Hook Promise PSA. Would it have had a more resounding impact or a better impact on the viewers if it showed the positives of stopping gun violence versus the negatives of what happens after gun violence occurs?Dan: One thing I think that's important that we'd be remiss if we didn't add here is that the ad itself within, I think a couple of days of it, I think had actually earned millions of dollars or a great sum for Sandy Hook Promise. So for that group, so-Erin: Donated ad spend.Dan: Donated ad, yeah there we go.Erin: Or ad, media placements.Dan: This is why we have Erin on because she can say the right words.Erin: I'm here all night.Dan: Exactly, this is going to be one of two hours now with Erin. No, but it did have an impact. It did, it did, it was successful. And I think something important right now that we have to think of is, do we have to be provocative today? Is that how you get people's attention or is there a way to balance that? Logan, you want to jump in?Logan: Yeah, sure. I think also this is just a microcosm of society at large where we've become less of, even in the media where 20 years ago it counted on who was reporting the right news at the right time and now it's become who's reporting it first, whether or not they have to issue corrections later or not. And so I think in that same kind of click-baity kind of way that that society on, especially on the internet has become, I think that this PSA may have fallen victim to that. And as you said, whether or not that was the right move is kind of debatable, but I think this is a small part of a society's directional move at large.Erin: Yeah, I mean certainly you have to cut through the clutter. No one would dismiss that. Especially any talented marketer. I'm also not insinuating or advocating for doing nothing. Doing nothing is never an answer either-Dan: Right.Erin: They certainly have an admirable cause that they're going after here. And obviously the genesis of the Sandy Hook Promise Organization, it comes out of, it was birthed from a really horrible, horrible tragedy in United States history. But in terms of the approach and just looking at it from a technical messaging standpoint that we as marketers do, I'm just not sure it fully executed what it’s intention initially was.Dan: All right. Well Erin, you definitely gave us a lot to think about here. We thank you for coming on and I think for sure we'll be seeing, as long as we have television, as long as we have advertising, we're going to see similar ads like this, so we'll be sure to keep our eyes on it and follow those trends. So thanks a lot.Erin: Yeah, thanks for having me. Bye guys.Logan: Centuries before cell phones and social media, human connections were made around fires as we shared, the stories have shaped our world. Today, stories are still the most powerful way to move hearts and minds and inspire action. At WordWrite, Pittsburgh's largest independent public relations agency, we understand that before you had a brand, before you sold any product or service, you had a story. WordWrite helps clients to uncover their own capital S story. The reason someone would want to buy, work, invest or partner with you through our patented story crafting process. Visit wordwritepr.com to uncover your capital S story.Paul: We mark an anniversary with this episode of the P100 podcast, the audio companion to the Pittsburgh 100, and that is the second anniversary of the Pittsburgh 100 e-zine. Our podcast is a little bit younger here but we're pleased to have with us in the studio for this segment, Chris Schroder, who is the founder of The 100 Companies. Say hello there Chris.Chris: Good morning Pittsburgh.Paul: The Pittsburgh 100 and this podcast are one of more than 20 affiliated publications in The 100 Companies network. Chris is in town for a few days, visiting, working with us on a few things. So we thought it'd be a great opportunity to give the listeners a little bit of background on why we do the 100, why we do this podcast. And since Dan and I are both former journalists and so is Chris, to have one of those, “didn't journalism used to be great and now where the hell is it going”, sort of a conversation.Dan: Was it ever great?Paul: Dan, your experience might be different than mine.Dan: I wasn't in the Woodward Bernstein era, so I don't know.Paul: I had a tee shirt when I got into journalism, which was during that era. The tee-shirt said "If your mother loves you, if your mother says she loves you, check it out".Chris: Trust, but verify.Paul: That's right. That's right. So Chris, tell us a little bit about your background.Chris: My blood is full of ink. I was a high school newspaper editor, college newspaper editor, came up in the Watergate era, graduated from high school when Nixon was resigning and then worked for six daily newspapers, and then started my own neighborhood newspapers in Atlanta. And we built that up to about a hundred thousand circulation, had about three different titles. About 10 years ago I started working with some journalists in the Atlanta area who worked for the daily newspaper and they were unfortunately being downsized out of the daily paper.Paul: A common refrain.Chris: Yes, and so they, I helped them start a publication there that had a newsletter, website and social media platform. So I helped them start that. I'd developed a revenue model for them. It's doing great 10 years later. But I noticed three or four years in that people were not clicking on the read more link in the stories as much as they used to in the newsletter. They were seeming to be fine with a shorter excerpt. So I tried to come up with a newsletter where you did not have to click through, where everything was contained in the newsletter itself and so we started designing that, realized that might be about a hundred words. So we said, why don't we call it the Atlanta 100, every article be exactly 100 words, every video be exactly a hundred seconds. And we went to market, people really enjoyed it.Chris: And later I talked to a conference of PR owners, about 150 owners in the room, and was telling them the history of content marketing all the way through the rise of newspapers and the fall of newspapers and ended with a journalism project on the Atlanta 100. And at the end of it, 12 owners came up and gave me their business cards and said I'd like to start a 100 in my city. So that thus began the expansion into a network of The 100 Companies.Paul: So Chris, something that Dan and I get a question about quite often, and really Dan is the editorial director here, having come to us directly from journalism. Where do the 100 publications and podcasts like this sit on the journalistic scale? I mean we joked about Woodward and Bernstein, obviously we're not an investigative journalism enterprise. How would you describe what we do?Chris: Well, we are part of what I see as the new emerging marketplace in media where we've had a sort of disassembling over the last few years of the traditional media marketplace. So 1,800 newspapers have closed in the last 18 years. Tens of thousands of journalists have been let go to be put into other jobs or find other careers. We've had a lot of changes, a lot of new emerging media coming up digitally. There's a lot of interest of course in the last 20 years in social media, but now we're finding the problems in that with Facebook and other issues of privacy.Chris: So I think what we are is a part of the solution and part of the experimentation that we will in another five years start to see a lot of clarity as people start to organize and merge. And there will be some platforms that emerge and some that fall away as we're seeing now with the larger level of some of the streaming, a lot of organization going on with HBO and AT&T and Comcast and different people trying to organize who's going to win. There'll probably be three or four winners in the streaming of video. Disney's getting into it, so many other people are. But there's going to be a consolidation there. Eventually, there'll be a consolidation of, as there was in the beginning of traditional newspapers in America in the 1700s, there will be eventually a settling of the industry and we certainly expect the 100 platform to be one of the winners.Paul: So gentlemen, last question, biggest question. What is the future of journalism?Dan: Well, if I could jump into it first here. Obviously the 100 gives us again, just a small little piece of the media landscape here in Pittsburgh. We're not going to be, we're never going to be the PG. We're not that. And it's not what we're trying to be. But I see a lot of former journalists in Pittsburgh that have found websites that maybe five, 10 years ago people would've considered blogs and blogs maybe had a stigma compared to them. But now we're seeing really sharp good people with news sense.Paul: Yes.Dan: They understand what is newsworthy.Paul: Storytellers.Dan: They're good writers, they're storytellers and they're finding these outlets that people are starting to gravitate to. Not long ago we had Rossliynne Culgan of The Incline on. They're doing a lot of great work there. Between say Next Pittsburgh, we see good stuff from out of them. There are a lot of good small outlets that journalists are flocking to after they either lose their job or they just realize that, I hate it, there's not much of a route forward in the newspapers. So there's always going to be room for people that know how to write, I feel like.Paul: Yes. And tell stories and write information. Chris.Chris: I think storytelling is very primal. That's how we all learned to hear, store and retrieve information as children. And it goes back millennia, the storytelling tradition. So I think it's very important to do it in as few as a hundred words or as many as 10,000 words. I'd like to look at journalism on a continuum and I think what's going to happen, I like to think that it's all sort of a pendulum. And that while in the last five to 10 years, our attention spans have gotten much shorter, I think we're poised and ready for what I think might be one day a pendulum swing by a future generation who, attention spans will start to push to be much longer and they'll appreciate the longer read and the longer write. And I think that could happen. Right now we're still in the throws of people just getting very short morsels of information. Twitter did expand from 140 to 280 characters, but I think we're going to see two or three years from now, people start to settle in and realize that morsels are good, but it still leaves them hungry.Paul: Well, Chris, really appreciate the perspective. Thanks for being here in Pittsburgh and joining us for this segment on the podcast today. We will have to have you back at some time in the future and see how some of your predictions and Dan's have meted out.Chris: Well, you all are doing great work. You're one of the leaders of our national network, and so thank you for the work you're doing and the innovations you're doing with this podcast and other things. Keep up the great work.Paul: Thank you, Chris.Dan: Thanks, Chris.Dan: Okay, we're back for another edition of our Pittsburgh polyphony series here and really enjoy this one because we get a chance to learn about some new artists that are doing some great things in the region here and Logan, this is a pretty new, interesting artist that we want to talk about here and can take us to introduction.Logan: So we're going to be talking about Sierra Sellers today. Neo soul, RMB, jazz artist in the Pittsburgh region and she's been putting out some tracks, but she's really seen some recognition in the recent past and I had the opportunity to see her at Club Cafe about a month ago and she just really brings a lot of great energy to the room. She has a great voice and her and her band really interact well and she just brings a lot of positive vibes to the audience.Dan: Yeah, that's one thing I think, you talk about the energy here and that's an important part of a performer here. As a guy, as an artist yourself, what do you think that offers whenever somebody can kind of control a crowd?Logan: Oh, it's invaluable. I mean it's the same as any other kind of entertainer, whether you're a comedian or anything else up on stage. And being a performer versus doing a performance is the difference between getting up on stage and singing or rapping or whatever you're doing, all your songs or giving an actual performance and putting on a show to the audience. So, one is vastly more memorable and more connective than the other. And being able to do that on stage is something that, if you want to be a successful artist, you're going to have to learn how to do.Dan: When you talk about Sierra, what exactly is it that she uniquely brings to the stage?Logan: Yes. So initially it's just herself. She just has kind of a bubbly personality, but she also gets the crowd to interact and she tells some stories from inspiration behind the songs or inspiration behind the instrumental or the production and talks with the band and just really kind of gets a feel for the audience and kind of feels them out and is able to work the crowd.Dan: That's awesome. Can you tell us a little bit about the track we're about to hear?Logan: Yes. So we're about to hear a track of Sierra's called Shine. It's a recent track, the leader on Spotify's playlist. They have a set of astrological sign playlists, with a pretty prominent following, and this landed her on Spotify as Libra playlist. It's collaboration with fellow Pittsburgh rapper who goes by My Favorite Color, which is a great name. But yeah, we're going to lead you out with Shine by Sierra Sellers. A nice vibey track. Great for just a chill day. Just a little mood booster. So hope you enjoy. 

Fidelity Answers: The Investment Podcast
How to invest for income

Fidelity Answers: The Investment Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 27, 2019 31:39


Three portfolio managers with a focus on income strategies in different asset classes discuss how they go about building for income in uncertain times. Richard Edgar, Editor in Chief, talks to Peter Khan for fixed income, Chris Forgan from multi asset, and in Hong Kong, Polly Kwan for equities. Transcript RICHARD EDGAR Things aren't easy for income investors. There are now $12.5 trillion dollars of debt around the world with negative yields and the hunt for positive yielding assets continues to drive valuations higher and push investors further up the risk spectrum and that risk is becoming all the more real as volatility picks up, growth slows, and central banks change their tone. All this at a time when the need for income has never been so great as aging populations around the world need to fund their way through increasingly lengthy retirements. So what can be done? How can investors build portfolios that will safely deliver on income in uncertain times where the rules seem to be turning on their heads? With me and poised with their answers are three Fidelity portfolio managers each focused on income strategies but each representing a different asset class. First here in the London studio is Peter Kahn. Peter, welcome. You've got some 25 years of experience investing in fixed income under your belt. What drew you to bonds?  PETER KHAN Well, believe it or not Richard, I was foolish enough to leave the beginning of the first tech bubble 1.0 back in San Francisco in the mid to late 90s.  RICHARD It was possibly a good time to leave.  PETER Well it might have been. Timing is everything, of course, they say. But for me having started out my career in financial markets with the focus on equities that was to me a little bit of a one-dimensional market at the time - or so I thought - and I was very much more attracted to thinking about multifaceted impacts of the combination of the bottom-up stuff together with macro factors that tend to dominate in fixed income spaces - that sort of puzzle appealed to me.  RICHARD So complexity was it was part of the appeal for you.  PETER Well said.  RICHARD Okay, well also here in London from the multi asset team is Chris Forgan. Now, Chris, income is often seen as one of the more defensive styles of investing. Are you yourself cautionary by nature? Does this explain your career? CHRIS FORGAN Yeah, I think I think it probably does actually. Certainly how I was drawn into this particular area of investments. I look at what’s attracted me over the years in terms of investment styles and managers and I think have a natural cautionary nature that underpins what I do and that very much is at the heart I think of a multi asset income approach.  RICHARD It seems like it was predestined then, Chris. CHRIS Yes. Yes.  RICHARD Okay. Well joining us from Fidelity's Hong Kong office representing the equity team in Asia is Polly Kwan. Polly, welcome to you. You've been based in Asia for all of your career - not typically regarded as a region with much of an income focus. How did you end up managing a portfolio with that income focus? POLLY KWAN I started at Fidelity in Tokyo back in 2000 where there was an increasing push of capital management and also return to shareholders in that country. So I witnessed that companies which did more shareholders returns got more appreciated by the market in terms of share price performance. So that's how I have a bigger belief in terms of dividend payments. And also later time moved to Hong Kong from Tokyo and started covering property. Property is a sector that needs more balance sheet and cash flow analysis - that helps me to do my job today because if you want to invest in a company that can pay you dividend today and tomorrow you need to take an all rounder approach looking at not just P&L but also balance sheet and cash flow.  RICHARD So it's a rounded view that appeals to you, as well.  POLLY Yes.  RICHARD Okay, well thank you all very much for joining me. Now, Peter, let's come back to you. We're in a new world, aren't we: the traditional reliable income assets - government bonds, high quality corporate credit - they're not doing what they used to. Are investors keeping up with this new reality?  PETER It's very difficult to keep up with the new reality of basically return-free risk in those high quality segments that used to be the foundation of investors’ portfolios, particularly low risk tolerance investors just looking to clip a coupon to keep up with inflation. The degree of financial repression that we have today…  RICHARD It certainly doesn't sound very appealing.  PETER No. It implies that you need to stretch a little bit to... basically run to stand still. In keeping up with inflation, with generating an income stream from fixed income assets now implies that you've got to go down in quality, not necessarily too far down in quality but you certainly need to introduce some asset classes into the mix of asset allocation in your portfolio that traditionally wouldn't have been there in past days. So I mean specifically things like high yield bonds and emerging market corporates and to a certain extent hybrid instruments can be the sort of additional spice in a portfolio that on a well-diversified basis will allow you to achieve what it is that that you need on an income basis.  RICHARD So you've got to get a lot racier with your fixed income allocation which perhaps people haven't been used to and that's the worry.  PETER That's right. And I mean we've been hopeful that we would leave these times behind, these special times post financial crisis that were seen, even last year, as potentially an anomaly. Now that we are so deep into the expectation of QE 2.0 or QE infinity the idea is that we really must say that the new normal perhaps endures for a lot longer than we previously thought and that of course has led to this buzz word of ‘Japanification’ or ‘Japanisation’, depending upon who you speak to. This sort of locking in the low rate, low inflation, low growth environment in perpetuity is at the top of investors’ minds.  RICHARD And Polly that's the area of course that you talked about. You started your career in Japan and it’s a country that's had to deal with this sort of environment for a very long time. Talking about your clients outside Japan though how are their demands changing when you're talking to them about income equity strategies? POLLY Asia has always been perceived as a growth-only kind of region. However, I have to say that the attitude both from the management side and also from the investor side have changed over time. I mean, of course, you know with this low interest rate environment naturally people are seeking a higher income, but also it has to do with the demographics itself. I mean in Asia we are no different from other parts of the world. If you look at it overall we are facing an ageing population. So with an ageing population actually more investors want to have income on top of growth. So when they think about Asian equity, if you are investing into something that has long term growth - we still believe there is a long term growth potential in Asia equity - but along that journey you'll receive some dividend payments. This is something very, very nice to have, especially for an aging population.  RICHARD We’ll come to demographics in a moment but just thinking about the company managements that you talk to. You're saying that attitudes amongst them are changing, that they're beginning to be more prepared to hand over dividends. Is that right? POLLY Yes, because a lot of the corporates in this part of the region they suffered in the crisis in terms of their share price. They have been thinking hard about how to have a more stable kind of share price and they know that there's a need from the investor side that they will appreciate some kind of sustainable and consistent dividend pay out that will have good support to the share price. So that attitude has also changed. RICHARD One way of making your shares stickier, I suppose, for people hanging around for that as well.  POLLY Exactly.  RICHARD Chris, coming to you. People are looking for new, clever ways to generate income. Is multi assets benefiting from that? CHRIS Yeah, absolutely. I think multi asset has seen huge growth in terms of demand, in particular for income solutions. We can go where we see opportunities and we can retreat from areas where we see threats. And as Peter alluded to earlier, you think about your traditional income assets and your government bonds, your high quality investment grade, which are certainly lower yielding today than they historically have been. We can continue to hold those assets for their defensive characteristics but blend them with other assets such as high yield, such as equity income, both from Europe but also from Asia as well. RICHARD And alternatives as well, I imagine.  CHRIS Yes. This is the other exciting area that somewhat exploded in the last 10 years, post the financial crisis, is the onset of the alternatives universe where we're able to access some attractive opportunities both from a return perspective but also from an income perspective. When I talk about alternatives I’m talking about things like infrastructure, renewables, loans, and asset leasing-type vehicles. The drivers of these asset classes are often quite different to what drives mainstream asset classes - equities and bonds - and so when we bring them into a portfolio and blend them with these other asset classes it’s clearly very additive in terms of delivering a lower volatility outcome for the end client.  RICHARD What are you looking for when you do build a portfolio? Just briefly describe how do you do that blend. What's the recipe?  CHRIS Well, we're very much looking at the opportunity set in front of us. Does this asset from the fundamental level look to be offering value going forward? Are we getting paid to take on the associated level risk? What's the driving force of that risk underpins it today? And what's the income generation and how does that therefore sit alongside the other assets could be potentially could invest into? In terms of the portfolio, is it adding exposure to something we already have or is it bringing something differentiated to the overall portfolio mix? And obviously if it's a latter - and in particular with alternatives that's what you get - then it adds value to the overall portfolio mix, particularly in terms of delivering a diverse well diversified portfolio often with lower levels of volatility.  RICHARD So that's the appeal of alternatives, that you're getting a different type of revenue stream, but you've all talked about this different world where the usual sources of income just aren't there. Thinking about the particular assets that each of you is looking for for income, if everyone else is piling in and seeing the appeal of bridges or whatever it might be then aren't the prices of those assets driven higher as well? CHRIS Yes. In a lot of ways they react in manners we've seen with traditional asset classes over the years so therefore we appraise them the same way and if the price of the asset has been driven higher and we think that's ultimately made the asset expensive or it's unsustainable then we'll clearly look to retreat away as we would with any and any other investment. RICHARD You make it sound so simple. Peter, how about you? Is it just going further and further up the risk spectrum?  PETER Interestingly, I mean Chris is absolutely right in terms of the forces that are at play that you've highlighted. But in thinking about an income focused portfolio, particularly within fixed income, that definitely creates an environment where you tend to, in sort of extreme euphoria cycles, you tend to see that dash for trash kind of dynamic kicking in and people going all the way down into the most remote and illiquid assets that they can find in order to extract that additional value that they believe is there. And we haven't necessarily seen that happening year-to-date within fixed income market performance. If you think about the high yield market for a second on a risk-adjusted basis it's actually the higher quality elements of the market that are producing the best returns year-to-date and that's because investors are indeed discriminating and concerned about a combination of factors notably liquidity and the potential for default losses to impair their values further down the food chain. If and when we do get a recessionary environment developing in the US economy or the European economy then you'd really anticipate that the lower quality assets are going to need to offer a much better compensation for the intrinsic risk that you're taking than they do today. And we have a bit of this investor schizophrenia going on at the moment in that people are getting crowded into as much income that they can possibly acquire but they’re, at the same time, afraid of taking that final step down into the mire, if you will, to pick up the juiciest of assets because they just don't know how deep that swamp can be - to completely mangle the allusion there. RICHARD Yes, whatever it is it sounds grim. Polly - the dash for trash: that's perhaps not how you would describe finding income in equities.  POLLY I do agree that over the short term when there is a chase of yield then the higher dividend yield stocks become very expensive compared to where they should be. However, there is a difference if you want to invest into the long term. I always tell people, do not only look at today's dividend yield but you want a company who can pay you today also who can pay you at least the same amount of dividend tomorrow. So don't fall into that dividend trap, that I would call it. Having full analysis not only on the P&L but also very solid analysis on the balance sheet and also cash flow to make sure that all the companies are going to pay at least as much dividends that they can pay today tomorrow. So that is the difference and there’s still a lot of stock picking opportunity.  RICHARD So that's the analysis you can do just looking at a spreadsheet. What about the conversations that you have with managements? What do you look for there? What gives you confidence about the dividend tomorrow? POLLY Investing using a dividend strategy - company visits and doing due diligence with a company is very, very important. I think if an analyst does a decent job in terms of looking at the dynamics in an industry, the balance sheet, cash flow, they can do a good forecast in terms of earnings, but whether a company will pay you a dividend tomorrow: it comes down to the management decisions. So knowing the management well enough, knowing the track record, knowing their thinking - any concern, any investment plan that they may have in the next 12 to 24 months - that makes a big difference. That actually is part of a major step I need in order to assess whether a company will make that dividend payments that I'd expect in twelve months’ time.  CHRIS It's definitely fair to say that when you think about equity income investing it actually tends to on the whole be the more defensive area of the market you get exposure to. You see that particularly in risk-off periods in markets that traditional equity income investors tend to perform certainly better than the wider market on average. You saw that certainly through the volatility we saw last year, particularly in Q4, where the natural defensive nature of a lot of these managers or investors comes to the fore. So it's a positive that underpins that approach. RICHARD And capital preservation? CHRIS Yeah, absolutely. Very much about strong balance sheets, cash flow generative companies that can maintain the dividend over time.  RICHARD All three of you are sort of nodding at that aspect. Peter, I mean how do you build that in? That thinking.  PETER Well, I think there is a lot of common aspects in what Chris and Polly have said and a lot of correlation between these different flavours of income products that we're trying to manage and deliver superior returns for clients. A lot of that correlation to interest rates will mean that we tend to move together but there can be significant differences in alignment of interests between management, creditors and shareholders over time. So it's interesting to hear what Polly has to say in terms of the priorities for her screening companies, and Chris as well, in portfolios whereby you have confidence in the ability to generate growth in cash flow to service the dividend. That's clearly one part that's very important for a credit analyst to think about as well, but when the rubber hits the road we may also have comfort and confidence as bond holders to own names …  RICHARD You come first. PETER Exactly. So when push comes to shove the dividend can be switched off to the benefit of interest service or assets can be sold and depending upon the nature of the documentation, around the bond instrument in question. The proceeds of that asset sale may or may not need to be delivered to creditors. So that's an additional factor that we'd be thinking about where naturally we'd have the same inclination as our colleagues in multi asset and equity to say, we'd like to back off of a name that simply is not able to continue growing and its capital structure may no longer be appropriate for it, but if there are enough levers to pull in the balance sheet or in the cash flow to divert down that debt sluice rather than dividend sluice then we may still be comfortable and confident enough to own some aging industries, if you will. RICHARD You might go where Polly fears to tread. PETER We might, which sounds perverse, right? Given an investor might think fixed income should be more risk averse than an equity investor. But it’s just thinking about the combinations and permutations of available capacity to service the debt where things diverge.  RICHARD Now you're both obviously sometimes looking at the same companies just different instruments from them. And you alluded, Peter, to the fact that a credit analyst might also be looking at some of the same indicators from a company. How much cross pollination is there between the two sides though from equities and fixed income? How much do you look at those same companies together? PETER Increasingly. Certainly on the financials side there's been a lot of good coordination for many, many, years on this front. Particularly going back to that post financial crisis episode where the global financials needed to raise a lot of capital - credit analysts working very closely together with equity analysts to really understand what was on the balance sheet and what the value of that might be, how much capital cushion is required is kind of integral to the thinking about how we might want to position ourselves in the debt capital stack of national champion banks in Italy, for example. And it's increasingly happening more in industrial space, technology space, and consumer space as capital markets grow around the world and we see new issuers coming to the market from regions outside of developed markets. To have the context of understanding where that kind of business, that kind of capital structure might trade elsewhere in the world, and then overlay some additional thinking about, well this jurisdiction is a little bit more risky or these instruments are a lot less liquid than those that we naturally see, helps us to calibrate and develop an expectation.  RICHARD And Polly, it may be a blessing that you don't invest in Italian banks, for example, but how do you combine that different view in your approach? POLLY In terms of talking about stock picking, I mentioned the P&L - and of course in Asia everybody wants growth - but I look at the balance sheet, whether a company is taking a reasonable level of debt and I need to see a company that can generate free cash flow that can cover that dividend. When companies in Asia, they move to a direction of focusing more on a dividend or setting up a dividend policy, that also leads them to think about the capital structure more. Early on, Peter mentioned about when in a bad time how a company can services its debt - I mean, from my side, because equity shareholders, if things go bad we are the last to collect any money left on the table: in Asia we still want growth but I want them to grow on a very healthy capital structure. RICHARD Which is what you want as we get towards the end of the cycle. When that end happens, none of us seems to know for sure, it's been going on for as long as I can remember. Chris, how do you cope with it? How do you cope with unpredictable messaging from central banks, the effect of politics - I won't name them now, it seems rude to - but how does that influence what you're thinking about as you manage your portfolios now?  CHRIS It's certainly bringing more risks and more challenges to how we look to construct our portfolios. But overall with these heightened risks that we perhaps see on the horizon alongside slowing growth globally at this juncture it certainly points to taking a more defensive positioning to one's portfolio, looking to be more diversified across asset classes and asset types.  RICHARD Peter? PETER Without a doubt, right? I mean the uncertainties that we're dealing with on a day to day basis are very difficult to forecast and very difficult to hedge but they need to be incorporated in the expectations about where things might get to in terms of radical changes in regimes and the market tail seeming to wag the dog of the FOMC policy -  the Federal Reserve - at the moment is just one of them that we clearly need to factor into our thinking about how quickly regimes may change. But actually for an income-based investor a lot of this minute to minute and day to day stuff probably creates more opportunity than threat and a lot of it can be considered noise. But if the cycle ends in a way that's unanticipated it will come back to the point that Polly made earlier about quality and confidence in balance sheets that will make a difference particularly for fixed income investors. When you do need to add a little bit of risk into the mix because there is no free lunch to generate your income stream and you have a reasonable allocation to high yield you want to have a reasonable confidence that most of the significant positions in your portfolio are indeed worth the paper they're printed on, so to speak. RICHARD They’re robust enough.  PETER Yes, the high conviction levels in the companies being able to one way or another to redeem that debt. And it's that kind of environment and modelling around stresses that I think will become evermore important in the thinking about constructing portfolios in the future.  RICHARD So you're able to ignore the vacillations, the noise, as you put it.  PETER I'd love to be able to completely ignore it, but…  RICHARD Well, you can you stand a little bit above them. But one thing you can't ignore because it's something that is affecting all of us everywhere in the world and Polly referred to it early on is the demographics that are changing - an aging population around the world. Almost everywhere. How does that play out in your world? What concerns you about that side of things? PETER I don't know if it's necessarily a concern because that would be sort of the silver lining in the cloud for fixed income as an asset class: as populations age and need to have more focus perhaps on capital preservation then they will tend to allocate a little bit more to fixed income. So the risk is, from our perspective, that we can no longer rely upon past history to dictate exactly how cheap fixed income assets can become in the event that growth picks up and inflation picks up because there is such a significant pool of savings that are looking for a desirable income stream, that are willing to commit to additional fixed income exposure at lower and lower levels. So that's one of the dynamics that's currently at play in the market - the buy the dip on the back of the central banks is a short term cyclical thing, but buy the dip on the back of the demographic trends and debt disinflation dynamics in the global economies - that's a more structural thing that we need to contend with. RICHARD Much bigger picture.  PETER It's about managing people's expectations too.  RICHARD And this new reality that we began with, of course. And Polly, I cut you off earlier talking about demographics but what are your thoughts? You’re in a part of the world where China is aging, other parts of Asia are much younger. How do you adapt?  POLLY I think, like I said before, I think investors overall there is increasing demand for income but at the same time I think the one beauty about Asia in particular is that we are just at the beginning - very, very early stage in terms of companies starting to have a consistent dividend payout. So there is still a lot of opportunity. And another example is a lot of developed markets already have REITs but REITs are a relatively new thing. Not that many markets in Asia have REITs set up yet. So that will be an extra investment instrument that we can have from the equity side that can generate decent dividends; stable income. At the same time, if you believe in the overall growth story in Asia asset price appreciation will also benefit the investor as well. So I always tell my investors, if they buy Asian stocks, buying something with an income you get the valuation buffer, you enjoy the long-term growth story in Asia, but you also collect a dividend paycheck every quarter, every six months. RICHARD I've got one more question for each of you, a final bit of advice. What should someone consider, what are the opportunities they should watch for at the moment, for those people who are who are looking for income? Chris, let me come to you first. CHRIS I would probably talk closer to home really on this one. Linking back to your previous question, just talking about demographics. You mentioned earlier that people are obviously living longer nowadays and requiring a form of income in retirement. We can look across all these asset classes to bring a solution together that can be very targeted in nature. And later in life you're wanting the assurance of your capital going forward, so a more defensive approach, and focusing very much on the downside is a strategy that can sit along perhaps other income solutions in retirement. RICHARD Successfully pitching your home turf there. Now let me ask my single asset class managers here what they think the opportunities are. Polly, let's come to you first.  POLLY I think opportunities we are facing in Asia: one, another topic that we didn't really touch upon, which is in the spotlight these days is the trade war. A lot of people when they invest in Asia are very scared about the potential negative outcome from the trade war. And that's why, for example, a lot of the tech stock got so down. But as an income fund manager one thing I can tell you, the beauty about Asia is that we have quite a few tech stocks that have very solid balance sheets, some of them even in their cash balance sheet have very good free cash flow. So if you're a long time investor and you believe that this trade war is still going to resolve one way or the other, actually you get a pay, in the form of dividends, to be patient and waiting for that. So I think this is one opportunity that people can look into in Asia.  RICHARD And Peter, a final word to you.  PETER Two interesting things - one, you mentioned at the beginning was $12 trillion of negative yielding debt, and the second thing that Polly has just left us with was a trade war resolution ultimately coming about. The combination of those two factors is probably the biggest danger for fixed income investors at the moment because once we have the pressure valves released and perhaps so much of this monetary stimulus is no longer required we are going to see perhaps a shift in interest rates. We wouldn't expect that to be your father's shift in interest rates, or mother's shift in interest rates, of 100, 200, 300 basis points but 50 to 100 basis points back up in yields will create some capital loss for investors who are currently getting crowded in. So I think at the moment the sensible thing to do is not only to decrease the duration of the portfolio but the offset to that in order to maintain an enhanced income stream is to diversify and to consider almost a barbell approach of high quality investment grade credits and government bonds if and where you can find them with a positive yield and a positive real yield, namely something like US treasuries, and then adding some high quality emerging markets and high yield credit to the mix. It helps to provide investors with a good risk-adjusted balance in the portfolio. RICHARD Ever alert to the dangers. Well thank you Peter Kahn as well as Polly Qwan and Chris Forgan. Now if you want to read more about income investing we have a whole edition for you on the topic online, just search ‘Fidelity Answers’. And if you like this discussion please do rate us on your podcast app. That's it for me. The producer was Seb Morton-Clark and studio management was by a technical army: Connor Baillie and Alex Willcox here in London, and Tommy Su in Hong Kong. Thank you very much indeed for listening. Goodbye.

reThink Real Estate Podcast
RTRE 64 - Get Off My Lawn: A Guide to Modern Marketing in Real Estate

reThink Real Estate Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later May 27, 2019 24:20


Download this Episode On today's episode, we talk about the shiny object, ways to build your business and modern marketing. Please leave us a review and subscribe for more! reThink Real Estate Podcast Transcription Audio length 24:20 RTRE 64 – Get Off My Lawn: A Guide to Modern Marketing in Real Estate [music] [Chris] Welcome to re:Think Real Estate, your educational and hopefully entertaining source for all things real estate, business, news and tech.  [Christian]: I am Christian Harris in Seattle, Washington. [Nathan]: Hi, I am Nathan White in Columbus, Ohio. [Chris]: And I am Chris Lazarus in Atlanta, Georgia. Thanks for tuning in.  [music] [Chris]: Hey everybody and welcome back to re:Think Real Estate. Chris here with Christian and Nate. What's going on guys? [Christian]: Hey fellas. [Nathan]: What's up? Another week since last week. And I don't know. You know, the usual grind here. It's… [Christian]: You seem excited to be alive. [Chris]: ow's your CRM coming Nate? [laugter] [Nathan]: It's gonna get done after I get back from Key West next week. So… [Christian]: Let me know. I will walk you through it.  [Chris]: Man. [Nathan]: Work hard play hard boys. Work hard play hard. [Chris]: Must be good to be a real estate agent.  [Nathan]: I guess so. [Christian]: It is good to be an agent.  [Nathan]: I like it. What are we talking about today? [Chris]: Well we were just talking about [censored] marketing in real estate and how not to do it. You were just showing us a sign of a real estate agent that put his sign out in the middle of the Utah backcountry. On a…what was that Nate? [Nathan]: I mean literally it's in bum [censored] Egypt. I mean it was out…I mean literally it's a like a 16 mile hike. Like I mean maybe it's genius because here I am talking about it. Right. I don't know. [Chris]: Good marketing. [Nathan]: You know, I mean I don't know. But literally like it's like who's gonna see this, you know. Like you spent a…I mean what's an average sign cost? Hundred bucks? [Chris]: 47. [Nathan]: What's that? [Chris]: 47. [Nathan]: You use the cheap one.  [Christian]: Depends on how many you buy at a time. [Chris]: That's a temporary sign with the thing in the middle. [Nathan]: OK well either way I feel like this guy throw away 47 dollars. Because I doubt he'll ever go back to get it. But, you know, bad marking. You know, Christian was asking me do I do marketing. No. I mean yes and no. I think we've talked a little bit about that. That Ohio running realtor Instagram is of course my marketing. Even though it has nothing to do with Realty. [Christian]: Your Donut Saturday with your son. That's marketing. [Nathan]: It is but it had…I mean that was actually started before I became an agent. So I'll be at…a ton of people identify me through the donut Saturday. But I don't…I don't…I don't mail stuff out. I don't, you know, I'm not out blasting stuff on social media. I really hate most of that stuff. I think there's…there's more organic ways to do it. and I generally find that there's more bad examples than good examples. [Christian]: Yeah so you're saying that there are different ways to do marketing? [Nathan]: Yes but…let's go…there's…there's many different ways to do marketing. The question is can you do it well? And my answer would be no. Most agents do not do it well. [Christian]: So there's plenty of examples of bad marketing. How do you…how do you not do bad marketing and do good marketing? What is that? What does that mean? What are those standards? [Nathan]: Well I think…OK so I, you know, how do you not do bad marketing? OK well that'd be like saying all right, it's same reason I don't take pictures. Right. I'm not a [censored] photographer. And I'm not in marketing either.  If you have a marketing background, maybe I get it. But most of the stuff I see agents do is poor. It's poor video. It's poor pictures. They're there…I don't know what even the terminology is when they create their own business cards. It's just horrible. Like there's a reason there are people they get paid in marketing. And you should go pay them to do it. I mean you get a better result. I'd rather be really… [Christian]: Do you? Do you Nate? [Nathan]: Yeah I think so absolutely.  [Chris]: So please do not go buy the printable like perforated business cards and then use your word art. And print them. [laughter] [Nathan]: Yeah word art. Yeah right. Well you see a lot of that. You see really bad names of real estate teams. And, you know, it's just like oh man it's so tacky. I mean there's…I guess there's a place for them because they're still doing business. But… [Christian]: Well…well I'll back this up a little bit. I don't know if you wanna scratch this or not. So, you know, we've got a bit… [Chris]: No this is all good.  [Nathan]: I know you've been picking at soething.  [Chris]: This is alright.  [Christian]: So so far we've kind of [censored] around about bad marketing which is very subjective. Because… [Chris]: Welcome to the water cooler. [Christian]: What's that? [Chris]: Welcome to the water cooler.  [Christian]: Right, you know, like I myself when it comes to marketing try to put myself at the consumers shoes. And say “OK what's, you know, what…what's the objective of the marketing and am I accomplishing that?” You know, and so I think there's unfortunately most…at least in my experience, most, you know, brokerages and agents. You know, there's kind of the standard of like “Yeah well you do a farm, you know, and you just solds and just listed postcards and you have, you know, your face on your business card and, you know, just kind of all this really low bar like everyone does it. Everyone's told to do it.”  And people who aren't agents don't pay any attention to it. They don't care. You know, it doesn't bring them any value. It goes right in the recycling. You know, you direct me on stuff. And so that brings a question about what is…what is good marketing. Yeah I know what caught my attention as a new agent when I saw social media stuff that stood out or community events or, you know, things that I thought were interesting and unique in this space.  And I think that's kind of the key. Is like is it different? Is it gonna catch people's attention in an industry of white noise? Or, you know…And so I think a lot of that there's not just like hey you do this one thing and that's good marketing. I think in this world of noise, you have to have many touch points. It has to be consistent. It has to be driven towards a specific end result. You know, whether that's someone saving up for email or a meeting or liking your page or following you. You know, like it all has to be designed in a consistent way to…to push people towards a certain desired objective. And most people don't approach marketing in that way. There's kind of like half hazard-ly throw stuff out there without a desired intention in mind.  [Chris]: It's a weak thought Christian. Among real estate agents. [Christian]:  What's that? [Chris]: To think about how the consumer is gonna like the content and the message. [Christian]: Yeah.  [Chris]: You know, it's…I'm not a marketer. By all means like that's not my forte. I can train a real estate agent to sell and have a successful business. I could teach them some of the techniques that they should think about when they're finding how to market themselves. But by all means I am NOT a marketer. Like I'm not gonna create a campaign. I am NOT gonna run all that stuff. I'll leave that to other people who are more creative than I am and just let them do their thing. [Christian]: But it certainly had that desired effect to you once. And you could send that to a marketer. [Chris]: I…I know what we need to accomplish. And so here in Georgia, we…we actually do recruit new agents at my firm. So we have…we get all of the information for the people who pass and we send out collateral. We send out like we send out really nice marketing pieces to them. And so my wife recently got her real estate license to help out in the office because she's a part owner in the company. So some of the things that she's doing, she needs a license now. So she got her license and just for the hell of it we decided “OK we're gonna see what other brokerages are sending out.” And it ranges. Some of them send out, you know, one eight-and-a-half by 11 piece of paper that's a letter. Some of them send out postcards. Some of them send out…there's one KW office. They send out like this worksheet. Right. And it's got this three boxes or three columns and a bunch of rows. And each row it's like “Check about if this broker offers this.” It's like a broker checklist. Interview other brokers and see if they have everything we have. [Christian]: Like a comparison sheet. [Chris]: Yes. Yes that's exactly what it is. And that was probably the most creative. There was a Coldwell Banker office, it sent three po…three postcards from the exact same broker. Brokers face on it. And then it has like no message. Right like the postcard says like “Be bold.” Or like “Be strong.” Like on one. And it's like you've got two or three words taking up the entirety of this like six by nine postcard. And it doesn't say anything of value at all. It's just like motivational [censored]. So then like we look at what we're sending out. And we're sending out this like…we're sending out two mailings, in depth packet of everything that the company offers on this. Like premium glossy photo. And I'm like “You know what? This is why people call us off of this stuff. It's because these other brokers that are in our market doing this, it's garbage.” You got to…you got to focus on what the consumer is gonna want. I'm glad you do that. [Christian]: Sure. Well I think to, you know, the key in on what you said, you know, it's a little cliche these days or whatever. But talking about bringing value. Right. Like you've got to resonate with whoever you're trying to get in front of with something that…that they're going to, well, resonate with. You know, there's gonna be a value that they use. That…that catchphrase. And so it's typically not going to be “Hey I just sold this house or I closed in five days.” They don't give a [censored]. They don't know what that means. Like, you know, but if you are like, you know, you're specializing in a certain community. And, you know, you're sending out something who says “Hey have you checked out this new pizza joint that they just opened? Here's the interview with the owner.” You know, like that doesn't have anything to do the real estate. But you're getting your name and message out there. In alignment with “Hey this person is actually invested in the community. Actually supporting that business of actually providing something to the people that would frequent that business, who might find that interesting.” As an example of, you know, a community aligned marketing strategy that's, you know, one touch piece amongst many.  You know, whether that's, you know, if you're gonna do a farm have that be consistent. And there's technology you can utilize to do, you know, retargeting Facebook or Google Ads that, you know, have that consistent message to those same people you're mailing. If they, you know…you know that kind of thing. But that takes planning. That takes technical expertise. And I think that's a far cry from, you know, Nate was saying “Hey I'm not a marketer. Hire that [censored] out.” And I agree with. That but there's so a lot of low bar marketing stuff out there, that's like…My last brokerage, you know, they've had like a social media company come in who basically said “Hey, you know what Facebook is? We'll take care of that for you. And what they meant by that is “If you sign up with us, we're gonna send out this exact same [censored] generic posting…” [Chris]: That you would. [Christian]: Yeah right. And like, you know, I'd be falling for some this people. And you'd see the exact same posting on six different agents sites in the same company, because they're just sending out the same generic [censored]. I'm like that does more to harm you and your reputation that does to like not send anything out at all. [Chris]: Definitely. One of the major things that I learned when…when we started doing SEO on our website, is that for any third party, like if you really want to get your money's worth, you have to hire in-house. Like if you're not hiring in-house, you're just going out and hiring a firm, unless they are a premium level firm where you have a dedicated account manager that is spending X number of hours on your account every month…you're just not gonna get your money's worth. [Christian]: Right and it's not gonna be cheap. [Chris]: Hire in-house.  [Christian]: Yeah. [Chris]: Where you have to monitor it in-house and then outsource the work itself. But to just go out and say “Here take care of it.” That's…that's like, you know, you're eating in a den of snakes.  [Christian]: Right. Well and if you're gonna hire that out, if you're an agent you're like “Hey marketing is not my forte. I'm gonna hire it out.” you better make sure that wherever you hire is asking you questions. To make sure that that content is, you know, in your voice. It's, you know, it's not gonna be, you know, if someone who's following X agent knows you personally, and they see something coming out, they're like “That doesn't sound like them. They wouldn't send something out like that.” Like now you've got a authenticity issue. And, you know, you're going to be doing more damage. I mean especially as you we're seeing, you know, the demographic shift and the impact of social media. What people care about is…is authenticity, being genuine. If they catch wind of “Oh you just hiring out some generic someone, someone, some bot or some company is running your social media…yeah unfriend. Not interested. I'm not going to work with them because, you know, they can't even bother to post real stuff from themselves.” [Chris]: If you're looking to hire an ad agency, you're gonna be on retainer for a minimum of 5k a month. And that does not include your ad spend. Like if you want a good ad agency, if…if you're just looking to hire, you know, a marketing consultant who's gonna charge you, you know, 150 dollars a month, for this number of posts on social media, it…it's…you might as well light your money on fire. It's not going to do anything for you. [Christian]: Well there's different…I mean they're just from models, you know. I mean I'm a very DIY person. But I also know that me, I'm not a professional marketer. Like I know, you know, kind of the strategy aspect of it and…but, you know, I've hired like a local marketer. Who would sit down with me and flush out, you know “OK this is what you have going on. How to be aware where are your missing pieces. And not leverage things where they're not connected.” That kind of stuff and kind of map it out for me. And then I go execute it. Now if you can hire someone to execute it's, that is gonna be a lot more expensive. Because that's very times, you know, intensive.  [Chris]: Yeah I mean and that's gonna be the difference. Like you can…you can bring in a consultant, for almost anything. But then you have to do the work. And the consultant is not gonna come up with the whole idea for you. They're gonna help you work through it. So but if you want…but if you're…My point is, you know, if you're hiring, you know, the hundred and fifty hundred and ninety nine dollar marketing company online, that's a subscription, versus you really want advertising, it's a difference.  Like you've got that retainer every single month. And you've got to hit that spend limit with them. And that does not include your ads. [Christian]: Sure. [Chris]: They'll go through and they'll do everything from your direct mail pieces, to video creation, to all of it. [Christian]: Right. And that's gonna be an actual marketing campaign with multiple platforms and tiers. Not just “Hey we're sending out social media posts on your Facebook.” It's entirely different. And I mean it's some agents who don't, you know, see the benefit of that. Or like “I don't have time for that” you know, like Nate. I mean he stays busy enough and successful enough to not need that. But…but I mean the stuff he does organically is still marketing. It's just not your typical overt cheesy agent stuff. Which I think speaks…it's a lot more powerful than if you did the traditional “Just sold, just listed, hey look at me, I'm in an open house.” You know, and everything's just overtly real estate. Which it doesn't resonate with the majority of people, the majority of the time. [Nathan]: No and, you know, I think you actually…what's you're gonna see and unbeknownst to you guys, but you're gonna see me doing a little more marketing here in the future. But yeah well I have the luxury though of…Our company just brought on a marketing director that has a very strong marketing background. So we will have an in-house marketing department that… [Christian]: Nice. [Nathan]: Make, you know, will be able to take on what visions I have. Or I don't want to say visions. I call them thoughts. Yeah I mean I had a meeting with her last week. She's awesome and I…I equate what she can do to what like my tattoo guy does. Right. I come up with this wild little sketch on a piece of paper that looks like a third-grader did it. I say “Hey here.” And then a week later he hands it back and I'm like “I don't know how you got that, but it's perfect.” You know… [Christian]: Sure. They will take your vision and make it into something. [Nathan]: And make it into something and Karen will be able to do that for it. Some…a lot of brokerages I don't think have, you know, that good fortune of having a marketing director that has a very solid background with a large company that can create some of these things we want. Within the vision that you need to do. I think it's important that whatever your theme is, you have consistency with it. And a lot of people don't do that. I think a lot of real estate and what you do is marketing. Right. So if you're gonna do it, do it well. [Christian]: Sure. Well I think a lot of agents don't realize it like what they're putting out there, you know, is represent themselves. You know, because I mean you can have your marketing and your advertising. Typically people use them interchangeably. But they're not, you know. Like for us, you know, we just, you know, ponied…pointed up. And…and hired Max the designs to…to do our marketing piece, you know, pieces. Which is essentially a design firm, you know, small design team down Los Angeles that walks you through a creation process of like everything, from color scheme to…to fonts to like what's the feel, you know, your brokerage has. And all those kind of stuff to make stuff that's customized for you. All the pieces are consistent. Totally customized to provide a platform. All your agents can log in and create their own stuff. Customize it, you know, download it.  Like all that is like the bare minimum marketing pieces that you can then use for presentations or social media stuff. Or…or whatever. But, you know, something like that gives you a consistency for your agents, for your firm. But then on top of that you've got the actual “OK I'm gonna run a marketing campaign and that requires, you know, some intentional thought behind. What's my desire goal? What messages are gonna resonate with whom? What platforms win?” You know, much more complex than just aesthetic marketing piece.  You're muted.  [Nathan]: Everybody got quiet. So… [Chris]: No one's muted. We just were talking…[laughter]. All right. Well I think that is definitely you now… [Christian]: Helpful. Hopefully it's interesting. Oh boy this is the funny part.  [Nathan]: Anyway.  [Chris]: No I mean it's…it's great. We…we haven't put anything in place like that for our firm right now. Even though we have a…our listing coordinator has a marketing background. She's actually in portfolio school right now. So to kind of an extent we can…we have that ability. She'll bounce some ideas off of us. We'll bounce ideas off of her. Actually just to make sure we're not doing anything stupid.  But for everything with us, it's a lot of…it's word-of-mouth. And I think that that's another type of marketing that people don't pay enough attention to. Going back a few years to when Scott Stratten [phonetics] talked about on marketing. At Inman he said, you know “If you want word of mouth, what do you do? You do something worth talking about.” So there…there's that whole aspect to marketing our businesses. Doing things like Ritz Carlton. Doing things like Disney. Doing things…taking so much advanced precaution with our clients, thinking about their problems before they ever have it. That that way the client has no other alternative but to say how great their experience was. And I think that that's something that, you know, we need to figure out or put more focus on also, because that stuff's free. [Christian]: Yeah well and that's what, you know, for all that you're leveraging the client experience. Right. It's how you do your business, you know. All the marketing advertising is how you build up from, you know, getting in front of people to get them to that place where they're your client. And then that experience comes in and the referral business can happen. It's all part of a, you know, a long cycle of business. Hopefully. [Chris]: Absolutely. So I think that's good. [Nathan]: Yeah. [Chris]: Any final thoughts while you're at it? [Christian]: I would say as an agent, know your strengths, know your weaknesses. Don't try to do everything. Hire out the stuff that you're not an expert in. In this case marketing. But, you know, you got to find…you got to find someone that can draw out what that vision is. So that it's consistent. Enhances your brand as opposed to completely contradicts your…consistency. [laughter] Words. [Chris]: Nate any final thoughts? [Nathan]: No. Stay off Facebook. Don't request me. [laughter]. Get off my lawn you kids. Seriously I was like…all of that stuff that everybody else does, don't [censored] do it.  [Christian]: There's that. [Nathan]: I don't want to be your friend because you're not gonna sell me a house. All right. All right. Guys good luck and hope it works out for you. [Chris]: Yeah. All right so basically there's different types of marketing. Figure out what you want. Avoid the shiny object. Don't think that you're gonna find something that is going to solve all of your problems for one low monthly subscription. And then don't leave out the word of mouth. Make sure you're doing the things for your clients in your daily business. Make sure that your clients are your number one focus. Because guess what? Costs a whole lot less to keep a client than it does to acquire a new one. Everybody this has been re:Think Real Estate. We'll catch you next Monday. [music]  [Chris]: Thanks for tuning in this week's episode of the re:Think Real Estate Podcast. We would love to hear your feedback so please leave us a review on iTunes. Our music is curtesy of Dan Koch K-O-C-H, whose music can be explored and licensed for use at dankoch.net. Thank you Dan. Please like, share and follow. You can find us on Facebook at Facebook.com/rethinkpodcast. Thank you so much for tuning in everyone and have a great week.  [music]  

reThink Real Estate Podcast
RTRE 60 - Breaking Out of a Rut in Your Real Estate Business

reThink Real Estate Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 28, 2019 28:18


Download this Episode We've all been there. Life hits you like a freight train and knocks you off course. Today we discuss how to get the train back on its track. Tune in to hear about how we deal with death, struggle, and negative outside voices. reThink Real Estate Podcast Transcription Audio length 28:18 RTRE 60 – Breaking Out of a Rut in Your Real Estate Business [music] [Chris] Welcome to re:Think Real Estate, your educational and hopefully entertaining source for all things real estate, business, news and tech.  [Christian]: I am Christian Harris in Seattle, Washington. [Nathan]: Hi, I am Nathan White in Columbus, Ohio. [Chris]: And I am Chris Lazarus in Atlanta, Georgia. Thanks for tuning in.  [music] [Chris]: Everybody and welcome back to re:Think Real Estate. I'm Chris here with Christian and Nate is back. No longer sick. Welcome back Nate.  [Nathan]: Thanks. Thank you. [Chris]: Yes. All of energy today. [laughter]  [Christian]: He is possessed to be here. [Chris]: Oh. Let's see those jazz hands Nate. [Nathan]: Hold on. [laughter]. [Christian]: What are you typing? [Chris]: Not even…Not even ready to start. There we go.  [Christian]: Yeah don't worry about this.  [Chris]: So we were just talking before getting started here about, you know, what do you do when you're in a rut. Like you're just out of it, you know, listening to Nate's voice. He's in a rut right now. Even if it's just for the next hour. So like Christian what do you do when you're in a rut? Like how do you pull yourself out of it? [Christian]: I mean I'll tell you one thing that's key to not do and that's to quit, and to listen to the demons, you know, that are speaking…speaking lives in your head about how your failure and your, you know, nothing's ever gonna change and it's gonna be like this forever. I'm sure I'm just the only one that hears those negative thoughts but… [Chris]: It's gonna be like this forever. You're a failure. [Christian]: Don't listen to them. I know. See now I'm hearing the voices for real. This is so real. [Chris]: [laughter] In your headphones.  [Christian]: Yeah in my headphones. So that's the first thing you don't do. [Chris]: Yeah I gotta agree. [Christian]: For me personally, you know, I just kind of keep my head down and keep going. But I mean I lot of it depends on why I am in a rut. Is it like a family rut where relationships aren't going great? Is it work? Is it financial? You know. Because I think, you know, the solution to those are all gonna be a little different. But the key to getting out of those is leaning…leaning on people. You know, like being honest. Having people that can come around to you and speak truth into that. Whether it's co-workers or family members or, you know, besties, you know. Don't isolate yourself because that's…that's doesn't go well for most people. [Chris]: Gotta have your besties. Nate. [Nathan]: Yep. [Chris]: What do you think? [Nathan]: What's the question again? [Chris]: How do you get out of a rut. [Nathan]: Oh how do you get out of a rut. [Christian]: It's your topic buddy. [Chris]: Yeah this is your choice Mr. “I'm in a rut.”  [Nathan]: How do you…You know, I don't know. You got to find, you know, how you used to work triggers. You got to find….one you got to be able to identify you're in a rut. Right. I mean, you know, yeah I just kind of went through one. Yeah I was sick for a week. Had some unfortunate family things happen. And, you know, it was just [censored] death of you. I mean it's what it was but you know it side tracks you. Right. You know, as I call it the…the train gets off the rail. So you one you got to recognize that the…the freaking train you're on is off the rails. And then you got to figure out what's the trigger to get it back on. You know, for me it's being very scheduled and stuff. And just it's…I don't know you have to just recommit.  You know, what's the…I used to have a mentor who used to say “You kind of have to recenter the salt on the plate.” And I think that's what you got to do. You got to be able to identify it. You got to figure out, you know, why you're in it. OK get out of it, you know, and then , you know, there's certain things. I don't know you can read motivational stuff. I mean Gary Vee I, you know, it's not for all people but he's for me. And I can get on a pity party and he gets me out of the pity party. So [Christian]: Yeah nice kick to the junk to get you back on track. [Nathan]: Yeah and I think in our industry, I think we all get kind of jaded at times. You get….you get I don't know. You get frustrated and then you get sidetracked.  [Christian]: And it's just you. [Nathan]: Yeah all right. [Chris]: No it's definitely not just you.  [Nathan]: Yeah I know it's everybody. I was talking with a colleague the other day and, you know, he said “Man I just…” he said “I didn't do [censored] for six months.” And now you know, he knew it. He identified it. But, you know, he's like the worst part is now I gotta play catch-up. I, you know, we all, you know, we get these peaks and valleys. And I don't…I don't like to get in those peaks and valleys. I like to have, you know, a nice steady stream of income. Right. [Chris]: Well six months is a little bit too long. That…that's not all right. Six months is an active decision to say “You know what, I'm just not gonna work.” [Nathan]: Yeah. [Christian]: I think it's called clinical depression. [Nathan]: Yeah well, you know, he was working on his home doing some other things. Fine. But… [Christian]: OK so he's just distracted. [Nathan]: He's just distracted and I think we all can get distracted. And then I think we just get frustrated. You know, we can get in our own way. So and, you know, it's, you know, you hear a realtor say “Oh I'm…” You know, we talked about this before. You know, “I'm so busy” And you say “What do you have going on?” And they're like “Oh I got one house in contract.” But you're so busy like…I don't know. It's…when I'm not busy, I'm not busy. You know, I don't even like the question what people say “Oh it's spring time right now. You're, you know, you must be busy as all get out. I'm steady. I'm not busy as I'll get out. But when you talk to me in November, December, January and February, guess what? You get the same response. Versus a lot of people say “Well I ain't got nothing going on.” So staying out of a rut I think is important. I think it's important that you identify how long you're in one. And it only took two weeks to get in one. Just because of, you know, being sick. And we're all self-employed. Right. o… [Chris]: Yeah I think I think one of the things is it doesn't take too long to get into a rut. Like one thing can happen and throw you completely off the rails. And then it…you have to go through…well depending upon what it is, you've got to go through these stages of healing to kind of get back into your groove. So if it's…if, you know, if it's family that's throwing, you know, things at you that are like “Oh, you know, what you're wasting your time. You're not in a good environment. The industry is gonna end soon. Your real estate agents are gonna be obsolete. Everything's gonna be AI in tech.” I just got that from my [censored] father the other day. And… [Christian]: Ouch. [Chris]: Yeah like “Really, no I…I don't think it is but, you know, that…that's great that you're encouraging me. I really appreciate that.” But you got to go through this stage of accepting what has happened. Seeing it from, you know, multiple points of view. Realizing that, you know, you're either making the right decision and then you double down on your decision, or there's some corrective action that needs to happen. And then you need to make the corrective action. [Christian]: I mean I'd say that, this is kind of cliché, but I definitely say that it's very important to…as you're trying to, you know, realize, you know, “OK what's…what set me in this rut and how do I get out?” is to try to only focus on things that you can affect. Right. As most of stuff in our life we have no control over. You can't control other agents, can't control the market. You control what you do and how focused you are. And, you know, your attitude and all that kind of stuff.  But I'd say that's definitely key to getting out of it is not…not, you know, what we call catastrophizing, if that's a word, which I don't think it is. But, you know, essentially… [Nathan]: It sounds great. [Chris]: Yeah if it's not a word it sounds like a word and it should be a word. So yeah… [Christian]: It's…it's a word that would they use in in the military's newer…what they call it, resiliency training . Essentially, you know, one of the keys to, you know, not getting in a rut or recognizing when you are going into rut is recognizing, you know, a mindset that's a downward spiral of catastrophizing everything. Where, you know, one thing happens and then you just assume the worst and then that, you know, self-fulfilling prophecy happens. And you keep spiraling downwards as opposed to, you know, “OK let's look at the big picture. Let's not think of the worst thing let's think of, you know, outcomes that are positive and, you know, be optimistic as opposed to pessimistic”, you know.  This is one of the mental tricks of, you know, how are you going to position yourself mentally to get out of the rut. As opposed to, you know, staying in that rut. [Chris]: I like that. That's really good. So Nate, cuz you ran for 24 hours last year, what was like what was going on in your head and do you think that any of those things could be used to get you out of a rut ? [Nathan]: Well I'm getting ready to run for twelve hours soon again. I think it's just it's…it's a semental staying power if you would. Because what's the easiest thing to do in any of those scenarios are with what we do for a living, what's the easiest thing to do? [censored] it. Quit. Right. [Chris]: Like quit. Don't even… [Nathan]: Just quit. Right. I mean I think what most people don't realize and, you know, I can use it running wise or even and, you know, in this rut…What we think of and perceive is something that maybe feels like forever, is really not that long of a period of time. Right. When I did that race out in Colorado or run out in Colorado, there was a gentleman that, you know, he quit after, you know, about 16 hours. And he said “I can't do it anymore.” And I said “Dude just take a break. Don't leave the course. If you leave the, you know, if you leave the course, you can't restart. But you can you could take a rest, that's fine. It's OK. If you want a rest for thirty minutes or three hours then you could start back up on whatever mile you're on.”  Right. And he said no he couldn't do it. He went back to his hotel. About twenty three hours and thirty minutes into it I seen him at the finish line, start/finish line. And, you know, him lapping through and he comes and pulls up beside me and starts running. And I was like “What are you doing back out here?” He's like “I should have listened to you.” He's like “I left. I got back to the hotel. I took 30 minutes. Laid down and I was like nah I feel great now.”  So I think what we do is it's…it's how we perceive that. Right. like “Oh you're in a rut.” And I have been in a rut for two weeks. And it's that like Christian said, you get the self-fulfilling prophecy. And then it does spiral out of control. Right. versus if we can kind of slam the [censored] brakes on things, and go “Hold up. All right. Reset.” And…and grab a hold of it by the balls a little bit, you know, then…then you've got a good opportunity. But I think we just we, you know, society as a whole and what, you know, whether it's real estate or not, we…we just get caught up in that bad moment. So you got to be more optimistic than pessimistic. [Christian]: Yeah well I think it also help if, you know, kind of speaking to people getting into the industry, if there was a more realistic portrayal of what it's like to be a new agent. Because I mean I've, you know, speaking of our first quarter was very, very rough financially. And we have like five agents that just gave up. Just “I'm done. I'm not renewing my license. This was too hard.” And it's kind of that lack of resiliency because they'd…I don't think they had a realistic expectations coming into it. They're like “You can't just sit on YouTube while you, you know, quote to do your calls.” [laughter] Like you're not gonna get…You know, so there's a lack of resiliency. There's a lack of hustle. A lack of urgency and then, you know, no matter what, you know, your brokerage does, or people come up alongside you, they don't do it. They don't listen. And then they quit. And you're like “Yeah I kind of saw the writing on the wall.”  You're like, you know, it's…from the perspective of a broker like it's really easy to become jaded. And, you know, my version of a rut looks differently, you know, because I'm looking at agents and productivity and, you know, margins. And that kind of stuff. From agent perspective, you know, it's trying to get business, you know, having people say no to you. Or if you're new to an area trying to figure out how to get the word out there. And, you know, that kind of stuff. But either way it comes down to like not giving up, being resilient when things don't go perfectly, not letting that spiral and ruin the rest of your day.  [Nathan]: I would agree. [Chris]: Definitely, you know, you've got to be able to compartmentalize a little bit to know “Hey, you know what this is not that big of a deal.” Or, “You know what, this sucks. But, you know, I gotta keep ploughing on because if I stop I'm never gonna get this done. I'm never gonna hit my goal. So I've got to keep going.”  You know, it took, you know, I was in a rut a few weeks ago. And it took me a good five to six days to work my way through it. And it wasn't until I kind of saw some things from a different angle that, you know, it was…I realized, you know what, what I was doing was correct. And, you know, this one situation was an outlier. And it really didn't affect what I was doing as much as I thought it would. [Christian]: Yeah I mean a lot of what we're talking about here is your perspective. Right. And earlier I mentioned not letting yourself be isolated. And the reason for that is that other people can bring a perspective that you don't have. You know, they're looking at that from the outside. Where you may be, you know, kind of myopically looking at your feet. And, you know, where you just stumbled while they're looking at the big picture of like “But look at all this potential and look at where you came from and look at what's ahead of you.”  You know, I think that's very important to have that community around you, of people that can speak into you. Well that's your spouse or business partner or whatever. [Chris]: And sometimes you don't even want to hear it. Sometimes you're just like “You know what, I…I'm not even gonna listen” and you have to hear from some like third party that has nothing to do with you. Because, you know, those that are closest to us sometimes we feel like they're just, you know, boosting us up. And it's not authentic. [Christian]: Right. And then your wife says “That's what I've been saying to you.” And you're like “Oh sorry.”. [Chris]: Yeah. [Christian]: I get that [censored] all the time. My wife's like “Why wouldn't you just listen to me. That's what I was telling you.” And I am like “Oh [censored] you're right.” [Nathan]: Well that's…that's the funny flipside of being resilient. Another word for that could be stubborn. Or [laughter] hard-headed, you know. So what keeps you driving for it could also be what keeps you from listen to people. So … [Chris]: Yeah I think not so much that, but we have…we have this tendency that if something shakes us to our core. like that we're…if something happens it's that messes us up and throws us way off track, then we have this tendency to not exactly trust everything that we've done, up until that point 100%. So if there's something…if there's something that's in our core circle that's telling us something and then whatever happens throws us off our game, then we're gonna immediately have a certain distrust for this. And we're gonna go to an outside source to verify whether we're right or wrong. And once we do that, if we verify “You know what, what we've been doing is right.” then we come back to that circle and like “You know what, everything here is good.” We're happy. If something's wrong then we're gonna come back to that circle and be like “Wait what the [censored] is going on here? Like why…why are you saying this. Or, you know, why didn't…why…” You get it. Yeah it's…it's not just about listening to those that are closest to us. It's a mental thing. Like if something…mentally we've got to recenter ourselves. [Christian]: It sounds like you're saying that insecurity creeps in, depending on where we feel like things went wrong. [Chris]: Yeah definitely. And I mean it all depends on whatever happens. Right. because sometimes it's something small and it's not a big deal and it maybe, you know, maybe it's something that we're just disappointed in, and it's gonna take us, you know, a few minutes to get over. Or maybe it's something…maybe it's a personal attack or something that a relative is going in, the new agents is going. You're not making any money. You need to stop. Right. This is…you're…you're wasting your time, you're wasting your money, you're wasting our money, if it's a spouse. You know, even if you're doing the right things you may have not planned long enough. Nothing ever happens fast enough. Nothing ever happens, you know, the way that we want it. So you've got to kind of have that margin of error that you can work with. [Christian]: Sure and when you come into with…realistic expectations. Right. I mean so much of what happens in relationships that goes wrong, or getting in a rut that…that, you know, the reason we get there is because expectations are unmet, or our situation changes. You know, like if…if we think is gonna be easy and it's not, you know, we get in a rut. If, you know, we expect to make more money in the first quarter than we did, you know, it's easy getting in a rut. I mean it's just kind of…and not letting those quote failures drive you or dictate you. Because I mean what, you know, one man's failures is another person's learning, try opportunity. Yeah and that's something I've had to learn. Is like theoretically I understood. You know, as this ethereal concept I understood that failure was inevitable, and I need to be able to learn from that. But than going through that, that's experientially a lot different.  [Nathan]: So I need to get over this whole thing of how my job interferes me living my best life. [Chris]: You have the one job that you not interfere with you living your best life. [Nathan]: I don't have a job.  [Christian]: This is coming from the guy who's taken like several vacation this month to go down to…[crosstalk] [Nathan]: I know. I know. Listen you…listen I don't even have a job. I have…I do something I enjoy and love. I'm fortunate that I don't even do it as a job. I get to do what I enjoy. [Chris]: That's good. [Christian]: Yeah well let's…let's take us a little deeper and more personal. I mean Nate you kind of brought up the subject, cuz this last couple weeks have been pretty rough for you. I mean what have you found to be helpful kind of getting out of this rut for you? [Chris]: And first do you need to lay down on the therapist couch and put five cents in the jar? [Nathan]: No. Again it's…what's been helpful for me I mean again it's…I think, you know, what's the old saying? You know, you you're the average of the five people you spend the most time around. So I think it's also about the people you surround yourselves with. And that, you know, when you do get in that, they'll help you with that. You know, or they'll, you know, they'll they're kind of champion you and…and support you to say, you know, “Hey yeah…” You know, when you say “I'm in a rut or I'm this” they'll…they'll boost those spirits.  And it won't be an ego boost. It won't be one of those things like “You're the best thing in the world next to cotton candy.” But they know how to push you in the right direction to support you. And I think that's what…having that support is important. And I mean that ranges from colleagues that I have, to neighbors, to a wife. Like, you know, it's…it's all those things. You know, it…it makes, you know, surviving that period of time easier.  And…and sometimes you just need that outer push. And you also need it…I think you need the people around you that are honest with you. You know, what I mean? [Chris]: You don't need “Yes men. Yes.” [Nathan]: Yeah right. Yeah you need somebody to go tell you the truth. I mean that's, you know, that's, you know, my friends, the people I surround myself with will tell me, you know, what they think. And…and sometimes I don't want to hear it. [censored] A lot of times I don't want to hear it. But it is what I needed to hear. [Christian]: Sure. No one likes hearing the hard truth. [Nathan]: Yeah, no you know. [Chris]: But to be able to appreciate it though when it's in front of you. [Nathan]: Yeah. Yeah you're right. [Chris]: That's one of the hard…the hardest thing that I've found is when, you know, getting that criticism. Whe…when you just want to wall up and go into like active defence mode. Like just letting your body language relax. Having, you know, open gestures and trying to be open-minded to put yourself in the other person's shoes, and see what they're seeing.  [Nathan]: Right. [Chris]: And then trying to see if there's some corrective action that needs to be made there. That's…that's hard when you just go into like “Alright go ahead, give me the feedback because it's rare that I ever get feedback like this. So, you know, take advantage of it while you can.” [Christian]: Sure. Well it can be challenging too because, you know, no one's perfect and no feedback is gonna be perfect. So you have to like decide “OK what's an honest truth that I need to hear” versus “OK that part is kind of [censored]. I'm gonna not take that, you know, what I'll take, you know, kind of not throw the baby off the bathwater.” Like taking the truth where you find it whether that's in, you know, quote a rival or enemy, or that's in someone who's, you know, really close to you and has your best interest at mind. You know, like that could be…it can be challenging. Because, you know, typically I find that if you're playing it safe, there's gonna be a lot less friction and a lot less controversy and criticism. If you're really pushing the bounds, that's when things get tough and people can get ugly. So… [Chris]: Yeah. [Nathan]: You know, I know how to…at least I know how to do it. I know how to have a fight with myself. If that makes any sense. You find out [crosstalk] Yeah I know how to like… [Chris]: Elaborate on that. [Christian]: Yes do. [Nathan]: Because you've got to be willing to call your own [censored]. Right. You've got to be willing to kind of punch yourself in the face. Right. you've got to be… [Christian]: I need to watch conversations with you. [Nathan]: Yeah. Right. That's a staff meeting. Remember? It again it's, you know, you…it's like…I mean it sounds crazy but it's having that conversation in your head of “Hey Nathan, stop being a pussy and do what you know, what you need to do. Get your [censored] up off the couch. Or wake up on time. Or eat right. Or whatever it is. You're not doing these things. Stop…stop [censored] yourself.” And just having that honest, you know, that David Goggin [phonetics] said, you know, “You got to be able to look that man in the mirror.” Right. And that man in the mirror is, you know, me. And so if you can't have that honest fight, dialogue with yourself internally, I don't think it matters what anybody tells you then. [Christian]: Well the starting place for that is being self-aware. Like if you don't know yourself like you're gonna have a real tough time having that honest conversation. [Nathan]: Well most people can't do that though. They live in some [censored] fairyland. [Christian]: Well yeah, you know, I mean we all have our blind spots. Some people are more aware than…than others, you know. [crosstalk] The most important thing in life is…is being honest about that, you know.  [Nathan]: Right. Sorry. I don't know. You gotta find what works for you. I know what works for me. [Christian]: Yeah you…you be unique. [Nathan]: I'm good at doing that. Chris are we gonna wrap it up? [Chris]: Yeah so I think we…we hit on some good points. The…I think no matter where you are in your career you're gonna get hit with something that's gonna throw you off your game. You're gonna…you're gonna have a Nate moment where you got to be in front of the mirror and you got to kick yourself in the [censored].  You know, one of the things that I tell some of the new agents is, you're always gonna have a boss. And even when you're self-employed you still have a boss. It's the person in the mirror. And who do you want to work for? Do you want to work for a strong leader? Somebody who's going to step up and challenge the things that needs to be challenged to make sure that things are getting done that need to be done? Somebody that's gonna keep it on track? Or do you want to work for somebody who is just very lackadaisical and doesn't really care when you clock in?  And you have a boss, whether you're working for somebody else or yourself. So it's just a matter of making sure that you're doing the right things for you. When you get stuck in a rut, you got to pull yourself out of it. One way or another.  [Nathan]: Yeah, you know, Henry David Thoreau [phonetics] comes to mind. Sorry. Pulling out the big gun. But, you know, he said “What lies…what lies ahead of us and what lies behind us are small matters compared to what lies within us. And when you bring what's within you, out into the world, great things happen.” Right so, you know, I think you gotta remember what's inside. [Chris]: We need to set up Nate's…Nate's motivational quotes of the week. [Christian]: I know that's good. That's a good one. And as kind of closing thoughts…kind of reflecting on our conversation here. You know, obviously people's struggles are vary based on them, their personality, situation and what not. A lot of we've been saying is, you know, kind of “Don't give up. Keep trying. Push harder.” Yeah that kind of stuff. But I also want to say that it's not entirely up to you or it's not just about working hard or trying harder. Because sometimes, you know, you push too hard and you work too much and you get sick. And, you know, your body forces you to…to take a break. So I know for me one thing that's rejuvenating, and it can help me get out of a rut sometimes even when I feel like my rut is I have too much to do, is to act…intentionally take a break. Spend more time with the family. Unplug from work. Now some agents, you know, err on that side too much. Where, you know, spend too much time…they spend too much time relaxing. And not enough time working. I don't think that's our problem. And I think that's a lot of agents problems.  But give yourself permission to take a break, rejuvenate, spend time with family, you know, not always be…be working. Because sometimes that's all it takes to get out of a rut.  [Chris]: I couldn't agree with you more. And, you know, it's…sometimes it's hard for…for agents to take off, you know, an entire week from work. Just do a few long weekends every now and then. You don't have to…you don't have to take off a week or two weeks. Sometimes that's…that's not realistic. But make sure that your mental health is in check. And that you're taking some time to decompress and unwind and put things in perspective. What I've found is that when…when I'm able to do that, I'll come back with some new ideas. Because I'm not thinking about, you know, the day-to-day. I'll be able to just kind of, you know, day dream. Whatever it is. Read a good book and come back with, you know, a new perspective on what we're doing. So couldn't agree more with you Christian. Nate great points.  Everybody thank you so much for tuning in to this week's episode of re:Think Real Estate. If you haven't already ,please go to the website which is rtrepodcast.com. sign up for the newsletter so you never miss an episode, whenever we drop one, which is every single week. Thanks for tuning in everybody. We'll see you next week. [music]  [Chris]: Thanks for tuning in this week's episode of the re:Think Real Estate Podcast. We would love to hear your feedback so please leave us a review on iTunes. Our music is curtesy of Dan Koch K-O-C-H, whose music can be explored and licensed for use at dankoch.net. Thank you Dan. Please like, share and follow. You can find us on Facebook at Facebook.com/rethinkpodcast. Thank you so much for tuning in everyone and have a great week.  [music]  

Living Corporate
64 : Diversity & Inclusion (w/ Chris Moreland)

Living Corporate

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 5, 2019 53:34


We have the pleasure of speaking with Chris Moreland, the chief diversity and inclusion advocate at Vizient. He explains why he puts inclusion first and talks about the top three things most companies are getting wrong when it comes to D&I.Connect with Chris on LinkedIn!https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisjmoreland/Connect with us!https://linktr.ee/livingcorporateTRANSCRIPTZach: What's up, y'all? It's Zach.Ade: It's Ade.Zach: So listen, y'all, we gonna get straight to it this time, 'cause we have a really special guest. I'm really excited. Today we have the opportunity--we had the opportunity rather to sit down and speak with Chris Moreland. He's the chief inclusion and diversity advocate at Vizient Incorporated, based out of Dallas, Texas, and I'm just gonna read a little bit of his profile so we can kind of talk about what we're talking about today. Known for possessing a contagious regard for winning, a bias for action and a healthy disrespect for insurmountable challenges. A street-smart C-level leader with a diverse industry background, an indispensable partner for innovative organizations, people development, and building teams. Chris is best known for leading organizations through change, developing innovative solutions, and deciphering ambiguity. He established a track record of performance and execution at Fortune 500 icons like Vizient, Microsoft, Expedia, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsi, and Mobil, okay? So this person that we got to speak to today, he and I had an amazing conversation about inclusion and diversity, and in the conversation that you're gonna hear, you'll hear why he puts inclusion first, but we're really excited and want y'all to hear the whole interview, and so we don't want to make it too long by, you know, adding to it, so--Ade: We're gonna keep it short and sweet.Zach: That's right, we're gonna keep it short and sweet. So unfortunately, Ade, no Favorite Things this week.Ade: Nope, but we have an amazing, amazing, amazing interview, so it's good.Zach: It's dope. And after the interview, you know, we'll wrap from there, but the next week we've got a B-Side, and it's me and Ade talking about the interview, talking about D&I, and, you know, having fun. Hopefully y'all laugh. Maybe y'all will cry. Maybe you'll laugh and cry at the same time. I don't know. We'll see. Maybe. [strange noise]Ade: What was that noise? [laughs]Zach: It was like a [strange noise]. It was a shrug. That's, like, a shrug if I was to put a noise to it. [again]Ade: I'm gonna pass on your sound effects skills once again.Zach: Man, my sound effects skills are fire, but that's okay. In fact, you know what? Hold on. JJ, go ahead and give me some air horns, one time for ya head top, for Chris Moreland, 'cause he gave us a fire interview. [imitating air horns] Let's go. [JJ drops 'em] I'm giving him the air horns before we even get to the interview. That's how fire the interview was. What's up?Ade: Look, I don't disagree. Shout-out to Chris. Amazing conversation.Zach: Shout-out to Chris.Ade: You on the other hand are a walking dad joke store.Zach: Yo, I really feel like--so watching that movie Us, I really feel as if that character that ya mans was playing was really just me in, like, five years with no beard, but that's me.Ade: Like, Winston Duke's character?Zach: Yes, I feel like that's me.Ade: I have not heard great reviews, so you probably should not--Zach: No, first of all, Us is fire, and we can talk about that later.Ade: Well, not--you know what? Yes, let's close this out.Zach: So shout-out to Chris, shout-out to Vizient, and yo, shout-out to him being the chief storyteller at Storyteller's Consulting. He's gonna talk a little bit about that in the interview as well, and we'll make sure we have all of this information in the podcast notes, but look, until next week, it's been Zach.Ade: And this has been Ade.Zach: Y'all check out this interview. Peace.Ade: Peace.Zach: And we're back. And so as we shared before the break, we have Chris Moreland on the show. Chris, welcome to the show, man. How are you doing?Chris: I'm fantastic. Thanks so much, Zach.Zach: For those of us who don't know you, would you mind sharing a bit about yourself and how you got into your field?Chris: Absolutely. Well, my name is Chris Moreland. I reside in Dallas, Texas, and I am now the chief inclusion and diversity advocate at Vizient. Vizient is basically a supply chain company that does GPO for health care systems. We do about 100--maybe 105, 110 billion dollars worth of hospital spend on an annual basis.Zach: That's awesome. You know, I guess for me--so let me just say as a quick aside, and this isn't even in my questions, but I just wanted to say it--it's really inspiring to see a person of color, and frankly a black man, in such a position of influence, and I'm just really excited to have you here. So I probably should've said that at the beginning. I don't really care. This is our show. I just want to tell you that I'm happy that you're here.Chris: It's good to be here. It's good to be here.Zach: Absolutely. So look, let's get into it. So I'm on this app, right, called Fishbowl, and it's an anonymous posting app for consultants. Every now and then diversity and inclusion comes up, and most are disillusioned by the topic because it's being seen as a lot of talk and very little walk. So what do you think are some of the top three things most companies are getting wrong when they talk about diversity and inclusion?Chris: Right. That's a really good question, Zach, and it's not a simple answer, but I'll try to simplify the answer. There are several things that companies are not getting right, and if you--if you look at the most recent research, I think it points to some very important things that I think, going forward, we really need to focus on. The first thing is that most companies tend to put diversity and inclusion into the bucket of human resources as though it is part of a function which is different than the function of marketing, which is different than the function of, you know, research and development, which would be different than the function of sales. I think that's one of the biggest mistakes, by putting it specifically in a function. The second thing that I think goes wrong often times with the way companies approach diversity and inclusion is around--they use education as a way of changing behaviors, and we can talk about this a lot more later, but education has been proven now as being the least credible way of changing a human being's behavior, okay? And then the third piece, which I think a lot of people get wrong as far as diversity and inclusion, is how they think about diversity and inclusion relative to accountability. It's one thing to talk about it, but it's a whole 'nother thing when no one ultimately is accountable for the changes that they would like to make relative to diversity and inclusion.Zach: Expound upon that a bit more if you could.Chris: Absolutely. So the first piece around which function generally owns diversity and inclusion, and that being human resources. The reason why that normally doesn't vet out very well for companies is that the organization then feels like their [?] human resource officer is ultimately responsible for diversity and inclusion, and that's an error. Diversity and inclusion should be part of every function. It should be part of the culture of the organization. It should not be quarantined off into a specific function, because it should flow just like values, just like goals, just like culture. It should be part of the way we do business. It should be used as an enabler, not as a functionally-constrained part of an organization. You know, the second piece, which points education--education, as you know, is something that people try to use to make different decisions and result in different behaviors, but as you know if you've ever gone to church, if you've ever seen students in school, education doesn't necessarily mean that once a person knows what they should do, knows the right thing to do, understands the impact of certain actions, that they are going to then adopt those habits, those practices. Each of us go to church every Sunday, and we--depending upon what denomination you may be part of, but you can see the same church crowd that sits in the pews on Sunday, they go out and cut each other off in traffic immediately following the service in some cases, and so it's--you know, it's a bad way of thinking that "I'm going to change the behavior by telling you the right thing to do." And in the last piece, which is what I call just accountability, is that, you know, again, if it's in HR, a lot of times HR feels accountable solely, but no one else in the organization feels as though they have any accountability. They feel as though it has been quarantined off and thus there is a function that is accountable for it, but that is the only function that ultimately becomes accountable for it in that instance, so yeah.Zach: Man, that's incredible. When you and I first met, we talked about diversity and inclusion, and you told me--you said, "Zach, you know, a lot of times people get those letters--the order of those letters wrong, and they should be putting inclusion first." So let me ask you this - what does inclusion really mean practically, and how can companies actualize inclusion in the workplace?Chris: Right. So inclusion, in my title and at least at Vizient, we actually put that word in front of diversity, because inclusion has more to do with the actions that you are taking. Inclusion has to do with "Who's in the conversation? Is the conversation being had? Does everyone's perspective, opinions, and backgrounds matter? Is there value seen in my difference?" Not "Am I different?" Diversity, which really comes from a Latin root word meaning "divertere," or "to divert, to separate." It's the differences between us. It's pretty much meaningless in any organization unless you have the inclusion part first, and the inclusion means that I see you, I see your differences, and I see the value in those differences, and ultimately I don't want to move forward with any decision, with any strategy, with any proposal, until I get all different sides of this idea understood and heard, because understanding that when I am inclusive I actually get a much better outcome. It should always precede diversity. Diversity by itself is pretty meaningless unless it is preceded by inclusion.Zach: Yeah. No, absolutely, and so I'm curious - what methods have you seen that are effective when it comes to organizations really leaning into the inclusion piece of their I&D strategy?Chris: Right. That's a great question, because there is a--there is a huge difference. It's like night and day when it comes to organizations and effectiveness of those organizations when you do lead with inclusion. A couple of practices. One, there is--there are very few human beings that I've met thus far who are openly and consciously biased. In other words, open and conscious bias means that I see you, I see your differences, and I am absolutely just going to deliberately exclude those differences from my decisions, from my thoughts, from my practices, from my campaigns and everything else. When I lead with inclusion, what it does is it says I understand that I have this subconscious, this subliminal, this unconscious ability or need or desire to assimilate with those things that look similar to me, and we all have this in our personalities. We all want to assimilate with like things. We want to be around people who look like us, act like us, talk like us, have the same backgrounds as us, because it makes us more comfortable, and there's nothing wrong with that, but in order to actively have an inclusive culture, you have to understand that it's an uphill battle. It goes against our natural tendencies, and so when organizations actually adopt a truly inclusive culture, it doesn't start with just education, making people aware of the subconscious knack to go away from things that are not like you. It actually does more than that. It goes to creating an understanding of what those differences are and why and how those differences can and should be used to create greater value. I'm not talking about, in this case, educating you on unconscious bias. I think you may remember more recently in the news Starbucks had a situation with one of their restaurants, and they shut their stores down for an entire half-day, and what they did was they focused on educating people on unconscious bias. So there was a training that was done around unconscious bias, and the net effect of that training based on all research is that it had a shelf life of about 90 minutes.Zach: 90 min--an hour and a half?!Chris: 90--an hour and a half. It had a shelf life of 90 minutes, but then our natural, innate tendencies go back to exactly the way we were before we were exposed to that education and training. And so the good thing is that they at least acknowledged that there needed to be something done. The bad thing is that they're using the same tools that we used in 1962, in this country, in order to make civil rights the rights of everyone, and you can see, you know, 50 some odd years later, the outcomes are the same. It's because the techniques and the practices are the same. A lot of it is education, and then the second piece to that is legislation. So when you educate and legislate, you believe that, "Oh, things are going to change." They don't change. These are behavioral tendencies that we have to tap into in order to try and counteract things and make people's behaviors actually change.Zach: Well, see, it's interesting that you say that because--in terms of the historical lens by which you're looking through to discuss inclusion and diversity and facilitating change, because I don't necessarily know if I--if I see a lot of the historical narrative being engaged when we talk about effective methods and approaches to really driving inclusion and diversity, and often times, in my experience, these programs rarely even engage the subject of race explicitly, even to the point where they may create, like, different points of diversity. Like, diversity of thought, diversity of education, and yes, I'm not saying that those points don't exist, Chris, but historically, like, those points, they're strongly interwoven with the intersection of gender and ethnicity, right? But I don't know if I necessarily 1. see a lot of invoking of history when we talk about education and effective methods moving forward in the future, and I don't know if I see a lot of--in fact, sometimes I hear diversity of thought or diversity of education or diversity of background really used as replacements for diversity of race and intersection between--intersectionality of gender and race. Have you seen that? And if you kind of see where I'm coming from, why do you think that is?Chris: Yeah. So let me answer both questions pretty quickly, and then I'll get into a little detail. So the answer is yes and yes. Yes, I have seen it happen. Yes, it is very, very frustrating, and yes, I do understand why it is happening the way that it is happening, because--first let's go back to the terms of diversity and inclusion and why most people tend to use the word diversity preceding the word inclusion. It is because it is a lot easier for me to point out all of the differences between, you know, the 7.5 billion people that are in this world. I can tell you there are differences for all of us, and we should all be aware of and appreciative of all of those differences, but let's think about that at a neurological level, because that's where change happens. It happens at a neurological level. So Zach, if you walk into a room, and a person who walks into a room--and you're originally from where, Texas?Zach: Yes.Chris: Okay, so you're originally from Texas. So you walk into a room, and then right next to you a straight Caucasian male walks into the room, and his background just happens to not be from Texas. Let's say he's from L.A., okay? So he has diversity of experience. You have diversity of race. You both walk into the same room, and you're both seen by a group of executives that are sitting around the table that you're about to engage. Sitting around that table, what do you physically think the reaction will be of your presence versus your male straight white counterpart's presence who just happens to be from L.A.? Both having diversity, you know, based on just them walking into the room. And again, the audience--let's say the audience is full of Texans, okay? So if you--go ahead. Please answer that question, and then I can go on.Zach: [laughs] Yeah, I think--I think that if it's all Texans and they are, let's say, all white men, I think they're gonna gravitate and presume that the white--my white counterpart is the more senior, more competent authority in the space.Chris: Exactly. There are a certain set of assumptions that go into your brain, in other people's brains, the second you or I walk into a room. The second you or I walk into a bus, the second you or I walk into an elevator. And again, I do not blame the neuroscience behind the minds of the individuals who make assumptions as soon as you or I walk into a room, but it is very different when I used the word diversity talking about race versus when I use the word diversity and I talk about a person's background or a person's education, because certain people have certain assumptions that are attributed to their physical being. They can't help it. You can't help what I think about when I look at you as you walk into a room. You have no control over that. It's just like the white straight male from L.A. cannot help what I may think about him when he walks into the room, but some of these assumptions, some of these thoughts, some of these implicit biases are nothing--they have nothing to do with who's standing in front of you, okay? So I think--going back to your question, I think a lot of times--in the field of diversity and inclusion we've now migrated away from the cornerstone of diversity and inclusion, which had everything to do with gender and race, and we've migrated now to diversity of thought, diversity of background, diversity of experience, diversity of a lot of different things, and I'm not saying any of those things are wrong, but I am saying that neurologically, when I think about the word diversity, the reason why I believe we have to go back to the cornerstone of diversity, which has everything to do with gender and race, because of that reaction when you walked into the room with your white male counterpart. Until I can get this country and individuals in corporate America past the fact that they have no control over that implicit bias associated with that initial impression, then I cannot move forward and start thinking about other forms of diversity because there is an implicit association associated with just your physical presence that, quite frankly, has a stereotype associated with it, and it has a whole set of thoughts and assumptions associated with just your physical presence, which is where I think the work needs to be done, which is where I think we need to start building from.Zach: So you've made mention about making authentic connections and those neuropathic pathways. I'd love to hear more about that. When we first spoke, like, you talked about that. I'd love to hear more about that, because as you and I know, the real change happens at the executive level. So one, please expound a little bit about those pathways and those genuine, like, connections, and then what methods have you seen be effective in driving that sort of openness to be connected outside of one's comfort zone at, like, the top and highest of levels?Chris: Wow. So big question. [both laugh] I'm gonna start with three words, and then I'm gonna dive into each of those words just briefly so I can uncover some of what you've asked. The first word I want to talk about is a word called covering. The second word, or words, I want to talk about is safe place, and then the third word that I want to talk to you about is change and change management, okay? And these are all different, but they're all connected. So covering, let's start off with that. The reason why men and women who look like you and I, who work in corporate America, spend a large percentage of their time covering is because we understand that there are certain stigmas associated with our physical presence and there's no getting around it. The reason why you or I might not necessarily be as open to talk about some of our childhood experiences in the corporate setting is because we do not feel as though they are appropriate, and so we hide them, we cover them. Covering is an actual term that was coined back in the mid-'60s by a sociologist who talked about stigmas associated with all different types of people, and we all have them, you know? Straight white men also have the habits of covering, but they are a lot deeper when it comes to some of the underrepresented races in this country. So if you're either foreign background or of a heritage that puts you into a category as far as being called brown of some sort or shade in this country, you spend a lot of your physical energy covering, covering up who you authentically are, because you do not feel as though it's appropriate. You do not feel that you will have a good opportunity to assimilate unless you cover. And covering goes across the board. It's everything from how you groom yourself to, you know, as you're getting older, some of us, you know, color the gray hairs that may be popping out of our heads, and others of us cover even things like our bodies. Our bodies are a lot of times covered. There's a--the first billionaire female in this country made a billion dollars by covering women. It's the woman who started the SPANX brand in this country. The first billionaire woman under 40, I believe it is. SPANX. SPANX is nothing more than us having an openly bias toward a thinner physical person, and thus SPANX helps us do that, and so we like to cover the fact that we are not necessarily of a certain physicality, and we hide that through things like SPANX. So covering is where a lot of this starts. Go ahead. You have a question.Zach: I was gonna say--you were talking about SPANX. You know, it kind of reminds me of the first black--the first black female billionaire, Madam C.J. Walker, right?Chris: Absolutely, absolutely.Zach: Right? With selling perms and relaxers, right? Like, that was--I think that kind of falls into the bucket of covering. Please continue though. This is amazing.Chris: Yeah. No, you've hit something that is extremely important. I wasn't gonna talk about it because a lot of us suffer from this, but the reason why weaves, the reasons why straight hair, the reason why the European look for African-Americans in this country has been such a phenomenon and has made so many millionaires and billionaires in this country, is because of this thing called covering. When we view something as being the way that we need to better assimilate, we spend our entire lives trying to fit that image, trying to mold ourselves into the image of what we want to assimilate into. We bleach our skin. We straighten our hair. We change the way our body is shaped, all with an effort to cover who we actually are. So a lot of this starts with the idea of [or phenomenon?] called covering. Let me move to the second piece, which is safe space. Safe space is what your executive leaders at every major corporation in this country need to create in order for other people not to feel the need to cover. A safe space is basically an environment or a culture where inclusion is part of what they just do. Inclusion means that I am going to allow you to show up and be your authentic self because I think there is so much value in that. "Chris, I want you to come to work. I want you to dress, act like, be like, you know, fashion yourself after who you really are versus who you believe we want you to be, because we see value in that. We see and understand the value of your differences. We want to know who you are really, and through that story we're actually going to use it to create a better organization, a better company, a better culture." So the idea of creating a safe space can only be done when senior leaders see and understand the influence that they have on an organization and in a culture. If you've ever been in an organization where you felt like there were certain things you can't do, you can't say, certain ways that you just can't act--and not because they're inappropriate, but just because the leader, who creates the culture, has already deemed certain things as being inappropriate, and if you've been in any corporation in this country you know, depending upon which company you're a part of, there's certain things that are just not allowed, and those certain things often times are usually authentic parts of who you are. They're not abusive. They're not distasteful. They're just part of who you naturally are. One key example is my administrative assistant, who for the longest time had been wearing hair pieces and weaves and wigs and everything else, and she had been working for me for about two years, and she called me one weekend in almost a panic, and I answered the phone and I said, "What's going on? What's happening?" And she just happens to be African-American, and she said, "Chris, I'm going to text you a picture of me, and I want you to let me know if it's okay." I said, "Okay," and I thought it was--I thought it had more to do with clothing that she was wearing. She texted me a picture of her wearing her natural hair.Zach: Oh, wow.Chris: Wearing her natural hair, and she said, "Is it okay if I show up to work on Monday without my wigs?" And I said to her--and I'm not gonna use her name 'cause I don't want to embarrass her on this podcast, but I said, "Oh, my God." I said, "You look beautiful." I said, "You look like my sister. You look like my daughter. You look like my mother. You look like my friend. You look like the person who is my partner at work, and I love your authentic self." I said, "Do not ever feel like you have to cover who you are to show up at work." She says, "Well, I just wasn't sure if it was appropriate," and I told her--I said, "You are beautiful as you are. Please show up just like the picture has you," and again, all she did was allow her hair to be natural, and it was just curly, a little kinky, but it was the cutest, most beautiful picture I have ever seen, and since time she has worn her natural hair every day of the week.Zach: That's beautiful, yeah.Chris: Exactly. I could not make this story up. So as a senior leader, your job, your accountability, is to create a safe space so that people who are different can actually show up as themselves. The third piece that I would talk to you a little bit about is called accountability or change management, and when I say change management/accountability, what that to me says is that's, again, the job of the senior leaders in the organization, and that has more to do with if they show up as what I call Pepsi perfect, then they have already set the standard. If they do not or are not willing to show any humility or vulnerability, then no one else will feel like they can make mistakes or be vulnerable. They set the stage, the culture, for the organization and how the organization is going to evolve, and when they believe that they have to be perfect or show up perfect or set requirements such that there can be no mistakes, then you get very unauthentic, unengaged people showing up. The last piece of your question was methodology, and "Chris, how do you think we can use--what methodology have you used to try to create this environment of safety, this culture of inclusion and the ability for people to show up authentically?" And I'll tell you, it starts at the neurological level, and that is it has everything to do with your ability to articulate who you really are, and I call that story-telling. And the reason why I call it story-telling is because there is actually a neuroscience change that happens in your brain when you hear a person's story. When you take the time to understand a person's background, when you take the time to understand what has gotten a person to where they are in life, you change yourself. The reason why you change is for two things actually. One, the reason you change is because your brain doesn't know the difference between an experience and a story. So if I tell you a--if I tell you about a story, it is the same thing as if you were to experience it yourself. If I talked to you about my story of growing up in Cleveland, Ohio, and basically having to take two buses and a train to get to school every day and some of the experiences that I had going through, you know, high school and college, after I finished my story, Zach, you will neurologically change, because your body--your brain doesn't know the difference between my story and you actually experiencing some of that yourself, and so you get this flood of hormones that go through your body which actually change the neuro-receptors in your brain and make--because your brain has this thing called plasticity, you actually change. You feel different about me, and the reason why you feel different about me is because you see a part of you in me. Because it may be a completely different experience that I had in high school or college or even in the work environment, but as I tell you my story, you see yourself in me, and it brings you and I together. And it's not just you and I, it's me and the CEO. It's me and the chief marketing officer. It's me and the chief operating officer. So as opposed to that person or those people relying heavily on what they physically see when I walk into the room, when I tell them my story and I learn their stories, they can no longer look at me the same way because they have neurologically changed. We have created relationship where was none before.Zach: Wow.Chris: Yeah.Zach: [both laugh] Hold on. You know what I like about you, Chris? Well, I like a lot of things about you, but I like the way that you be--you be hitting, like--you be hitting [?] bars, and then you'll be like, "Yeah." Like, "That was fire and I know it. React to that." [both laugh] No, no, no. There's so much there, and I think--first of all, we're probably gonna--we're definitely gonna have to have a part two to this podcast because I want to get deeper. At the same time I don't want us to go have a two-hour podcast, but I do want to follow-up on something. So then when you're talking about creating these--like, sharing these stories and making these connections, you know, what are ways that black and brown professionals coming into an organization can facilitate that in a way that manages up? Like, what are ways that they could do that and help move the needle forward in their favor? What are ways that they could--they could share their stories and create those connections that would support and help them in their careers?Chris: God, that's a great question. So I'm gonna use a term which is based on education, which I told you at first that education does not necessarily change you, but I want to use this term from education 'cause you can start using it and applying it in your day-to-day. And it's a whole study and science around this thing called emotional intelligence, okay? So emotional intelligence, a quick definition of what it is - it's just your ability to take everything that's going on today in your life, Zach, everything that happened, you know, this morning--you know, you, you know, getting out of bed at a certain time, having to, you know, get certain things done, worrying about certain other things that probably lingered from the weekend--your ability to take all of those things that are just clawing and drawing at your attention and put them to the background and focus on Chris during this podcast. Your ability to do that is the quick definition of what emotional intelligence is. It's all of our ability to take everything that's going on in our lives and put it as a backdrop and to be present and able to listen to and serve the person who is sitting in front of us. So taking ourselves and putting ourselves secondary to another human being, but how does emotional intelligence actually help us as we're trying to create these inclusive organizations, to your point or your question, "How do we manage up?" We do it by being emotionally intelligent, and I'll give you a little bit more definition about how that application actually works at work. First of all and foremost, emotional intelligence is the best-correlated skill set to career advancement that there is. Let me pause and say that one more time. Emotional intelligence has the greatest correlation to career advancement than anything else. It is higher than IQ. You may get a job because of a high IQ. You get promoted because of a high EQ, and in this case EQ is emotional intelligence. And so how does that show up and how does that work? It works like this. As you get into an organization--and let's just say that you are different from an ethnicity or from a race-based perspective--first of all, all eyes are on you, and you probably know that if you've been employed by any of the major Fortune 1500 companies in this country, and because all eyes are on you, you get a lot of exposure that you had not even really anticipated or asked for, but the way you manage that from an emotional intelligence perspective is that you spend all of your time trying to find out and figure out what is going on with other individuals and people around you. One of the first things I did when I came to Vizient seven years ago--this is the truth--is that I went up to the CEO--first of all, I didn't take the job until I got a chance to meet the CEO, and I made that a prerequisite before I even came to the organization because I knew that the CEO creates the culture, and I wanted to figure out exactly what type of culture he had created. The first meeting that I had with him, the first thing that we talked about was his dress, the way he dressed, and the reason why we talked about the way he dressed is because he dressed the way I had always wanted to dress. It was very colorful. He had--you know, custom jeans on. He had designer shoes on. I mean, even to this day I can't afford everything that he wore, but it was so well put together that our first conversation was around his dress. I then wanted to understand how did he progress through the organization, so we had a really long conversation about the fact that he started out as an analyst, you know, 30 something odd years ago and then eventually was promoted up through the ranks of CEO. I found out about his wife and her background and the fact that she started out as a CPA. I also had many, many conversations with him about his son. He only has one son, and his son at the time was just about to enter college, and he had an incredible attraction to African art. I also found out that he spent a lot of time in New Mexico, and the reason why he spent a lot of time in New Mexico is because 1. it gave him a chance to get away from Texas, and 2. he was able to basically walk down the street and people really not know who he was or what he did. So he could kind of not have to be a CEO for those periods of time where he got a chance to get away. The reason why I tell you this story is because I immersed myself in understanding who he is, how he thought, how he worked, what was important to him, what his likes were and what his dislikes were, and as I did that, as I immersed in his life, he then paid the same respect to me. He paid the same respect to me, because he began asking questions about me and my story and what brought me to where I was in my career, in my life, in my work and everything else, and we built a very strong relationship. I'm gonna pause on that word relationship, because a lot of times the things that hold us back in corporate America, especially if we show up either from a gender difference or from an ethnicity difference, is that we don't take the time to form those relationships, and they have to be formed very selflessly. Very purposefully but very selflessly. You cannot walk into a relationship and expect a person to just automatically, you know, ask you about your family or your spouse or your education or anything else like that, even though that's a big part of your story. You have to first start out by asking them about themselves. I always tell people when they're about to go to an interview or if they're about to, you know, have a first conversation with another human being, and I tell them, "Use the 80/20 rule," and the 80/20 rule says that you should only talk 20% of the time, because when you're talking, you're not listening. When you're talking, you're not able to hear the story of the other person who is in front of you, who emotional intelligence tells you should be the center of your attention for that interaction. Does that make sense?Zach: It does make sense. For sure, for sure. So let me ask you this, because I'd like to get, you know, your prediction. Based on your expertise as an I&D subject matter expert, like, what is the future of I&D if it stays its current course?Chris: Yeah. I will tell you if it stays its current course--we've seen the current course trajectory for inclusion and diversity over the last 50+ years. We still have the same representation of minorities in CEO positions and board director positions and females in CEO positions and board director positions that we've had for the last, you know, 30+ years. That course has not changed. We have the same make-up as far as individuals who are moving into C-level jobs. We've got the same make-up that we've had, you know, for the last 35, 40+ years. That trajectory has already been put in place, and it continues to be there even though the demographics of this country have completely changed. As a matter of fact, if you're under the age of 18 right now, the majority in this country have actually become the minority and the minority have become the majority, but it doesn't mean--because the numbers are there, it doesn't mean that there will be change in organizations and corporations and boards of directors and people making key decisions. If you look across the world, we see where that phenomena has happened in other countries, where the minorities in a country are actually still in powerful positions over the majority of people who actually happen to be part of the organization or the countries, because they have not changed. They have not understood how to change the mindsets and really tap into the value of the vast majority of people who actually inhabit the place that they're at geographically. So the current trajectory has already proven out that it will remain the way it is, and the bad side, the down side of that trajectory, is that we don't have the ability to tap into one of our greatest resources, which is the true, rich diversity of people that walk into organizations every day, that walk into churches every day, that walk past you down the streets every day.Zach: Hm. That's a heavy--that's heavy, but this has been a great discussion, Chris, and, you know, before we wrap up, I'd like to know - are there any other projects that you're working on?Chris: Yes. Yeah, so the one--the latest project that is just unfolding at the conclusion here of 2018 has been a small I'll just call it boutique consulting firm that I just decided I'm going to create, because I don't see the current trajectory changing, and I said, "You know what? At the end of the day, one person can make a difference if they just figure it out and start doing it in a very meaningful way," and so I just started a small firm called Storytellers Consulting, and Storytellers Consulting has a lot to do with what we just discussed on this podcast, and that is teaching executives how to tell their stories and how to bring the stories out of the people who they work with and how to create inclusive cultures and how to create safe spaces and how to evolve organizations into becoming more inclusive. If there is nothing that is done at the neurological level, change will not happen, period. So here's my final thought on how change happens and why I know for sure this is true. So January. January is the most important month of the year for a lot of people, because they make a lot of promises to themselves. Most of us--most of us make promises like, "I'm going to lose that 10, 15, 20 pounds that has burdening me for the last, you know, 15 years of my life." That resolution lasts 'til about February 15th. I always give people right up 'til about Valentine's Day, and then the behaviors go back to what they used to be, right? And the reason why the behaviors go back to what they used to be is because change management requires for people to actually change neurologically, and the only way that that happens--let's call it for the sake of losing weight--the only way that you're gonna physically be able to lose weight and keep it off is if something triggers you to know that my behavior has to change or else there's either a consequence or else I see the benefit so much that I'm not gonna go back to my bad habits, and for a lot of people, those changes happen only when you get burdened with something like--something bad is gonna happen to you if you don't lose weight. Like, you get a call from the doc and they tell you the consequence of you not losing the weight. So short of that--because most people are not faced with that--short of that, we've got to change neurologically, which means that in order for me to physically make sure that you're going to stick to your commitments, I've got to explain to you in a way that makes so much sense that you are not gonna go back to your bad habits regardless of the temptation. The reason why this is so important is because, again, for most of us, we get off the diets by February 15th, and the reason being is because we've done nothing to convince ourselves that we have to be on that diet or we have to change our way of living. In diversity and inclusion, that neuroscience change starts with creating a relationship. The same exact thing would happen if you were to--as opposed to telling someone else that you're gonna lose a whole bunch of weight, if you signed up and created, let's say, a partnership with someone and said, "You know what? For the next year, you and I, three times a week, are gonna meet at the gym. We're gonna go together. I'm gonna hold you accountable, you're gonna hold me accountable, and we are going to change our lives together." When there is that partnership, that relationship, that neurological change inside of your head, inside of your body, it has a lot better of an opportunity of sticking, and so that's exactly what we want to do with Storytellers Consulting. That's exactly what we want to do when it comes to change management just in general across the country.Zach: This has been a phenomenal conversation. I just--I really appreciate it, Chris. Before we let you go--I know you just shared some--first of all, you've been dropping sauce this entire conversation, but do you have any final thoughts or shout-outs?Chris: Yeah. I guess the final thought or shout-out I have is 1. I really want to just let people know that one, there is no criticism associated with, you know, where we are today in this--in this country relative to diversity and inclusion. I do not feel like it is anyone's fault. I don't want anyone to, you know, hear this podcast and believe that, Zach, you or I are saying that there are so many social injustices going on in this country that, you know, this is just a throwaway or there is someone to truly blame for everything. That is not the message whatsoever. The message is that most of our current existence, most of our decisions, most of our behaviors, they are so subconscious, unconscious, subliminal, that we're not even aware of it a lot of times, and so all we're doing, all we're saying, all we're advocating for is for people to actually do things that are more consciously driven, and when you do things that are more consciously driven and there's a motivation and a methodology for you to do that, then we can actually make change, and that is exactly what we're advocating for, is that we just really think about this from a historical perspective, realizing certain things have just not been that effective, you know? The legislation that we did back in the '60s and, you know, all of the affirmative action pushes that we've done through the '70s and '80s, you know, as great as they've been, you know, to make people feel better, they really have not necessarily touched on the--on the real metrics associated with businesses and corporations in this country, and our organizations are missing out on an incredible opportunity to tap into what is now going to become the majority population in this country. And so again, my shout-out [?] to take a very introspective look and approach at what are we personally doing right now to build relationships that actually go beyond our racial differences, go beyond our gender differences and create true, meaningful, authentic relationships with other human beings by getting to know them at a neurological level. A lot of times, that is done through stories and through the art of storytelling.Zach: Chris, we definitely appreciate you being on the Living Corporate podcast today, and we consider you a friend of the show, and we hope to have you back, man.Chris: Thank you so much, man. It has been a pleasure and a gift and a blessing. Thank you.Zach: Amen, man. Peace.Chris: Amen. All righty, be well.

reThink Real Estate Podcast
RTRE 54 - How to Play Nice with Other Real Estate Pros

reThink Real Estate Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 18, 2019 27:49


Download this Episode It's easy to for some agents to get along well with their peers. For others, not so much. Tune in today as we discuss the skills necessary to be a pro that other pros want to be around. Here are the secrets to playing nice in the sandbox. The rules are simple. Play nice in the sand box. Rethink Real Estate Podcast Transcription Audio length 31:05 RTRE 36 –  Erica Ramus on Promoting Women Leaders [music] [Chris] Welcome to re:Think Real Estate, your educational and hopefully entertaining source for all things real estate, business, news and tech.  [Christian]: I am Christian Harris in Seattle, Washington. [Nathan]: Hi, I am Nathan White in Columbus, Ohio. [Chris]: And I am Chris Lazarus in Atlanta, Georgia. Thanks for tuning in.  [music] [Chris]: Hi everybody and welcome back to re:Think Real Estate. I am your host Chris Lazarus here with Nathan White, Christian Harris. Guys how are you? [Christian]: Hey. [Nathan]: Hey, I am fantastic and beautiful. [Chris]: Hey Nate how is that CRM going? [Nathan]: I knew that was coming why didn't I [inaudible] [laughter]. The think about my CRM. I am embarrassed. I swear people it is happening. It is going to get out of my head and… [Christian]: We do know you swear a lot. [Chris]: Yeah you do swear a lot. [Nathan]: Yes I am going like…Man it's gonna be bad. It's gonna be bad in my office. I am gonna have to shut the door. There is going to be a lot of curse words probably. Probably. But you know I drink a lot of caffeine and I swear a lot people, if you don't know. So yeah we're getting there. It is process right. So I should…The episode after this hands down I will give you some feedback. [Chris]: It's OK. We're gonna keep your feet to the fire. [Christian]: Focus that caffeine and rage to getting your CRM up and running. [Chris]: Definitely. So.. [Nathan]: Yeah I am going to. [Chris]: For everybody tuning in if you get a chance, if you haven't already. Go to and check out our website and our new newsletter at rtrepodcast.com. If you go there, you can click on the little box. Type in your name and email address and every week when we launch a new episode you will be notified. So this week we have an amazing guest. Her name is Erica Ramus. She is the broker owner and magic maker at Ramus Realty. Erica welcome. [Erica]: Thanks guys. [Chris]: It's great to have you on. For our agents who are not in your neck of the woods, why don't you tell us a bit about you and your company? [Erica]: Sure. I am the broker of a small independent boutique company in rural Pennsylvania. I run the middle of the North East. And so most of the cities around. I am very, very wear off. And we have less than 10 agents. I have 8 agents and me and an apprentice in the office. And while we are small in boutique we are mighty. So, we have only 8 people in the office but we have 13% market share.  [Chris]: What? [Erica]: Yeah. The largest companies in the area have 15, 20 and 80 agents. And consistently we have…typically we have…I checked yesterday. We have 40 sites pending currently. And the biggest company has 75.  [Chris]: Wow. That is incredible. [Erica]: So highly productive.  [Chris]: Very highly productive. So when we first met it was…You know it feels like this entire podcast is right around the Inman crowd because Erica and I we met out at Inman. Christian was there also when we were doing the…feeding the homeless. Before the conference started and we were at the same panel about being a broker and non-producing.  So you operate your brokerage a little bit different than I do. Which is you know I am the trainer right I don't go and do really anything. I hope people build their own careers. Tell us a little bit about how your office is run. How are…how are you able to obtain 13% market share with only 8 agents under you? [Erica]: I think of my office as running almost like a super team.  [Chris]: OK. [Erica]: So my name is on the door and before I was in real estate I was a magazine publisher. And I had multiple magazines which…one was a local scoop living magazine. So you probably have Atlanta Life or Atlanta Living or Seattle Living. Something like that. [Chris]: Yeah. [Erica]: So I started that and everybody in town knew me. I was the magazine lady. I was selling ads. And hawking my magazine. And than I got into real estate so when I got in I was almost an immediate success because everybody already knew my face. And I used the magazine to my benefit as well. All of my houses of course were advertised in my own magazine. [Chris]: Nice. [Erica]: So it as a great jump-start. But I built a team under me. I very quickly realized that I couldn't service the leads that were coming in. And so than I left to go out on my own. I built a team up of people who just honestly want to be fed. I produce the leads. I state myself as the reign maker ruler. I do all the marketing on the back end. My face is on almost everything.  And when we're agent advertising my name is on the door so I have very strict control over quality. I do all the marketing and produce all the materials myself. The leads come in, the get filtered through the agents and than I am to deal with after  in the background if something goes wrong. But that is my role. I see it as feeding the agents and making sure that everybody is happy and productive.  [Chris]: And recently you were telling me I think a couple of months ago that you started doing a lot more travel recently and talking and really try moving into more a leadership role within the industry right? [Erica]: yep. So I have always written. Obviously magazine writing was my background and blogging. And so I have always written articles and so I am speaking locally. But recently in the past 2, 3 years I started taking up national speaking engagements. I spoke at Better Homes and Gardens about 2 years ago at their last region event. And Inman and National…NAR. And so my inner circuit.  [Chris]: I am impressed.  [Christian]: Awkward pause OK. [Chris]: Awkward pause.  [Christian]: OK. [Chris]: There we go. Alright there we go. So…So you…Inman, Better Homes and Gardens, NAR. Now you're on one of the committees with NAR too right? [Erica]: Yep. Next year I am on the research and development committee. This past 2 years I have been on the housing opportunity committee. I have dome some professional development so… [Chris]: That's fantastic. So the reason I am bringing this up is because there has been a lot of talk. And a lot of focus on women leaders within our industry. Because let's face it, Christian, Nate and I are the majority. I am sorry we're the minority in real estate. This industry is almost 60% female and the leadership is skewed the other direction.  So tell us what it is like to be not only a broker owner as a female because that is something we will never know but also to be putting yourself out there in the leadership role as a speaker and travelling across the US to talk about helping other women to step into a leadership role and grow their business also. [Erica]: That is something I have always been passionate about, it is owning my own business. I started my own businesses from scratch. When I was in my early 20s. And it was the magazine business. I was not content about just being the editor or publisher. I wanted to own the magazine. And I did. So I have always been an entrepreneur.  And once I started in real estate I knew very quickly I either wanted an ownership role in my company or I was gonna start my own. So to me it was never a question of why would I try or why would I do it. I question all the time why ever women don't step out into leadership roles. And why they don't start their own brokerages. A lot of women seem to express that they're unhappy where they are. And they search for other brokers. When I was unhappy I just started my own company.  So…But I think it is something that is inside of you. It is innate. And a lot of women I believe are afraid to take the chance. It was a huge risk when I went out on my own and I had a young son and my husband but who totally supports me and everything I do. All my crazy ideas. But you know why don't women say “I want to make a change”? And instead of jumping from broker to broker “I want t start my own company” or “I want to be a manager in the firm”.  But almost all the managers and owners in my area they're all men. So…Local especially when the kids are young and if you have children you can relate. I know you have children and I know Christian and Chris you both have young children. But I didn't have a husband at home taking care of the kids. And he works too so that was challenge and that is probably why I didn't travel and didn't do a lot of speaking. Occasionally I would travel but I didn't do the NAR stuff. I didn't do the contract until the kids were out of the house and it was much easier. Now I just have to worry about the dog. [Christian]: So Erica being the reign maker at your office you mentioned kind of matching leads and giving hose out and kind of working all the back end stuff and being very involved with the transactions. What is your means of acquiring that new business. Do you kind of do the traditional you buy them or are you just a known entity that you actually got a lot of community coming to you? When they have real estate needs? [Erica]: WE do both because while I certainly have enough organic coming into the site…The site is…I don't know 15 years old basically. We get great Google traffic on our own but we also do buy some leads. So specifically we have about 35% of our closing will be repeat referral business. Out at a given point and the remainder are just walk-in office street. We have a very prominent location on a busy highway corner. And we also have a little bit of Zillow paid. Not much. We actually cut that back significantly. But Zillow pushes a lot of Facebook ads. And we get great leads just from Facebook and also some Google paid.  [Chris]: Has there ever been anything that has happened to you that you think would discourage another woman agent from becoming their own business owner or stepping up into a leadership role either on NAR or on a national speaking arrangement? [Erica]: I think there still is a disconnect between strong women and the belief that strong women versus a strong man in negotiating or even running a company, the woman is not necessarily respected as much as the man. I just…I still see that. And I believe that a man who is negotiating a problem on a deal who is a broker and if he is perceived as being strong is not necessarily being perceived as difficult. He is just being a strong businessman and negotiating or advocating for his client.  Whereas women when we step up to the table and argue on behalf of our client or try to push something through that is strong in our belief we're seen in a negative light as opposed to a positive right. And I haven't necessarily seen this happen on a national level. Every meeting and committee that I have been involved with in the state national has been very respectful. But I see it locally. Most of the brokers around me are all men The managers are men and there is definitely still the stigma against the strong women.  [Chris]: In your office what is the breakdown on demographic, men versus women that are working with you? [Erica]: I have one fantastic man [laughter]. [Chris]: One fantastic man so you have 7 agents working for you that are… [Erica]: All women.  [Chris]: All female. So…Christian and I are running our own office. We each have our own company and obviously we do not fully understand the female experience. If we wanted to create an environment that is conductive for females to come in and be successful and grow their business, what should we do as male brokers in an industry that is 60% female? [Erica]: I would say bring them along with you. Bring them up and along. Bring them to meetings. Bring them if you're going to say chambers of commerce function. Or local meetings. Board meetings. Bring them with you and mentor them up. I think women have to be told that it is OK. It is OK to be strong. It is OK to get a babysitter some nights and go out to business functions. You don't have to be home every night with the kids. I… Women feel guilty about this. I know I did. Getting my broker's license I had to have my best friend at the house from 6 to 10 Thursday nights when I took my classes. And I felt terrible that they were in school all day with my friends rather than with me. But…You have to empower them and also listen to them. You should listen to. A lot of women get stepped on their voices get stepped on and they don't necessarily feel like they are heard.  In my office meetings for example the man in my office he's named Will. He is fantastic. He is very open to giving suggestions at our office meetings. His voice is very vocal. And I have watched some of the women step back a little bit when he speaks and I will pull them out of their shell and say “That is a great idea Will. What do you think about it Stephanie?” And pull them up so that they are not shrinking violets in the background. [Chris]: That's a…I think that is fantastic. we'll have to make sure that we are doing things like that because you know right now we…at least my office is predominantly female. So we try and create an environment where no ideas are really shunt. Right we want everybody to feel empowered that when they come into the office their ego is left at the door and everybody is here to either better themselves or better the people around them.  OK If they're not in the office for one of those 2 reasons they're not welcome because every…So we want that environment where people feel “Oh hey you know what everybody's voice is heard and everybody gets the same amount of focus form the office on how they can grow their business.” And I think one of the challenges being a male broker is that we just instinctively we yell at each other. I mean guys, that's what we do. [Erica]: Right. [Chris]: So when we sit in meeting we're gonna yell at each other. Politely but we're gonna basically be vocal. And what I have learnt is that a lot of women let that happen. They kind of step back so I really like that. That's one of the things that I am gonna have to work on. When I am in those meetings recognizing when they are kind of stepping back and binging them forward. That is great. Thank you Erica. [Erica]: What's the body language? And you know when someone has something to say but they're not gonna say it. And I pull them out of it and make them say it because I wanted them to know their voice is important to me.  [Christian]: Yeah I thing that is important as a leader whether male or female. You know people have different personality types and you know kind of as a type females in general tend to be not as aggressive. So…But you know I know that guys are like that too kind of pick them out like “Hey you know I see you haven't said anything during this meeting, what do you think about this” you  know and try to pull them back in. [Chris]: I think that is excellent advice. So take note brokers. Male brokers. This is what you gotta be doing because face it women are on the move and it's…They're the majority we're the minority, I am the user minority because I am not only a man, but I am a millennial. We make up 4% of the industry. So…It's important to pay attention to this stuff. Nate? [Nathan]: So to pick back on that Erica I always like to ask our guests questions that we have on the show. So the first one I would almost think maybe it would be applicable maybe I am wrong, but first question I want to ask you is how is failure and current failure set you up for later success? Question 2 is what are bad recommendations you hear in our profession and then the third one is if you can have a gigantic billboard anywhere with anything on it what would it say? So go [laughter]. [Erica]: OK and the first question is easy. The biggest failure in my entire life was when I had the magazine. I bought the magazine from my prior boss. I got tired of doing all the work. That's what I thought. Doing all the work and not being the boss so I just bought them out. And I blamed the pregnancy on that one.  So I bought it without looking at the numbers without the advice of my attorney, my accountant and my husband. [laughter]. The trifecta and a couple of years later I…the whole industry changed. Destruction came in. The disruptors but we already hear them all the time in our industry. And domino started falling and I was 3 quarters of a million in debt. In this tiny little rural world and I somehow managed to start a second magazine which actually was successful but I learned huge, huge lessons in that first failure, like when you get a pay, pay roll, you don't use a discover card. You know or huge lessons that I never repeated again.  All having to do with my ego and the handling of overhead. Which leads me to number 2. So handling the overhead whether you're the broker or the agent. Everyday my agents come to me I feel with this great news scam. This great new product that somebody wants them to buy it too. “It's only 99 dollars a month. It's only 25 dollars a week. Only…It's only 100 dollars to put a business card up on our program.” You know over and over again. “It's only…It's only”.  And there are people who make lots of money selling products off the backs of agents who should not be spending that money. So, I warned my new agents “Please don't spend any money on any lead generators. I will make your leads for you. Just sit back and work the leads. And do not ever say it's only, because in January when you're adding up your taxes it's gonna be a huge number”. So that to me is one follows the other. Keep your overhead low. [Chris]: Shiny object syndrome.  [Erica]: Yeah the new shiny object thing. [Nathan]: Yeah we have talked about that before but that is a great recommendation. I mean awesome. Awesome recommendation.  [Chris]: “It's only gonna cost me my success”. [laughter] [Erica]: Yeah and than they say “You only need to sell one house”. If you only sell one house you can't pay off the thing. Now I don't want to hear that. [laughter]. And then I guess my billboard would be “Be fearless”. Just that's my motto “Be fearless”. I am… [Chris]: Where would you put it? [Erica]: I would… [Nathan]: I didn't ask where. [Erica]: Yeah he didn't ask where so I don't have to answer that question. [laughter] [Chris]: OK OK ,be fearless. [Nathan]: Yeah I mean literally the question is “If you could have it anywhere with anything on it…” I mean it doesn't matter where it is it's what's on it I guess. Is the message. And be fearless. [Erica]: Yeah. [Chris]: I love that. So Erica we were talking the other day and you were currently working on an article for Inman. About how we focus our business. This kind of piggy bags off of our last episode with Billy a little bit. So what is your philosophy? You are running this business, you've got 8 agents, you are the reign maker. They are killing it. You've got great market share. What is your business philosophy about how you treat your clients and how does that set you apart? [Erica]: I…A lot of brokers say “We're agent centric, we're agent focused, we're all about the agent”. I believe the broker owns the client and I am client focused. It's all about the client. If you serve the client well the agents will be well fed and taken care of and that side of the coin takes care of itself. But it all begins with the broker and the client and so our entire office is very client centric. Even to the fact that if somebody is working with the client they're not handling it well or they are not mixing well with this person, they're getting frustrated. We will just pull them off that one and say “Give it to this person”. And switch them. It's about the client not about you and your commission or the money coming into the office. [Christian]: Preach it sister.  [Erica]: So…Say it again. [Christian]: I said preach it sister. [Nathan]: Preach it is right. I mean if you go by even our last episode part of this. Again it's client. This is like another one of the common themes in our podcast right guys? I mean and lady.  [Chris]: It's tuning in. [Nathan]: Listen listen, this is not rocker science. We are not reinventing the wheel. We are not…We are not coming up with something new. We're actually just going in and doing what we should be doing and taking care of the client. Good Gosh I mean we can't say it enough. But I mean why do we have to keep saying it? [Erica]: Because people are too dump to do it. It's simple.  [Christian]: Right. Well and I think it's because we push it back against the status quo of the industry. The franchises… [Chris]: They're like KPIs KPIs KPIs. [Christian]: All of that stuff is set up to be focused on sales and numbers and money and getting as many agents as possible you know. [Erica]: Yeah. [Chris]: Recruit retain recruit retain. [Christian]: Exactly. So I mean being client focused or caring about people is not…You are going against the flow of how the whole industry works. [Nathan]: Right yeah. You know there are stats and all that good. I had an agents yesterday…sag way real quick. Sorry. They chased bank at their home office. I get invited to their…their first time or their home buyer programs. And it is great being a chased preferred agent but they are having to be another agent there that is new and one of the other agent speaks and said “Hey we haven't lost the house and in our competitive market you probably will.” And she said “Not me” And I was like oh come on just stop. Like here we go with the ego and not making it about the client, you're making it about you. And can we just…More people. I am gonna stop. Just stop making it about you there. [laughter] [Chris]: Yeah it's the ego. [Erica]: And brokers can be afraid to get people out of their office when they don't fit not only the culture but the way the agent should be. I terminated one who was all about her. She rebelled on a client because the client was 10 minutes late on an appointment [laughter]. And the client forwarded me the text message and she said “I don't have time to wait for people at houses”. I was “You need to leave now” [laughter]. [Nathan]: If this was online and like a quote I would be doing that arrow and this…This this right… [Chris]: Yes. [Nathan]: Man that is…Yes. Don't be afraid. [Chris]: One of the…One of the things that I have learned over the last few years in kind of the leadership role of running a company is your culture that you build and that you operate is based off of thousands of tiny interactions. When you have people like that the ego, the meltdown, the trip, like they're just gonna suck and drain all the energy away from the people that are really trying to do good. So I couldn't agree with you more Erica. You just gotta get rid of those people. Unfortunately, I think there is too many brokers that if you got a pulse and a license you're… [Erica]: When you're being judged…When you're in a major franchise and you're being judged by the head count in  your office…I don't judge myself. People ask me...I will go to Inman and the first word out of their mouth is how many agents I have in the office. So I have… [Christian]: It's the metrics of measuring success. [Erica]: Exactly. I am proud of my market share. I am proud of the fact that my agents do a minimum of 24 sites a year. I have 2 that are doing 40 this year and one who is approaching 60. That is a lot of site. [Chris]: That is a lot of site. [Nathan]: That is slaying the dragon. [Chris]: I think that having…A lot of people put pressure on the metrics. “Oh number of agents, volume sold”. But I think the biggest metric is per person productivity. Because I think if those numbers win the per person productivity I think you are destroying Remax who is the…I mean their franchise on average is the highest per person productivity at like 16 sites per agent on average.  They don't even bring in KW because they are the biggest but they don't have the numbers per agent that KW has. That Remax has. And your average real estate agent in the industry is gonna do like what? 3, .4 deals per year? And that's just sites. So 3,4 sites per year I think is the average. And you are destroying that. And that is fantastic and you're doing it with a complete math of 10 people.  [Christian]: Yeah and that's the…That's the business number side of it. Anything else taken into accounts, smaller you know indie brokerages like ours you know can have the luxury of being able to be in charge, in control of developing that culture, how happy are your agents? You know, like on Remax or whatever. You know name any franchise and you know largely they have undefined culture. Like there is no distinguishing factor as to you know….What is like in their office versus anther franchise. Like they're just there to you know have head count. [Chris]: Our office has the best coffee machine. [laughter] Stuff like that. So Erica for any…We've had the theme kind of today of being the woman business owner. For anybody who is thinking about like stepping up like what advice would you give them? [Erica]: I would say that if you're not strong in your leadership skills or don't feel like you're there, that don't know how to be a leader, get a coach, get a mentor. There are at least in my areas there is classes you can take as far as leadership. Or find someone who you admire and ask them to take you under their wing because it really is by osmosis I think in this business and if there is someone in your office who shows promise bring them up with you. I take my agents all the time to chamber of commerce function, to mixers and just have them by my side so they can watch me interacting with other business people an helpfully bring up their confidence level. [Chris]: I love it. That's great. Erica for anybody who wants to get in touch with you and say they've got somebody moving to Pennsylvania or they just want to reach out and pick your brain on some of the things that you have accomplished, what is the best way that they can reach you? [Erica]: They can always call me or email me. My email address is easy, it's my name. ericaramus@gmail.com. And that's –E-R-I-C-A-R-A-M-U-S@gmail. And my phone number is 5704492131. If you google me it's all over. [Chris]: Awesome. Erica thank you so much for taking the time out of your day today to join us here in re:Think Real Estate. For everybody who is listening in please visit us. Go to rtrepodcast.com. Subscribe to the newsletter so every week when we launch a new episode you're gonna get notified. Thank you so much for tuning in. We'll see you next week.  [music]  [Chris]: Thanks for tuning in this week's episode of the re:Think Real Estate Podcast. We would love to hear your feedback so please leave us a review on iTunes. Our music is curtesy of Dan Koch K-O-C-H, whose music can be explored and licensed for use at dankoch.net. Thank you Dan. Please like, share and follow. You can find us on Facebook at Facebook.com/rethinkpodcast. Thank you so much for tuning in everyone and have a great week.  [music]  

reThink Real Estate Podcast
RTRE 53 - How Body Language Can Improve Your Real Estate Business

reThink Real Estate Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 11, 2019 25:59


Download this Episode Body language is one of the most important tools in your arsenal to build a rapport with your clients. Today we discuss how much more important your body language is to your clients than your words and your tone. We discuss the ins and outs of the handshake, when to avoid closing the deal, and what different signals mean. Tune in and don't forget to leave us a review on iTunes! Our body language conveys a clear message. Rethink Real Estate Podcast Transcription Audio length 25:59 RTRE 53 – How Body Language Can Improve Your Real Estate Business  [music] [Chris] Welcome to re:Think Real Estate, your educational and hopefully entertaining source for all things real estate, business, news and tech.  [Christian]: I am Christian Harris in Seattle, Washington. [Nathan]: Hi, I am Nathan White in Columbus, Ohio. [Chris]: And I am Chris Lazarus in Atlanta, Georgia. Thanks for tuning in.  [music] [Chris]: Everybody welcome back. This is re:Think Real Estate your number one source for real estate, business, news, tech and tactical advice. Today we're talking about body language and why that's important in your real estate business. Christian. What do you think about body language buddy? [Christian]: The language of the body. [laughter] I think it's good. I think it's something we probably don't focus on enough because you know there's a lot of subconscious queues that we take from tone of voice and the…and the disposition of someone's body that we don't really recognize. You know we focus on scripts and what we say but you know it's actually a relatively small amount of our communication, affective or not is through our words. [Chris]: Absolutely. So interestingly enough if you haven't…to anybody out there if you haven't researched how body language works and how communication works, about 7% of all communication is vocal. Those are the words that I speak. The words coming out of my mouth. And 30…what was it? 38% of all of it was actually vocal. That is the inflection, the tone of our voice makes up more of the communication that we're…in the message that we're sending to others, than do the actual words that we speak today. [Christian]: Wait is that why my wife is always upset with me? And she never focuses on what I say but how I say it? [Chris]: Yes. Yeah that's actually… [Christian]: Lessons to learn there. OK.  [Chris]: And yeah. So interestingly enough that you bring that up. People that are naturally able to read a room, so if you've come across somebody and you're like “Wow they're very perceptive”, it's because they pay attention to body language. And women are way better at this than men are. Just naturally they stop and think.  But 55% of all communication is through body language. It's nonverbal. It's in the gestures that we make. It's in how we present ourselves. And, you know, for anybody watching this you're not gonna see anything that I am doing but you'll hear in the vocal inflection more than you'll pay attention in the words that I am saying just statistically. So please keep listening to my inflection. [laughter] But it's extremely important. And I think that in real estate we have all these sales gurus that are telling you “This is what to say, this is what to say. Call them. This is what you need to say to somebody”. They're writing scripts down. They're telling you how often you need to call somebody. They're telling you when like who you need to call. You need to call all your neighbors and you're doing circle prospecting and you're inviting them all to you open house.  But it doesn't tell you that…none of these coaches talk to you and say “And by the way when you call them don't do this and talk like “Hi my name is Josh and I am a realtor and I am listing the house down the street. We have an open house coming up and I would like to invite you there [flat intonation]”. Because you're gonna put everybody to sleep. Not only that but nobody wants to talk to somebody that they don't know and they're not passionate or enthusiastic about anything that they're saying so the inflection makes a difference. What do you think Christian? [Christian]: I think you're real spot on there sparky. [Chris]: Just keep petting my ego. [Christian]: Yes. [Chris]: Like words I never get tired of hearing. “You're right”. [Christian]: Yes it's interesting because so much you know with something like google something like audio podcast, all you're hearing is the voice of the content and the inflections. Right? So like on my other podcast it is interview based. It's the Sea Town podcast. What I started doing is instead of having the guest sit you know across a chair across from me, everybody sitting and talking, I use my stand desk and we put the microphone in the middle and we stand. And have a conversation.  Because there is actually you know statistics that talk about, you know, you actually have a lot more energy naturally and a lot more expressive when you're standing and you can talk with your hands and you're not like standing in a chair. And so you can actually hear them in someone's voice as far as their energy level and their excitements if they're standing versus if they're sitting. You know.  And I notices that myself. Like if I am monologue-ing or something I have to be really intentional like if I am doing video I need in my head I need to be super over the top excited because it might actually come out to the other person like I am talking normally. [Chris]: Yeah and I mean it's really weird because a lot of people talking about the inflection in your voice like if you're selling something you need to be passionate about it. Because people hear the passion more than they hear the words that you're saying. So if you're sitting down with a seller or a buyer and you're talking about “Oh this is the process and this is how we're gonna help you buy the house and we're gonna get you prequalified [flat tone]” versus “Hey this is awesome. You're at a stage now where we have a lot to do and here's what we're gonna do. We're gonna get you prequalified and you're gonna talk to X,Y,Z lenders and once we get the prequalification down we're gonna start doing the home search. So you've given me some of the things and…[excited tone]”.  The message is completely different. Inflection in how you talk. People can hear passion. People can hear whether or not you actually care about what you're doing. [Christian]: They can tell whether or not you believe in the product you are selling so to speak. [Chris]: Yeah. [Christian]: Yeah. [Chris]: “I think everybody should own a home” [flat tone] “I THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD OWN A HOME” [excited tone]. [Christian]: Your examples are killing me. Stop. Stop.  [Chris]: [laughter] So I mean and then it comes down to like the body language. Right? So once you're actually in front of people how important is body language? Well not only it is 55% of all communication but it…body language permeates even our vocal. It permeates our vocabulary. Right? You're got phrases like ‘to shoulder a burden'. ‘To face up to it'. ‘Keep your chin up'. ‘Put your best foot forward'. They all describe how we can approach things and inevitably these phrases give an innate understanding of what that message is supposed to portray. Even if you're not able to communicate it verbally. Right? People just understand what those mean. And that's because we understand the messages that come across through body language.  All right so here is some things that we could talk about how we can add body language into your repertoire. How you can focus on improving things. So there was a study done on using your index finder to point. And first off you should never point with your index finger mainly because there is lots of cultures that consider it rude.  Secondly because this study had 2 different audiences, same speaker, same speech. In one speech the speaker was pointing with his index finger. In the other speech he was gesturing with his hands open, palms open, hands up. And 80…over 80% of the audience was receptive and thought that he was well mannered in the…in the speech where palms were open. Under 40%...actually over 40% of the audience thought he was arrogant and did not know what he was talking about in the speech where he was pointing with his index finger. So there is some food for thought there. [Christian]: I mean I find that pretty interesting. I was talking about a case study. What…if our listening are thinking to themselves “What are we talking about when we're talking about body language?”. Like the things that come to my mind are the obvious ones like if I am sitting you know leaning back in my chair with my arms crossed I am giving off, you know,  the impression that I am closed and I don't give a [censored] about what you're saying. [Chris]: Yeah. [Christian]: If you know I am generally sitting with open posture I am receptive to what someone is saying or respectful or whatever. [Chris]: Yeah. And… [Christian]: Here are some examples. [Chris]: In most times you're right. Now there is a few reasons people are gonna sit with their arms crossed though. People are gonna sit with their arms crossed either they don't give a [censored] about what you're saying and they just…they…nothing you say is gonna get through to them or maybe they're anxious. Maybe they're nervous.  All 3 of those feelings will come across when somebody is crossing their arms. For example, you know crossing arms isn't just it as a…crossing arms is the most common especially for kids. But as people grow up they get more kind of conscious about what they're doing with their hands and arms. They start taking on more of a subtle role.  So if anybody has ever watched Prince Philip. Prince Philip will grab and adjust his cufflink which is his arm crossing his body. It's a nervous tick that he has and he does it whenever he is in large crowds. Same thing Queen Elisabeth. She will clutch a purse. She will hold with both hands so she is crossing her body. And people, adults do this all the time.  So it's just watching for the subtleties and it's learning to understand what they're actually doing. And this is super important because Christian if you're sitting across from me and you're a seller and you're talking about listing your house and your arms are crossed it's not a good time for me to go in for a close and ask you to sign stuff. [Christian]: [laughter] Yeah it doesn't seem like a lot of buy in, you know. [Chris]: No it's time for me to start digging in and asking you questions to find out what's really bugging you. So I mean… [Christian]: What would you say… [Chris]: Go head. [Christian]: Sorry didn't mean to interrupt your example. I was gonna say what are some examples for real estate agents to come across as far as like being in tune not only to your own body language but to your client's body language as far as what they may be saying without saying it? [Chris]: Well for us we want to make sure that we're doing a few things. 1, we want to be open. We want to gesture with our hands open not with our index fingers. We never want to cross our body so when we're seating we're not crossing our legs. Now women in you're wearing a skirt that is an exception. But we're not fidgeting. We're…our arms are open. Our arms and hands are not touching. Arms are not crossed. Sitting upright with a good posture. Those are all extremely important.  Second your handshake. Your handshake is incredibly important. You want to have a firm handshake. There is 3 different styles of handshake and they all mean different things, right. If your handshake is palm up than that's kind of a submissive handshake. Those are things that you would give when you're meeting the pope, right. Somebody who is in a very important higher up kind of status.  And then for the opposite of that is the palm down handshake where you are displaying authority. It could be a power symbol. So for the most part when you're meeting with people especially clients, people that you're doing business with you want to make sure that their handshake is vertical. Right, your palm is up and down and you want it to be firm.  And then starting off with a good handshake because once…if the handshake gets [censored] up, if somebody misses whatever it is just grab their elbow, do it again. Say “Hey let's get this right” because doing something like that is gonna show them that you care enough about them to make sure that you're getting off on the right foot and you're gonna make sure that the meeting is important. [Christian]: Say when I mess up on a handshake I just go in for the awkward like “Hey bro…” bro hug you know. That usually…wait I don't close my deals.  [Chris]: Yeah never met someone with those [laughter]. That usually doesn't work.  [Christian]: Yeah I wouldn't recommend it on the first meeting. [Chris]: So there is actually ways that you can really make a handshake more powerful. But if somebody is…if you just know them, right, it creeps people out if you like touch them and give them a handshake. But if you just spend time like an hour getting very personal with somebody about what they have going on like when you shake their hand to leave you can grab the outside of their hand. Say “Thank you for your time.” Or maybe their elbow and just handshakes shouldn't be more than 3 seconds. [laughter]. If they are they get creepy. But just doing that extra gesture shows that you care, that you can empathize with what they go through.  It's just not something that you do right when you meet somebody cos than it's weird and creepy and they're gonna think that you're inauthentic. So I mean there is a lot of things that we can do as agents to use our body language to make a…the experience more warm, more inviting for our clients and the people that we're meeting on a daily basis.  [Christian]: Alright. So…So Chris give me some examples. Let's do a brief list of body language to dos and body language to don'ts [laughter]. Things not to do. Let's start with some stuff that we should be doing like specifically regarding, you know, maybe common interactions that a real estate agents would have with a client. What are some things they wouldn't be conscious of when meeting a client? [Chris]: Well when you're meeting a client you always want to make sure that you're making eye contact. That you're not crossing your hands. You're not fidgeting with anything. You are giving them your full attention. It's important that you have good posture. That you're upright. Shows that you are caring and paying attention on what they have to say. [Christian]: OK now what if let's say they are from an Asian background. Because a lot of these body language to dos are relevant to the American culture which you know to some other cultures we seem aggressive. [Chris]: Yeah we definitely do. [Christian]: But the Asian cultures you know it's respectful to you know not make eye contact and look down you know or be more passive you know. [Chris]: Culture is definitely something to pay attention to because it is extremely important. There is a great book out there and if I can remember it I will post it in the links. Which is basically like a cheat sheet of how to interact with like 100 different cultures. And what's…what's considered appropriate and what's not. So that's really up to the individual to know who they are gonna be meeting with. And to make sure that they understand how they need to act.  Body language though is gonna be pretty universal. If you are fidgeting is gonna come across that you are not interested. If you're crossing it's gonna be closed off. And the reason body language is so universal is because that's how communication happened before language developed. Like we had silent movies. Silent movies worked before audio came into the movies. People understood what was going on and that was universal. People can understand a story based off of not having words. [Christian]: Sure interesting, interesting reminder yeah. [Chris]: Sure there are cultural things but for the most part you want to be open, you don't want to have anything crossed because you want to be considered trustworthy. You don't want to touch your face. You don't because touching your face is like a nervous tick for a lot of liars so you just want to stay away from all of that and just focus purely on what the other person is doing. Don't fidget. Pay attention. [Christian]: But what about the…the common…I don't know if it's a myth or not. You know I have heard that if people are lying they always look up and to the left. You know like that kind of stuff I mean like is…Because I know like when I think. Like if someone asks me a question I have to think about it. I notice that I look away. While I am thinking I don't look back like I don't know like that is subconsciously picked up or matters. You can't really control it. [Chris]: Well people pay attention to that stuff but I don't know if it's about a lie. So for that I think people look up in a way because they want to focus on their thought process and not be distracted by the person that is right in front of them. You want to pay attention to the person as much as possible. And sometimes they might ask you a difficult question and you need to think about some details but I will try not to pure away if possible. But you know that is a little outside of my realm. I am not too familiar how the unconscious works with you know look up and left or look up and right. [Christian]: Very true.  [Chris]: Based off of what you were saying. [Christian]: OK so what…what…So getting into some of the things not to do. You know you mentioned you want to focus on the other person. What about when you focus on in the wrong way of too much and you know people get a creepy vibe? What are some body language things that give off that that ? You don't want it. [Chris]: I think [crosstalk]. For me really the worst is a bad handshake. The dead fish, the like bone crushes. The…the sweaty palm I mean it's…those handshakes, those meetings never go well. Somebody comes in and they're meeting with me and they come off the back like immediately I need to go the restroom and like wash my hands. And I understand, there is a certain…there is a percentage of the population that is like…somewhere between 10 and 15% of the population I think that suffers from a medical condition where they just overly sweat. I get it. But if you're going into a business meeting before you go in have a handkerchief. Get a little dried off there and than, than start.  [Christian]: Sure. [Chris]: And I would probably say that the limp, the limp fish is like way worse the bone crushes. That's probably the second worst in my book. [Christian]: Sure. [Chris]: But that's like to me that's like the holy grail. You don't violate that. [Christian]: Sure. Would you say that…that you kind of…I know it is a general statement but that…what does a handshake say about someone like either a bone crashes to me that says hey they are trying to…they are coming in aggressive. And they're trying to dominate the other person. [Chris]: Exactly. [Christian]: While the limp fish is like super passive, not gonna have an opinion about things. Doesn't want to offend people. [Chris]: So the limp fish is an interesting one because for the most part yes. They're like…they're the message it conveys is that they're submissive. They're not gonna be very strong. But there's a cavy out there. If they work in a profession where they use their hands like if they're a surgeon don't expect to get a strong handshake from a surgeon. Especially if they're a very good one because their hands are insured. Because if…if they just do that naturally like all means to protect the tool that is their livelihood.  But yeah typically the bone crusher is a power move. People don't do that on accident. They do that because they want to make an impression. And I think a lot of people come in with the bone crushes thinking “Oh I am gonna show them that I really mean business and I am gonna crush their hand and show them that this is a strong handshake”. But the reality is that if you go to do something like that to somebody and you are not their superior, you are not in a position of authority with them it's a complete turn off. I had a home inspector do that for me and you know what I am not messing with them. I don't want to deal with anybody that is just trying to put on a show. And you know be more important than they are. Just vertical… [Christian]: Type a yeah? [Chris]: Yeah. Firm match the grip of somebody…of the other person. That's all you gotta do. It's not hard. It's not rocket science. [Christian]: Sure. [Chris]: But I am finding out that like I don't know, did your dad ever teach you how to do a handshake when you were younger?  [Christian]: My dad didn't teach me [censored]. I hope he doesn't listen to this podcast. [laughter]. Not now there wasn't a lot of intentional training that I remember from my dad unfortunately. [Chris]: OK so a lot of…a lot of man get that. [Christian]: Yeah. [Chris]: Women don't. That's not something that is taught to women. So women have to get out and learn these stuff because they will come into…if a woman comes in and they do a very weak handshake in a business environment they're gonna be thought of as feminine. And they're gonna be treated as such.  If they don't come in with that firm handshake that says “Hey I am here I am on equal ground with you and we're gonna do this” than there is…it's been traced that they'll be treated differently. Conversely if they come in with a bone crusher nobody is gonna want to deal with them. They're here for a power play which… [Christian]: Sure. I am sure there is gonna be some subconscious double standard where they're gonna be “Me and you rather as dudes and not used to think in terms of…and OK if a guy you know does this thing this is my response but if a woman does it I am gonna think about it differently” you know like… [Chris]: Yeah. [Christian]: Yeah that can definitely be unfair in the business world. You know kind of a double standard that we subconsciously apply.  [Chris]: Definitely. There is a great book for anybody who is interested in learning more about body language and how it can impact and shape how your business ventures go. Not only in your business life but it also talks about things that you need to know in your daily life. How to read a bar, how to read a party and you're able to see how people are feeling based off of how they interact. The book is called The Definitive Book of Body Language. The Hidden Meaning Behind People's Gestures and Expressions. By Allen and Barbara Peas [phonetics]. It's a great book. Currently reading it now and somewhat sound like an expert based off of that but don't take it for granted.  [Christian]: Oh yeah. [Chris]: I get my info from books.  [Christian]: I will make sure it doesn't go to your head. [Chris]: Thank you. I appreciate that. No it's definitely good stuff. It's important that we pay attention to how we're communicating with people not just verbally, not just vocally but also through our body language. So everybody thank you so much for tuning in. This has been another episode of re:Think Real Estate. We'll be back next week. Nate will be back. And I think we've got some guests coming up soon. So we will have some good guests. We'll see you soon.  [music]  [Chris]: Thanks for tuning in this week's episode of the re:Think Real Estate Podcast. We would love to hear your feedback so please leave us a review on iTunes. Our music is curtesy of Dan Koch K-O-C-H, whose music can be explored and licensed for use at dankoch.net. Thank you Dan. Please like, share and follow. You can find us on Facebook at Facebook.com/rethinkpodcast. Thank you so much for tuning in everyone and have a great week.  [music]  

#KeriTV - Getting “REAL” about real estate
007 - “The Pocket Listing Service"? A Must know in this market!

#KeriTV - Getting “REAL” about real estate

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 16, 2018 10:25


KERI: Hey guys! It’s Keri TV. I have a very special guest today. I’m super excited to introduce Chris Dyson, a fellow colleague at the agency. We have something we’re so excited to share with you that’s become a little bit more mainstream in the agent circles.  It started as an agency exclusive, and it’s called the PLS, which stands for the... CHRIS: Pocket Listing Service. KERI: Pocket Listing Service. We’re going to explain a little bit today on our episode on what that means and how it benefits you, agents, and why It’s so great. KERI: First, to start things off, what is a pocket?  That can be a very confusing term. Pocket is slang for listings that we have that are not on the MLS. If something’s on the multiple listing service, It’s pushed out to Zillow, RedFin, and every website possible.  It’s a pocket, so It’s something secretive that you have in your pocket. CHRIS: Correct. KERI: It’s an off-market property.  Off-market, but with sellers that are willing to sell.  That being said, Chris, tell us a little bit more about the PLS.  Thanks for being here today, too. CHRIS: My pleasure, thanks for having me.  Very exciting. KERI: Very exciting. CHRIS: It’s what Keri perfectly described. Pocket listings have actually become more and more prominent in our market, as you know.  Frankly, it was born from frustration in, as you know as as well, we would get sent hundreds, probably, sometimes thousands of emails a month from clients saying that I have this pocket listing.  I’m looking for that pocket listing. Frankly, I was frustrated.  There was nowhere we could go and search for that information when you needed it. If the email came and you didn’t have a client, and it was gone and it was forgotten about. KERI: Yeah. CHRIS: It was really born to try to fix that problem.  To have somewhere agents could find information that they’re already sharing in an email.  If that could live in a searchable platform, that was the goal. KERI: Yeah, and it’s amazing.  Who gets too many emails?  I know I do.  I’m trying to find that random email that had a pocket when you get a new call if the new buyer is just super hectic. CHRIS: That was really the impetus that started the platform. KERI: Cool. How does it work? You’ve got the platform. Tell us more about how it functions and helps agents and clients. CHRIS: The biggest key with PLS is that it is an agent-only platform. KERI: Okay. CHRIS: Obviously, the conundrum is, how to do you market an off-market property? KERI: It’s off-market. CHRIS: Exactly. What does that mean? KERI: How do you do that? CHRIS: The only way you can really do that effectively, the key with it, is that these are sellers who want to adopt an off-market strategy. They either demand discretion, which in the big cities, especially Los Angeles, we have a lot of celebrities who don’t necessarily want their information in the public realm. KERI: Exactly. CHRIS: I don’t know an agent who doesn’t have a client that would say, I will sell it at this number, but I don’t want to go to the hassle of putting it on the market.  KERI: Exactly. CHRIS: What do you do with those? KERI: Hey guys, want my very expensive listing? CHRIS: Yeah!  The key is to make the platform only accessible to agents.  That, one, helps keep the information out of the public domain, which is what the seller is asking for in the first place.  Secondly what that does, which is probably the most important thing that this site is designed to try to achieve, it lets agents leverage this information to give us all a competitive edge.  I think what’s really become a huge problem or an issue for agents is now the MLS is sharing information with the Zillows, the Trulias, and the Redfins. Clients are saying, why do I need an agent?  Everything’s available online. KERI: Right. CHRIS: Part of what the PLS allows the agent community as a whole to do is take the information that sellers want to be kept out of the public realm and leverage that to give us all the information that our clients don’t have access to, and in turn, make everybody more valuable. KERI: Very valuable  What happens if somebody’s got their property listed on the PLS and nothing happens?  Say there’s no showings or offers.  What happens next? CHRIS: This is probably where, again, the PLS can be valuable to potentially all listings.  I’m sure you have clients that think the house is worth more than you think it’s worth. KERI: Not at all! CHRIS: Not at all, right?  One of the coolest things that we’ve seen over the last year is that agents have used the PLS to list properties in a ‘coming soon’ capacity, before putting them on the MLS. KERI: Ah, okay. CHRIS: That’s right.  In a lot of instances, the property is sold, which is amazing.  A lot of agents have actually used it as a tool to get a price reduction out of their sellers.  Those sellers who think it’s too much, if it hasn’t moved and they haven’t gotten the activity, it’s given them the ammunition and the data to go back to the seller and say, listen.  The agent’s have seen this.  We haven’t got a call.  Let’s put it out and get it onto the MLS at a more realistic number.  Zero days on market.  That has been a really cool thing to see honestly. KERI: Yeah. CHRIS: I’m delighted that that’s really happening. KERI: Because days on market can translate to a lack of value. If something’s on the market too long, it becomes a stale listing. You know. The whole nine yards.  So the type of agents that are on the PLS, when you say to your seller, it’s been on here and say we haven’t had much traction, who’s in this, besides the agency’s agents?  These are some of the top agents in the nation.  What other types of agents?  How do we explain to our seller’s who’s looking? CHRIS: I mean, the majority of our agents are LA based. KERI: LA based? CHRIS: It’s only effective if you have a critical mass of agents in any particular place. KERI: Exactly.  Those agents are on the site. CHRIS: That’s right. We now have just a shade under six thousand agents. KERI: Six thousand agents, oh my gosh. CHRIS: I include them. If you can reel off all the top agents in town, they all have memberships. KERI: Mh-hmm. CHRIS: You can really argue to your seller that the best agents in the business are going to see your information KERI: Mh-hmm. CHRIS: If it’s not selling, maybe we should rethink our strategy, going to the MLS. KERI: That’s an amazing, coming-soon platform, to make sure that you hit the market at the right price that attracts buyers. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Brilliant! I didn’t even think about that. CHRIS: See? KERI: What about for buyers that are looking?  How would they benefit working with agents who are members of the PLS? CHRIS: Again, it gives those buyer’s agents access of entry that their clients don’t have.  It makes you look better. KERI: Okay!  We like that. CHRIS: That’s exactly. KERI: Good. CHRIS: I think, in any business, someone’s only going to work with you if you offer value and have information they don’t have access too. KERI: Exactly. CHRIS: Part of this is to try to give that to the agents and help protect and ensure the industry as a whole, Keri. KERI: Yeah. CHRIS: That’s the plan. KERI: Transparency and value is the highest of important qualities all our clients want.  They want agents that are doing something, that are different, and that provide valuable information, because there’s so much of that online. They can get properties and comps. They can get all the tools they need, but something like this creates another echelon in our industry. CHRIS: Yes. KERI: Which is amazing. CHRIS: Perfect. That’s it. KERI: What are some examples of times where PLS has made a huge impact?  What are some of the success stories you’ve heard of? CHRIS: Listen, again, I’m delighted to say that I get texts and emails all the time. I actually got a text from Marshall Peck, mentioning him. Marshal listed a house.  He texted me in the morning to say that he had a house that was coming on the flats, Beverly Hills.  He put it on and then texted me back half an hour later and said, just got three calls in ten minutes.  Now, I’m able to go and actually get the listing signed.  We got a listing signed as a result of putting it on the site that he didn’t have the executed contract in full. KERI: That’s amazing. CHRIS: That’s unbelievable. KERI: That’s a huge benefit.  Yeah. CHRIS: Yeah.  We’ve had deals done, we had a deal that we followed. An agent brought a property on at six point five and sold it for seven point two within in a week. KERI: What! Multiple offers off-market. CHRIS: Multiple offers off-market, yep.  KERI: That’s brilliant. CHRIS: A lady at PLG estates, Carey Moore. This was for a property in Griffith Park.  She got her asking price through the site.  It’s really working. KERI: Amazing. CHRIS: It’s amazing.  I’m delighted. KERI: I actually had an interesting case.  I met some buyers, some clients, at an open house.  They knew eight other agents.  They were like, Keri, we know this person.  We know purple bricks.  We know all these different agents who are willing to give us money back, this whole thing.  When I met them for the second time, I let them know about the PLS, and it showed them inventory on there that wasn’t available through their other agent friends who were on the MLS and they were like, Keri, we love you.  Can’t wait to work with you. CHRIS: Amazing. KERI: Yeah. It’s been an incredible tool in this day, with all the information out there.  Yeah.  Okay, speaking of the PLS and some of these beautiful properties, I was just looking through, a couple days ago, I saw this one on Oriole in West LA. Not West LA.  The one for twenty-nine million, that was just listed.  That is unbelievable.  I’ll show you a picture. CHRIS: It’s a cool house. KERI: A few pictures of that one. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Then the one in Malibu, on Murphy. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Those views are amazing. The one in Playa on Trolleyway, that’s very rare for that area, on the beach there. CHRIS: I mean, we’re very lucky to have a ton of really relevant inventory, and, quite frankly, if you’re not on there, you’re unnecessarily putting yourself at a disadvantage.  I mean, God bless what everyone wants to do, but this is really information you should have access to.  And it’s free.  Still. KERI: And it’s free! CHRIS: There’s no excuse. KERI: It’s free.  We like that. CHRIS: Yeah. Still free. KERI: Definitely, if you’re an agent, let us know if you’re interested in the PLS, and if you’re looking to work with an agent, make sure they are a member of the PLS so you have all the access.  Here Chris, I know you’re busy with this entire new amazing website and obviously servicing all your clients. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Thank you so much for being here. CHRIS: My pleasure. KERI: I can’t wait to post this.  Thank you guys for watching.  See you next Tuesday on Keri TV.    

JavaScript Jabber
JSJ 332: “You Learned JavaScript, Now What?” with Chris Heilmann

JavaScript Jabber

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 25, 2018 73:57


Panel: AJ O’Neal Aimee Knight Joe Eames Charles Max Wood Special Guests: Chris Heilmann In this episode, the panel talks with programmer, Chris Heilmann. He has written books about JavaScript, in addition to writing a blog about it and is an educator about this program.  He currently resides in Berlin, Germany. Let’s welcome our special guest and listen to today’s episode! Show Topics: 2:19 – Chuck talks. 2:41 – Chris: He has talked about JavaScript in Berlin upon an invitation. You can get five different suggestions about how to use JavaScript. The best practices, I have found, are on the projects I am on now. JavaScript was built in ten days. My goal is to help people navigate through JavaScript and help them feel not disenfranchised.  5:47 – Aimee: The overall theme is... 5:54 – Panelist: I really like what you said about helping people not feeling disenfranchised. 6:47 – Chris: There is a lot of peer pressure at peer conferences 7:30 – Aimee chimes in with some comments. 7:50: Chris: I think we need to hunt the person down that put... 8:03 – Panelist: A good point to that is, I try to avoid comments like, “Well, like we ALL know...” 8:27 – Chris: There are things NOT to say on stage. It happens, but we don’t want to say certain things while we are teaching people. We are building products with different groups, so keep that in mind. 9:40 – Aimee: My experience in doing this is that I have found it very rewarding to share embarrassing experiences that I’ve had. My advice would to tell people to let their guard down. It’s encouraging for me. 10:26 – Chris: It helps to show that you are vulnerable and show that you are still learning, too. We are all learning together. 90% of our job is communicating with others. 11:05 – Chuck: Now, I do want to ask this... 11:35 – Chris answers. 12:24 – What makes you say that? (Question to Chris) 12:25 – Chris answers. 13:55 – Chuck: The different systems out there are either widely distributed or... You will have to work with other people. There is no way that people can make that on their own. If you can’t work with other people, then you are a hindrance. 14:31 – Aimee chimes in. 14:53 – Chris: They have to be very self-assured. I want to do things that are at the next level. Each developer has his or her own story. I want to move up the chain, so I want to make sure these developers are self-assured. 16:07 – Chris: Back to the article... 18:26 – Chuck: Yes, I agree. Why go and fight creating a whole system when it exists. 18:54 – Chris chimes in with some comments. 19:38 – Panelist: I still use console logs. 19:48 – Chris: We all do, but we have to... 19:55 – Aimee: In the past year, I can’t tell you how much I rely on this. Do I use Angular? Do I learn Vue? All those things that you can focus on – tools. 10:21 – Chris: We are talking about the ethics of interfaces. Good code is about accessibility, privacy and maintainability, among others. Everything else is sugar on top. We are building products for other people. 22:10 – Chuck: That is the interesting message in your post, and that you are saying: having a deep, solid knowledge of React (that is sort of a status thing...). It is other things that really do matter. It’s the impact we are having. It’s those things that will make the difference. Those things people will want to work with and solves their problems. 23:00 – Chris adds his comments. He talks about Flash. 24:05 – Chris: The librarian motto: “I don’t know everything, but I can look “here” to find the answer.” We don’t know everything. 24:31 – Aimee: Learn how to learn. 24:50 – Chris: There is a big gap in the market. Scratch is a cool tool and it’s these puzzle pieces you put together. It was hard for me to use that system. No, I don’t want to do that. But if you teach the kids these tools then that’s good.  24:56 – Chuck: Here is the link, and all I had to do was write React components. 26:12 – Chris: My first laptop was 5x more heavy then this one is. Having access to the Internet is a blessing. 27:24 – Advertisement 28:21 – Chuck: Let’s bring this back around. If someone has gone through boot camp, you are recommending that they get use to know their editor, debugging, etc. Chris: 28:47 – Chris: Yes, get involved within your community. GitHub. This is a community effort. You can help. Writing code from scratch is not that necessary anymore. Why rebuild something if it works. Why fix it if it’s not broken? 31:00 – Chuck talks about his experience. 31:13 – Chris continues his thoughts. Chris: Start growing a community. 32:01 – Chuck: What ways can people get involved within their community? 32:13 – Chris: Meetup. There are a lot of opportunities out there. Just going online and seeing where the conferences 34:08 – Chris: It’s interesting when I coach people on public speaking. Sharing your knowledge and learning experience is great! 34:50 – Chuck: If they are learning how to code then...by interacting with people you can get closer to what you need/want. 35:30 – Chris continues this conversation. 35:49 – Chris: You can be the person that helps with x, y, z. Just by getting your name known then you can get a job offer. 36:23 – Chuck: How do you find out what is really good content – what’s worth your time vs. what’s not worth your time? 36:36 –Chris says, “That’s tricky!” Chris answers the question. 37:19: Chris: The best things out there right now is... 38:45 – Chuck: Anything else that people want to bring up? 39:00 – Chris continues to talk. 42:26 – Aimee adds in her thoughts. Aimee: I would encourage people to... 43:00 – Chris continues the conversation. Chris: Each project is different, when I build a web app is different then when I build a... 45:07 – Panelist: I agree. You talked about abstractions that don’t go away. You use abstractions in what you use. At some point, it’s safe to rly on this abstraction, but not this one. People may ask themselves: maybe CoffeeScript wasn’t the best thing for me. 46:11 – Chris comments and refers to jQuery. 48:58 – Chris continues the conversation. Chris: I used to work on eight different projects and they worked on different interfaces. I learned about these different environments. This is the project we are now using, and this will like it for the end of time. This is where abstractions are the weird thing. What was the use of the abstraction if it doesn’t have longevity? I think we are building things too soon and too fast. 51:04 – Chris: When I work in browsers and come up with brand new stuff. 52:21 – Panelist: Your points are great, but there are some additional things we need to talk about. Let’s take jQuery as an example. There is a strong argument that if you misuse the browser... 53:45 – Chris: The main issue I have with jQuery is that people get an immediate satisfaction. What do we do besides this? 55:58 – Panelist asks Chris further questions. 56:25 – Chris answers. Chris: There are highly frequent websites that aren’t being maintained and they aren’t maintainable anymore. 57:09 – Panelist: Prototypes were invented because... 57:51 – Chris: It’s a 20/20 thing. 58:04 – Panelist: Same thing can be said about the Y2K. 58:20 – Panelist: Yes, they had to solve that problem that day. The reality is... 58:44 – Chris: We learned from that whole experience. 1:00:51 – Chris: There was a lot of fluff around it. 1:01:35 – Panelist: Being able to see the future would be a very helpful thing. 1:01:43 – Chris continues the conversation. 1:02:44 – Chuck: How do people get ahold of you? 1:03:04 – Twitter is probably the best way. 1:03:32 – Let’s go to picks! 1:03:36 - Advertisement Links: JavaScript So you Learned Java Script, what now? – Article WebHint Article by James Sinclair Clank! Angular GitHub Meetup Chris Heilmann’s Twitter Chris Heilmann’s Website Chris Heilmann’s Medium Chris Heilmann’s LinkedIn Chris Heilmann Chris Heilmann’s GitHub Smashing Magazine – Chris Heilmann jQuery CoffeeScript React Elixir Sponsors: Kendo UI Sentry Digital Ocean Cache Fly   Picks : Amiee Hacker News -  How to deal with dirty side effects in your pure functional JavaScript AJ KeyBase Joe Framework Summit Clank ASMR Charles Get a Coder Job Course The Iron Druid Chronicles Framework Summit Chris Web Unleashed Toronto Kurzgesagt It Is Just You, Everything’s Not Shit

All JavaScript Podcasts by Devchat.tv
JSJ 332: “You Learned JavaScript, Now What?” with Chris Heilmann

All JavaScript Podcasts by Devchat.tv

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 25, 2018 73:57


Panel: AJ O’Neal Aimee Knight Joe Eames Charles Max Wood Special Guests: Chris Heilmann In this episode, the panel talks with programmer, Chris Heilmann. He has written books about JavaScript, in addition to writing a blog about it and is an educator about this program.  He currently resides in Berlin, Germany. Let’s welcome our special guest and listen to today’s episode! Show Topics: 2:19 – Chuck talks. 2:41 – Chris: He has talked about JavaScript in Berlin upon an invitation. You can get five different suggestions about how to use JavaScript. The best practices, I have found, are on the projects I am on now. JavaScript was built in ten days. My goal is to help people navigate through JavaScript and help them feel not disenfranchised.  5:47 – Aimee: The overall theme is... 5:54 – Panelist: I really like what you said about helping people not feeling disenfranchised. 6:47 – Chris: There is a lot of peer pressure at peer conferences 7:30 – Aimee chimes in with some comments. 7:50: Chris: I think we need to hunt the person down that put... 8:03 – Panelist: A good point to that is, I try to avoid comments like, “Well, like we ALL know...” 8:27 – Chris: There are things NOT to say on stage. It happens, but we don’t want to say certain things while we are teaching people. We are building products with different groups, so keep that in mind. 9:40 – Aimee: My experience in doing this is that I have found it very rewarding to share embarrassing experiences that I’ve had. My advice would to tell people to let their guard down. It’s encouraging for me. 10:26 – Chris: It helps to show that you are vulnerable and show that you are still learning, too. We are all learning together. 90% of our job is communicating with others. 11:05 – Chuck: Now, I do want to ask this... 11:35 – Chris answers. 12:24 – What makes you say that? (Question to Chris) 12:25 – Chris answers. 13:55 – Chuck: The different systems out there are either widely distributed or... You will have to work with other people. There is no way that people can make that on their own. If you can’t work with other people, then you are a hindrance. 14:31 – Aimee chimes in. 14:53 – Chris: They have to be very self-assured. I want to do things that are at the next level. Each developer has his or her own story. I want to move up the chain, so I want to make sure these developers are self-assured. 16:07 – Chris: Back to the article... 18:26 – Chuck: Yes, I agree. Why go and fight creating a whole system when it exists. 18:54 – Chris chimes in with some comments. 19:38 – Panelist: I still use console logs. 19:48 – Chris: We all do, but we have to... 19:55 – Aimee: In the past year, I can’t tell you how much I rely on this. Do I use Angular? Do I learn Vue? All those things that you can focus on – tools. 10:21 – Chris: We are talking about the ethics of interfaces. Good code is about accessibility, privacy and maintainability, among others. Everything else is sugar on top. We are building products for other people. 22:10 – Chuck: That is the interesting message in your post, and that you are saying: having a deep, solid knowledge of React (that is sort of a status thing...). It is other things that really do matter. It’s the impact we are having. It’s those things that will make the difference. Those things people will want to work with and solves their problems. 23:00 – Chris adds his comments. He talks about Flash. 24:05 – Chris: The librarian motto: “I don’t know everything, but I can look “here” to find the answer.” We don’t know everything. 24:31 – Aimee: Learn how to learn. 24:50 – Chris: There is a big gap in the market. Scratch is a cool tool and it’s these puzzle pieces you put together. It was hard for me to use that system. No, I don’t want to do that. But if you teach the kids these tools then that’s good.  24:56 – Chuck: Here is the link, and all I had to do was write React components. 26:12 – Chris: My first laptop was 5x more heavy then this one is. Having access to the Internet is a blessing. 27:24 – Advertisement 28:21 – Chuck: Let’s bring this back around. If someone has gone through boot camp, you are recommending that they get use to know their editor, debugging, etc. Chris: 28:47 – Chris: Yes, get involved within your community. GitHub. This is a community effort. You can help. Writing code from scratch is not that necessary anymore. Why rebuild something if it works. Why fix it if it’s not broken? 31:00 – Chuck talks about his experience. 31:13 – Chris continues his thoughts. Chris: Start growing a community. 32:01 – Chuck: What ways can people get involved within their community? 32:13 – Chris: Meetup. There are a lot of opportunities out there. Just going online and seeing where the conferences 34:08 – Chris: It’s interesting when I coach people on public speaking. Sharing your knowledge and learning experience is great! 34:50 – Chuck: If they are learning how to code then...by interacting with people you can get closer to what you need/want. 35:30 – Chris continues this conversation. 35:49 – Chris: You can be the person that helps with x, y, z. Just by getting your name known then you can get a job offer. 36:23 – Chuck: How do you find out what is really good content – what’s worth your time vs. what’s not worth your time? 36:36 –Chris says, “That’s tricky!” Chris answers the question. 37:19: Chris: The best things out there right now is... 38:45 – Chuck: Anything else that people want to bring up? 39:00 – Chris continues to talk. 42:26 – Aimee adds in her thoughts. Aimee: I would encourage people to... 43:00 – Chris continues the conversation. Chris: Each project is different, when I build a web app is different then when I build a... 45:07 – Panelist: I agree. You talked about abstractions that don’t go away. You use abstractions in what you use. At some point, it’s safe to rly on this abstraction, but not this one. People may ask themselves: maybe CoffeeScript wasn’t the best thing for me. 46:11 – Chris comments and refers to jQuery. 48:58 – Chris continues the conversation. Chris: I used to work on eight different projects and they worked on different interfaces. I learned about these different environments. This is the project we are now using, and this will like it for the end of time. This is where abstractions are the weird thing. What was the use of the abstraction if it doesn’t have longevity? I think we are building things too soon and too fast. 51:04 – Chris: When I work in browsers and come up with brand new stuff. 52:21 – Panelist: Your points are great, but there are some additional things we need to talk about. Let’s take jQuery as an example. There is a strong argument that if you misuse the browser... 53:45 – Chris: The main issue I have with jQuery is that people get an immediate satisfaction. What do we do besides this? 55:58 – Panelist asks Chris further questions. 56:25 – Chris answers. Chris: There are highly frequent websites that aren’t being maintained and they aren’t maintainable anymore. 57:09 – Panelist: Prototypes were invented because... 57:51 – Chris: It’s a 20/20 thing. 58:04 – Panelist: Same thing can be said about the Y2K. 58:20 – Panelist: Yes, they had to solve that problem that day. The reality is... 58:44 – Chris: We learned from that whole experience. 1:00:51 – Chris: There was a lot of fluff around it. 1:01:35 – Panelist: Being able to see the future would be a very helpful thing. 1:01:43 – Chris continues the conversation. 1:02:44 – Chuck: How do people get ahold of you? 1:03:04 – Twitter is probably the best way. 1:03:32 – Let’s go to picks! 1:03:36 - Advertisement Links: JavaScript So you Learned Java Script, what now? – Article WebHint Article by James Sinclair Clank! Angular GitHub Meetup Chris Heilmann’s Twitter Chris Heilmann’s Website Chris Heilmann’s Medium Chris Heilmann’s LinkedIn Chris Heilmann Chris Heilmann’s GitHub Smashing Magazine – Chris Heilmann jQuery CoffeeScript React Elixir Sponsors: Kendo UI Sentry Digital Ocean Cache Fly   Picks : Amiee Hacker News -  How to deal with dirty side effects in your pure functional JavaScript AJ KeyBase Joe Framework Summit Clank ASMR Charles Get a Coder Job Course The Iron Druid Chronicles Framework Summit Chris Web Unleashed Toronto Kurzgesagt It Is Just You, Everything’s Not Shit

Devchat.tv Master Feed
JSJ 332: “You Learned JavaScript, Now What?” with Chris Heilmann

Devchat.tv Master Feed

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 25, 2018 73:57


Panel: AJ O’Neal Aimee Knight Joe Eames Charles Max Wood Special Guests: Chris Heilmann In this episode, the panel talks with programmer, Chris Heilmann. He has written books about JavaScript, in addition to writing a blog about it and is an educator about this program.  He currently resides in Berlin, Germany. Let’s welcome our special guest and listen to today’s episode! Show Topics: 2:19 – Chuck talks. 2:41 – Chris: He has talked about JavaScript in Berlin upon an invitation. You can get five different suggestions about how to use JavaScript. The best practices, I have found, are on the projects I am on now. JavaScript was built in ten days. My goal is to help people navigate through JavaScript and help them feel not disenfranchised.  5:47 – Aimee: The overall theme is... 5:54 – Panelist: I really like what you said about helping people not feeling disenfranchised. 6:47 – Chris: There is a lot of peer pressure at peer conferences 7:30 – Aimee chimes in with some comments. 7:50: Chris: I think we need to hunt the person down that put... 8:03 – Panelist: A good point to that is, I try to avoid comments like, “Well, like we ALL know...” 8:27 – Chris: There are things NOT to say on stage. It happens, but we don’t want to say certain things while we are teaching people. We are building products with different groups, so keep that in mind. 9:40 – Aimee: My experience in doing this is that I have found it very rewarding to share embarrassing experiences that I’ve had. My advice would to tell people to let their guard down. It’s encouraging for me. 10:26 – Chris: It helps to show that you are vulnerable and show that you are still learning, too. We are all learning together. 90% of our job is communicating with others. 11:05 – Chuck: Now, I do want to ask this... 11:35 – Chris answers. 12:24 – What makes you say that? (Question to Chris) 12:25 – Chris answers. 13:55 – Chuck: The different systems out there are either widely distributed or... You will have to work with other people. There is no way that people can make that on their own. If you can’t work with other people, then you are a hindrance. 14:31 – Aimee chimes in. 14:53 – Chris: They have to be very self-assured. I want to do things that are at the next level. Each developer has his or her own story. I want to move up the chain, so I want to make sure these developers are self-assured. 16:07 – Chris: Back to the article... 18:26 – Chuck: Yes, I agree. Why go and fight creating a whole system when it exists. 18:54 – Chris chimes in with some comments. 19:38 – Panelist: I still use console logs. 19:48 – Chris: We all do, but we have to... 19:55 – Aimee: In the past year, I can’t tell you how much I rely on this. Do I use Angular? Do I learn Vue? All those things that you can focus on – tools. 10:21 – Chris: We are talking about the ethics of interfaces. Good code is about accessibility, privacy and maintainability, among others. Everything else is sugar on top. We are building products for other people. 22:10 – Chuck: That is the interesting message in your post, and that you are saying: having a deep, solid knowledge of React (that is sort of a status thing...). It is other things that really do matter. It’s the impact we are having. It’s those things that will make the difference. Those things people will want to work with and solves their problems. 23:00 – Chris adds his comments. He talks about Flash. 24:05 – Chris: The librarian motto: “I don’t know everything, but I can look “here” to find the answer.” We don’t know everything. 24:31 – Aimee: Learn how to learn. 24:50 – Chris: There is a big gap in the market. Scratch is a cool tool and it’s these puzzle pieces you put together. It was hard for me to use that system. No, I don’t want to do that. But if you teach the kids these tools then that’s good.  24:56 – Chuck: Here is the link, and all I had to do was write React components. 26:12 – Chris: My first laptop was 5x more heavy then this one is. Having access to the Internet is a blessing. 27:24 – Advertisement 28:21 – Chuck: Let’s bring this back around. If someone has gone through boot camp, you are recommending that they get use to know their editor, debugging, etc. Chris: 28:47 – Chris: Yes, get involved within your community. GitHub. This is a community effort. You can help. Writing code from scratch is not that necessary anymore. Why rebuild something if it works. Why fix it if it’s not broken? 31:00 – Chuck talks about his experience. 31:13 – Chris continues his thoughts. Chris: Start growing a community. 32:01 – Chuck: What ways can people get involved within their community? 32:13 – Chris: Meetup. There are a lot of opportunities out there. Just going online and seeing where the conferences 34:08 – Chris: It’s interesting when I coach people on public speaking. Sharing your knowledge and learning experience is great! 34:50 – Chuck: If they are learning how to code then...by interacting with people you can get closer to what you need/want. 35:30 – Chris continues this conversation. 35:49 – Chris: You can be the person that helps with x, y, z. Just by getting your name known then you can get a job offer. 36:23 – Chuck: How do you find out what is really good content – what’s worth your time vs. what’s not worth your time? 36:36 –Chris says, “That’s tricky!” Chris answers the question. 37:19: Chris: The best things out there right now is... 38:45 – Chuck: Anything else that people want to bring up? 39:00 – Chris continues to talk. 42:26 – Aimee adds in her thoughts. Aimee: I would encourage people to... 43:00 – Chris continues the conversation. Chris: Each project is different, when I build a web app is different then when I build a... 45:07 – Panelist: I agree. You talked about abstractions that don’t go away. You use abstractions in what you use. At some point, it’s safe to rly on this abstraction, but not this one. People may ask themselves: maybe CoffeeScript wasn’t the best thing for me. 46:11 – Chris comments and refers to jQuery. 48:58 – Chris continues the conversation. Chris: I used to work on eight different projects and they worked on different interfaces. I learned about these different environments. This is the project we are now using, and this will like it for the end of time. This is where abstractions are the weird thing. What was the use of the abstraction if it doesn’t have longevity? I think we are building things too soon and too fast. 51:04 – Chris: When I work in browsers and come up with brand new stuff. 52:21 – Panelist: Your points are great, but there are some additional things we need to talk about. Let’s take jQuery as an example. There is a strong argument that if you misuse the browser... 53:45 – Chris: The main issue I have with jQuery is that people get an immediate satisfaction. What do we do besides this? 55:58 – Panelist asks Chris further questions. 56:25 – Chris answers. Chris: There are highly frequent websites that aren’t being maintained and they aren’t maintainable anymore. 57:09 – Panelist: Prototypes were invented because... 57:51 – Chris: It’s a 20/20 thing. 58:04 – Panelist: Same thing can be said about the Y2K. 58:20 – Panelist: Yes, they had to solve that problem that day. The reality is... 58:44 – Chris: We learned from that whole experience. 1:00:51 – Chris: There was a lot of fluff around it. 1:01:35 – Panelist: Being able to see the future would be a very helpful thing. 1:01:43 – Chris continues the conversation. 1:02:44 – Chuck: How do people get ahold of you? 1:03:04 – Twitter is probably the best way. 1:03:32 – Let’s go to picks! 1:03:36 - Advertisement Links: JavaScript So you Learned Java Script, what now? – Article WebHint Article by James Sinclair Clank! Angular GitHub Meetup Chris Heilmann’s Twitter Chris Heilmann’s Website Chris Heilmann’s Medium Chris Heilmann’s LinkedIn Chris Heilmann Chris Heilmann’s GitHub Smashing Magazine – Chris Heilmann jQuery CoffeeScript React Elixir Sponsors: Kendo UI Sentry Digital Ocean Cache Fly   Picks : Amiee Hacker News -  How to deal with dirty side effects in your pure functional JavaScript AJ KeyBase Joe Framework Summit Clank ASMR Charles Get a Coder Job Course The Iron Druid Chronicles Framework Summit Chris Web Unleashed Toronto Kurzgesagt It Is Just You, Everything’s Not Shit

The Quiet Light Podcast
Building an Amazon Affiliate Business from the Ground up – with Chris Guthrie

The Quiet Light Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 3, 2018 41:31


Chris got fired from his last job, thankfully! He was speaking with co-workers about his affiliate revenues he was making on the side and his boss found out and fired him! Fast forward almost 10 years and Chris is the host of the UpFuel Podcast and an expert in the Amazon Affiliate space. He is the owner of several businesses in the Amazon space, including affiliate, SaaS and physical product businesses. His opinions and recommendations are not theories…they are from real life experiences. Chris is humble…you'll get that in the Podcast. He didn't sell or pitch anything. He just shared his experiences being an Amazon Affiliate entrepreneur. One thing he said over and over when it came to being successful within the Amazon Affiliate space is to “differentiate” your site. Make sure that whatever product line you choose to pursue, that you differentiate your site from others…there needs to be a strong reason why the end user would review products on your site versus the competition. Episode Highlights: Chris has been self-employed for just under 10 years. His Amazon Affiliate income replaced his “job” income…before he was fired. He owns wordpress plugins, saas, affiliate and physical product businesses. Each niche has its strengths. Choose a niche that is of interest if you are starting out. If you are building a portfolio of Amazon Affiliate sites, then a system and process takes precedence over passion. Price point matters GREATLY within the affiliate space. Develop a product review site, not an information site to help buyers make decisions. Content is still critical, and Chris outsources much of it these days. Amazon's cookie length is 24 hours, allowing you to make money off products you are not reviewing. A long term approach is the key to long term success. Building links can accelerate ranking, but is no replacement for good quality content. When buying…beware of PBNs! Transcription: Mark: Joe how are you? Joe: I'm doing fantastic Mr. Daoust, how about you? Mark: Good. I'd understand you talked to a friend of Quiet Light and a friend of Brad one of our brokers here, Chris Guthrie. Joe: Yeah Chris is from UpFuel.com and AmaSuite and I mentioned those upfront because we didn't talk about it at all during the podcast. He's an entrepreneur, have been self-employed for about 10 years, went off on his own after he got fired. He was actually talking to his coworkers and bragging about how much money he was making doing affiliate marketing and his boss found out and fired him; probably the best thing that ever happened to him because he'd been doing very well ever since. And the subject of the podcast is really specifically focused on the Amazon Affiliate Space. Meaning you build the site doing product reviews on say vacuum cleaners and people look at those reviews click on one that they like and it takes them to Amazon, somebody buys it on Amazon and you get paid. And it's really Chris's … one of his areas of expertise and I mentioned Up Fuel which is his podcast and his blog that he talks about this on so I would recommend people tune in. But also AmaSuite which is a software service that he's built that helps people sort of narrow the path in terms of what they want to find, what products, how to … what niche, what category and he didn't talk about it at all. He didn't pitch. He didn't promote so I'm doing a little bit for him because what I was trying to get was a clear path for people that want to either build one from scratch or buy one and grow it or things of that nature. And I think that he was hesitant to talk about his own product because he's such a nice guy. He really … listen Mark I'm going to, don't let this go to your head but he reminded me of you a little bit which is he just wants to have conversations and help people. And when he helps people it comes back around. And it was a great great great show and I think it'll help a lot of people in terms of the Amazon Affiliate Space. Mark: He reminded you of me huh? Joe: Yeah just the better looking, a lot better looking. Mark: The poor fellow. Joe: All right well let's get to it … I mean if you … it's got to be good so let's get to it then. Mark: All right here we go. Joe: Hey folks it's Joe Valley from Quiet Light Brokerage and today I've got Chris Guthrie on the line with me. Hey Chris how are you doing? Chris: I'm doing well thank you for having me. Joe: Chris you're like a … you're a little bit of famous in my world you know. You are. You're like a star. I know you from your podcast and we've run in the same circles for years but didn't get a chance to meet each other until last October right? It's Rhodium Event Weekend out in Vegas. It turns out you're very good friends with one of our brokers here, Brad Wayland. You guys are in the same neck of the woods I think right? Chris: Yeah well actually he's an up and a little bit south to Seattle; he's over several states but- Joe: Okay so in the internet world I guess you're in the same neck of the woods because you're- Chris: That's right. Joe: You should like candies; you guys don't even if grocery's on. Chris: Yeah. Joe: But you talk to each other often? Chris: Definitely, yup. Joe: Well he speaks very highly of you. And I … as I said pre intro here we don't do fancy intros. I don't have your bio in front of me. I know about you. I know what you do a little bit. But I think folks want to hear it directly from you. So why don't you give us a little bit of background on how you got started in the internet space and what you do for a living these days. Chris: Definitely. Yeah so probably the reason why I try and put myself out in the first place is just because it leads to conversations and other different types of opportunities. That's kind of some eyesight a long time ago when I was digging into this online space that I wanted to blog about it and talk about it because it would lead to relationships and friendships that I count people out and they count me out. And that's sort of why when you said the famous thing I think … I don't really think that but it's more just that's kind of why I went with that direction. But yeah I pretty much just have been doing various online businesses now for about 8 ½ years full time. On the Amazon Affiliate Side of things that's actually how I was able to first leave my day job. I was just fired but I left ahead that job and was able to just keep doing online stuff because my Amazon Affiliate income had replaced my day job income. And so I just basically got to work the next day working on building more sites and growing the main primary site I had at the time. But yes so other than Amazon Affiliate thing I also run WordPress plugins, a SaaS company, physical product company, and other different types of Amazon Affiliate or well regular affiliate websites as well. So a bunch of different things along the way but yeah I've been here right for quite a while. Joe: So what's your favorite in terms of running the business? Do you like the physical product space which takes working capital and things of that nature or the Amazon Affiliate Space? Chris: It's tough to say because each one has its benefit. With the affiliate side of things, you don't have any … you don't have to deal with any capital it's just other than your initial capital to invest in the content creation and building a site out. There isn't going to be as many costs associated with that especially once you get up in ranks and start making money. And then there is … in many cases there's less ongoing expenses. But on the physical product side you're constantly putting in more cash and then a lot of cases it's just a matter of trying to lay the damage to yourself for as long as possible so you can continue to grow that business. I mean everyone has a different goal in terms of what they want to do with any business type but in the physical profit side you've got to do … you've got to re-invest so much more. So I can't really answer I guess one way or the other I think it really comes down to what people are most interested in. For me, I like both and so that's kind of why I still kind of have my feet in both areas; both on the physical product side and if the affiliate side and then also selling software and things like that. Joe: Got you. Well as we talked a little bit before we started recording, I've sold a number of affiliate spaces, businesses where they're selling Amazon Affiliate products and making money through Amazon Affiliates. And it's becoming more and more prevalent in some of the event groups like Rhodium Weekend, a lot of folks getting very interested in that. I've always been in the physical products space, I had a couple of content sites and my physical products site was actually write good quality content and Google will reward me was my methodology. And it happened but I sold physical products. But the affiliate space is fascinating for me and I think more and more people are wanting to learn more about it. So that's obviously why we're chatting today and want to really get your expertise on how do you get started in this space? How do you focus on growth? Can you ramp it up? Can you do pay per click? Do you do social media? Do you do the tricks and tactics that they do with physical products on Amazon, or what's the approach? And then maybe keep in mind that we have both buyers and sellers that listen to the podcast. So tell me from a starting point how do you begin in the Amazon Affiliate Space? Do you just simply research a product, pick one, and go with it? Do something you love? What would you recommend to those listening? Chris: Yeah definitely. So for the way I like to do things is I like to look into … it's more of a just general niche research. And that's of course … you said that where there's a lot of baggage because there's a whole different bunch of different ways you can do this. You can use various tools to help with the research process. You can just go out to Google based on things you're interested in and do research in that way. On the Amazon Affiliate side, that's what I'd spent more of my time doing was focusing more on areas that I was most interested in personally. So I had a site that was focused on like smaller computers and that was something that I was interested in personally. So that's kind of how I decided. I was looking at the various niches online and what people were ranking for and how they're making money. And it just seemed like a lot of the content they are creating wasn't really … in many cases at least for the niche that I was in before I sold that site, they weren't even actually reviewing the products that they're talking about. They are just basically writing articles and using CNET [inaudible 00:08:34.7] large conglomerates, larger websites to come up with the information they could write about. So what I did and so I was … you know contacted these companies and got them to send me products for free and I sent it back and do things like that. So with any site that I do whether it's Amazon Affiliate or anything else it's … for me, it's mainly about finding a way to differentiate. So looking at any niche is just okay what can I do to be better or to better serve the audience than the existing niches that are out there? So I usually- Joe: Okay. I would think it would matter that it's something you're interested in because with an Amazon Affiliate Space you're reviewing the products. You're writing content about it. You're sharing your voice and your opinion. It seems like it'll be important that is something that you like. Chris: Yeah definitely I mean that's … for me that was the approach. I mean I think that if the goal and this isn't something that I've done personally but if the goal is to really systemize and launch dozens of sites or something like that then you would need to just … you could really do just things your interested in because you can't potentially run out of those. But you'd be looking at different types of criteria just like what's the average sign price of a product, that's one of the things that you focus on as well is if you're focusing on a niche where the price is much higher then you can make more money in Amazon's Affiliate program because of the way they have the structure; their affiliate payouts. But that's something to consider as well is just the price of the items that are going to be sold. Joe: Okay so focus a little bit on something that you like but also look at the math behind it in terms of the Amazon Affiliate Payouts and the different categories that they have and the price points. Because you're going to get a paid … you get paid a percentage of the close transaction I assume; is that right? Can you touch on that a little bit, how you make money as an affiliate? Start from scratch and assume that people are tired of physical products or tired of SaaS products and they want to maybe buy one of these. How do you make money doing it? Go right into that a little bit. Chris: Yes, so the way that it's done pretty much is just focusing on … actually to see and try to pull up the actual charts that I have memorized it off the side of my head but each category will have different types of payouts. And pretty much the way you can … I would say and try and pull it really quick but I have it in front of me … yeah, so the way that I would that is find- Joe: So somebody reviews a product and let's say they're reviewing vacuum cleaners. And someone sells vacuum cleaners on Amazon; obviously, they do. And I'm talking about the reviews on those physical products and someone clicks on the link and goes to buy it on Amazon, I get paid a percentage of that but I never have to own the physical product that's the upside of this right? I get a percentage of the sale but never have to purchase the inventory, correct? Chris: Exactly yup and in pretty much the … and I was trying to find the category here, so every category is different and they'll show you which … what the fees are like I'd give you one example, so if it's outdoor tools for instance that's 5.5% as a percentage that you'll get. And the great thing too is any time that you send someone to Amazon you'll get a commission on any product that they buy while they're on Amazon. So even if you're referring people to vacuum cleaners then you can get sales on other types of these accessories as well within a 24 hour window. That's the cookie blank for Amazon. Joe: Excellent. So I know that with physical products you can get to the top fairly fast. There's different processes and categories and not just on Amazon but if you're selling a physical product all that you need to do is pay some PPC ads for instance with Google Ad Words. It's not a winning formula oddly … obviously all the time but with affiliate how are you getting traction? How are you getting up to page one of the search engines and is it a short term game or is it a long term game? Chris: Yes, definitely more of a long term game. With any website that I'm trying to build out and rank it's more of kind of like we say you're creating content or someone is creating content for you. Looking at what's ranking there and listing okay what can I do that's better than that? And then having someone or doing it yourself. Creating out that content and creating something better. Things that you can do to accelerate the process of trying to rank would be building links and doing things like that. For me most of the time it's more of an emphasis on the content creation side aspect but like in the case of the examples I was referring to before that I sold, I would do things like trying to … because mine was in the tactical category, I try to do things like breaking news within that niche. And I would contact larger sites to say hey this product is available on Amazon now. And like in gadget and other types of sites like that, I had a link back to my site because of doing that. So it's like another way to try and help with getting more link authority from external sites that would help with the content that I was creating for that site. But that's kind of the process that … and I would never do anything like pay advertising for affiliate sites. It's … and I'm not sure if any of Amazon affiliate person out there that's doing that. For me I just … it never [inaudible 00:13:30.0] just because I know that the margins you're getting from the sales of the products you're referring rather. Joe: Yeah. Chris: There's not really enough money actually if I'd like to drive then paid traffic to try and convert that paid traffic. Joe: Right. Chris: Years and years ago people would do just racked paid advertising straight to Amazon's website and you could do that before they banned it but that was like years and years ago. Joe: Got you. Well, they get smarter every year and fix the problems and make it tougher. And the people that are doing it right, I think survive in the long run and knows that cheating to get to the top end up getting kicked to the curb hopefully anyway. Chris: Yeah. Joe: So with an Amazon affiliate site, some people have the impression that if you've got a physical product site that you're constantly managing customer service, constantly managing inventory and that it's a grind, you get to constantly churn out new skews to stay on top of the competition and then, of course, grow beyond Amazon.com to the different countries. It sounds like and some people get the impression that it sounds like, seems like Amazon Affiliate would be build it and let it grow slowly and it's a lot less work. But from what you just said which is breaking news and staying on top of things you're putting in the same kind of effort on a daily basis I would assume with an affiliate business as you are with that physical products business or is that not the case? Chris: It's not necessarily the case. I think it really depends on the niche that you're in because you know it like before we hit recording you mentioned another mutual friend that does Amazon Affiliate things as well. Joe: Yuan Fitzner let's just say his name out loud. So Fitzner it's you and he's a great guy. For anybody who doesn't know him, find him through Rhodium Weekend; he's fantastic. Chris: Yeah so he's probably a good person at all as well but he doesn't do any link building, right? He focuses more on just creating the content and that's similar to the strategy that I do as well. But in the case of the niche that I was in specifically before I sold that site doing that as a strategy was … I knew there was a benefit there. Because I think one time Engadget linked to the site and they didn't change the affiliate link. I think it was like several thousand dollar affiliate fees that they … but in that case, it was more just like here is something that fits- Joe: You didn't point that mistake to the under laying and good backing. Chris: None of it, it's just like tip line and you just say hey here's this product that's out now and people are probably excited about it and it's available on Amazon now. And yes that was a nice little bonus but … so now it was more of like niche specific. I definitely think that … I'm probably more often than not actually. You're building out affiliate sites because I had other sites as well. I have other sites that it's not like that. Where we're not trying to break news or do things like that. It's just more niche specific. Even people in the technical space they don't want to do that approach and they don't have to. I mean that's just kind of the style that we chose for that site. Joe: Okay so good quality content, SEO friendly over the long run and theoretically you'll get rewarded. Is that the basic simplified dumbed down approach? Chris: Yeah I mean it does simplify it but that's really kind of the core. And I think I really emphasize just the differentiation aspect. Like any site that I build it's always like okay I don't really want to enter this area unless I'm willing to do something multiple times better than what's already there. So that's the approach I take for really building any site. Joe: What are some of the mistakes that you've made then in terms of doing these affiliate sites? I mean what did you learn the hard way? Chris: Yeah. So of the some of the mistakes I made was … at least for me personally, I do better having fewer sites and just focusing on doing really well with those sites as opposed to having many sites. Like another [inaudible 00:17:09.7] can find that was Spencer he … years and years ago he used to do like hundreds of niche websites and make money from Google AdSense. For me I never … she was interested in doing that type of approach and systemizing in that way. But for me at least it was just a matter of trying to focus on two small niches and so I can … I think I had one that was on HDMI cable reviews. Which was a fail because that was … HDMI cables are inexpensive and then it's also it's just kind of a small niche and … well, not necessarily a small niche but it was kind of a … it was hard to do well with that one then than some of the other niches I went after. Joe: That could seem like it would change a whole lot over the years either. Chris: Yeah I mean it was … well, that's the change in standards in terms like new for kay, signals and things like that. But yeah it was just like if you can go with higher price items that's helpful right? With the part that I was doing is computers and so it'd be you know … or small laptops rather that would be more of a payout each time. Joe: Okay, I had an example given to me maybe at December, January you know someone that was passionate about … I think it was salt water fishing and writing a blog about salt water fishing and within that doing the affiliate links on the different tackle and lures that you can get with salt water fishing. Would that be an approach that someone could take? You know if I have a passion like that whether it's salt water fishing or basket weaving if you will, to build a site based upon that passion and then just go with that approach? And then the follow up question is all right great how do I learn about SEO as you have over the years? What resources do you have? Because it seems again really simplified to say just build a site that you really are passionate about, find great products, review them, and off you go. But you're still got to build an SEO from this site and write good content that that the … your Google is gonna love, right? Chris: Yeah so going back to the example, I think if you're building out just a site that you're passionate about and then trying to then add Amazon Affiliate as like a monetization … kind of like an add-on, I think it's harder to make Amazon a larger portion of the revenue for that site. If the goal isn't from the start like hey we're going to build out like a more of a review type site as opposed to here's something that we're interested at about just general information and then here is while reading this article happened to may be interested in this specific lure or whatever the example is you gave. Joe: Salt water fishing. Chris: Yeah, so that just from what I've been looking at sites in the past it just seems like that's more challenging. What usually ends up happening in those types of cases, the website owner usually ends up making a larger portion of their money just from banner ads or other types of ad platforms like that and then Amazon is more of a supplemental as opposed to the sites that I build. It'd be more … really focused around the review side of things. And so it'll just be like people that are coming to this content are interested in reviews about this product and so then that traffic is more likely to buy something than people that are just interested in general information come to my site and then they may or may not be in a buying state. Joe: So a clear differentiate is a content site that's just giving information about products in general versus a review site when you're comparing a variety of different products. And when you choose one of those products it's going to Amazon and you get a percentage of that revenue. That'd be, right? Chris: Yeah and I don't think it's a bad thing to do … really your example where you're building out because it's great to generate revenue from ads and just have a lot of traffic as well just from various articles you're writing and all about salt water fishing and then also be able to make money from Amazon with the Affiliate Program. It's just there's two different ways that you might see sites if you're on the buying or building or selling side of things. Joe: Well on those three sides which do you like … do you think, let's just talk about two; building or buying. We had Walker Deibel on the show a couple of weeks ago talking about build versus buy or buy versus build. It's actually in a book. He's coming on the Quiet Light team as an advisor in July. Do you personally in terms of specifically the affiliate space, Amazon Affiliate Space do you think it's better to build or to buy? Chris: Well I've done all of them. Build, buy, sell, every aspect on the Amazon Affiliate Side. I prefer now at least … I've been doing this for a lot longer to … or that depends right? Because it depends on for me at least where my capital might be tied up; either I just recently bought something or I'm doing other investments that are outside the online space and I want it just free of capital. And so I'm not actively looking to buy something or I'm just trying to focus on okay now that I've got that other thing going on but I can try and focus on scaling up all my things and as well. I prefer, if I had to pick one I'd say I prefer building and then being able to sell after that because for me at least I'd like to be able to invest less of my own personal cash. I know you mentioned [inaudible 00:22:18.3] before, [inaudible 00:22:19.4], a lot of the buyers there they don't have access to capital that I don't have access to through … you know people have consider with more money that they can then use as investing partners. And so I suppose if I … given the opportunity I had more capital then I would probably be doing more buying. So I guess it's tough to say. If you don't have cash and you want to just get started then building would make the most sense and maybe you can sell once you get to a certain point. That gives you some capital to either reinvest and build more sites or maybe build or buy other things. But if you have access to capital from … for any reason then buying would be great because you're able to just start with something existing. Joe: How long has it been for you from that build to sell? Do you typically hold something for 12, 24, 36 months? What have you seen? What do you try to set as a goal for yourself when you're building something? I think okay I'm going to build this to eventually sell it if that's your goal, how long do you like to hold it for? Or does it just depend? Chris: Well, a lot of the times it's more just a … it really does depend. Because half the time I do this site … well most of the time actually when I do these sites it's more a matter of I'm building something up, I like the cash flow and that's kind of the main goals is just building our monthly cash flow from various websites, businesses, etcetera. So that's kind of more of what I'm after is just getting more cash flow and then rather than just trying to pull out my capital right away and just to sell. So for me, it's all about the cash flow and I am not always interested in exactly trying to sell. Joe: How many how many balls do you have in the inner; Amazon affiliate wise, how many sites are you juggling now? Chris: If I were to add up all the different sites it'd probably be … I had to look- Joe: You know it's more than a dozen or so when you have to look. Chris: Well, no it's more I was trying to get a specific number. I'll say it's less than a dozen but I also include in that other affiliate sites that just make money from other CPA type offers opposed to Amazon. Joe: Got you. Chris: Because kind of once … for me, Amazon was a starting point. That was kind of how I got into the whole space was building out this Amazon Affiliate Site, I was doing it on the side outside of my working hours in a completely unrelated job and just trying to find a way to earn enough money to do this full time. And then once I started making enough money from Amazon it opened up all these different opportunities to try and do other things as well. And that's one is going to software, creating tools for Amazon Affiliate Sellers or well affiliates rather and doing things like that. Joe: How long has it been since you were thankfully fired from the last day job you had? Chris: Yeah, I was looking it up. Actually, I have it on my calendar October 13th is the day and it was … it will be nine years this year, later this year rather. And then I'll be 10 years the next year but that will be sort of, that'll be what 2000 … I'm trying to think now what the year it is, 2018 so it's 2009 I believe. Joe: 2009. Chris: Yeah. Joe: It's a long time to be self-employed; it's impressive that you pulled that off. Chris: Yeah. And now for me at least it's more of a matter of just further building out multiple different income streams and revenue streams from a variety of different businesses. There's … well, that's a whole other discussion right whether you should focus on just one thing or kind of spread it out. For me, it was more like build something out that starts making cash. And it's like well I don't know if I can really sell this for enough to make it worth selling. It's not going to change my life in any meaningful way so I'll keep it and have someone help me out to run it. Well, that's kind of the approach I'm working with. Joe: So if someone is listening to this and they were in your shoes, you know where you were 10 years ago and they had a day job and they want to do what you've done which is building Amazon Affiliate Sites and make some income on the side what should they expect? Should they … if they pick a category they like, they do a review site, they sign up, they get involved should they … would your expectations that they're going to hit 1 out of 10 on sites that they do, 2 out of 10, 5 out of 10. What would you give them in terms of a ratio so that they can understand and of course these are all ballpark numbers and what kind of money can they really make? I mean we're talking about on the small side a few thousand bucks a month and the people that are big and really experienced at this you know what kind of money are they making? Chris: Yeah you know that's a tough … it's tough I think with the ballpark it's a challenge to give an answer to that because the experiences that people have may lend themselves to be able to be successful more easily. Joe: All right, well look everybody listens to me all right. And they're like Joe you're an idiot but I like you and you know would … I have people tell me like they feel like we're old friends from this nude podcast. But you know me through Brad, we chatted, if I was to do this … let's be specific. You could say … be honest say, Joe, you're going to do 1 out of 10. Just face it, Joe, you're not going to do well. I mean you're the expert what would you guess if people are going to do this with some these in experience on a thing that they love and they're smart and they're going to do research online, they're gonna go to your podcast, they're going to go read everything about Chris Guthrie and figure how you do it. What are they going to do, 1 out of 10, 1 out of 5, what do you think? Chris: Ah if they're learning from me it's going to be 100% right. Joe: You're a humble guy every time okay. Chris: Yeah and though I'd say probably it's … with a lot of things, you get into it and sometimes they'll hit and they'll do well. So for me, the best site that I have was doing over 10k a month. Joe: Okay. Chris: Worst site would be like $300 a month. And that's where I'll be some of the weaker ones and then some are them between where I have a few thousand or so. Hit rate would be more like maybe 25-50% with sites that would be doing pretty well. But it … yeah, it's just really tough to answer that question for me. Joe: You improved that hit rate I would assume with the research that you do upfront. Is that right? I mean just like a physical products business on the web, on Amazon or Shopify whatever it is if you do your research up front; what are the competition price points, how are you going to sell it, things of that nature- Chris: Yeah. Joe: And you're doing the same thing with Amazon Affiliate; you need to pick a product with a great margin, something that you can write about, something that has been up searches online. What tools do you use to help … even if you have a passion for something whether it's worth it on … whether it's worth creating an Amazon Affiliate Business? So are there certain tools that you use to help that hit rate go up? Chris: So well tools for like the research side of things? Joe: Yeah to help ensure that the path that you're going down is going to be as successful as possible. Chris: Yes, I use a lot of SEMrush actually. So I use that tool quite a bit because I just like to pull up a site, see what stuff is ranking well, where they're getting their traffic from and- Joe: Do you have the paid subscription for that or do you just use the free version? Chris: So I fluctuate off and on. So from the process of building or going back to yeah I'd more than all do the paid subscription, and then if it's okay we've got enough stuff on our plate let's just focus on what we have and not create anything new then it's like well I don't really need to pay extra subscription right now. So I fluctuate in and out. Ahrefs is another tool I use as well although that was another one that I just was okay I got a good sense of where our competitors are in their links, where they're getting traffic, and okay I cancel out as well. So it's like- Joe: I always get that one wrong, it's A-H-refs is that right? We did a giveaway when we launched the podcast on an account on a subscription for that but it was Mark's area of expertise. Can you spell it out for me? Chris: Yeah, it's A-H-R-E-F-S.com and I'm not even sure how you're supposed to pronounce that either. Joe: Okay. Chris: So I mean I met someone that works for the company at that conference as well. I didn't bring that up but yeah- Joe: Mumble what they said that'll generally work. If you actually … the way my 16 year old does, he just speaks confidently and I believe him when he's comp … no idea what he's talking about but he speaks confidently. I think that's the trick. Chris: Yeah. Joe: All right so Ahrefs- Chris: Yup. Joe: You went through it and that one is more of what links the sites have right? Is that what you're looking at? Chris: Yeah, so it'd be more like looking at both viewers and the lengths for me. I was merely just trying to see where my key rankings were and so I was kind of more just tracking how it is we're doing. For SEMrush that's why I would use just the tool for research. And the thing is that here's what … the thing with tools and especially the two tools I just mentioned they've been around for years and years and years so they have so many different things that I probably didn't even know. Like I probably didn't even need one or the other it's just like when you get comfortable using one tool for one thing you'd use it for just that one thing. And then you might use this tool for the other thing. But that's kind of what the approach I would do. Joe: Okay. So do that research upfront and what you're looking for is traffic, competition, links, things of that nature before you go down the path to increase success rate, any other recommendations that you'd give somebody just starting off? Chris: Just the main thing I would say is well … I mean if you're looking at what … just looking at larger sites that are doing well. Seeing … I try to reverse engineer a lot. So when you're looking at starting from now that you're doing your research process and seeing what sites are getting in the traffic beyond just like figuring out why are they getting this traffic. Is it because they have a bunch of links pointing at them? Is it because their content is much much better? That's … I guess I keep coming back to this like but it's always for me differentiation. What is it that they're doing that's really doing that is working really well for them and then how can I do better than that? And so in the process of doing that research and looking at that then you're going to see okay it looks like they're using AdThrive or something for their ad platform and then they're using Amazon's Affiliate Program and maybe they're using LinkShare so you link to Walmart and things like that. Joe: From a buyer's side if somebody came to you and said “Hey look I'm looking at buying this site can you give me your opinion on it?” What things should buyers look for that maybe somebody in the Amazon Affiliate Space has done this sort of cheat and it's not going to last, is there anything that stands out that people should be aware of or look for? Chris: It's not because … you want to look at where they … if they are building links you want look at where they're doing it because there's you know PBNs or things like that are definitely more gray area. Joe: If I were … go ahead and say what PBN stands for, please. Chris: Yeah, Private Blog Networks, that's where people build out like huge networks of blogs and then they use links on those blogs and point them at the site. And then those blogs are getting traffic or links part of them as well. So that looks like you're getting links from higher quality sites when in fact they're just sites people would construct pretty much solely for the purpose of pointing links at properties they own or properties their clients own. And I can't remember exactly how long ago it was but Google cracked down and quite a bit. From what I've seen people kind of just got it underground and so it's kind of the [inaudible 00:33:26.3] a lot but … so looking at that is helpful in terms of how a buyer can protect themselves from that. Usually, you're able to use some of these third party tools to help check that out. There's also things where if you're signing an agreement that's saying I haven't used a PBN and then you find out that they are because maybe you're ranking stopped or go down because they've stopped in turning to run that PBN and point the links at you then that's something that you could have legal recourse to go after them. But that might be something out of buying side that included- Joe: Yeah, that's what you definitely don't want to have to do is to go after them after the fact. Chris: Yeah. Joe: Because you're chasing them for money that you gave them which is never a good position to be in. Chris: Yeah. Joe: But certainly doing the research to see where those … where the traffic's coming from and see if there is a PBN and trying to avoid it as much as possible. I think a lot of the times Chris getting to know the person, trusting a broker that's involved if there is one involved, really getting to know the seller in a positive manner. I always recommend whether it's a $35,000 site and it could apply to 3,500 as well, or a 3.5 million dollar site, if you're buying it, it's your money, you worked hard for it, get on a plane, spend an extra thousand dollars stay in a Holiday Inn whatever and meet the person face to face. Do a Zoom or Skype conference call so you can see them and talk to them but meet them face to face before you close the transaction. You can go under LOI in advance but I just don't think there's a better substitute for a handshake, having a lunch or dinner or beer and getting a better feel for them. Of course, you've got to do that due diligence and that research and hire experts like yourself or [inaudible 00:35:14.5] whoever might do the research if you don't have it to protect your money. It's something you worked hard for and I can tell you right now that when you make an investment and you blow it, it's really really hard to pull the trigger again. I know a lot of people that have done that. I know more people that have been incredibly successful and then unsuccessful. But those that thought they knew everything and thought that everybody was kind and trustworthy like they were and they pulled the trigger and something changed in the world, there was a shift with an algorithm update or whatnot and things just fall apart. They can fall apart very quickly. So lots of research meet somebody face to face, use the tools that you're talking about, the Ahrefs and SEMrush, check for PBN things of that nature. You know most people are good but it's the few bad ones that you just want to avoid in my opinion, in my experience. As far as up the top line revenue you think you know if somebody that can do this maybe they're making $10,000 a month that they do really well, how many hours a week are we talking about that is going to take to operate a business of this nature? Chris: It's definitely if … so for I guess it depends. For me, I'll give … I can really only speak to my own experiences. So for that site that like my bigger site that I had before I sold it, it was probably 15 hours a week or so and then the rest of my time was on other projects. So it wasn't like a full time thing because I was doing it outside my day job in the first place and then I only added a little bit more time because then I thought okay well I've got this new time. I don't want to have all my eggs in one basket because now I have no job and just one primary site and then other sites that are also helpful but wouldn't be enough for me to cover my bills and for … at the time I was like okay I just want to make sure I could … I don't have to go back and get a job. Joe: [inaudible 00:37:01.3] Chris: And so that's kind of the approach that I took and it worked for that site. It really depends on me and a lot of times too with Amazon Affiliate Sites especially, you're able to hire out for a lot of aspects of the process of building; either building, maintaining, any aspect to that because it's just content creation and there are a lot of writers that you can find. They can cover that part. And so if you're not doing it yourself and you're finding ways to get yourself out of that process then it can be much further reduced. Now I try and just … for me it was I try to only come up with ideas and then work with people that can help implement a lot of these or to … it's more just about trying to really limit the amount of time I spend on actually like creating content for instance. I might like to write about something on a blog personally but if I can have someone else do it then it wouldn't make sense for you to do that. Joe: Yeah, content creation can take an awful lot of time. Chris, we're running out of time. Can you share any last minute thoughts or recommendations for those that are listening that are either building, buying, or selling Amazon Affiliate Sites; any last minute advice that you would give them? Chris: Yeah, I would just say that … well, actually I'd say if anyone is curious or has other questions feel free to … I would like to say feel free to email me. Joe: You know without a doubt I want to … let's talk about how they reach you. We'll put it in the show notes as well but you know throw out whatever email address, phone number, blog sites, anything you want to share right now I'd be happy to do that. But we'll also put it in the show notes so everybody can find it in writing and get a link there too. Chris: Yeah so to answer your question I'd say decide on what you want to do right? If you're trying to … and everyone probably has a different expertise or where they're at with their life, what they want to do. If you're limited by a capital and you have a lot of money to invest then it may make sense to just simply build something so you can build it up and then come to your brokers like you guys of course and then sell it and that can give you cash that would … you could then use to reinvest and do those things. And that might be something you would do while you're still at your day job. If you're already on a site where you have access to more money then buying something would make sense. And being able to then take where you're at and growing it from there. I'd really just say that decide which focus you want to go with. Make sure you find ways to differentiate. I mean I kind of bring out that this whole time but for me, everything that I've done with any business is always been for me differentiation and finding ways to do much better than the competition. Joe: That seems to be the good … best key word here is just be different. You don't want to be like everybody else; differentiate yourself. Still do all the things right, still build something that people want to come to and trust but differentiate yourself in whatever way that you can. Excellent. Chris, how do people reach you? How do they find you? Share any information you can now so that they can get in touch with you and talk about this. Chris: Yeah, so best place would probably just be UpFuel.com which is my site. We didn't talk about it much but I sell the WordPress plugin that helps people with Amazon Affiliate things as well and that's EasyAzon.com. Joe: EasyAzon.com? Chris: Yeah so if it's … if you're running WordPress and you know a lot of people do of course then that's a software you can use to help with creating links and earning more money from those links as well. Joe: Excellent. I will make sure that link is in the show notes as well. So UpFuel.com, EasyAzon.com anywhere else that you are in the world? Chris: Twitter @chrisguthrie and yeah so that's probably the main ones but I'm happy to … if any … if you're on the buying side and you're just looking for second opinion, I try and I've just done well with trying to provide value and people with no expectation, no return and then things work out so- Joe: I agree. Just help people have good conversations and it comes back around. All right man listen I appreciate it Chris thanks so much for your time. Hopefully, folks that are either building buying or selling Amazon affiliate sites will get some good resources here. Thanks for your time today I appreciate it. Chris: Thanks.   Links: Upfuel.com: An up to date article with respect to the Amazon affiliate niche. Easyazon.com: The plugin that a lot of WordPress users install as well (they have over 10,000 installs). AMASuite.com: Discover products and how to differentiate and source them inexpensively.

The Frontside Podcast
104: Blockchain Development with Chris Martin

The Frontside Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 28, 2018 35:49


In this episode, Chris Martin of Type Classes and Joe LaSala of The Frontside talk about blockchain development. Do you have opinions on this show? Want to hear about a specific topic in the future? Reach out to us at contact@frontside.io or on Twitter at @thefrontside. This show was produced by Mandy Moore, aka @therubyrep of DevReps, LLC. TRANSCRIPT: JOE: Hey, everybody. Welcome to Episode 104 of The Frontside Podcast. I'm Joe LaSala. I'm a developer here at the Frontside and I'm going to be hosting today's episode. Today we're going to be associating blockchains and other cryptographically secure technologies and everything that has to do with the web and the future of the web. We have with us Chris Martin and he's currently with Type Classes. What do you do over there, Chris? CHRIS: Our goal is to teach functional programming with Types, specifically with Haskell and a little bit Nix. We do subscription video service. JOE: There seems to be, I guess a bit of an overlap between people who are into functional programming and people who are involved in this new space that has opened up, this new web, I guess and that's something that I want to talk about based on a tweet that I saw you made recently. You mentioned that there's a big section of the Haskell community that is being drawn into whatever the hot ICO is at that moment there, something along those lines. CHRIS: Some of it are bitcoin people or something else but there's definitely a weird overlap that I can't fully explain. JOE: It seems like strange bedfellows, right? CHRIS: Well, there's a couple of things that make sense, which I think the distributed systems in cryptography are kind of these notoriously hard problems. I think when somebody wants to convince their boss that they really need to use Haskell for this problem, I think they can make a persuasive argument in this case. JOE: That's interesting. There's actually, a lot of technology around blockchains around bitcoins, specifically being written in Haskell. I didn't know they were technologically overlapped like that. I guess I just thought they were two very kind of passionate communities but you're saying that a lot of the bitcoin startups that you might see coming out in any given week are actually being written with an eye towards functional programming. Is that accurate? CHRIS: I don't know about bitcoin along this bit but I think some of the people who are working for banks and trying to develop their own sort of novel internal blockchains and stuff, I think those are the people who see this. Although in the case of banks, we don't necessarily see what's coming out of them, so we can't verify whether they're actually shipping things or not. JOE: Yeah. That means there's a lot to touch on there. I would agree with you on your initial sentiment, also just to extend to say that I think personally that both communities are really evangelical. Functional programmers, people who are into functional programming, for me it hasn't clicked yet and I know that it will come into my heart. I've asked functional programming to kind of where things are starting to fall into line where I'm certain to see the world in that way but for people who have seen the light fully, I'm sure believers once monads and functors kind of enter the conversation. They don't leave. It's similar like when bitcoin first started and everybody's running about the gold standard. Really, it's just nothing. It was hard to find resources on it that did the most of the amount of screaming. CHRIS: Yeah, you're absolutely right, that culturally, they're going to attract the same group of people or the people who are willing to adopt something that's not fully fleshed out yet, people who want to take what they believe and sit in this community and try and spread it to the rest of the world. I think it's the same kind of people. JOE: The early adoption, I think is something I can consider too. I guess it's a very risk-oriented group. CHRIS: Yeah, kind of. I mean, Haskell is pretty old, I guess but -- JOE: That's fair, yeah. CHRIS: -- Some of the changes that really make it, it great and usable lately are pretty [inaudible]. JOE: That's interesting. You mentioned this idea -- we kind of skipped over a little bit but thanks, having their own blockchains and that's something that I think that maybe people not actively following this space, which is I will say, a very hard space to keep up for those of us who are actively following it. But those who may just know blockchain through the name of an iced tea company changing or some sensational news article or what have you or just through bitcoin even, but I know that it's not the blockchain. It's not a singular blockchain. It's very easy to implement the fundamental structure. It's a linked list, essentially, with the kind of a cryptographic thing that keeps from breaking that link. Those links are inserting new history, I guess the further you go back. I guess people are even exploring different data structures like directed acyclic graphs and stuff and how that could be used to map other domains but the reality is it's a linked list and you can spend up as many of them as you want and you can mine blocks based on all this different criteria. Bitcoin is a proof of work associated with the minting of a new block and that's been a problem for them as they scale as a currency but it could be a history of anything and the minting of those blocks can be based on anything. You mentioned banks, the financial kind of sector is certainly interested in these smaller private chains but do you think there's a use for that consumer market as well? How do you think that your personal blockchain or set of blockchains might be a factor in the hobbyist of the futurist life? CHRIS: Oh, wow. That's a different question than I thought. [inaudible] where you're going with that -- JOE: Where do you think I was going? CHRIS: Well, we're talking about banks and so, the question is now everybody other than banks -- JOE: Well, it could be everybody, including banks too, however you want to take it. CHRIS: Yeah. There's a much harder question, I think of what in the world we're actually saying when we are talking about blockchain, right? The notion obviously has started with bitcoin but if what you want to do is bitcoin, then you should just be as in bitcoin, so what are we talking about similar bitcoin and the general phrase people have they like to throw in here is Byzantine fault tolerance. I'm talking about any kind of system that can have multiple participants. We're used to talking about clusters of computers and making systems that can work if one of them fails, if one of them just stops working but now, we're starting to talk about how do we make systems work if one of them gets hacked, then we still have some assurances that the whole system works together as a whole. JOE: Would you consider Byzantine fault tolerance to be the defining factor of a blockchain because I feel like there's the timestamping element that goes along with it. I feel like they're kind of part and parcel, right? CHRIS: Kind of but if you're not considering Byzantine faults, if you're only talking about systems where you have benign faults, which is a machine goes down sometimes, then timestamping isn't really a problem because we can just use NTP and we all have a pretty sensible idea of what time it is. JOE: Time specifically, even just like, I guess order. I always considered sequence to be a massive part of what a blockchain fundamentally was. You have the distributed aspect of the network that gives this sort of resilience to malicious intent but not only is it protected, I guess against demolition and malicious intent by this crowd strength but also just fundamentally through the cryptographic side of it, you can't go in and insert things that didn't happen. Once that order has been said, it's been written in stone, basically, right? Because the way I understood is there were papers coming out of Bell Labs in the early 90s and those two things set as approaches to this independently and it wasn't until the internet advance so we put them together and we're able to achieve Byzantine fault tolerance through that. Is that, I mean...? CHRIS: It does help a lot, I think to buck up and think about what the state of research was in the 90s because I think that's something that a lot of people in blockchain space kind of lose sight of. You have a whole lot of people writing papers now who didn't used to be academics until a couple of years ago. It was the early 90s where we started having faxes and we started having what later turned into what's kind of known as raft. Like you said, they solved the ordering problem. Even something as simple as what we call Lamport clocks which is you have sort of a virtual timestamps and as long as nobody's malicious, if you remove the timestamp forward, then we can all have something that resembles the deterministic forward flow of time. Then, that milestone that I was like to remind people of this in 1999 is when we had the paper practical Byzantine fault tolerance. JOE: That was '99. You're talking about the... was it Castro and --? CHRIS: Liskov, yeah. JOE: Okay. I didn't know it was '99. CHRIS: Interestingly, the same Liskov that the Liskov substitution principles named for, Barbara Liskov. It's also a distributed systems research. JOE: That's swell as well. I kind of heard the concept of Byzantine fault tolerance but I never read this paper. I'm also surprised to find that it didn't come out of that same period of the early 90s and it was as far as '99. I haven't read its entirety but I did fall asleep reading it last night. You mentioned this specifically, I guess, when we're talking today, as a paper that is important. It's the work that we're trying to do at... was it Hijro, I think? CHRIS: Yeah. JOE: Yeah, so what kind of work were you doing there and what is important to you, I guess about this paper specifically, when you look at all the research that went into priming the community for the space that we are now in? CHRIS: When I joined Hijro, I got kind of a difficult and nebulous mission, which was that everyone in and around that space that was trying to sell to banks was if you said the word blockchain, you could get your foot in the door because all the banks were looking at bitcoin and saying, "Well, look, this is clearly something that's going to be big and we don't want to be missing out, so we have to figure out how this applies to us." JOE: What year is this? They were working this in 2014-ish, is that right? CHRIS: '15 or '16, I think. The question was trying to figure out what aspect of it was actually what they wanted here. What Hijro is trying to sell them, the details aren't even important for this conversation but we need an interbank solution. We needed a ledger of accounts that 'we weren't a bank so we couldn't be the one holding everyone's money and keeping track of the flow of money in our network.' We were on something that the banks were truly in charge of but we didn't want to necessarily have our platform be owned by a particular bank. We wanted to be the sort of consortium of all of our partners. JOE: Consortium is a keystone word I think here, that we should definitely come back to that. CHRIS: Yeah and people talk about, if I use the word consortium blockchain, I think sometimes in contrast with the public blockchain, with the 'free anyone can join' blockchain. JOE: Yeah. I'm particularly fascinated by this concept. That is a term that is used. I can confirm this. But you're doing that pretty early then because I feel like that concept didn't make it out into, I guess the public understanding, until recently or maybe I'm just behind at times. CHRIS: Yeah, I guess so. I don't know. When I start working on this, I just spent a couple of months trying to read papers about what was in space and I guess, the only big name that was trying to do something like this was Tendermint. JOE: Tendermint? Interesting. CHRIS: You can pick out technologies like this because the magic number is always one-third. They can tolerate Byzantine failure up to one-third of the nodes. That was a theoretical result that was reached, just sort of the best you can do. Before BFT and then BFT is one of those solutions in that category and Tendermint does something similar. JOE: That, I guess is sort of the background to this paper and it's impacting your life. I guess, what is put forth in this paper is to solve for higher tolerance. Would that be the right way to put it? CHRIS: Did you say higher tolerance? JOE: Yes. You're talking about the Byzantine tolerance is 30%, right? With Tendermint? But you're saying that they're doing something similar to that's before in the paper? CHRIS: The most interesting thing to me, I think is probably, hopefully possible to convey concisely is the rationale behind the one-third number because that took a while for me to really appreciate but I think it really clicked when it did. One of the hardest intuitions to get people to break, I don't know, way of thinking to shift, I guess is convincing people that consensus is even a hard problem because I had this conversation a lot with people that'd say, "I've got this JavaScript library here, for instance that just lets me broadcast a message to all the nodes in a cluster, so why can I just do that?" Why can't we just use one at a time to do it and if I detected someone's trying to cheat, if I get two different messages from someone that are conflicting, maybe I can just ignore them. JOE: Not in finance. That's kind of ironic, I guess that you found it difficult to get people to come to a consensus about the importance of consensus. CHRIS: Right. The basic flow of all these things is we describe them as voting systems. We have voting rounds where each time, like you said the blockchain of the ledger or whatever it is, just a linked list, so the problem of using consensus build database is we're just going to iteratively try to vote or come to consensus on what the next block is. What the next ledger entry should be? Obviously, since we don't have a synchronized wall clock to go by, we have to assume messages can come in any order. We might all sort of speak up simultaneously and propose different blocks as the next one, at which point we have to start over and retry that. But furthermore, I can send different votes to different people if I'm trying to be malicious and that's where the tricky part comes on. The rationale for the one-third number, maybe I can just try to come around to that and say it directly then, is that when we take a vote for what the next block is going to be, we need the supermajority. We need two-thirds of the participants to have all said the same thing and the rationale for that is it's actually easier to think of it backwards. Rather than saying, two thirds of the total, what we say is, "If we're going to allow some fixed number of nodes to fail, to behave maliciously --" you know, we traditionally call that number 'F' in the paper, then what we say is we need 3F+1 total nodes to be participating. JOE: I didn't know that was sort of codified into how conflict is resolved on things like bitcoin during blockchain. It's inherent, I guess. CHRIS: No. This is the total opposite of what bitcoin and Ethereum are going to do. JOE: Because I always thought it was just going to be like a majority, I guess but what you are talking about is more like how the Senate would were to pass a resolution to the constitution, like it has to be an exceptional majority. I'm starting to understand why one-third, specifically. It's 3F+1, I guess. CHRIS: The reason is because for each vote, every time I look at the results of a vote, I have to be able to assume that some number that we called F, of the people that I've heard back from are trying to cheat me. It turns out I need to be sure that the majority of the votes that I've heard back are from people who are actually following the protocol correctly and not lying. We need to be tolerant to two kinds of failure. One is that a node simply goes down and we don't hear from them and we don't receive a vote from them and then the other kind of failure is the Byzantine failure, that they're not following protocol in some way. The reason I need 3F+1 nodes is because we need to be able to make progress, even if F of these number is we didn't hear from at all because they're down and then, I need 2F+1 votes because I need to take into account the possibility that some F of these votes were from cheaters and then we need to have more honest votes than lying votes. JOE: That's pretty profound. I definitely going to finish the rest of this paper while conscious later today. I guess we're a little off with regard to math at this point and it's when you said, you spent I guess a month or so just reading papers around the time you started with Hijro and I guess did you stop because I feel like I've read just more white papers than ever thought I would outside of the academic setting, just trying to keep pace with what's been going on, particularly with regard to the web. I don't if you're familiar with like IPFS but these sort of directed acyclic graph things are popping up all over the place and platforms are even now being built on this concept. I guess, Ethereum feels impractical in a lot of ways. These dime-a-dozen tutorials, when you started talking about the global computer that is Ethereum and the blockchain and it's going to change everything in the internet and you won't have to pay Comcast like some central authority or you just pay for each transactions. The reality of it is every time you do a write against a data store have, first of all, thousands of computers go and verify that and also, you don't want to store your information on a linked list. It's not feasible for storing large data structures and it becomes very expensive for the user and for the person, if you're maintaining a smart contract for the contract itself. These are volatile, all little points of value. It's impractical. CHRIS: It's definitely a cost that you don't want to incur. In all cases, just a confirmation time is a cost you don't want to incur. JOE: Absolutely. CHRIS: There is one nice thing that that you can do in some cases, which is that people is talking about the piggybacking on these blockchains like if I have a system and I just want some extra assurance to keep it honest, then I can do things like periodically publish a hash of my database onto something like bitcoin or Ethereum. JOE: Yeah. That actually happen with anyone in financial... They do publish stuff in the paper and this was before cryptographic ledgers but to basically prove that this was the state of something, I remembered seeing this somewhere, like there would be in financial news, like there'd be some crazy number or string at the top to verify what was on the string. CHRIS: Yes. Of course, the irony there is that you really don't need some kind of blockchain if you want to do that because the fact that we're doing that before the blockchain has existed and doubly, it's funny because the first block of the bitcoin blockchain, the genesis block includes in it, I think a New York Times headline, which was intended as proof that Satoshi or whoever didn't spend years mining bitcoin prior to releasing it. It's supposed to be a proof of the time of the first genesis actually was. It's funny that we are actually already had this verification system and what that demonstrates is sort of a principle of consensus that I like to talk about which is that as you increase the time scale, consensus becomes an easier and easier problem. I think the reason why something like newspaper headlines are reliable means of a timestamp is just mostly because they're big and slow, because there's only one every day. I think the whole challenge like you said of, how a lot of systems kind of boiled down to having the white paper for bitcoin refers it describes bitcoin as a distributed timestamp server, something along those lines. The reason why you need a new technology to do that, I think so that you could have timestamps that are every of couple minutes, rather than every 24 hours. JOE: That's a very interesting take on it. I guess, the more time there is, it is easier to reach a consensus. It's just interesting to think about. It's funny as humans like the longer time passes, the less reliable memory is, I guess, less reliable history as we conceive of it, I guess. It's different when you record something than the way that you hold in the brain that sometimes I wonder how much impact that's had on. It's a little ephemeral, I guess but it's interesting. CHRIS: Yeah. I guess my statement is limited to the on-scale where we can actually fit into memory. JOE: Right, that most of the times, it's the only relevant scale, I guess, like a blockchain doesn't have use outside of our use of it, inherent to it, so it's going to be seen through that lens, I guess of our use of it. I think it is kind of profound, a thing to think about that I definitely considered. You mentioned using blockchains as adding a little bit of... how do you put it? Like truthiness, I guess, we'll say. I know that's not how you put it but adding a little bit of security, maybe around something else but the reality is you can get away with that on a number of other levels. I think that's important and interesting to think about. There seems to be this trend now talking about a blockchain as part of a bigger picture or consortium blockchain or a consortia of blockchains, right? Because a consortia would be multiple and then a consortium would be... No, a consortium would be a single grouping, consortia would be multiple groups. Basically, going back to the problem you're trying to solve with Hijro, you have multiple banks and I believe eventually, I don't know if you work on it, there was a protocol that came out of that company to unify these blockchains, like a few of them. They demoed and everything. That, I think gives you some power with regard to access control but again, I guess, that's not a thing that you really need consensus for. So, where does it fit in? Aside from things like voting and transparent finance for maybe a political cause or in the case of bitcoin, just finance in general. In bitcoin, I feel like we got Mongo DB super hard in the sense that it just got applied to every domain and it applies to very, very few. CHRIS: My boss at Hijro, Lamar Wilson really like to say that people talked about blockchain like it was hot sauce and they sort of sprinkle it on everything to make it better. JOE: That's sad. CHRIS: I guess, two answer to that one. One of the places where it absolutely captivates people's imaginations too far and doesn't work and then places where it doesn't work, so I want to start with the first here because the biggest mistake that people make is that there was this notion of tokenization that came out of Ethereum, where anyone could make a smart contract that represented something and now, also that I can trade digitally. Just like it's money or some kind of digital asset, so people want to talk about putting your car, putting your house on the blockchain or selling it there. But it's just shocking how many times I had to remind people that if I make a smart contract that represents cars and I put my VIN number on it and I transfer you my car, at Ethereum contract in an exchange for a bitcoin, if I call the police and report my car stolen, they're not going to look at the Ethereum contract, right? JOE: Yeah. Man, you're really right. People don't think about that enough. If your car is in the blockchain, your car still on the block. CHRIS: What we had realize when we're selling solutions like this is that they're great for some reasons but you need actual legal agreements to underpin things when you actually make connection to the real world. The magic of bitcoin that can't really be replicated is that the coin actually didn't need a pinning to the real world because the thing bitcoin was running was itself. It just depended on hoping that people were going to find the coin and ledger valuable intrinsically and bitcoin never really purported to control things in the real world. JOE: I guess, definitely not in the paper. There are some place that can buy in from some very specific elements of society that sort of cemented its place as useful but we don't really need to go to that road, I guess. I don't know. You know, my roommate is a lawyer and we have this conversation often and I feel like if we go down law and cryptography, we're going to be talking for too long, where we are at currently. CHRIS: Right and that wasn't your question anyway. It was just what I respond to easiest because being a critic is always the easier thing to do. JOE: I can feel you there. CHRIS: One of the interesting things that I never even found too much about but I noticed this in a couple of passing references as I was reading stuff about Byzantine fault tolerance in general is that it seems to have some application in things like flight control systems and space ships because when you think about a computer that you're going to send into space, you have two things that Byzantine fault tolerance applies to directly. One is you need a lot of redundancy. You need these control systems, maybe you have a dozen things computing the same result because you can't replace the hardware when once you shot something to space. The second thing is once you've sent something outside the atmosphere, all of the sudden, you're being bombarded with a lot more cosmic rays than you were before. Now, you actually really do this idea that computers can fail, not just by stopping but by producing wrong results. All of a sudden, it becomes a lot more real because you actually have physics slipping a bit at your computers. JOE: I don't even think you have to go as far as space if you talk about just like a fleet of something, like self-trading cards. I suppose, in domain where there is an interplanetary file system, it's good to specify the planet we're talking about. Just having worked a little bit with robots in college, they lie all the time and they produce bad data constantly, so not even bad actors just incompetent actors, I guess could definitely... This is something that has to be, I guess on our minds as we move forward as the society that has more connected devices, which I think as much as I would love to have left this conversation off in outer space, I think bringing it around to the internet of things, which is sort of where this all began months and months ago is probably a good place to stop meandering through these cryptographic weeds. You can probably put a pin in this. I think we've been talking about for a while now, I guess and just kind of trying to see what it is and where the applications are. It's constantly changing and never clear, I think is the conclusion that I've come to. I don't know. I think, just kind of shooting the breeze about it is a fitting end to a series of Frontside engagements in this space, for the time being. CHRIS: I've seen several people try to tackle the space of how to stop relying on things like Google Drive to store our data because I think a lot of us have realized that we're tired of losing all of our family photos every time a hard drive dies but a lot of people are uncomfortable with trusting Google with everything. This to me seems like a perfect opportunity for people to start building redundant systems among their home and friends. JOE: Yeah, I completely agree. I'm actively trying to do exactly that right now. CHRIS: Oh, cool. And you don't necessarily want your cluster of machines that's running on all of your family's computers to be able to go down if your 10-year old get some virus, right? JOE: Right and also, there's definitely things that you want just within your home or even just within your section of the home. I guess you could layer chains, to kind of manage those interactions? CHRIS: Sure. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by layering chains. JOE: You could have consortia in this case. If you had like a hypervisor, almost like a control notice, essentially or some type of view from above of this situation, you could say, think of it as a family scenario. We have three different houses on this call that all belong to our immediate family and cousins and whatever and it's like, me and my siblings, we have information that we all want just within the siblings. We don't want Mom and Dad to know. We don't want the cousins to know, so you could basically use like a blockchain to kind of date access to data that is held within that consortium and then the consortia could communicate amongst each other. Only the pertinent information that they wanted to allow access to at that time and then, internally of course, you could have all these different mechanisms for how you actually store that data or how you actually serve it up. It's pretty complicated. CHRIS: Yeah, I think you made a lot of sense, though. JOE: Yeah, cool. I'm hoping so. There's been some work on it out of Microsoft, actually. CHRIS: On the files storage problem, specifically? JOE: I guess this is like with a smart home and kind of just teaching devices to cooperate and ask each other. If you had a section of connected devices that maybe were related to the workflow that a human being might go through to get groceries or something and then a section that's related to doing laundry or whatever, eventually, they would learn to communicate in the laundry grouping and could say, "Hey, grocery people. We're out of soup," or something like that. It's sort of almost happened organically, I guess. I had not actually felt like I found that paper. I've only found references to it. This is where I need to get something like academic access but that was interesting stuff. I don't know how I end up here, either. This has always happening when you're talking about this domain. Anyway -- CHRIS: People's ideas, it's just sort of generally inspiring concept so people is following you everywhere. JOE: Yeah, it's heartwarming. You know, with my ICT, I could look back and see exactly where I usually came from than [inaudible], the name of the farmer who grew with. I don't know. It'd be so much easier to fake most things, really when you think about it. On that note, I hope that this conversation was... I know that there was no JavaScript and I apologize for that but I hope that our audience finds it interesting on some level and I want to thank you for your time. Chris, it was really great talking to you and getting your take on these things as somebody who's been in the industry for a while. Definitely, some fascinating points to consider and definitely, I will finish that white paper, probably this evening because it's pretty cool. If anybody in the audience has anything they'd like to ask you about pertinent to this conversation or anything else, where is a good place to get a hold of you? CHRIS: For me, it's mostly Twitter. I'm @chris__martin. I'm also at Type Classes, if you want to talk to me about our new business. JOE: Cool. This has been Episode 104, I believe of The Frontside Podcast. Frontside, we're a consultancy based in Austin, Texas and we love writing elegant, sustainable code and just producing good stuff, really. I think that's what we're all about. I think, we can agree at least, that's a core tenet of what we do and if you would like us to produce some good stuff for you, feel free to get in touch with us. Also, feel free to reach out via email if you have any ideas for future topics or any feedback about this episode. I also want to thank Mandy for producing this episode. You can catch us next week, I believe for our talk with Brian Douglas on Probot and Robert will be hosting that one, as far as I know. Thank you all for your time and feel free to reach out. This has been The Frontside Podcast. I'm Joe LaSala. Chris Martin, thank you for joining us and have a good day, everybody.

Success Smackdown Live with Kat
Supplement Launch- For the driven mofo

Success Smackdown Live with Kat

Play Episode Listen Later May 30, 2018 44:50


Chris: Yeah, yeah we're rolling. Yeah? Kat: Is there enough light? Okay, no that was already on. I think I'm becoming addicted to light. Chris: You've got it down. All right. Kat: Okay, we're live already. Chris: Yeah ... what? Kat: What, mother fucker- I get ... Chris: You're gonna have to redo it. Kat: I can't redo it. I'd have to- Chris: [crosstalk 00:00:30] Oh, no. No, that one's done. Yeah that's- Kat: This is live. We're already live. What you're saying is being heard. What I'm saying is being heard. Chris: That is so funny. Kat: I think people have heard it before. What's up? Chris: Yes, it's working. Kat: We are technological geniuses. Chris: We just did have it take off a certain [crosstalk 00:00:50]. Kat: We've made ... They didn't do much. Hey, I managed to get the internet working for a second and a half. Chris: Oh my God. Kat: Can we kick this off by telling people the quotes of the day, Chris? Chris: All right we can share this. Yeah, all right. Kat: So should I tell them one from the other day or is it gonna off our buyers? Chris: No, no, no, we share. We're truly authentic [crosstalk 00:01:08] Kat: We're here for authenticity. We are literally about to fu- ... We are about to launch. Am I allowed to swear? Chris: No. Kat: No? Chris: No swearing. Kat: Okay, sorry. We are literally about to launch our supplement. We get to that in a moment but first I'd like to tell you three very informative and important quotes that I've been noting down. Chris just ... This is a man who, when you meet him or you see him, even online, you'll see that he is one of the most genuine good guys in the world. Kat: He is the nicest man in the world. He's one of my closest friends. I love him to death, he is the nicest, sweetest, person. Would never hurt anything and yet he just comes out and then he seems very like ... Wow, that was quite rude. Chris: Sorry, that is true. Kat: So the other day we're like "What should we call our livestream for our prelaunch live stream which shoots on Friday?" And I'm like thinking of creative titles cause I'm awesome at that and he's like, "Can we just call it-" Chris: Headlines are key. Kat: "This is why you're fat and we're not." And I'm like, "Wow." Chris: Because within context as well, we were talking about ... Kat: Please explain. [crosstalk 00:02:12] Chris: How we used to do diets before we used to be massive carbophobes and then over lunch we were talking about how we're just been loving eating carbs but doing it the right way. And how much better in shape we are now. And it's just- Kat: Well this leads me into the next quote which i that well ... Chris: Yeah, nicely done. Kat: Which is that we set up the lighting, and I'm like "Damn, that lighting's good." And Chris goes "Damn, it's good." And he goes, "Or is it just cause we look so good?" I'm just like "Wow, just be matter-of-fact about it." Oh, do you need to share that to your page? Do you need to share that to your personal page? Chris: Yeah. I can, with you. Kat: Okay, so we are ... oh and what was the third quote? Chris: What was the third one? Kat: Damn it, there was another really good one from just a second ago. So there was the one about "This is why you're fat and we're not." There was "Is this lighting really good or it just cause we look really good?" And then there was another one that just happened just then and it was so funny. I nearly wrote it down and then I was like "No, there's no way I would forget that." It will come back to us divinely. Chris: Not sure. Kat: Welcome, welcome, welcome to the show. Chris: We've got some big news. Kat: We have huge news, I think we're not even allowing ourselves to be ... Chris: So exciting. Kat: As excited as we are. I know I think we're not letting ourselves be as excited as we really could or should be about this. I think we're excited and we're like this is a big deal, and I'm just like "No, but do you understand what a big deal it is?" Chris: This is a big deal. This is a really big deal. Kat: Two plus years in the making? Chris: It's even longer. Kat: I think it's three years [crosstalk 00:03:49] ... Chris: We can put this dick ends downs. Kat: I think it's like pre ... dick- really? We started to formulate this before time began in our souls. Chris: Yeah, exactly. Kat: That's how good we are. I got to the quote book, the intelligence was coming through divinely from generations before but in a physical human sense, maybe three years. Chris: [00:04:07] Particularly there's star dust in there. Kat: Well it's actually ... Yes. And gold dust. You get a little piece of my soul. That's some powerful stuff. Look what I've created. Chris: That's really funny. Don't worry about the lighting. We're good. Kat: Yeah, we're good. We're good with the lighting. So we might be a little bit excited. We might be coming across as a little bit extra hysterical than normal, but it is such a huge deal. And welcome, welcome, welcome to everybody. I'm so happy and grateful that you're here with us. Kat: Hello over on our business page and hello on our personal page, and hello wherever else you are. I am either going to talk excitedly in a hilarious or just randomly crazy way for now, or I'm going to just stop and let Chris present with deep profound wisdom. Chris: I'll chime in as well. Oh, always. Kat: All the things. But let's just quickly say ... Okay, Lisa just summed up the whole entire situation. Chris: Wee. Kat: He says, "Wee." That's exactly right. We have an amazing founding deal. Chris: Founding special. Kat: But we're not going to tell you about that now, because we've got too many other exciting things to say. Chris: Yeah, we've got some more important news. Kat: Okay, I'm done. Chris: Okay. Kat: For now. Chris: Well we haven't decided on everything at this moment. So we need to do this together. So this is actually like ... Kat: Co-creation. Chris: Exactly. We all need to come together right now and actually sort this out. Kat: Yeah. So just stop what you're doing, put it down. Chris: Because this is literally the only time you are ever going to get this special at this product, this price, ever. Kat: Ever. Obviously if you've been following Kat for any time and even myself, you'll know that we want to celebrate. Actually, you know what's really interesting? This little bit random, I actually went through the ... See, Kat you're looking gorgeous. Chris: Yeah, I'm all right as well. Kat: No, I think that's definitely for you, sorry. Not me. Oh, thank you. I'm going to take that. I'm taking it from here. Thanks, Lonny. Chris: Kat, how high can you go. Random segue, we actually just reviewed the ... With my other coaching business, reviewed what the key parts of what the most accessible coaches are doing right now. What was ... What have they done? There was two things that was actually really interesting. Chris: One was how long they've been in the programme and why they're succeeding. So it's a common factor, and two, was they always jumped on the programme as fast as possible. Kat: Of course. Fast action takers. Chris: I know, but it was actually really interesting for me to actually see it. Kat: Oh, it was actual research. Chris: Yeah, we actually went through everything. Kat: That's gold. I say that all the time. Chris: The most successful people. No, it's legit. Kat: Oh, hello. Yeah. Chris: Yeah, well, exactly. Fair enough. Kat: We literally became business partners over cauliflower. Chris: Cauliflower and chicken? Kat: I could have make that some more exciting. Well, there was one. But it was a two-second decision, wasn't it? Chris: Yeah, it was. Kat: It was. Oh, then you came around and we talked about it the next day again, but it had already obviously ... Really we're just joking around nothing. We did a hilarious life show together. Chris: Yeah. Kat: But that is so true, and I say that all the time when I'm working with high level badass entrepreneurs and creators. I always say, "I want to work with the people who say 'yes' straight away." Because that's like me, and those are the people who get awesome freaking results. So we're really here today not just to ... With such excitement and gratitude and passion launch our product, finally. Kat: But we're also here ... There it is. We're also here to really honour those people who already know that they want one of our ... Oh, look at Ryan. You couldn't have product placed him any better than the hat. Ryan says, "Is this the one I tried last year at your place? It tasted amazing." I think my second one did have vodka in it. All right, just hold the final ... Let's save the shenanigans part of what you can do with this for later. Kat: Let's just talk pure. In fact, it was very healthy in the process of my training. But yes. So we didn't even prepare that little bit of testimonial earlier at all from Ryan who says it tastes amazing. It tastes freaking amazing. Okay, I'm getting distracted again. Continue on. Chris: Okay. There's a few things that we've all got to sort out right now. One, when you actually have to get onboard these founders special. Two, we're going to share with you actually how much of a discount that you're going to get and that's a lifetime discount as well. So we're going to make this as much of a no brainer as possible. Kat: Oh, I just remembered the other quote. Chris: Oh, what was the other quote? Kat: It was I said to you, "Is that really sneaky?" And you said, "Yeah." I really like it. Chris: Okay, just kind of side note, that was ingenious business strategy that we actually did when you just said we ... Kat: Because I'm a ninja. As I proved to you earlier. Chris: We share that later. We share that later. Keep business strategies coming down on this as well. It's all working. So two things we're going to work out. One, when you actually have to get on board by, because this can only last so long and we're going to have to cut it right now. So this, it's actually going to be pretty limited. Because we can only take so many people on board. Kat: Yeah. Chris: Two, the discount you get, which is a lifetime discount. And you know what? Three, we actually just added in. Sorry, for the first 100. First 100? Kat: Oh, I thought it was going to be 50. You're seriously pulling this up for 100 people? Chris: I want to be really nice, because I wore my give shirt today. Because I want to give. Kat: Oh, I want to cut it off really. I like to make people jump on board or work for it. Chris: No, we'll do 100, because there's a lot of ... Yeah, okay. No. Kat: All right, that means I have a point saved for later to make a decision about something. Chris: All right. You got one brownie for later. One video for later. Kat: I'll get to be in charge of something later. Chris: First hundred people that are going to be coming on board, you're going to get a copy of my book, "Craving the Truth", which is actually the book where I show you how to be able to get into the best shape of your life, and how to not do it by doing depriving diets, which we have right here. Tada. Kat: There it is. Fabulous book. Chris: So you'll get a copy of "Craving the Truth" as well coming on board in this, but we can only do that for the first hundred. Kat: For free. Extra fast action, take a bonus. On top of the crazy discount. Oh, wait. Do we make them pay full price if they're getting a book? Chris: I don't want to have to make them pay full price. Kat: All right. Why not? I was just trying to be funny. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It's fine, because my lighting's fabulous. Chris: Yeah. You look good, life is good. So if you want a copy of the book for free, where I give you the diets. We talk work outs. We talk actually what Kat and I are doing. You're going to have to get on board really quick as well, but also, lifetime discount. Can we tell them how much the discount is? Kat: No, make them work for it. Send a love heart shower. Chris: Oh, yeah, I love how you do this. Kat: A load of love hearts, and we're just going to tell them the office straight away. Just like that? Chris: Melissa. Kat: Hi. Chris: Thanks, Mel, appreciate that. Kat: Yeah, there you go. Chris: It's a great pull. Kat: Let's. So we just give ... Whoa, you guys loving the love heart shower. Thank you. Chris: Whoa. Kat: Do you want a comment something hilarious or just comment get on with it already? Chris: Let's have best comment. I will just give you a copy of the book straight away. Kat: I can't talk through this offer, because I'm going to get too giggly and excited like a little kid at Christmas, and I'm not going to get the details right. I'm trying very hard to restrain myself here, but I'm so excited. So Chris is going to tell you the deal with it. It's literally more crazy than what we thought we were going to do. We dropped down an extra ... We actually dropped down an additional ... Chris: No, let's prepare for lunch. Kat: Over an additional 20 percent on what was already the reduced founding members price. Chris: Yeah, it was. Kat: Wait, did you just say they get to lock it in for life? Chris: Yeah, it's lifetime. Kat: I thought we were just giving that for the first month. Chris: Lifetime. This is exactly. Kat: What? Chris: When you get on board, but here's the thing. When you get on board, you get it for life. If you ever leave. Kat: You're out. Chris: Never get it again. Kat: We're never talking to you again. Chris: No. We'll talk to you, but you just want to get the discount again as well. Kat: If you buy us a drink. Chris: You've got to ... You actually get the discount for life. Kat: Yeah, that makes sense. Chris: That's a bit of a no brainer. Kat: That is a no brainer. Couple of no brainers. I'll eat anything that tastes delicious, especially if it helps me look that pretty. Thank you. Chris: Oh, that's really sweet. Kat: That's all the alignment. I'm reverse ageing. When you ordered this product, you will reverse age from between two and five years in the first 10 days. Chris: We can't say that. Kat: Hashtag disclaimer. I just it. Chris: The FDA does not agree with that at all. Kat: Shut up. Chris: I have to be legitimate with this stuff. Kat: I mean it. I mean it, because I decided, and I get what I decide. Can we just bring the mindset side into it? It's fine. When you sign up I'll get you a special training for free on the reverse ageing. How's that for a bonus? Chris: All right. Kat: Oh, let's have that in as a top 100 bonus. I will do a training on how I reverse age for free for the first 100 people, and I'm not kidding. Chris: I'll buy that. Kat: Look at this skin. I'm nearly 50. Chris: That's very funny. Kat: Well I'm 38. I'm nearly 39. But I'm reverse ageing at the speed of light. Everybody knows that. Chris: No, actually ... This gets really good. What we haven't actually said as well is if you get on board this offer today, you will be able to join the tribe. So what we're starting in part is our private tribe, yeah. Kat: Oh, yeah. We're getting to our programme. Chris: It's going to be a little bit ... It's probably something we should talk about right now as well. Kat: Wait, do we actually? No, this is for real now. I'm not pretending. Are we actually giving them that? Chris: Yeah, they get a private group. It's already set up. Kat: Oh, of course. Yes, all right, fine. Onward then. Chris: This is stupid. Kat: Okay, I'm done. I'm done with my talking. I've got the entertainment, and now Chris is going to tell you the deal. The deal is about to drop. We are going to give you a link. You're going to click it, you're going to buy, and you're going to have a glass of water to celebrate, since you don't have the product yet. I'm waiting. Chris: Well you do have to wait. Kat: But we'll drink something in your honour. Chris: You do have to wait. So let's break this on down. Number one, first 100 people, I'll give you a copy of the book and I'll send it straight to you. Number two, you get the discount for life, and it's over 40 percent the discount as well. So that's a bit of a no brainer as well. Kat: We want to make it crazy no brainer for sure, legitimately of course. Chris: Yeah, I know. Three, you get access into ... whilst you have your membership, whilst you're getting this each month sent to you, you have access into the tribe, which is where Kat and I are going to be sharing with you what we do with our food, with our diets, with our training. I'm going to be in there giving you as well, because I've got literally 12 months worth of training, nutrition and lifestyle coaching ready to rock 'n' roll for you. Chris: So you'll get access into that private community where it's members only in there, and then ... Kat: That's got content from both of us, which is combining over 30 years of experience and knowledge and application and results. If you can, have some brain power. Chris: We literally needed a team member to go through how much content we had. Kat: It was several staff members who had to go through that and have been doing it for nine months. Chris: I feel so sorry for Jess actually. Kat: And Mim, shout out to Mim. And Jess too. Chris: And Mim. Yeah, sorry, too. Bingo. Kat: And shout out to Ash and Bron as well who've had so much to do with this launch and does so much work on that. Chris: I wish they were here. I got a notification on my page. Kat: I just was reading it over actually. Really. Chris: Okay, awesome. So you get the book. You get 40 percent discount and that's for life. You get access into the tribe as well. Now what we're going to do ... Kat: We were going to ... Sorry. I know I'm just terrible at cutting you off. I'm the worst at that. But we were going to charge for the tribe. We were going to do it as a separate. Chris: No, we are going to charge for the tribe. Kat: Yeah, but we were going to make it like you would pay a bit extra to get the coaching platform, as well as the product, and then it would be extra, extra for people who just wanted the coaching, which is basically means stupid people, because why would you not buy this? Then we decide to give it for free. Chris: So if we actually boil this down right now. Kat: Yeah. Chris: What the offer is is the super food blend will actually be recommended retail for $97. The tribe, our coaching community that's private for members only, that's actually priced at $50 a month for that. So obviously that's $150 a month, but if you get on board now, can we say it? Kat: Let's just do it. We've dragged it out long enough. They've been waiting and wanting. Chris: If you get on board now, you will get everything, which is sent to you each and every month, and your monthly membership into the tribe, and it's only going to be for $59. So we're cutting off $90 every month, and that's a life time discount going into it. So literally, there's a massive discount. So that's something like ... It's a gigantic discount. Kat: Whatever it is. Chris: First 100 people, I'll send you a copy of the book for free. Kat: And you'll get my reverse ... And you'll get my training on reverse ageing if you're in the first 100 people as well, which is completely serious. Chris: All right, Ricky. So Ricky asked a really good question. Can you consume it if pregnant? Now with supplements, you do technically have to say and you'll see on the back here, "Caution, if pregnant or nursing or taking medication, consult your health care practitioner before use." Kat: It's required to say that. Chris: My Lauren, wife, she has been pregnant with two children whilst taking this and my daughters have this as well. So when they ask for chocolate, they're actually asking for this bad boy. Kat: Yeah, I give this to my kids as well. Who are young as you know. It's required to say that. It's required to obviously that you've got to consult with your medical adviser that. Chris: Yeah, good question. Kat: I would take it. Lauren took it, etc. I just want to also clarify, really we had it locked in that launch offer ... That the retail price, the price that we will be selling it at. It's not just like what we're saying is retail. We will be selling it at $97. We were going to do the founding members offered at I think $79. That was locked in, and that was decided. Even up until last Friday. Kat: We did the pre-launch video and had some fun with that on Friday. You might have jumped on on that. Oh, we were supposed to notify people. I will send them a link after this, yeah. Chris: Yeah, we'll send them. Kat: I can't even remember why we decided to drop it down so much more. I think we just ... We get so excited. We are so proud of this and so excited and it's been so much work and blood and sweat and tears that's gone into this on Chris' behalf. I really just want to honour him. He's an amazing business partner and friend, and the work that he's put in. Literally travelling the Earth to create pharmaceutical great product in the world. Kat: It is literally the most exceptional formulation that you could come up with. Digestive health, probiotics, all this good stuff, but then also, working together with somebody that you're obviously good friends with, that's not automatically enough to make a great business partnership as I know a lot of people know. Chris: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Kat: So it's just been amazing to have a shared vision for something that we're both so excited to bring to life. It's been a little painstaking at times to get to where we're already, but like any amazing vision brought to life, you've got to be willing to go through those periods where it's things are going slow than you want or you thought something was just going to work, and then it didn't. Kat: So it's been quite the journey, and it's been one that's been heavily supported by the people we just mentioned and shouted out earlier as well. So there's a lot that's going into this and it really is. It's such a big deal. It's something that we know that we're going to take for life, be proud of for life. We really trust and belief that when you start to take this, firstly, the taste of it is incredible. It just tastes amazing. It's chocolate flavoured greens powder. It's flavoured naturally with cacao. Kat: It tastes incredible. Every single person who tried it is like, "Holy crap, where can I get this? I want to take this forever." So we know you're going to love the taste, but the benefits and the health side of it, the brain power side of it. The mineral focus side of it. The fact that you're just getting all these good things covered for yourself and your family in one hit. We know that you're going to be part of this for life as well. Kat: So this is something that for long haul it's not just business on the side of our respective empires that we already have. We really see it as a vision for the community that we want to build of like-minded individuals, like us, like you who are committed to being about us in every aspect of life. In business we brain function, and looking and feeling hot AF as well of course. Kelly says can you use it if diabetic. Chris: Yeah, you can. It actually says on here "diabetic safe". Where did I actually have to say that? Here. Last bullet point. No, extras. No extra added sugar. It is diabetic safe. It is only flavoured with stevia. So you only use the really good stuff. Please post the ingredients out. Yeah, Angela if you click the link that you'll get access to ... Kat: We could give the link. Chris: I will give you the link. If you click the link, you'll get access to the page which has the full ingredients on there for you. So you can actually read this rather than me sticking this up to the camera. It's still not being readable as well. Now, what we also have done is we put a 60-day guarantee on this. So we want you to taste it. Kat: That's how confident we are. Chris: We want you to use it. Exactly. That's how much we ... We're a little bit cocky when it comes to this. Because we know it's that good. We've been using it for that. Angela, you're absolutely welcome. So we want you to get your hands off it ... On it. When you get your hands on it, and you start using it, you'll see. You'll actually notice the difference as well. So what you want to be able to do is number one, it's not about supplements. Chris: Now let's just talk right now. I want to jump in and talk about ... Yeah, sorry, go. Kat: Should I give the link or should we give them preparation that I'm going to give you the link, because we are doing this first hundred thing. Chris: Oh. Kat: Let's tell you what we want to tell you, so that you're paying attention, and then we're going to drop the link. Chris: Okay, let's do that. Kat: Yeah. Chris: We'll jam real quick, and then we'll give you the link so that you can get access to all this stuff right now. So I want it in my mouth right now. Kat: All right. Well, it's a sensory experience, and you can tap into the collective energy. That's right here in this space and place. Here is some we prepared earlier. Chris: Jaya, can you put your email below and I will literally send you a copy of my book, because that was the best comment so far. Kat: Comment of 2018 award. We're adding that to our book of hilarious quote. But we will drink some in honour of everybody. You can tap into our collective energy. Chris: Right, cheers. So I'll answer Theo's question. So this is what we're doing. Because we're doing the very first batch, for all of our members with this super food blend, it's going to take between three to four weeks for everyone to get there. So that's why we're doing this founders special. So we want everybody to come on board. Now, and this is what I want to say and this is why it's so important. Kat: Yeah. Chris: It's not about supplement. Kat: That's why we're doing a huge discount. Chris: It's not about the supplements. Jaya, thank you so much. Can someone remind me to send Jaya a copy of that? Kat: Yes, I'll email you right now. Chris: Or just ... perfect. It's not about supplements, okay? So why are we actually talking right now? Why are we starting a health and fitness company? Why are we wanting to help you with this stuff? It's because you want to be able to look, feel, and function great. You want to be a part of the one percent of the one percent. You want to look great. You want to feel great. You actually want to perform really well, and that's not just the body performing on a biochemical level. It's how your brain performing as well, and you're actually enjoying it. Chris: How do we actually do this? It's not just by taking a supplement. Supplement's the cherry on the top, and we're going to be the first people that now run a supplement company to tell you it's not abut the supplements. This is why we're doing the tribe. So we help you, we show you, we teach you. We're giving you actually what's needed when it comes to, what to eat, how to eat, how to set up your lifestyle. What about when it comes to your work outs? When it comes to your movement as well. Chris: So especially when I break it down in the book, I show you the actual workouts and there's a yang and a yin philosophy. So like a yang, this is going to be a white training. A yin, it's going to be a walking. It's going to be your saunas, your ice punch pools, your meditations, all these kind of things. Kat: Yoga. Chris: Yoga. All these things we need to be able to put together. So it's a holistic approach to giving you exactly what you need. That's why when I first ... One of the reasons, our first conversation, we're like, "Hang on, there's a lot of 'supplement companies' out there and they're doing sometimes great products, sometimes crappy products. Let's not even go down that path." What's missing right now? No one's giving you both. No one's giving you here's the great ... Literally world best formulations, raw products, and manufacturing process. Kat: And taste. Chris: And taste. Which is kind of the most ... It's not technically the most important thing. But it's the most important in the sense that you're not going to take it if it doesn't taste amazing. It tastes so good that you just ... You want to have more. You just want more. I was crying when mine ran out. My samples that I had at home. Kat: Yeah, I had to get more for Kat. Chris: I had to have a massage to get over it. Kat: And a meditation, and some prayer. Some prayer. Then I may have harassed him over what's happened. I literally once was tapping in from every city around the world going, "So can you send some to New York? How about Florida? How about Texas? How about LA?" Chris: I tried to send it to her in two different cities. Kat: But I kept moving too quickly. Chris: And it kept missing. Kat: Come in San Diego, take me around. Chris: Obviously what I want to get across to make sure that we do this right is while we're doing the tribe is so literally Kat and I can give you what's needed to be able to make sure that you look, feel and function the way that you want. It is literally like that. Then when you want to put the cherry on top, when you want to perform. Because this is the thing and I talk about this. Chris: Number one, that our food quality that get isn't as good as it should be. You're not getting all the nutrients. You're not getting everything that you really need at the end of the day to be performing your best. We have high stress levels in our modern lifestyle. We have a lot of chemicals in our environment that help us become toxic. So we want to be able to become un-toxic. We want to be able to get rid of that stuff. Chris: So this is why we started with literally a greens formulation. But it's not a greens formulation. This is ... Kat: So much more. Chris: A super veggie type antioxidant blend. It's got a fruit antioxidant blend. It's got digestion support, and it's got a probiotic blend in here as well. So this is why we want to try and you come at this, because the thing at the end of the day is I don't want you to have a covered or room full of supplements. You want a handful of things, and that's what we're going to be doing, Kat and I together. We're going to be coming together. Kat: There would be new products. Chris: And are really doing a few products that give you the biggest bang for your bucks. So you can actually get on with your life. Because what I don't like is trying to do so many different things, that when we have more important things to do, I don't want to be worrying about my diet, or my work outs, or I'm not looking as I good as I feel like I should be. Or all that kind of shit. Chris: I'm a dad. I am running businesses. I want to be able to enjoy life. I want to be able to have us come together and just have fun. I don't want to be absolutely hating life because I'm doing a dive. Kat: You want to look and feel your best and be your best, and be fitting everything in but doing it just with ease and flow as well. We both, this is another thing. We've both done the hustle life before. I love the word hustle by the way. For me that means something powerful and flow based, but what I mean is we've both done business and life and fitness in way where it was kind of burning yourself out or pushing beyond a healthy limit and that's nothing I look back on and regret, because it made me into who I am now. Kat: But at this point in my life, and for both of us as well, it gets to be about having it all whilst operating at a level of excellence. Feeling your best, looking your best, being at your best, and having it jus be flow and ease. So there's already so many things that each of us do and support our communities to do that create that just through lifestyle and the way we choose to live our lives and live according to our values and so on. Kat: This just takes it to that next level. It's about enhancing a way of life. So that's again another reason why we've created the tribe to go with this to support you with the education, the information, and the empowerment, to get the results that you need. So we will be giving you the nutritional information literally over 30 years or at least over 25 years of combined experience between us. Chris: Over 24 years. Kat: At a really high level as well, where both of us really dedicated our money and our time to learning and studying with the best people in the world, and that's how we met. Through classes around the world. We're bringing you the most cutting edge, real nutrition information, hormone information, fat loss information, digestions, stress management, sexual energy and libido as well. All ties in together. Sleep quality. Kat: Mindset, of course, right? The ins and outs of the trainings side of it as well as the nutrition side of it, and we're teaching from a standpoint of full life in a way that feels amazing. It's not a freaking diet. It's not a quick fix. It's not do this for six weeks or 12 weeks. We're bringing to you our combined experience of well over two decades, and where we can look back and go, "We did all that crazy stuff and maybe you did as well." Kat: It is what it is. Now we actually have a way of living where we get to look and feel and function at a standard of excellence 24/7 always. It's just how it is. We don't sacrifice anything in order to look our best and feel our best. We know that you don't have to as well. So this is not come on board, our magical diet that's going to fix you, and then you're left floundering afterwards, rebounding back. Kat: This is make some small simple adjustments that are going to immediately feel amazing for you. You're going to be immediately be elevated internally and in your energy and your emotions, and even dare I say spiritually, because of course it heightens everything. You're going to see those physical shifts and changes as well. I get asked all the time. I know Chris gets asked all the time, "How we can be such busy, successful entrepreneurs both with our own families and small children, and still get to have ... be in great shape and be legitimately healthy and brimming with energy, and have the energy to do all those things?" Kat: That's so easy. We let it be so easy. It's such a small amount of time or energy that creates such a massive return on that. So everything that this is about. Like Chris said, it's not just a supplement. It's you get this amazing supplement and you get everything that since ... Yes, hold it up. Everything that's inside of us that we've taken all this time and effort and working with literally tens of thousands of clients between us over the past, decade plus, in order to just know what works for life. Kat: So I said at the start of this that I feel like I can't fully express what a big deal it is, and I feel like maybe I'm now starting to express what a big deal it is. But should we? Do you want to add something there or should we give them this link? Chris: I think we should give them the link. Kat: I don't know why I feel nervous. So hang on. Chris: It's good. Kat: Should we give them the link to the Facebook group as well or we just give them this link? Chris: No. Kat: No. Chris: The what? Kat: No, the one from the other day I meant. All right. We'll figure that out later. Chris: Oh, no, give them that link. Kat: Okay, so now, are you ready? Are you excited? Are you eager? Are you going to send me another love heart shower? Are you ready to click by pull out your credit card, get it at the ready, and here's what you're going to do. In about 19.5 seconds or however long it takes me to stop talking, I'm going to ... Which could be 19.5 years. I'm going to put this thing into the comments here. Kat: You are going to click the link. You are going to grab your credit card. You're going to run to the back of the room, and you're going to purchase this product. Chris: All right, hang on. Kat: Hang on. You're only supposed to say three things. That's what I'm telling from this stage, wait. Get your credit card, click the link, buy the product, be in our top 100, get Chris' book for free. For being a fast action taker badass, just like we are, you know your life is going to change for life, and you get a free book as well. It is amazing. And you get my free training on reverse ageing. Chris: I'm really excited for that. Kat: Me too. Yeah. I'll give you the link. I'm ready. This is it. This is it. This is the moment of truth. Chris: They just want us to getting it taken out really quick. I would literally be ... Kat: Yeah, I'd be running to the back of the room or to wherever your credit card is. Chris: Oh, God. Oh, shit. Just happened. Kat: We just? Did we just break the internet. Boom, boom, boom. Okay, I feel like we needed to prepare the drummer as a roll sound. I could have played when I did that. I actually feel like I need to take a breath. Chris: Oh, that's good. Oxygen's really good as well. To set fire. Kat: Can I just add that to quotes? Quotes from Chris. Oxygen is really good for you. Okay, what else are we going to say? Chris: Oh. Kat: Oh, did you tell them to comment there? Or are they just saying how it is over there for the fun of it? How did that just start happening? Chris: I don't know. Kat: Is it because they clicked this? Chris: I have no idea. Kat: What happens? Chris: Yes, it is. Kat: Oh. Chris: Oh, we can see everyone coming through on this one. Kat: We can see who's signing up. Chris: Going up. Kat: Go, go, go, go, go. Oh, we can see all the notification. Chris: I didn't ... This is ... Kat: Tamara's in. Michelle clicked the link. Sarah clicked the link. Chris: That's really funny. Kat: Come on, keep going. All right, and oh, when is this? Ooh, Thalika. She's on it. Just on it. Chris: Laura. Kat: All right. This is so exciting. Chris: This is so fun. Can I share? This is more exciting. I remember when I did my very first online fitness launch. Kat: Laura can't click. Chris: I had the PayPal app on my phone. And when I did the launch, it was like my PayPal app on my phone make a little ding noise. Or no, like a payment would have gone through. This is more exciting because it's a hell of a lot more people coming through. Kat: Sage says, "I can't click." You might have to try different device, because people are definitely clicking. And it's working. So how's this, though? It is so exciting. Last night I was out with a friend, and she's like, "So, what are you doing tomorrow? I'm like, "Oh, yeah. I'm doing whatever and whatever." Then I'm like, "Oh, and I'm just launching a supplement company with my friend Chris till 11:45. Kat: It's like, "Wow, this is huge." That would be huge. We're just quickly launching a supplement company that we're going to take. Angela says, "I can't click on iPad." What can we do about that if people can't click on some devices? Do you have it? Because this is the mo ... Do you have a different link? A longer one? Chris: Can you comment back then or? Kat: No. Chris: PM them? Kat: Do we have a different version of that link? Chris: No. Kat: No, I don't know what to do about that. Ash and Bronwyn, are you on? Chris: What's your problem? The request to the group. Theo. Did you click the link Theo, that Kat has just given you? Kat: Okay, one second. We tested this 1600 times. We will not be swayed. I'm clicking it now. Chris: It's definitely working. We're seeing people still coming through. Kat: Okay, so when I click that, it goes me to Facebook messenger. Chris: Don't worry, Theo. We'll get your link. IPhone can, iPad can't. Kat: It's taking me to Facebook messenger when I click it. Is that right? Chris: Yeah. Kat: Then where is the link that they're going to get that message to them? Chris: The link to ... Yeah. So we'll send you to Facebook messenger, and then Bronwyn said type it in. Kat: Then you've got to press get started. Chris: Then I should maybe put zero admin. Yeah, see, there you go. Kat: Okay. So when you ... We thought we tested it all, whatever. So when you click it, it's going to take you to Facebook messenger. It may not work on the iPad. Then it's going to ... Then you're going to click get started, and then it's going to start, "This is MBB Bot. The My Body Blend's Messenger System." Chris: Oh, my God. Kat: It will say it in that voice. Then it will say, "Do you really want access to a secret launch of Super Food Blend?" It will say it in that voice. Then you'll press "hell yes," which I'm doing now. Hell yes, I just did it. Now it says, "Awesome Katrina, click the prelaunch of verboten below to get our one-time only freelance offer for ..." Okay, I feel that we're being repetitive. For our brand new Super Food Blend. Kat: Plus, if you think there's anyone else who might need to know. I mean why would you take him in unless you want them in the top 100? So now I'm clicking that link, wait for it. Shana says, "Get started." I see you guys on it, just on it. Chris: It's really cool how I can see you from one and then comes through to the other one. Kat: This is a genius. Chris: Theo, you figured that out, great job. Kat: This is a genius strategy. I just got through the sales page. Chris: Can't believe this works. Kat: Right here, live, on this live stream. There it is. Chris: So this is only for the private launch. So obviously once this gets closed down, you're not going to get ... Kat: Take it out. You can't get in on this deal again. Chris: Yeah, you can't get access to this, because we can't keep this up forever. Kat: So talk them through what are they going to receive once they then signup and purchase. Chris: Cool. Kat: Because just a reminder that the product is going to come. Explain all that. Chris: Yeah. So obviously the founders special with what we're doing today is we're doing our very first batch, and you're going to be a part of this. So it's going to take three to four weeks for you to get your actual first Super Food Blend delivered. We're going to be sending it straight to you, but that's why we also have the MBB tribe. So the tribe is going to be where Kat and I are going to be in there making sure that you get access to what's going to be the right meal plan, the right workouts. Chris: I'm going to be in there doing live streams, answering your questions. Kat's going to be talking about anti-aging. Plus, if you get in first 100, which honestly it might be taken up already. I don't know, you're going to have to just get on board. Kat: Just go, go, go. Chris: I'm going to give you a copy of "Craving the Truth". That's going to break down literally what you need to be doing with your meals, with your workouts and lifestyle, and what we're also going to be doing is this special that you get access to today is for life. If you stay on board with this, that means you get this lifetime discount. Chris: So normally Super Food Blend. This has got the RLP of $97 just for one. The actual tribe, that sells for $50 a month. That's $150, but you get access to it today for only $59. So that's a massive discount. I don't know percentage was, what it is, because I'm horrible at math and that's okay. Melissa. Yay, got my confirmation email. So there we go. Kat: Yay, celebrate. Chris: It's coming through already. So that's fantastic. So we want to make sure that everybody come on board because we've got a couple wait up our sleeve. Like tomorrow I'm going to be jumping on board doing a live show, walking you through how we actually get the right meal plan, because what we start with, this is a little bit of secret sauces, how I kick start fat loss is what I do is we do a 14-day metabolic restart. Chris: So what we do is actually in the first 14 days we actually get your body to learn to burn body fat. Now most people are trying to talk about how do I speed up my metabolism? That's actually the wrong question I believe, because let's think about the analogy of driving a car. People are saying, "How do I speed up my metabolism?" They're just thinking about, "How can I drive my car faster?" But what if your car is actually heading in the wrong direction? Chris: So you just say, "Going in the wrong direction faster." So what we got to do first is make sure that you go in the right direction, which is how do you get your body to actually tap into body fat stores, how do you actually burn body fat for fuel. Then we talk about actually speeding our fat loss. But what we do is once we actually get your body tapping into body fat stores effectively, then we actually start talking about stress. Chris: So what the biggest problem is to me people are stressed. They've got too high cortisol levels. They started throwing other things like testosterone, pregnenolone, all these ... Actually, let's not go down the whole monogram, because that's going to be too complicated right now. But what we're going to do is we turn your body into actually being able to burn body fat for fuel first, then we talk about actually being able to lower stress. Chris: So what you'll find is most people when first getting the guides and plans I'm going to be sending through to you, think it's too easy and there's not enough. But you'll find that your body will actually be able to lose weight faster, because we're doing things easier. Because what's the biggest problem so many people fall into and I know we've done it before is you decide that you're going to lose weight. So what do you do? Chris: You cut your foods down, you ramp up your workout. Kat: Do some drastic random stuff. Chris: You do more, more, more, more, more, and then what happens when you hit the plateau? Because you will hit hit the plateau. Kat: What happens is you crack it and eat a freaking container of cookies. Chris: Yeah, exactly. Kat: If you're a woman. Chris: If you're a man as well. Kat: I never did this. Chris: I did. Kat: Okay. Chris: That's the big problem. So you wind up crack it, and you start binge eating, and then you feel guilty, and that's bad. So mentally that's bad. Or you actually have to start eating less and less and less, because you're trying to get to that deficit. So what we do is we say, "Let's actually do a bottoms up approach." So let's start from the bottom and we actually build your food, so you'll see that we actually increase your food intake. So you're actually eating more and losing weight, because the whole just eat less move more scenario, it's a myth. Kat: Boring. Chris: I wrote a freaking book about the myth of it, and it's not fun at all. Kat: Yeah. I just love everything you said. I love how you're just on a ... Did this stuff just comes out of you because you're so passionate about it and you know it so well? Chris: I know I did it wrong for so long. Kat: It is what we live and breathe. It is just ... I think you can see your passion coming through right, and you're just going to continue to get so much more of that and all of our knowledge and learning and support and accountability through being part of this tribe. So originally we will ... completely keep them two separate products. The coaching platform versus the product. Kat: Then we're like, "No, of course we're going to honour the people who buy this amazing thing, and really are committed to change their lives, not just to taking a supplement." The thing is I don't know. There's so many more things that I probably could say. But I think we've kind of covered the best of it, and we're just so excited to welcome you. We can see people ... Thank you and it says thank you. Kat: We can see people over on ... So we've got Chris. My friend here and Chris' friend here. Chris' friend is hooked up to the My Body Blend's page. So that's where you go when you click the link, you'll go to the Facebook messenger of the My Body Blend's page which is our joint business page. You'll then follow the prompts there, and you'll jump on to the sales page that way. So we can see people's responses that are coming up on his phone, which is super cool. Kat: So this is ... It's just huge. It's the bringing to life of something that's been several years in the making in the physical sense. 10 plus years of friendship in the making, decades of learning and knowledge in the making, something I always wanted to do. Something I know Chris always wanted to do, and what an incredible thing to be able to do this with somebody who you have such a close friend in your life, but who you know is also going to deliver the level of support and empowerment for your tribe, that you would do yourself. Kat: That's just such a huge big deal when being in business is somebody else to know that their work ethic and how they shop and their level of passion and commitment to change people's lives is the same. So this is the beginning of an amazing journey for you. If you are joining us, how long will we be keeping the founders special open for? Chris: I only wanted to do ... Kat: We had a little fight about it. Chris: Yeah. That's all right. We're allowed. But what about if we do for just 24 hours? Kat: What? Chris: No, we don't do it in 24 hours. Come on, I'm not the queen of scarcity. I'm making people move fast, but I feel like we could give them. But it doesn't matter, because you would just click and buy it now anyway, otherwise you would have been in the top 100, and you'd be a crazy person. Kat: Well how long do we let this video run for then? Because we have to take this video down. Chris: I feel like I don't know what the answer is that I'm supposed to say now. I feel like we didn't rehearse this properly. That is because we didn't rehearse it. Kat: We didn't. Chris: Yeah. I didn't really walked in and be like, "Let's do it with the camera on." Kat: Let's just turn the camera on and see what happens, apart from running down funny quotes. Chris: What do you want to say to them? Kat: Did you see that I've written down your quotes over here? I've saved it. I've written down the three quotes so far from Chris if you missed the quotes earlier. The quotes were this. He wanted to call our live show "this is why you're fat and we're not". That was one of my quotes of the year from Chris. Another one is that really sneaky? Me asking about a little Ninja trick. He's like, "Yeah." Chris: We just don't cover a really good Facebook ad strategy. Kat: That is good. Chris, that lighting is so good, Kat. Wait, no, it's just because we look so fabulous. That's my personal favourite. Chris: I'm so happy with that. Kat: Well, I think this is it. Chris: All right. We're going to get busy. Kat: Okay, is this? This is? Chris: Yeah, I know. I just saw these already gotten on board. Kat: I didn't ... See, that didn't happen for me. But if you have any issues or concerns at all, or anything doesn't work for you, maybe test it on a different device. Some people did say it doesn't. Didn't work on iPad. I'm not sure why that would be, but it's definitely working for me on my laptop. It's working on the phone. Of course you compare either of us. Or the My Body Blend's page as well, which is probably the best place to go, because then you'll get supported by our team as well and get answer as quickly as possible. Kat: Seeing infomercial broker, I feel like we got so much gold content. You know what's going to happen now. My team will chop up this live stream, get some clips out of it, caption them up, and we'll just be promoting and having a hilarious time. Shouldn't business and life just get to be fun as well? So that's part of our philosophy and part of what we're here to show you. Chris: You're not having fun, you don't enjoy the life. Kat: You can bet your bottom dollar we're going to be having all sorts of shenanigans in that group once you're in there. Because it's how it should be. That's how it gets to be. All right. Chris: Oh, good. Theo got ... Kat: Oh, you're on. Perfect, Theo. Chris: Confirmation done. Kat: Yay, I'm so excited. Chris: All right, awesome. So we've actually got to get to work, because we've got a lot of members. Kat: Just casually launched a supplement company on a Monday morning in Bali. All right, we're going to go hangout with our members. We're going to see what's up. We're going to see you on the inside, click the link, do the thing, be in the thing. We'll see you in the thing. We love you. Chris: Ciao. Kat: Bye.

Success Smackdown Live with Kat
Voted The BEST Tasting Chocolate Greens

Success Smackdown Live with Kat

Play Episode Listen Later May 23, 2018 38:12


Katrina Ruth: So I think it might be the best thing that was ever invented in the history of mankind. Chris: I think it would be. It is. Welcome to Katrina Ruth. Katrina Ruth: Welcome to Katrina Ruth. I am Katrina Ruth Show I think you will find, hashtag. Katrina Ruth: Quick bring the kitchen over here so everyone can see your wizardry. Hello people of the internet. We have an amazing presentation for you today. I'm even going to call it a presentation. I'm going to be super American. Katrina Ruth: Hi Theo! Hang on. We is live! We is live. Okay. Don't even show them. We should do a [inaudible 00:00:59]. We can't just give it away right from the start. Chris: So... Katrina Ruth: We are going to talk about many things. I can't see how many people are on my live stream because that little thing is [crosstalk 00:01:08] Chris: Let's... Katrina Ruth: This makes me feel upset. Do you think it was kind of selfish of us that yesterday we had an entire conversation over lunch about recording it and sharing it with the world. Chris: It should always be recorded when we actually talk at the end of the day. What? Katrina Ruth: We have a WiFi issue already. We won't be foiled. No don't finish. It might have changed itself onto the hotspot. The hotspot of the villas. If you go into settings and see what WiFi it's telling you. Just talk amongst yourselves. Chris has a Wifi issue on his livestream. It's a presentation. It's a conversation. Chris: Do you see this? Katrina Ruth: I don't know. Maybe it doesn't care for having two live streams on it at once. Try again. Now, we're back. Chris: Ta-Da!! Great job! Katrina Ruth: Well done. So yesterday, we had an incredible conversation about being in fantastic shape and eating potatoes. Chris: Sponsored by carbohydrates. This episode. Katrina Ruth: This episode is brought to you by the letter P, for potatoes. Chris: We were extreme carbo-phobes. We both kind of came from the same school of thought. Katrina Ruth: The worst kind. Back in the day. Chris: [inaudible 00:02:45] Katrina Ruth: Just see what happens. Chris: We came from a very carbo-phobe... Katrina Ruth: Upbringing. I want to say upbringing. Chris: School of thought. Katrina Ruth: In the fitness world. Chris: In the fitness world for sure. Katrina Ruth: We are going to get to a point at some time, and we are going to reveal to you the best tasting super food blend in the world. Then we are going to sell it to you. With just incredible flare and pzazz. Chris: Jazz hands. Katrina Ruth: Your mind will be expanded. But first, we are going to tell you a few things. We have known each other for over 10 years. That's a long while anyway. Chris: Would be, yeah. Katrina Ruth: It would've been 2008. Chris: Yeah. Katrina Ruth: It's been 10 years this year. The first [inaudible 00:03:28] course in Sydney. We used to go to the same courses. We were indoctrinated as maybe you have been, into the idea that carbs are bad for you. You can't eat carbs. We are going to talk about many things today. Katrina Ruth: We are going to prove an amazing product. We are going to have a conversation about nutrition. Chris: I think this is also now printables or ideas on why we think you can be in better shape. Live a better life. Ultimately what we are doing and why we really connected, we went through so many bad things. I'll just speak from experience. From street dining, through competing as a fitness model, I went through a bout of bulimia. I went through really unhealthy relationships with food. It sucked. It was really bad. Chris: Now, I do things completely different and that's why we are laughing about it. We remembered while we were having lunch, we completely go by a different set up principles when it comes to food, movement, and life. We are so much happier. I'm in better shape. I am stronger. I literally beat my dead lift last week. This is all through not through dieting. Katrina Ruth: Oh you're back. How come much of this show is there? And only a little bit here. Chris: We are talking into two phones. Katrina Ruth: We have some high tech studio shoot set up. We are very impressive. We impress ourselves. Katrina Ruth: Mine is similar to what Chris just said. I went through fitness obsession days from when I was not even 20 years old. Then into fitness competing. I was a personal trainer for 13 years, that's how we met. Chris is from Sydney and I'm from Melbourne but we went into the same courses and we connected on our principals and values and outlook on life. Then we both started building on my brand and we both feel super successful on my brand. That's just a little bit about us. Katrina Ruth: I was so obsessive about food in my body. I thought I was really committed to health. I wanted to be really committed to health. I think like a lot of women and men, in my twenties, I was so desperate to look a certain way and I wanted to look a certain way. I thought I had to look a certain way in order to be good enough. Katrina Ruth: Can you do me a favour? Can you put the flashlight on my phone. The little light. No, no. The front of it. You see the flash button. Can you press that? I don't know if that makes a difference. Why does it look so dark. Okay, I won't worry about it. Chris: It's kind of the shading. Is it on the camera or no? Katrina Ruth: No. It's just my imagination. Katrina Ruth: I went through all the food obsession stuff. Ten years of eating with some bulimia off and on. At one stage, I was taking 50 or 60 supplements a day. Chris: Like Skittles. Katrina Ruth: I remember being in the gym and you would have a little bag with your supplements in it. It would have 30 different pills in it for each meal, minimum. Sometimes I think I had 40 and you needed a 20 minute break between [crosstalk 00:06:55] Chris: Have you ever thought about how much money you spent on supplements? Katrina Ruth: I might have some point. I always made more than I spend. It was good stuff. We would take some of the best supplements in the world and we were committed. We were doing what we thought was right. If you fast forward to now where we are both older. We both have families, kids, busy businesses as entrepreneur's, living location. Still just as committed to wanting to look and feel fucking amazing. In fact, I would say more committed. Katrina Ruth: At this point in life, there's no fucking way I'm going to take 30 or even 10 different supplements with each meal. I'm not going to do crazy extreme shit to my body any more. I still want to look and feel my absolute best. Which I think is a perfect segway into our amazing product. Chris: Exactly right. For me, this was born out of necessity. I literally looked at myself in the cupboard one day and was like, "This is a joke. Why is there so much going on. It shouldn't need to be this way whatsoever." This is how it was created. What is it that we need at the end of the day? What is it that we actually need to thrive? Let's just focus on that because we don't have the time to do the other stuff. Chris: Time is our most precious asset that we have right now. Katrina Ruth: We don't want to, we don't have the time. I kept buying supplements and they just kept sitting there and then I would feel guilty about it. I do know and understand that in a perfect world you shouldn't need supplements but it's not a perfect fucking world right? We are absorbing so many toxins continually from the environment. We are not always eating ideal food or getting enough sleep and stress. There's so many other considerations. Katrina Ruth: Both of us with our knowledge and backgrounds, if you want to be at your absolute peak and have a standard of excellence in your brain or your body, your gut and all those things. How you look as well, then it is beneficial to take an amazing quality supplement but you're not going to take all this shit. Katrina Ruth: I really tried so hard to get into the greens powder thing. As a fitness queen from way back and somebody who is still obsessive about fitness I was like, "I got to do this freaking greens powder shit." All my friends would be getting it down and working it down and I'm just a little bit defiant, you know? Katrina Ruth: Your screen just exited itself. Your phone is just like it's not happening. I'm a little defiant. A lot of people I know would force these vile tasting greens powders down because they were like, "It's so good for you." I would buy it. I think at one stage I had 10 different containers in my cupboard and I would just not take it. Like most of the people who follow me online, I'm a rebel. I'm not going to do something that doesn't feel good for me. Katrina Ruth: I'm done with the green thing even though I know it's so good for you and amazing. You can see this story is in a long drawn out many, but I think we should reveal our product and then maybe talk a little bit about how this came about. I don't know. Chris: Let's do it. Let's reveal it right now. Katrina Ruth: Reveal, wait! Send a love hash out if you want to see our product. Send me the love heart. Chris: Let's go. Should we wait? Katrina Ruth: Don't try to wait for the love hearts. Make them work for it. Chris: You got to. Katrina Ruth: You got to. Chris: Make the love hearts. Katrina Ruth: My audience knows that I love-[crosstalk 00:10:28] That was really cute and it's broken. I feel like you guys can go more. Go more. Go More. You can do it. Chris: That's very funny. That's so cute. Katrina Ruth: They know what I like. They take care of me see. Chris: Oh, it's like a flower. [crosstalk 00:10:45] Katrina Ruth: How long did it take to formulate this? Chris: It's about two years in the making. Can I just say something as well? Katrina Ruth: Say it all. Chris: When you said, we used to take the best supplements in the world, this is actually made by the same manufacturer. Katrina Ruth: It is the best pharmaceutical grade stuff in the world. All U.S. based. Incredible quality. There it is. There's our product. We are ready to bring it to market. Chris: Super food blend, the company that we have formed is My body blends because it's really all about your body. It's like what is it that you need? The blend of everything you need. That's kind of the conceptual of what's come through. Chris: The reason that we've chosen a chocolate greens to start off with, is number 1, this is the best tasting greens you will ever drink. I'm so happy to say that. It is the best. We put a lot on the line for that. Katrina Ruth: I have footage of over 20 entrepreneurs who've taste tested this at a party at my house. Late last year they were the first to taste test it as far as the public. I'm not kidding. Every single person was like, "Give it to me now, I need to buy it now." They have basically been harassing me ever since. Chris: So sorry to you for making you wait. Katrina Ruth: Everybody's whose tried it's actually here now. Chris: So sorry. Katrina Ruth: It is so good. Chris had done the work and put the time and effort into this to create this and bring the formulation to life. When he was first telling me on how to taste it, I was like, [crosstalk 00:12:20]. We were here in Bali have dinner together and he was like, "I will bring you some around tomorrow and you can try it." I'm like, "Okay, sure I'm going to try it obviously. Sure Sure." Everybody in the health market says that their product tastes amazing. You're like, "It's palatable if I hold my nose." Katrina Ruth: Then, we made some up. What a great idea! Let's have a live demonstration right now. Suffice to say, when I did try it, I was like, "are you kidding me?" It's so hard for me to not curse. I'm trying to restrain my language here. It just comes out. It tastes phenomenal. We are going to tell you about everything that is in there in a moment. Katrina Ruth: What do you need? We have a bowl of ice that we prepared earlier. Actually the butler brought it. Who takes a greens powder currently? Do you take a greens powder? Don't put your hand up, I'm not going to be able to see you. Put a comment in. Do you take a greens powder? I wonder why your live stream is sideways. Your comments are showing up sideways. Chris: It's Instagram. Katrina Ruth: Oh, your on insta. Chris: Facebook kept crashing. Katrina Ruth: Oh okay. Cool. That's why it's staying up there. Katrina Ruth: Do you take a greens powder currently? Or, do you have the greens powder in your cupboard that you feel guilty about not taking because it tastes so bad. Chris: How many different greens have you had before? Katrina Ruth: Well, I've purchased like 10. Then tried one scoop of it. Trainers and friends kept recommending which ever one. Chris: I've had about 30 or above. Katrina Ruth: Then I used to have to put 4 or 5 lemons or limes in them in order to make it drinkable which is not terrible. Chris: Like putting it in a smoothie or something else. Katrina Ruth: But then you kill the smoothie. It's not the worst thing in the world. It's like you would force it down. Katrina Ruth: Theo says, "Used to but haven't in a while." Did you make it strong? Chris: Exactly, you tell the story. Katrina Ruth: But we were going to do a- Chris: What happens when you're having something really good? Let's say you are having a chocolate greens. Maybe it's a really good coffee. Or something else you can mix up in water or a shake. The dilemma that you have is what happens when you get right to the end and you've got maybe a little bit too much for one serving? Katrina Ruth: Like one and a half scoops left. Chris: Yeah, like one and a half servings left. Do you have one really good one? Or, do you break it into two? I'd love to know your answers because we went through and we had the exact same answer yesterday. Katrina Ruth: What a dilemma. Do you go with two half assed ones? This is a true story because I've had three bottles of the product at home. A bunch of my greedy friends kept coming around and helped themselves. Literally people would come to my house, no kiss hello, just like, "Where's the chocolate greens Katty? Can I have some?" I'm not making this up. Chris: That's rude. Katrina Ruth: Mainly the boys. The girls are a little more polite. This is a true thing, right? So then it went really quickly. Then there was enough left for one really amazing shake. I would go like, "It's my last chocolate greens powder until we launch this thing." It was just the samples. So I'm going to have one amazing one or two half assed ones. Well, guess what you think I did? Katrina Ruth: Shauna says, "One big assed one." Yeah, we were on board with that as well. Alright, let's do a live demonstration right now. Oh my god. This is the most amazing thing I ever tasted. We should manufacture and sell this. Chris: It's almost our conversation. Katrina Ruth: Can we do that? That really was my reaction. The first time I drank it I was like- Chris: That's so funny. Katrina Ruth: Holy shit. I feel like it's not possible to impact to you how good this tastes. I feel like you think I'm probably taking this up a little bit. I'm not and I did give it to 20 entrepreneurs when they came to a party at my house. We've got all their testimonials and we have their live immediate reactions on media. We filmed there initial reactions. We will release that video on Monday. 100% of them were like, "Holy shit!" And they were glugging it down like thirsty nomads in a desert out of Vera Wang glasses. Katrina Ruth: It's incredible. It tastes so good. Honestly, I said to Chris, "Can you bring around some of the samples today so we can use it on the live." My real reaction is that I just wanted to drink it. Screw the live. I just wanted to have some. Chris: It's perfectly fine. I think there are a few things we can talk to when it comes to the actual product. Number one, I don't care how healthy or good it is for you. If you can't take it. Or if it's not nice and you can't continue on with it, it's pointless at the end of the day. Katrina Ruth: Right. You're just going to leave it in your cupboard which is what I did and I'm super health orientated, right? Chris: Yeah. Katrina Ruth: But I still didn't take it. Chris: Exactly. You're very motivated individual. You're a go getter. You make stuff happen. Still, if something tastes like ass, you're not going to drink. Katrina Ruth: I don't hate ass. You heard it here. I don't. Some people will. Some people will force it down. A lot of friends and followers are defiant by nature and I don't want to do something that doesn't feel good for me even if I know it is good for me. Chris: You shouldn't. Katrina Ruth: I believe there is a way for everything to feel amazing. Chris: It's like a diet. A diet can be really good for you but if you're not going to follow it then it's pointless because you're never going to stick with it and you're never going to get the results with it. Hands down, it's as simple as that. Katrina Ruth: Mm-hmm (affirmative)-we should talk about the screw macros after this. Chris: Yeah, we will. We will talk about those macros. That's why number one, it does taste so good. You're probably like, "Okay, you're just saying that." But no...literally it's this good. Chris: When my daughters ask for chocolate, they are actually asking for this and that's what they think as a chocolate drink. It's filled with the good stuff. We can talk about the signs for the good stuff, why its got a super veg antioxidant blend. Why it's got a fruit anti-oxidant blend. Why it's got digestive support in it. Why its got a probiotic blend. Why it's actually only flavoured with stevia so it's a good sweetener. It's non GMO. It's gluten free. It's good. That's the thing. Chris: We wanted to have the best quality product because it's going to have to be good, we have it. Katrina Ruth: We both have an extremely high standard when it comes to what we put into our bodies. We've both been in the fitness industry collectively for decades. It's just how it is. If you are going to bring a product to market, it's got to be the best in the world. It's not let's just label something and sell it out there. That's why it has taken several years to bring this to life. This is a huge big dig. Two years of formulating and another six months or so trying to figure out amazon subscriptions. Katrina Ruth: We did it right and we are so proud of this. We are about to give you an insanely amazing [inaudible 00:19:35]. Chris: Maybe we should say, what we are really doing is getting everything ready. This is only for people who are serious with their health and fitness. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. Kind of like an inner circle. Chris: Yeah, that's what we thought. People that we know are going to be jumping on board with this. The people that are like us who are in our inner circle and that's what we like. Number one, what we are going to be doing on Monday and what you will be getting access to on Monday, you literally won't be able to get access to any other time. Katrina Ruth: It's going to blow your mind. Chris: We are making it so much of a no brainer for you to actually want to join us. It goes beyond this. Number one, supplements aren't the be all end all. We going to be the first people to say, it's not about supplements. It's about helping you eat right, move right, live right and be happy with what you are doing day to day. That's going to be a big part of what we are doing. Chris: I even included it in my book as well. I freaking wrote a book that's all about this. Katrina Ruth: A scary amount of references in the back. Chris: 220 scientific references that goes into this as well. The food quality that we have these days isn't as good as what we need to thrive. We have a lot more stress and we have a lot more chemicals in our environment as well. So therefore we need that little bit of extra. Chris: If you are a believer that you need to get everything from your food, I'm not 100% on board with you. The model lifestyles that we live, don't allow that. Katrina Ruth: I think that's true in theory. I agree that's the ideal but is it available? No it's not. Chris referenced stress and I'm just thinking of the pace we live our lives. You kind of want to have it all right? You want to have the thriving business or career and the relationship and the family, if that's relevant, the active social life, and fun and adventure and look and feel amazing as well. If you want to have it all, that's available for you. That pace of life is not necessarily what we were originally designed for and in this environment as well. Chris: This environment is different. This is pretty sweet. [crosstalk 00:22:08] Katrina Ruth: Which is why we are in Bali. You know what I mean. There are so many things that rob out food of nutrition and this is simply about putting into our bodies what is meant to be there in the first place. Treating your body as the premier machine. I've always loved that saying, If you had a Ferrari and you drove it around town, like at an insane speed. Never took care of it and just fully trashed it at some point in time it's going to be a pretty banged up Ferrari. Katrina Ruth: Your body is a high quality vehicle so why not take care of it as one? We made this incredible product and have an incredible supportive community around which includes access to us and to our teams. So many cool things because we are so committed to sharing with our tribe and our like minded friends, clients, etc. There is a really easy and simple way to take care of your nutritional needs. Katrina Ruth: Specifically thinking about busy and driven people, who are conscious of their health in a very real sense; digestive health, mental health, emotional health, physical health. Who also want to look hot and feel hot. I feel like looking hot reflects how you feel. That comes from how your health is on the inside. You want to be operating at a high performance level in different areas of life. Katrina Ruth: Those are kind of the three areas that we address that body, brain and beauty. Chris: Totally. Katrina Ruth: I came up with that. Chris: Obviously. You really just made that up. Katrina Ruth: Carlos Kate says, "What makes it taste like chocolate?" Chris: It's actually the cacao beans. You can see that it has chocolate bean powder which is the natural flavour in it. Katrina Ruth: So good. Chris: Great question. That's why it tastes like chocolate and it is the good stuff. Katrina Ruth: Let's tell people about the offer. On the sales page, which we aren't going to give today. We are going to give it on Monday. We will tell you about this now and how it's going to work. If you definitely want to know when the cart opens, then comment below on this live stream. That way we can come back and notify you. Katrina Ruth: Once you go over there on Monday and read over the sales page, if you wanted to, you can see a whole lot more of the kinds of ends and outs of the formulation- Chris: Technical sides. Katrina Ruth: All that sort of stuff. We are giving you the highlights reel right now. What do we got for these guys on Monday? Chris: There's two big things that we want to be able to give you as apart of what we are doing with Mind Body Blends. One, is the top quality product. You are going to be able to get access to this every single month. It will last you one month. Chris: The second is community. What so many people are lacking right now, is the help along the way. This is where we want to give you the right information. It's not about more information. The first quote that I put in my book was from Derek Sivers. It says- Katrina Ruth: I like Derek Sivers. Chris: I have such a bro crush on that guy. Katrina Ruth: That's so cool. I didn't know you were into him. Chris: I absolutely love him. The quote is, "If it was just more information we need, we'd all be billionaires with perfect abs." It's not about more information. It's not about what you can get on google, watching another video, listening to another podcast, or trying to dive into another book. Chris: What's actually going to create transformation, information to transformation, that's where we want to give you the information so you know what it needs to do. Katrina Ruth: Some Perfecatation. Chris: Oh, I like that. Exactly. Katrina Ruth: And transformation. Chris: She's wired. Katrina Ruth: It's because I had the chocolate greens. My brain powers are activated. I want some more please. Chris: Yes ma'am. Katrina Ruth: Thank you. Chris: What we want to be able to give you, not just the product itself. We are going to be getting you to join the community. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. Critical Chris: This is about building the Mind Body Blend Tribe. Where we are going to be helping you to know what to eat, how to move, how to live. Giving you a behind the scenes and giving you the answers so you know that you can be in the best shape. Supplements aren't the be all end all, okay? We are going to be the first ones to say that it isn't about taking the product. You've got to be able to do the other basics first. Chris: You've got to move right. You've got to eat right. You've got to sleep right. You've got to be happy with your life and thriving in all areas of your life. This is going to be the icing on the cake. Katrina Ruth: Yeah, I love that you just said that. While we are obviously incredibly proud and excited to bring this product to market. Here's the flat out reality. I've given this to well over 20 of my clients and friends. Probably about 30 people in total. 100% of people were like "Oh my god. How quickly can I get this?" Pretty much all of them have followed up and asking if it was ready yet. Katrina Ruth: It tastes so good. People just want to keep drinking it. Then, when you add the high level ingredients, literally the best in the world. How we cover digestion probiotics. It is a no brainer as Chris said. I like to call it a Hell yeah no brainer offer which is what I tell my clients. Katrina Ruth: I know you want to hear the price point for everything we are doing for you. You're going to try it, and if you try it, there's zero doubt in my mind that you are going to continue to order it. We wouldn't bring anything other than that to market. Katrina Ruth: However, I love that Chris just spoke about, we are not here to give you a magic full of solution. Let's not dilute ourselves, are walking around with an exceptional quality of health, physicality, lifestyle, etc. just from taking this, right? It's coming from a way of life. It's coming from our underlying value system. Katrina Ruth: What the Mind Body Blends Community is about, it's about being in it for life. The life that you want to live for life. We really see this as an incredible community to obviously support year round health, nutrition, fat loss, brain power, all that cool stuff. We have so much cool content we have already created. Chris: It's disgusting. Katrina Ruth: Over 12 months of work content already created. Just teaching you everything from our combined expertise of years and years. Sharing and educating with you. Mostly we want to provide that community of like-minded people who are committed to their health, having it all in body, business, career, and in life. Chris: Kat actually just spilled the beans right there. When we were having dinner- Katrina Ruth: The cauliflower. Chris: Cauliflower and chicken. Katrina Ruth: Oh my god. How you felt about that cauliflower before you tasted it. It's how I felt about this. You were like, "I'm sure it's great Kat." Then when you tasted it you were like, "Oh my god!" Chris: Cauliflower is good but it can't be that good. It was legitimately amazing. Katrina Ruth: What were we talking about? Chris: The conversation went to having it all. I was like why do we make so many compromises in life? Why do we say, "Oh I want to build a great business. I want to build a great career but I therefore I have to let my body go and I get fat and I get inflamed. I'm getting unhealthy. Why do I become a dad?" Therefore I have to not be able to build my business or I get a Dad bod which is a bad thing. All of those things. Chris: There's so many compromises we make in life. Stop making all these compromises. Katrina Ruth: Right, you get to have it all. Chris: Just be able to have it all. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. Chris: I love it. Katrina Ruth: Kate said, "Can we sent the list of ingredients because she might want to share it with her clients." We can do that but it's also on the sales page right? Chris: Totally. Yes, so on Monday, you will get all access to that stuff. Katrina Ruth: Are we going through the prices now? Chris: No, hold your horses. Katrina Ruth: Kate asked for that too. Chris: Sorry Kate. Katrina Ruth: This is a pre-launch, Monday we are opening the cart. We are pre-launching the pre-launch right now. That's what's happening right here. Monday the cart goes open where you can jump into our community and some amazing offers on this. We are doing a one time never to be repeated. What we call "Founding Members deal" situation to honour those in our community who are already waiting for this and have had enough of us taking so long with it. Katrina Ruth: We already know so many people who are like, "Just give it to me. Where do I sign up? I don't care about the details." We feel that there is going to be other people who are hearing what you are putting down. I'm willing to put my faith in you. We are giving you an incredible offer with that when we go live on Monday. We will give you all the details of that. Katrina Ruth: On Monday, we will do a live stream as well from our Facebook page for the group. Helen says, "I'm totally sold of course." Kate says, "Do you have a trade price?" I think we will just go through all prices on Monday, right? Chris: Yeah. Totally. Legitimately Monday, you will get access to the price. The big thing we wanted to do is build the community at the start. We are going to go worldwide with this. We are going to go into retail everywhere with this. Katrina Ruth: We are flying a jet. Chris: Yeah. That as well. The biggest thing is that we wanted to make sure that we've got this community with us at the start. We build together. Katrina Ruth: Try to make members. Chris: Exactly right. Katrina Ruth: We always honour those people who are fast action takers just like we are who want to jump on it straight away. Chris: Those people who get results. Katrina Ruth: Of course. Those people who don't over think. Chris: Exactly. Should we get them to join-[crosstalk 00:31:58] I put it into my girls smoothies in the morning. It mixes really easily with water. Katrina Ruth: It's just water and ice. I really enjoy it with just water and ice. Chris: It goes really well with black coffee. Katrina Ruth: I may have made it into a Paleo espresso. It goes great with vodka. It really does. Chris: Or hot coconut milk. Katrina Ruth: I haven't tried that. There were plenty of entrepreneurs at my house that were drinking it with Paleo Espresso Martini's. We put cinnamon on top. Chris: We have a video. We will put it on on Monday. You will see everybody- Katrina Ruth: We put cinnamon on top to make it extra healthy. It tasted amazing. Everybody was just like, "Give it to me. Give me more." What else were you saying? I think I cut you off. Chris: Are there any other questions? Katrina Ruth: No. No. That's all the questions. Chris: Okay. Katrina Ruth: We are going to give them a link to what sir? Chris: Should we give them the link to the private group? The Mind Body Blends Group? Katrina Ruth: Yes, can you? Chris: Actually I already have the URL. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. Just scroll here. Chris: Got it. Katrina Ruth: Chris is just giving you now a link to our closed Facebook community that already exists which is about to blow up in the most incredible way as we start to build up what we are doing in there with the official launch. We've had that group already operational for a little bit of time but now we are officially launching. Chris: What you are going to want to do is make sure you join us in the group. You'll obviously get a lot of access to everything when we are going live on Monday. Plus, you're going to get everything else that we start putting in there as well. Katrina Ruth: Post it all in there. We will do a live stream as well. Chris: On Monday, we will be putting everything together for you. Katrina Ruth: Why won't it let me out of this comment. I was just going to add a note saying, we are already telling you that anyway. I was going to say be in the group to get first information or whatever but we have already told you that. It's so exciting. I think we have said everything haven't we? Chris: Yeah. Katrina Ruth: It's such an honour to be able to share this. Chris: We are so excited. Katrina Ruth: We are joking around and having a good time obviously as you should in business and life. In all seriousness, this is just the most incredible product in the world. I have desire to have my own company or supplement brand for over 10 years. I was a personal trainer for 13 years. How long were you a trainer? Chris: 11. Katrina Ruth: Right, so there you go. 24 years of personal training experience between us. Both of us were so committed to our education and growth. That's how we met. Just going to some of the best nutrition and hormone, strength training and that stuff. I think a lot of trainers are really committed to a standard of excellence. We both thought it would be super cool to have your own supplement company but I looked into it and saw that some people were just buying stuff and putting there own labels on it. Chris: There's a lot of charlotons out there and there's a lot of liars. The scary thing was actually getting into the business now- Katrina Ruth: This took us two years. It wasn't the easy way it was the right way. Chris: It's scary how many people are lying about their products. There's an outpour of quality. A lot of stuff is getting manufactured through China, the sourcing. The manufacturing gradiance is really bad. What they are saying is actually is in the product is simply not there as well. The actual potency of their raw and effective ingredients in there is just not there. Chris: There's a lot of lies. That was one thing for me, is that I want to create something that's really bloody good. So when Kat and I came together, we saw this fusion of what it is we can do and how we can actually create something that's so much easier for people to use and combine it all. As we said earlier, it's not about just the supplements by itself, it's far from that. It's about putting everything together and giving it to you on a silver platter so that you can move forward. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. Chris: Simple. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. You said it all. I'm so excited. I'm also excited to be in business with this guy because we have known each other for so long that you just know how someone is and who they are in business, in life, what their values are. I couldn't think of anyone better to go into business with. Katrina Ruth: I'm such a solid person in so much of what I do. I have my own companies and Chris has his own companies. Now, it's just an incredible thing to come together with a close friend and create a product that's such an incredible quality and be able to share it with the world. I feel like this is a 10 year plus dream that is coming to life for me in terms of having my own supplement company and to be in partnership that shares that vision obviously. Does the work. Comes back to you and supports you. I could go on and on all day. Katrina Ruth: Get in the Facebook group. The comment is pinned there. Get into our free Facebook community. We will be dropping links on Monday. We will be dropping the deal on Monday. We will do a live stream together on Monday. Don't know what time yet but we will announce that obviously. Chris: Exactly. Make sure to join the group so you get access to everything. Katrina Ruth: Yeah. Chris: Drop a comment here as well. I will comment back here when we go live on Monday and let you know. We will be open for a couple of days next week but then we will close it off. It will really just be a limited time for those people who want to get in on the ground floor to jump on board. It's going to be freaking amazing so that's all. That's the whole story. Katrina Ruth: Beautiful. Chris: Alright! Katrina Ruth: I'm so excited that I'll go away. Chris: You're so excited that you'll go away? You may go away. Katrina Ruth: Alright. Chris: Peace. Katrina Ruth: We are going to go. Have an amazing, epic rest of your day. We will see you on Monday and we will be sharing how you can get this incredible product. Katrina Ruth: Oh shit, I've spilled it everywhere. There it is again! Sending you love! Don't forget...life's now, press play.

Made It In Music: Interviews With Artists, Songwriters, And Music Industry Pros

We are celebrating our 100th Episode by bringing you portions of the best podcasts selected by the FCM Team. Stacey, X, Jerricho, Logan, and Seth are all interviewed regarding their favorite FCMS episode and share why that guest was the most memorable for them. We want to thank all of our listeners for their continued support. We will return all new and all fresh on Monday, March 26th with our MADE IT IN MUSIC Podcast.————————————Episode 100Full Circle Music Show– Hi, I'm Seth Mosley from Full Circle Music, and man am I excited, this is episode 100 of our Full Circle Music Show podcast, and not only that, the day that we're making a massive announcement. And what is that announcement? It's that we are re-branding. Yes, we're changing the format, the title, everything of our podcast to make it even more packed with value, for free, for you guys. And the new title, drum roll please, is the Made It in Music Podcast, by Full Circle Music. It's resources for music makers just like you who wanna go full-time in music, and stay in. So I just wanted to do something a little special on this episode to go along with the announcement of the Made It in Music Podcast, episode 100, and what we're doing this week is we're bringing you a best of episode. We picked our very favorite moments from the Full Circle Music Show and broke down just some really key points, things that we think you would get a lot out of, things that we personally got a lot out of. I'm Seth Mosley, thank you so much for listening. Here with Stacey Willbur, VP of publishing and A&R here at Full Circle Music. Man, I loved that you picked the Ginny Owens episode, 'cause it was one of my favorite not only podcast episodes, but what a lot of people who're maybe gonna go back and listen to this clip don't realize is that it was recorded at one of our Full Circle Academy songwriter retreats. And man, if I haven't told you already, the people that you have relationships with that you've been able to bring in to pour into our students is just absolutely incredible. So Ginny was one of those, she was at our last one, and I feel like I probably got more feedback on her than a lot of speakers that come in. That's where this podcast was recorded at. So what stood out to you about that, what made you pick that as your favorite moment?– Well, it was my favorite moment because, obviously 'cause we were there, we were actually in the moment, it was an experience. It was Ginny talking about very simple things, three key elements of songwriting. But what I loved about it is that she weaved her own story into all three of those elements. I loved hearing her story wrapped up into all of that.– Yeah, she talked about it being, something that I had not heard, and I think you said the same thing, that she compares songwriting to being a journey with a friend.– A journey with a friend, that was like an a-ha moment, I think, for so many, because I don't think everybody looks at it that way. It's a job, it's this, but as a friend, and the closer you get to a friend, you get to know each other, you get to know their hearts, you get to know their stories, and the same thing with songwriting. The more you spend time… Writing every day, getting to know your craft, understanding the different elements of songwriting, the better you become and the better you know yourself as a songwriter.– Yeah, and she talks about how it is a sought after treasure, too, I thought that was such a cool way to put it. What did she mean by that?– Well, it was interesting 'cause she said it was a sought after treasure pursued by an enemy. Which, the enemy, as she describes, are distractions. The distractions in your life that keep you from doing the thing that you love doing. So what are those things and how do you keep those distractions from keeping you from doing what God's plan and purpose is for your life, which is songwriting.– Yeah, and I think, man, she just… There's podcast episodes that we've done that I feel like I just kinda wish I had like a notepad the whole time, 'cause she just kinda drops quote after quote after quote, and one thing that you shared with me, that I totally agree with is that good is the enemy of great, and perfection is the enemy of creativity. That was, I thought that was brilliant when she said that.– Yeah, and I think, especially in this industry, we hear a lot of, oh, that's a good song, that's a good song, that's a good song. And we tend to leave it there, and we don't encourage each other to strive for the great. I think striving for the great is harder. ‘Cause it takes going back and rewriting, it takes time and effort. The good is, yeah, this is good, you know. But the great, I think, is you dig it in a little deeper. And she really shares that in the podcast, she shares the struggles that she went through as an artist. And just in her life personally to get to that point.– Yeah, so good. Well I'm really glad you picked it 'cause it's one of my favorite moments too.– Awesome.– Here's a clip from Ginny Owens on the Full Circle Music Show live from the Full Circle Academy songwriter's retreat.– [Ginny] I want to offer, just based on my experience as a songwriter over the past billion years, I wanna offer three key elements of a life of endless songwriting bliss. So three key elements to maintaining a songwriting life. So the first one is, songwriting is a journey with a friend. Show up every day so that you can go a little further together. Songwriting is an art form. The more you know the rules and master the skill, the freer you will be to let your heart guide the process. And, songwriting is a sought after treasure guarded by an enemy. In order to capture it, you must fight every day of your life. Listening, like, two different types of listening that I call active and passive listening. So, I really love pop music, so active listening for me is like, when I work out in the mornings, just rolling the Apple, new Apple, like whatever, pop playlist, or what they're playing at Apple List or Spotify, you know, playlist, and learning. What are they doing in the songs that you're hearing that you like? How are they creating hooks? What do the rhythm things sound like that they're doing. Things like, Chainsmokers came along and they sort of created this chorus, where you don't have to soar up in the top, you just do this, like, ♪ Baby hold me closer in the backseat — ♪ I probably shouldn't be singing that at the Christian — But you know, it's just this tiny little space of a chorus. So there are trends that you start to see as you listen to music. If you're a songwriter-ish type person, more of a James Taylor type person, then you can listen to current people that do that, like James Bay or John Mayer. Hear what they're doing, sort of study their technique. But the other thing is passive listening. And what I guess I mean by that is falling in love with music. One of the things I've recently discovered about myself is that I'm too busy thinking about… Analyzing songs, and I actually need to go fall in love with music again, 'cause it's just too easy to be critical. And so what I've learned is, probably the easiest way to do this, which is not something that streaming really lends itself towards, but to go get people's albums. And just listen to the full album and continue to immerse myself in it, and be patient. ‘Cause I'm sure, maybe some of you guys are like this too, I'm so impatient. I'll listen to half a song and then I flip to the next song. That does not create and inspire love for music. I think those things are key for deepening our skillsets, growing our skillsets, educating ourselves. And then there's another aspect, just as we talk about kind of this skill of songwriting. It's really simple, but I think it's really important, especially for new writers, and I kind of call it the accessibility scale. So on one end you have the more cerebral, the more personal kind of songs. Those are the songs you write for your grandma, or your brother, or a wedding. And then on the other end are the more super-commercial songs. So like, Bon Iver is super cerebral. Taylor, super commercial. Andrew Peterson is pretty cerebral. Tomlin, Jordan Feliz, super commercial. And so the more cerebral a song is, the more it's kinda written to please the writer. So most of those things fall kind of more in the middle, they're not generally purely one or the other. But the more cerebral, form matters less, it's kinda in the writer's head, and obviously the more commercial a song is, the more singable it is, the more melodic, the more many people can kinda follow what you're doing. You gotta know the difference. If you wanna write commercial, study it, learn the techniques, listen to the Full Circle podcast every week, because there's an art to expressing yourself that way. But if you're gonna write about family, if you're gonna write something super personal, don't let that out for critique, 'cause you don't want to hurt yourself in that way. You know what I mean? Protect the things that are really personal to you. And the more you kind of know the skill and the art of songwriting, the more you're gonna know how to do that. Skill, taking the journey, ultimately helps with our biggest challenge as songwriters, which is fighting for your songwriting. And if you don't believe me, I bet you do. Everybody probably believes that it's a fight. Songwriting is a treasure that's guarded by an enemy. And so in order to capture it, you must fight every day of your life. Not to be all dark and wage war-ish, but, we gotta wage some war. The hardest part of songwriting is what? Songwriting. You know, you always got something else to do. Or there's always a voice in your head that says not to do it. And I promise, lest you think it only happens to new writers I have this happen every day. I've just finally learned, oh, this is part of it. This is what I'm gonna fight every day. And especially when you've been doing it a long time, you can kinda even get more in your head, 'cause you're like, what if I don't know how to do anything current? So if you give up, then the enemy will win. So what exactly is the enemy? I do like how Kevin Pressfield, who wrote the Legend of Bagger Vance, but he has a book called The War of Art which I would highly recommend you all read. There's some swearing, but read it anyway. But he calls the enemy resistance. And he says any act that entails commitment of the heart is a reason for resistance. In other words, any act that rejects immediate gratification in favor of long term growth, health, or integrity, or any act that derives from our higher nature instead of our lower, will elicit resistance. Resistance cannot be seen, touched, heard, or smelled, but it can be felt. And the more important – get this. The more important a call or action is to our soul's evolution, the more resistance we will feel toward pursuing it. Ouch. And resistance takes all different forms. Sometimes it's you, right? It's the lack of discipline. That's what it is for me, a lot. I just wanna do all the other fun things. And I wanna think about songwriting, really I do. But, maybe I'll get to it. That's why scheduling is so key. And there are voices in your head, and that's why scheduling and showing up every day is so key. It diminishes the voices, I promise you. Sometimes it's 'cause you got a eat, and so you gotta work. So that's also why finding that time every week and putting it on a calendar can be so awesome to do. Another key in fighting resistance is knowing the people who are in your space. Knowing the people who are awesome and can hold you accountable, like probably some folks you've met here, and learning the people who are not safe for you to play music for. Another way to protect what you're writing, and who the safe people are not, when you're fighting resistance. Now, for those of us who are believers, who are people of faith, we know there is a deeper resistance from an enemy that is full-on against you. And especially when it comes to pursuing a gift that God has given you to inspire others.– X O'Connor. I love it, we're here in the studio on this exciting day, episode 100.– 100.– Recapping some of our favorite moments from the Full Circle Music show, and… Tyler Bryant.– Tyler Byant, man.– Good choice.– Man, my favorite, dude, we sat down with him, I remember it was kind of last minute, I got a call early in the morning like, hey, I think we're gonna do some Tyler Byrant interview today. So I remember driving down, and I was super pumped, I'd loosely known him from being in bands around Nashville and I was like, I love this dude's music, I'm excited to talk to this guy. And to sit down with him, he's a young kid, you know, and he's just got his head on in a way that very few other artist, songwriters, any musical person does, he just realizes that hard work comes above all else, everything in life. And this guy, his band is successful, but not necessarily at radio. No real radio number ones, no nothing like that, but he plays hundred thousand seat venues. It's like, that blows my mind. And to just hear him speak about hard work. No one's gonna work harder for you than you're gonna work for yourself, so take every opportunity that you've got and just make something out of it.– Yeah, I love it, and I think he even shared in the episode something about, they do a lot in Europe.– Yeah.– And I think a fan, they were playing somewhere in Spain and a fan had like, tooken a night train like across…– Across the continent, literally.– The entire continent to get there, and they were so pumped about it. And you can just tell that when an artist is engaged, and the fans can tell that you really care, as the artist, they're gonna care.– Yeah, absolutely, and… that was something that he also spoke about a lot in this interview is relationship building. Not just with the people around you, but with the fans. The fans can feel that level of commitment that you have to them. But then on the business side, too. They've been around labels and all that stuff a lot, and I just love the mentality of, be honest with the people you're with. Even if it's a hard conversation to have with somebody, the honesty is gonna preserve that relationship in the future. I think he talked about them leaving their label to kind of go out on their own, and the conversation he had with the label after the fact, like, hey, you guys are still always on the list at a Shakedown show, come out any time, you guys worked hard for us, just, it's time for us to go do something else. And I love that mentality.– Yeah, and we went and saw them in Nashville at… Was it 12th?– 3rd and Lindsley.– 3rd and Lindsley, which is a really cool venue. And it was one of the best live shows I think I've ever seen.– Yeah, they go for it. It's so tight, but it's just raw rock and roll. It was a fun night, I hadn't been to a show like that in a while.– No click tracks.– No click, it's just guys on stage just going for it, rock and rolling. I loved it, man, it was so much fun to just sit there and just, be like, yep, these guys own it. This is great.– Inspiring.– Inspiring, for sure.– Well here's a clip from the Full Circle Music show episode with Tyler Bryant of Tyler Bryant and the Shakedown.– [Tyler] We've talked about it a little bit, but I come from a blues background, I learned to play from an old bluesman in Texas. Even as a kid, I was offered a record deal, and it was like, we're gonna set you up with other kids and we're gonna start a band, and I was like, no, man, I just wanna play the blues. I wanna make, like, I remember Lyric Street records gave me a little $10,000 check to go make some recordings. I think they were legitimately upset when I handed them back like three Freddie King covers that I had made. You know, it's like, what did you expect, man? And I still kinda have that mentality where, I don't know if you guys ever have dove into this on your show, I'm sure you have, 'cause it's something that I feel like a lot of artists struggle with. It's mixing art, something that really moves you, and commerce. Let's eat and let's survive, and so all we try to do in our band is have a little bit of both, you know?– [X] Yeah, yeah. So touring has been your bread and butter. Let's just talk about that, how do you get invited out on a AC/DC or Guns ‘n Roses Tour without radio, without big number one chart topping songs?– [Tyler] It's hard to say, honestly. I think one, you gotta believe in what you're doing, you have to be convicted every time you put on a guitar. Whether it's in a writing room, whether it's in a coffee shop. That's what, you know, I have kids ask me at our shows who have bands, like, how do you get on these tours, how do you get these shows going? And it's like, you literally play every show you get offered. Whenever I was starting out, I had a fake email account. And I was the band's manager, my name was like Sarah, or something like this, and I represented, this was before the Shakedown, I represented Tyler Bryant.– [X] What's the Spinal Tap manager?– [Tyler] Yeah, and it would, there was another time where it's like, I literally called the box office of the House of Blues. This is when I was younger, I called them every single day until they finally told one of the booking agents, this guy won't stop calling, he wants to play. And he called me and was like, dude, you can't call the box office and book a show. And I was like, but, can you book me?– [X] Yeah– [Tyler] And he's like send me some recordings. So I sent him some recordings and some videos and he put my band on for Dickie Betts. And then I called the Dallas morning news, and I was like, my band's playing, opening up for Dickie Betts of the Allman Brothers, I think you should come film it and do a story. And they did, and it's that kind of hustle that I think is, what I've learned that we have to do because it's, any time we've waited on someone else to do something for us we fall short, and so it's, I think those, it's funny because we were at CAA, the booking agency for a long time, and they did great things for us, and after about a year and a half of not touring as much as we'd like, we thought, let's make a change, let's move agencies. But we had such a good relationship with our agent that he'd become family, it's a guy named John Huie. And so we left. We were on the road supporting Billy Gibbons from ZZ Top and I get a call from Huie going, he's just like, I love you guys and I wanted to know if it would be okay if I pitched you for the AC/DC world tour. And, of course we said yes, but this is someone who's not our agent. So that's where… Maintaining relationships, and always shooting people straight, and even if it's a tough conversation going, like, I think we have to move somewhere else, because we're not getting the love here. They kill it with country acts out of Nashville, and I'm sure that the rock department does great, too. We just weren't getting the love that we needed. Because maybe what we were doing didn't move them there, but I think even when a relationship has to stop, it doesn't – professionally, it doesn't have to stop emotionally and I think that's, you know. We're all from the South and believe in Southern hospitality and shooting people straight even when it's a tough conversation, and I think that's helped benefit our band.– [X] Well I love that, because there's so many bands that we come across that are just constantly complaining about their teams. They're like, my label's not doing this, my manager's not doing this, we don't have our publisher getting songs on sync, our publicist is not scheduling – it's just excuses and complaining about people not doing stuff for them. And what I'm hearing you say is like, screw that, do it yourself.– [Tyler] Oh yeah, absolutely. We just made our own record, and I called a few of the people from Universal Republic after we got out of our deal, and it was sort of an, I think both parties were like, this isn't really working for us. We weren't giving them what they need to do what they do best, and they were like, you guys just aren't setting yourself up to win. But I talked to a few people from the label who were like, wait, you guys aren't with us anymore? It's like hey, listen, you're always on the guest list at a Shakedown show, you guys come out, thanks for putting in the work, man. Because it's hard to find people to work for you, and it's hard to find people who will work as hard as you will, so you have to do it yourself. Or at least, even like when it comes to making music videos or setting up photo shoots, or finding the direction. I feel like that has to come from the artist, because I feel like a lot of artists fall short when they're waiting on someone else to show them the direction.– Here at Full Circle Music studios with Jericho Scroggins.– Hey, hey.– Thanks for being on the show today, buddy.– Thank you for having me.– I love the clip that you picked, it was a Michael W. Smith interview, it was honestly one of my favorite ones to do. Why don't you talk just a little bit about what stood out to you from that, and why people should go back and listen to it?– Yeah. The initial part of it is how he was talking about the start of his career, and even how that's when he got married with Debbie, that was like in '81. So when the Amy Grant thing and all that kind of stuff, it was a very busy time for his career. And so they saw a bunch of marriages around that time falling apart. And so he does think it's hard for people to tour 200, 250 shows a year and keep a healthy marriage. So it was super cool to hear how he… One thing I didn't know about Michael and his career was, he was never away from his family more than two weeks. And it was just, like, mind-blowing to me thinking about that, just knowing his career and that kind of stuff. And so just how he goes through and talks about the priorities of that. You do have a career, but you also have family, and making sure they know where priorities lie and stuff like that, and his family always came above his career.– Yeah, and we get to interview a lot of super achievers on the show, so it's always cool to see that, you know what, they've not only got their stuff together on a career level, 'cause obviously Michael W. Smith's the top of the top, but he was really good about keeping accountability in place, as well.– Right. Yeah, that was definitely another part of it that I really liked, because, it's not only, like, when you go out and do your thing and that kind of stuff, still keeping a good group of, a team around you, that makes sure you're still doing what you're supposed to be doing. Whether it's heart-wise, faith-wise, even mind-wise, you know what I mean? Like making sure it's, even having them help him keep accountable to making sure he makes it home every two weeks. Or being a servant on the road, and things like that.– Yeah, and another really cool thing that I think you mentioned was this idea about talking to the younger you. What did you mean by that?– Yeah, there's this cool part where, it's the giving the advice to the younger you part. And it really stood out to me when he said, if I could tell the younger me, I would say it's not about you. And what he means by that is like, just earlier on realizing… Yeah, you're given these gifts and stuff like that, but realistically the gifts help other people, it's being a servant, making sure you're using the gifts for the right reason. Everybody wants to be successful, but it's like, how you wanna be successful dictates a different way in the way you look at it, and that kind of stuff, and that's his thing. Earlier on he looked at it a little bit differently, like, how many CDs does he sell, how good was the merch and that kind of stuff, and he realized pretty early on after that, he's like, it's not about that. It's not about you. Is he reaching the lives, is he reaching other people, and I think that goes across anything we do. The stuff we work on, even we don't go out there and tour with it, but it's still putting in the 100%, because at the end of the day, it's not about me.– That's right.– It's about that.– Yeah, that's good. Well here is a clip from our Full Circle Music Show episode with Michael W. Smith.– [Seth] Thinking back over all the years being an artist I think one of the things that I struggle with and a lot of young artists, or writers, or producers struggle with is the whole balance of being a creative versus being a good family man. How have you found balance over the years to kinda keep all of that together, what's the secret for that?– [Michael] Well, we made the rule, Deb and I, when this thing started really taking off, in the Amy thing, and then did the Friends tour, Big Picture tour, we started having children.– [Seth] So you were married early.– [Michael] I got married in '81 to Deb, so it'll be 35 years this year.– [Seth] Congratulations.– Thank you.– That's amazing.– [Michael] She's awesome. But we knew, I think we probably really knew, probably when I did the Lead Me On tour, which was… Probably the most successful, other than the Change Your World tour it was probably the most successful tour I've ever been a part of, 'cause we sold out arenas, me and Amy, all around the country, and in other countries, as well. And we just started seeing people in our genre and in other genres, when it came to being entertainers and all that sort of thing that marriages were falling apart left and right. And so we, I remember just having a talk with Deb and just going, you know… If we don't make some rules, there's probably more chances of us being a casualty than not. And we're not gonna be a casualty. And so we just made the rule, I'm not gonna ever be gone more than two weeks from my family, ever. Even if I had to cross the pond, and come back, and cross it again. And I was never gone from Deb and the kids for more than two weeks. Had a little aircraft, and I don't talk about that much, it was worth every penny, I thought, I've gotta get home to my family. And a lot of times I'd do a show and I would literally walk off stage, and got in a car, and I was on the jet and I was home at midnight and I'm driving carpool at 7:15. I did that for twelve-and-a-half years. And I think if you talked to my kids, I think, I think if you could have a private one-on-one, I think they would all say, we were more important to my dad than his career was. And now I got all these young bands, I got some of these young kids are all starting to come to me and ask me exactly what you asked me. And I think that's part of my role in the future is to sort of be a fatherly role and try to help kids. I just don't think you can do 250 shows on the road and keep a family together. And they say, well, we gotta pay the bills, we gotta make the house payment. My response is, then buy a smaller house.– [Seth] Wow. Is there anything that you would kinda say to the younger you when you were first getting into it that you're like, okay, you might wanna do that a little differently. Is there anything that kinda comes to mind like that?– [Michael] Well, I think heart-wise, I mean, obviously, we all grow up, we all make mistakes. If we really are seeking the Lord, we all get a little wiser as we get older, but I'd probably go back and tell myself at 23, 24 years old, I'd probably just say dude, it's not about you. That's probably the first thing I would say. I was so, like, how many records did we sell, and did we sell any t-shirts, and it was just so like… And it's hard, 'cause you're excited, and you wanna be successful and I think I just wish I'd have seen the bigger picture a little bit. And that's probably what I'd say to these young kids going, why are you here? Reconnect with why you're here, because you're not here to be a superstar. But there's nothing wrong with being successful, at all, but it just can't drive you, it can't just encompass everything that you do, it just can't. I always say, what's your contribution, think about… Even in the hard times, and trying to get the thing off the ground, are you making a contribution, are you changing somebody's life? So, it's that kind of stuff I'd probably say, and then, if I had to say something on the musical level, I'd say it all starts with a song.– X O'Connor sitting here with Mr. Seth Mosley, founder of Full Circle Music. Getting ready to talk a little podcast action. So, your favorite episode out of the, we're at episode 100 now.– Crazy, absolutely crazy.– Yeah.– And your favorite one was with Chris Houser under very interesting circumstances, from what I remember, kinda spontane, spontaneous.– It was very spontane, I like that slang.– You know, it's kinda like pre-Fontaine, that runner guy, but it's spontane, it kinda flows off the tongue.– This was a spontane moment, we were in the car, actually on a radio tour, and one thing that I've learned by doing a podcast is, we're really, as sort of journalists, trying to bring interesting stories to our audience about stuff that they'll actually care about, you kinda just have to be ready at all times. So I've got this little pocket recorder and a couple microphones, I stuck it in the bag 'cause I felt like we might have some interesting conversations on this Matt Hammitt radio promo tour. I went out with him at the beginning of the year to promote his first single, ‘Tears', off his record. And so I just brought it with me, and we were spending a lot of time in the car, so I was like, okay, there's gonna be something good. So it was under interesting circumstances, but I think, what I've loved about our podcast is when our guests kinda just go off the rails a little bit and just feel free to tell stories, and just crazy. And Chris is such a great story teller. So it was one of my favorite episodes. And not only because of the episode itself, but really because of my story and how I met Chris in the first place. And one thing that he did that stuck out to me that I'll never forget, we touch on that in the podcast, as well.– I love it. And he's known for hitting as many radio stations as humanly possible in a very brief time. I believe you said he has a record. Do you remember what the record is?– He does have a record, he said he hit 13 stations in three days.– Now, were you a part of that 13 stations in three days?– I think we did, maybe, we might have done eight in two days.– Eight in two, that's still rather impressive.– It was a decent few. But I love it because, so often in this business we think about the result more than the relationship. And one thing that he drove home that you'll hear in this clip is that he talks about, really what he does for a living is to get to go talk to his friends about music that he loves. He actually cares about the people. And there are very few people that I know in life, let alone in music, in anything, that have spent three decades serving one group of people. And that's just dedication.– Man, you said it right there.– Yep.– It's powerful.– I'm ready to go back and listen to the episode myself.– Me too.– So let's jump into this episode with Chris Houser.– [Seth] You talked about you started tapping into your skillset which, I don't even know if you remember this but when I first moved to Nashville, I talk a lot about this on our podcast that my first record that I got was Newsboys, Take Me to Your Leader, and my first label record I produced was this one called Newsboys Born Again which you were working on.– Yes.– [Seth] And I think I met you once, maybe at Wes' house. Then I saw you, I don't know, a month later or something and you were like, hey, Seth, it's good to see you, and the fact that you even just remembered my name —– Oh, wow.– was huge.– [Seth] To me, your competitive advantage is you actually care about people and you're great with relationships.– [Chris] Thank you, man. That means a lot, and again, it's a, this is a small industry we're in, and I'm in my 30th year of promotion, radio promotion. And I think I'm starting to get it figured out, but every once in a while something comes along and surprises me, but I've seen a lot of people come in and go out from this industry, and one of my favorite clients, Brash Music, who had Aaron Shust, and Gunger, their MO was life's too short to work with jerks. And I also believe very strongly that you reap what you sow, and whatever you sow, you reap way more, and you reap way later. It's just the way it is. You can go out to a field with a handful of seeds and throw it out into the field, you don't go out the next day and say oh my gosh, look at all the growth. It takes a long time, but all the growth that comes into a field from one handful of seeds. And so I've always tried to be about sowing good seed, doing my best to love people well, and not losing myself in the process, which at times has been a challenge for me. Yeah dude, I don't remember meeting you, and I wish I did, but it's been an amazing thing to watch your trajectory as well, and to be doing this. We're on a promo tour right now.– [Seth] Yeah, that's the fun thing right now, we're out with an artist named Matt Hammitt.– [Matt] Yeah, what's up?– [Seth] We're actually promoting his new single, Tears. So this is what you do all the time, right?– [Chris] Yes, so these radio stations, we're visiting six, seven radio stations in two days, my record is 13 stations in three days.– [Seth] Wow.– [Chris] That was up in the Midwest, that involved taking a high-speed ferry across Lake Michigan, from Muskegon, Michigan over to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, dropping off one rental car, picking up another rental car and continuing to go. But these radio stations have a hard job, they've got 50 to 75 singles getting work to them every week by 30 to 35 record promoters, both between labels and indies. And so one of the ways that we get noticed is by bringing artists directly to them. And Matt is so beloved for, you know, radio stations are gonna play Lead Me every day until Jesus comes back. It's just a matter of fact, no one's gonna get tired of Lead Me by Sanctus Real. And so I never worked a Sanctus Real record, I've watched them from afar and been so impressed with them and their ministry, and so, there are other people you could go to. But you came to me to take this record to radio, I'm very honored by it, but in addition, I'm moved by it. I have to love, this is what I tell people. I make a great living talking to my friends all day long about music I love.– [Seth] That's a pretty good job.– [Chris] So I turn down the records I don't love. I take the records that move me, and the records that I love, by artists that I respect. And, I'm calling my friends, I'm not calling adversaries, I'm not talking to people at radio that I have to buffalo, or steamroll, or belittle, or slam a phone down and swear, and call them jerks behind their backs. I love these people, these are my friends, so I get to just go bring Matt and you, Seth, to my friends for the next two days. And these are people who work hard, like me, back in the day, they do it way better than me but none of them are making major amounts of money. They're doing this for love and calling, and yet, they're the venue, they're the avenue that we will go through to get this song on the air. And it's already impacting countless, thousands of people around the country in a very, very short amount of time.– [Seth] Yeah, well even, on the Sirius Highway, or Sirius XM The Message, they debuted the lyric video, we were just looking on the way up here and it's already at 37,000 views and 893 shares, which is a pretty substantial metric for a brand new label, essentially relaunching an artist.– [Chris] Yes.– [Seth] So that's a huge thing.– [Chris] Yes.– [Seth] Are you ever surprised and shocked with like a song that you think is gonna work doesn't work, or a song that you don't think is gonna work just blows up?– [Chris] Yes. I would say, my joke on that is, through years of therapy I've been able to mellow out a little bit. But there were times 10 and 15 years ago that I was sure a song was gonna be a smash, and nobody wanted it. It's like these 115 radio PDs got together in a smoky room somewhere and all decided what they were going to tell us promoters for the next year, and then they'd all go like, break! And they'd clap hands and they'd walk out. And so when I would get this massive pushback on a song, in the early days of this kinda promotion, I would go like, I don't know what a hit is anymore, I've lost it. And then I would go to the next step, I'm like, Am I even a Christian? And then I'd go all the way to like, God, are you even there, if I can't… And so, again, years of therapy have helped mellow me out, and life experience, just to get into a better spot of going, you know what, sometimes I'm wrong, a lot of times I'm right, and sometimes it's the radio stations that will say, oh, no, that's not a hit. I try to slow the no, I try to slow them down, because it's like, if you make a pronouncement, a negative pronouncement on a song this early, it's gonna be that much harder for you to admit you're wrong eight months down the line, six months down the line, let's just calm down, you tell me no now, that's fine. I'm just gonna find 20 people that you respect and get them to play the song, and we'll come back around, we'll just keep talking about it.– [Seth] And those people they respect, is that other radio promoters?– [Chris] No, no, other radio stations.– [Seth] Radio stations.– [Chris] Other radio stations. So then they're watching around to see who else, 'cause it's all defensive posturing and maneuvering. It's all, they don't wanna add a record, a radio station will say, we'll never be hurt by a record we don't play. Do you get that?– [Seth] Wow.– [Chris] We can never be hurt by a record we don't play, meaning, we might be hurt if we go too early on a song that our listeners end up not liking. So we'd rather watch the landscape and see what people are playing out here, and it's like, okay, that's fine. There are leaders, there are followers. If you need to be a follower on this, no harm, no foul, we're just gonna keep working this.– So I'm sitting here with Logan Crockett, VP of marketing for Full Circle Music and, man, what a ride it's been, we're on episode 100 on the Full Circle Music Show and we're talking about our favorites, favorite moments, and why listeners should probably go back and listen to some. And I love that you picked the Tony Wood episode. So what stood out to you about that, and why should people go back and listen?– Yeah, for sure. So with me, my perspective on the podcast is probably a little bit different from a lot of the rest of the staff. I've been around for just over a year, now actually working for Full Circle, but initially, listening to this podcast, I was, completely from the outside looking in, I was just, kinda like a lot of the people probably listening and/or watching this, someone just trying to kind of find their lane, their path in the music industry. And this episode with Tony Wood and this clip that we're about to play just really stuck out to me as something that I've never, ever forgotten. For so long, I mean I've been pursuing the music industry for years. And it always felt like, man, if you can just get kinda that one meeting with that publisher or that record later, or whatever company, just meet that right person and get that connection. If you can just do that, that's kind of hopefully the gateway to greater things, that kind of, getting that meeting, basically. But in this clip, Tony explained that it was so much more about getting meeting number two than about getting meeting number one. Because it really does make sense, getting meeting number two means that, if you had meeting number one, they have to like you enough to invite you back. And the way that Tony explained it in this clip, it was just, it was such a massive mindset shift for me because it just, it reformed my entire strategy for what I was trying to do with the music industry. It became so much more about okay, yes, meeting one obviously has to happen, but actually that's the easy part. So my goal was how do I get meeting number two? Meeting number one kinda flew out the window, and everything became about how do I score meeting number two, no matter what relationship I'm building, no matter what opportunity I'm pursuing. The goal became meeting number two.– Yeah, and in music, it's often about finding someone who is really where you want to be. And kind of emulating them. Wasn't there something that stood out in the episode about that, in particular?– Yeah he, Tony had kinda got his start thanks to someone named Tom Long, who was kinda that first person who really believed in him and helped introduce him to other people. And that was another big mindset thing for me, too, was this idea that, there's a lot in the music industry that you can control, there's a lot of things that you can do yourself to push yourself forward, but, it's going to be really, really, really difficult to get where you ultimately want to be if you're not finding someone else who can kinda elevate you. You need to find a champion, or a guide, someone who can get you further along the steps that you need to go.– I love it, and there's also this concept of, do your homework that Tony hits on, what did you mean by that, 'cause you were saying that that stood out to you.– Yeah. So yeah, again, all this stuff is in the clip that we're about to play, but Tony, it's a very kind of quick comment that Tony mentions, but when he was first meeting these other writers around town, and other publishers, he said that he did his homework on who they were and what they were up to. So basically, that really stood out to me 'cause now working for Full Circle, we have a lot of people who come through a lot of our events and things like that, but it feels like a lot of them haven't done their homework. A lot of them don't know like even, who is Full Circle and what are the different things that we do, what songs have we been working on, things like that. Normally I'm on a lot of calls with people through our academy and things like that, normally I have to completely explain almost from ground zero, what it is that we do, who we are, things like that. Not the case for everyone, but all that to say is if you are pursuing the music industry, before, and this kinda goes back into meeting one versus meeting two but before you get meeting one, make sure you do your homework, so that way you're giving your best first impression, and you're having amazing talking points when you do finally have the opportunity to sit down and have those interactions.– That's good. One thing that I love that we get to do with the academy, with our events, with courses and all of this stuff that we're doing is that we're helping dreamers, essentially. And there's kind of this common thread that we've heard, and I think you mentioned that Tony hits on this in the podcast. But this concept of, just trying, just giving it a try.– Yeah.– And why is that important, do you think?– Towards the end of the clip that we're about to play, Tony mentioned kind of his ultimate motivation towards, the big jump to moving to Nashville and pursuing all these opportunities. And his whole thing was like, you know, there's so many great opportunities in life. You don't have to be in the music industry, not everyone is meant to be in the music industry. The music industry is very competitive, not everyone who wants to be in it is going to be in it. But Tony's whole point was, that just really resonated with me was this idea of man, like if I don't just try and kind of give it everything that I have, a no is okay. Like if I meet the right people, and if I'm perfecting my craft and it's not good enough to be where it needs to be for the industry, then at least I tried, and I can live with that. But his big thing was like, man, if I don't try and give it all that I have, I won't be able to live with that. And that just resonated so much with me at the time, 'cause again, this was like, I think early 2016. So again, at the time, my involvement in the music industry was a little limited, I'd recently gotten out of college with my music business degree. I had a really great marketing job, but I wasn't that involved in the music industry, I was like running sound with my church and some things like that. But I knew that… In my being, I'm like, the music industry is where I ultimately want to be. And I was in a place where I kinda had a good job and all that sort of thing, but it was like, man, can I live with it if I don't do all that I can to get myself down to Nashville, to pursue these opportunities. And Tony just saying that, it's like, it was like he was speaking for me in that moment. Like yes, like that is ultimately where I'm at and I decided, there is no way that I will be able to live with it if I don't try, and give it all that I have, no matter what the outcome is.– And here you are.– Indeed.– Fruit of the podcast, that's awesome. Well here is a clip from Tony Wood interview on the Full Circle Music Show.– ASCAP was real helpful to me early as a songwriter, there was a conference that they offered like about five or six Monday nights in a row in October, where they brought in writers, producers, publishers, some great instruction. Something in that that was so significant, songwriter Dwight Liles said, the hardest meeting to get in Nashville with a publisher is not the first meeting, the hardest meeting to get is the second meeting. And it just killed me in that moment, 'cause I am such an introvert. And they would use the word networking and I hate the word, 'cause networking feels like, walk across this room and introduce yourself to this stranger, and tell them why they need to get to know you. And it's like, it's against everything within me, I'd rather just take a beating than do that. And I was like oh, no, if the hardest meeting to get is the second one, I'd better be ready when I get that, when I finally get the nerve up to go introduce myself, I gotta know that I'm ready. So that sends me into a month or so of panic about what do I do, what do I do. And I came up with this idea, Tom Long was the head of membership at ASCAP at that time, and he had put the conference on. The conference had happened three or four months earlier and I'd been stewing on that. And so here was the first professional initiation for me, I picked up the phone and I called Tom. And I said Tom, in the course that you moderated, somebody said the hardest meeting to get with a publisher is not the first, the hardest is the second. I need to be ready, I need somebody to tell me if I'm ready. And here comes the ask, Tom, will you be that man for me? And Tom says well, nobody's kinda ever asked me that, but okay, I tell you what, every couple of months, give me a call, bring me some of the lyrics that you're writing, and I'll take a look at them and tell you. I can't tell my story without such gratitude to Tom, Tom Long, for that. So I take the first meeting with Tom Long, walk in, the three current pieces of paper that I've typed up, put them on his desk, sit there, quietly feeling my organs separating while he's reading them all, just the tension, just dying right there. And Tom reads three and says, I've got some people you need to meet, get in the car. Drove me around to four publishers. I had done my homework, I knew who the publishers, I knew these people, I knew who their writers were, I knew the songs that they were having success with at that point. The first three dismissed me pretty quickly and go, eh, thanks but no thanks, and the fourth one was Michael Puryear who was with a small company, Lorenz Creative Services that was going at the time. They had just signed Steven Curtis, though before his first record, that was his first home, and they had recently signed Marcus Hummon who wrote God Bless the Broken Road. So it was kind of this small little boutique thing that was going, and Michael is more of a lyric guy, and he said, oh, why don't you start hanging around here some, and let me see if I can get some of our guys to write with you. And that was… The life changing moment for me, I'm so grateful to Michael for early belief in me.– [Seth] Sure. So, backing up, 'cause just the move to Nashville is such a huge leap of faith in the moment, I don't wanna gloss over that, for you and your wife. I'm sure that was just like a monumental thing. How does somebody know when they're ready to do that.– [Tony]Nobody knows, there is no knowing, there is nobody that's gonna say the time is right. It is that line between faith and foolishness. That's so close in there, you don't know. But I remembered, there was a point when I was finishing up school and still writing frantically, accumulating lots of sheets of paper. And they were in a box kinda under a bed. Early 20s, and I remember thinking, I can't imagine hitting 50 and not knowing, and not trying. I could live if I dared to show those to somebody and they said, ah, thanks but no, there's really not a place for you. But I couldn't live with myself if I didn't at least try. I remember sometimes feeling almost claustrophobic at that thought like, if I hit 50, and I've never at least tried, I almost couldn't breathe thinking about that. So that was some of the motivation that, you know if they had said, no thanks, go away, I could've lived with that, I could've gone and gotten, I could've worked at a church and been real happy with that, knowing that I tried. But not trying just was killer.– [X] Hey everyone, this is X O'Connor and you've been listening to the Full Circle Music Show, they why of the music biz, hope everyone enjoyed our episode 100, the special episode. It's impossible to believe that it's been 100 episodes already. And again, this is our last episode for a little bit, we're gonna be coming back at you with our brand new, re-imagined, rebranded podcast, the Made It in Music podcast, it's gonna be starting Monday, March 26th. It's so exciting, we're so pumped. So again, remember, March 26th, that's a Monday, that's gonna be the official beginning of the Made It in Music podcast. And we have some huge names already lined up for this, you guys are gonna be super excited about what we've got to come. It's gonna be more great content, for free, for you. We're looking forward to seeing you Monday, March 26th.The post Episode 100: The Best of The Full Circle Music Show appeared first on Full Circle Music. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Frontside Podcast
082: Peeple with Chris Chuter

The Frontside Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 15, 2017 39:19


Chris Chuter: @Chris_Chuter Show Notes: 00:47 - Peeple: What is it? Why? 02:59 - Iterations and User Testing 13:32 - Complexity of Installation 17:26 - Device Integration 22:15 - Setup and Installation 25:35 - Laws and Building Codes 26:39 - Getting Started in this Space 31:29 - Ensuring Quality, Integration Testing, and Deployment Pipelines 33:18 - The Manufacturing Process Resources: If This Then That (IFTTT) Transcript: CHARLES: Hello, everybody and welcome to The Frontside Podcast, Episode 82. My name is Charles Lowell, a developer here at the Frontside and your podcast host-in-training. With me is Elrick Ryan. Hello Elrick. ELRICK: Hey, hello. CHARLES: And today, we are going to be continuing our series on the Internet of Things and we have someone on the podcast today who's going to talk to us about the Internet of Things. His name is Chris Chuter and he is the CEO, inventor and founder of Peeple. Hey, Chris. CHRIS: Hey. How is it going? CHARLES: It's gone well. Thanks for coming on the program. Peeple, what is it? Why don't you give us a quick overview of the product? Obviously it pertains to IoT, what is it and how did you become involved with it? Let's delve into that. CHRIS: Yes, sure. Let me give you the elevator short version first then we can dive deeper. Peeple is caller ID for your front door. The idea is when you get a phone call and you don't answer the phone, what happens? It goes to your voicemail. You know someone called you. But today, if someone comes to your house, you have no idea that they came unless you're there. This is the central problem that we solved with Peeple. It's a little device, a hardware device, an Internet of Things device that fits over the peephole in your door in the inside of your house. When someone knocks or doors open, you get a push notification on your phone. You can open up the phone and you can see a live view of your peephole. In a nutshell, Peeple is a smart peephole. CHARLES: Is it more for the case when you're not home at all or do you find the people use it for what you would traditionally use a peephole. CHRIS: It depends on the person. Now, my personal use case is for keeping track of wandering kids and that's actually inspiration for this invention. I have two boys and when one of my boys was three years old, he managed to open the door, walk out, go on to the street and walk down to the end of the street. Now, I live in Austin and I live right off the edge of a very busy street. Now, my kid didn't die or anything like that. It's not a really sad story but a neighbor brought my kid home and it was one of those moments as a parent where you're like, "Oh my God. I'm a terrible parent." But being an inventor and an engineer, I was like, "I'm going to hook something up that just tells me when my door is opened or closed," and it morphed into this invention. We showed it to people at South by Southwest almost three or four years ago. That's when we realized we were on to something that didn't exist. It was just a little camera on the door. CHARLES: Tell me about those first versions. I'm so curious. It sounds like there's a lot of layers of functionality that you've been through, a lot of iterations so I'm curious about that. What's was that zero iteration look like? CHRIS: Version 0 was made in 24 hours. It was a hackathon for... I can't remember the name of it. There was a hackathon group that recently imploded and we won this hackathon. The hackathon thing was to make something... I'm not sure if this is for Internet of Things but we were all making that kind of stuff. I made this little Raspberry Pi demo with a little mini door and I had talked to my wife and this is how I was able to make this invention, to keep track the kid as I was busy doing other stuff but I talked her into giving me 24 hours to make this one thing. Then me and another guy, David we won this hackathon. We were like, "We've got to turn this into a real thing," because one of the awards of the hackathon was you go to Silicon Valley, you show this off and you do all this cool stuff with it. We were like, "We've got to actually turn this into something that's presentable." That was Version 0. It was just a little Raspberry Pi. CHARLES: Now, what were you doing to detect the state of the door? CHRIS: That's the crazy thing. The first version of the device had more sensors on it than the final version. The first version had everything. It had a doorbell, it had a knock sensor, it had a motion, it had a speaker that played Paul McCartney's 'Someone's Knockin' At The Door,' but it had an accelerometer. I threw everything in there the first thing and half of it worked for the hackathon demo but it was good enough to win. This is something that, I guess I could call wisdom now but the real thing I learned is you start with everything and then you narrow and get it more tuned and highly focused and more precise as a device, like the difference between the iPhone and the Samsung phones. One of them is to throw everything into it and then the iPhone is just really specialize into a few things really well. The next three years, we're pulling stuff out. CHARLES: What are some examples of that calling that you're describing where you're saying, "I'm to take this out? I'm going to take this out. I'm going to take that out." CHRIS: We got rid of things like the doorbell and some of the other sensors, mainly because it was just a wiring issue and as well as we wanted to keep track when the door was opened and closed. It didn't make sense to have the speaker on there at the time so we really focused more on the accelerometer and the knock sensor for the first version of Peeple. CHARLES: That is not the final version. Is it mostly just the accelerometer? What if someone doesn't knock? I assume there's some sort of detection that goes on with the camera. CHRIS: That's the next version. That's something that we've been working on right now, what we're going to be delivering. We have delivered our first, I would say Version 1.0 of Peeple devices to our customers. There's a thousand of these or so in the wild, all around the world and the next version we have added -- and I guess this my first real announcement of this -- a motion detection module. It's not a camera-based. It's more or less magic and it just works through the door. That's the most I'm going to say on it right now because we're probably the first hardware device that it's actually using this technology. ELRICK: That's an excellent pitch. Everyone loves magic. CHRIS: Yes, it's basically magic. It works through the door. ELRICK: As you were going to these iterations, were you doing like user testing to see what users wanted? Or did you internally say, "This doesn't make sense. Let's just take this out." CHRIS: Absolutely. That's the second part of this story. After this hackathon happened, we prepared to go on the road show to go and show it off to Silicon Valley but in the meantime, this hackathon group, I think it was called AngelHack, it imploded. One of their founders made all these disparaging comments about homeless people and what essentially happened is we lost the award. They said, "We're sorry. We can't give you the award," but we had spent about three months fine-tuning, making something pretty and putting a pitch together. I went in and I pitched at a TechCrunch Meetup in Austin and we came in second at that but during that meetup, I met one of the reporters and said, "You really need to talk to these guys in San Francisco called Highway1," so I did. We eventually ended up moving to San Francisco. Now, the reason I mentioned that to answer your question is they understand this idea of user testing, I think better than a lot of people. Even though they were focused on working on hardware and getting an IoT device that works out there, they were drilling it into our heads is, "You have to get this in people's homes now. I don't care how bad it is. I don't care if you have to hire people, to sit at a peephole and just look through it and pretend like there are hardware device. You got to do this and you have to find out what the problems are, what works. I want you to look at your biggest fears of this thing and you quash them and you do that before you put any Silicon down," so we did that as best we could. CHARLES: So you did that with the Version 0 and Version 1 devices? CHRIS: Exactly, just a Version 0, I have all these pictures. We put them in about 12 to 20 homes and we have these long extension cords powering this thing because we didn't have the batteries to figure out. We had these huge lag problems. It would take like 30 seconds to a minute before something would happen. We had all these issues but in the end, people were still like, "It had these issues. You couldn't do this," but the fact that I had a door log, a door diary as what we're calling it now, that's something I never had before. That's where your secret sauce is so we ran with that. CHARLES: Yeah. That's the kind of thing it never even occurs to you. CHRIS: Exactly. In the app, or at least the early versions of the app, is you have these versions like a calendar that are like, "Okay, I got 10 visits yesterday. I got 20 visits today. No one came to visit me today. I'm so sad," but I have a calendar of, I think it was May of last year when I got visited by three or four magazine salesman in one week so you could correlate that with, "Did we have any break ins?" or something like that. CHARLES: Yeah, it would be interesting to be able to share that data with your neighborhood or somehow coordinate that. one of things I'm curious about too is you did this user testing you were talking about, doing the wiring and the installation, it's a conversation that always comes up when you're talking about custom hardware because there's always the drive to be small, there's always the drive to be have a small form factor and then you have challenges of power like how do you power this device. How cumbersome is the installation onto someone's door? CHRIS: Yeah, we had it all. That's a big difference, I think between San Francisco or Silicon Valley and other towns is there's this acceptance and there's this readiness to participate in the tech scene. We did a call out for volunteers and we had no problems finding them. They didn't mind us coming to their house and hooking up these big, bulky things and just being real intrusive. The fact that we found these people and they were the key to this early stage of, "Do you become a product or do you not?" We were only there for four months but by the end of this time that we were there, there was this legitimate tangible feeling of we're not a prototype anymore. We're a product and we didn't have a product. It was just prettier but we could see the light at the end of the tunnel. I don't think that would have happened had we not gone through this very painful experience with all these poor people that we inflicted our device on. CHARLES: This actually is fascinating because obviously, you're back in Austin now and I never heard of programs like that, like sign up to have someone come up and test it at some alpha stage prototype in your home. That sounds crazy and yet, it sounds like they were just going out of the woodwork. CHRIS: In San Francisco, it's not a problem. If I put the call out now, I probably have to really like, "Here's an Amazon gift card." I have to start doing a little bit of bribery. ELRICK: I think I would sign up just to see the cool tech. CHRIS: Yeah and those people exist. I think we don't have the means to really find them. That infrastructure already exists. In Silicon Valley, you just go down to Starbucks. CHARLES: There ought to be some sort of meetup for people who want to experiment with very early stage IoT devices here in Austin. Maybe, we'll have to look at it. If that doesn't exist, I would love being a guinea pig. I actually think there is an untapped willingness here but there's just not -- CHRIS: I think you need a critical mass of hardware people and hardware devices that are ready to be put in doors or put in the houses. There's definitely some in there. I have a lot of friends and there are hardware meetups that we go to but this stuff takes so long and it's so hard as hardware is hard. There's that small window of, "We got this little idea of a water sprinkler. Do you think anyone want to try it out?" or something like that and then the moments gone. Then six months later, there's another one. CHARLES: Yeah. I wonder if there's a way to really decrease that iteration cycle so that you can get feedback more quickly. I guess the problem is when you need a physical device, you just needed a physical device. CHRIS: We're talking about the Maker Movement and the MakerClub. If you're part of those, these people are hard to find. People that go to Maker Faires, that's the people you're looking for. CHARLES: Right. Now, transitioning because ultimately your target customer base is not makers, not people who are willing to put up with wires and cabling and people doing protracted installation. What does the kind of 1.0 product look like? Because what I'm curious is what immediately jumps to mind is this thing sounds like it's going to probably consume a lot of power. How do you get the power to that and what are the challenges and what are the tradeoffs that you have to make to try and get that power consumption down or get the installation complexity down? How complex is it today to install? CHRIS: I guess, I'll toot my own horn a little bit but I think we have one of the easiest IoT devices on the planet to install. You can possibly not even need tools. You can use your fingers but the biggest challenge for any IoT device is getting that home network connection. If there's been a few technologies through the years in which they've tried to fix this problem, basically just like self-pairing or things like that, like how Bluetooth can sometimes be really cumbersome. Now imagine that with Wi-Fi, it's the same thing but now you've got a password you've got to throw in there. That's really the only real hiccup with the installation on our device and we tried a few things. We went through about three different Wi-Fi chips before we settled on what we were using now. The first Wi-Fi chip was a TI one, which offered this nice pairing capability but it just didn't work half the time. Then we switched to a Broadcom chip, which was really solid and stable but turned out to be the most expensive component in the whole device so we had to get rid of that. The Wi-Fi issue was something we had to solve early because it goes also toward your power consumption. We have a camera and a Wi-Fi chip and both of those take up to 140 to 200 milliamps of juice when they're on. We had to be really smart of when this thing was going to be on and that's essentially when we went in parallel with the knock accelerometer. This device stays asleep most of the time and that's how we get the many months of battery life out of it. We put a rechargeable battery inside, it only turns on when it needs to and it's just hanging around waiting for an event for the rest of the time. Those were the things we were solving to get the Version 1. CHARLES: Now, it's waiting for some event but in order to receive the event, doesn't the accelerometer need to be on? Or is there some motion detector that --? CHRIS: That's a solved problem. good news was that accelerometers are extremely low power in the nano or picoamps but that's also another reason why the motion detection was going to be a hard problem because that is not, unless you're using what's called a PIR that is not a low power solution. CHARLES: Acronym alert. What is a PIR? CHRIS: It's an infrared proximity detection. That's how almost all motion detection cameras work. They have one hole for the camera and another hole for the PIR. The problem with these are is they don't work well in sunlight, outdoor-light and things like that in one of our use cases so we were kind of stuck. That's why we've recently come up with this new motion solution that doesn't rely on that technology -- the magic solution. CHARLES: All right. When we're going to find out about the magic solution? CHRIS: As soon as I ship this next version because it is being used in a few products but it's not really stateside yet and I want to save my thunder but it's something that I think is really cool. It really is magic. It's just amazing to me that it works. CHARLES: Well, I'm eager to see it. You were talking about Wi-Fi being one of the biggest challenges. That's a perfect segue. The connection to the network for something that we're always curious is discovering a new and interesting device is always a pleasure and then the next thought that almost funnels immediately after is how can I integrate this with other strange and wonderful devices to make something even more wonderful? A question we ask everybody is have you thought about how this might be a participant in an ecosystem so if there were other devices around the home, how would they even talk to the people? How might it offer information to someone looking to, maybe do some custom integration in their home? CHRIS: That's a lot of questions in one. Essentially, there's two ways of looking at it. You can look at it from your customer's perspective, what kind of customer do I think is going to have this or is going to use this the most. Back when we came up with this, there were a lot of do-it-yourself types and If This Then That protocol was out there but we really wanted to focus on something that was incredibly easy to use and didn't require you to program anything. I was really frustrated with the whole idea of Internet of Things because it almost implied that you had to be a programmer to use it. I didn't like that at that time. I've since come around to it because there's all these great tool kits out there. We initially looked at integrating with HomeKit. We thought they'd be perfect but what a lot of consumers don't realize is early HomeKit -- I don't believe it does that anymore -- made you modify your hardware to put in this special Apple hardware. When you're making a device, it is so hard just to get the hardware down. It's so expensive. To add anything or to put anything else in there, it's a huge friction point. It's really something that small startups just can't afford to do. A big Nest or a company like that have no problem but when you're making a one device, this is a big deal so we weren't able to really leverage something like HomeKit for an API. But we do have our own cloud-based API. We're RESTful API but it's just not documented and put out in a way where we want to have people programming it. But the good news is we did leverage several APIs when we were making things like the app and doing things like the push notifications and things like that. Now, it turns out that a lot of the case we used are now integrating with things like Alexa and other device protocols so we essentially get those for free. This whole ecosystem is forming around us. Just most important is to get your device out there because you have a vision for what the device will be used for. But then your customers tell you what the device is really useful for and that's when the real work starts. CHARLES: Right. I guess, it's true you have your first line of customers and I guess the use case what I was thinking of is me being a developer. I'm thinking what products could be built then using this as a component, so to speak. Have you'd given any thought to that or have anyone had approached you to say, "This is amazing. I'd like to build this meta product that integrates that," or is it kind of early days? CHRIS: Early on, that was the approach of the Internet of Things and it merged away from that in my experience. Early on, it was all about building blocks. You got to understand, these are old Zigbee Z-Wave programmers and that was the whole concept. Then it got turned on its head by, "I really have this problem that I need to solve and I don't want to have to make a bunch of building blocks to do this." For attacking it from the other side, like you're saying, building up into pieces, I really recommend you talk to the Twine guys -- super mechanical -- they're here in Austin as well. A year or so before, we came out with Peeple. They put out this device which was exactly what you're talking about. An Internet of Things type hub where you just add in all the pieces and then you integrate with everything. They can better give you a story of how that lifeline goes. CHARLES: Yeah, because it's always something you think about because you've got all these wonderful things. CHRIS: Yeah, some would say, an Internet of Things. CHARLES: Yup, or at least a floor plan. ELRICK: When someone gets a Peeple device, what is the full installation story and set up? What is the walkthrough for that? CHRIS: We have a little video of that. What you essentially do for Peeple when you're installing it on the peephole in your door, you unscrew the peephole. Now, the way Peeple's work is they need to handle doors that are variable width, depending on where you live. There's no real standard. All of the Peeple's work by having a shaft that you screw onto another side so it's basically two pieces. Now, one of those shafts holds this bracket that we include in the package. You screw that onto your door with the peephole holding it to the door, then you turn on the Peeple device and you connect it to your home Wi-Fi and then you're ready to go. That's it. CHARLES: That's the hardware side of the onboarding and then what about the software? How do I go and look at my door diary? CHRIS: You do this during the installation. You go to My.Peeple.io and there's a little button to add your Peeple device. UI-wise, it's one user interface among all the platforms whether your Android, iPhone or on a browser. You just go to that webpage and associate your account to your Peeple devices. You will have to log in. You can log in with Gmail, Facebook or just a regular email. Then you add your device and any time you go back to that page, it will show you only the videos from your device so you have a list of all the events from your Peeple device on that page or in that app. CHARLES: That is interesting. I'm looking at the videos right now online. Although my problem actually is I've got a glass door. CHRIS: Yes, we got you covered as well. CHARLES: You do? CHRIS: Yes. The reason you have a glass door or a peephole and many people don't realize this is it because it's required by law. If you ever plan to have run out your house as a multi-family unit, you have to have a peephole or a window surface to where people can look out. Once we figured that, that's when we realized we were onto something. The first versions of Peeple came with these little adhesive pads that we called gecko skin and this is where we learned a valuable lesson. No matter how sticky you make your stickers, they're not sticky enough. We included three of these little tabs in every device to put on a glass door, if you had glass so the Peeple device would work the same way for glass door, except that you would use a sticker, instead of unscrewing the peephole. The only problem with the stickers were is they were not sticky enough. If there was condensation or a weather event or something like that, these things would fall off so we made a modification. We found better stickers and I mailed those out to all the people. But this is why hardware is hard. You're going to make these mistakes. In all our testing, we didn't find this but of course, once you have a thousand testers, you find a little more. ELRICK: That's interesting that you brought up the laws about the peephole. Were there any particular building codes or anything of that nature that you guys had to be concerned about when having Peeple installed things on their doors that you had to figure out before shipping them out? CHRIS: Not really. The Texas property code is more geared among making landlords do the right thing. In case you're wondering, I think it's Texas Property Code 94-152 that covers this. There must be an external viewable portion for all multi-family units to the front entryway. Now, this is just the Texas law. We had to look this up in a few other states and it turns out there's one in San Francisco, there's one in Virginia but they're all different. But so far, we haven't had any issues with any property codes or building code issues. CHARLES: This has been an almost four-year odyssey for you that you've been on, right? CHRIS: Right. CHARLES: You've been involved in this scene and working with hardware probably for a long time even before that, it sounds like. For people who are just getting into it, because I feel like there's this wave cresting now, where these types of startups and these types of side projects and hobby projects are just starting to enter the mainstream. Do you have any advice for anybody who would want to get into this space? CHRIS: Well, that's a great question. Of course. Now, contrary to what you just stated, I didn't have much of a hardware background. I'm a software guy. I can personally attest to the pains of becoming a hardware guy. Now, the irony of this is I do have a master's degree in electronics engineering but electronic engineering is so huge. It's such a big field that you can spend your entire career not doing much hardware. But I always had the ability to go back and build some circuits but I would say the number one thing, if you're not a hardware guy is go to some of these meetups or get involved in a community and find yourself one, someone who has experience doing hardware because coming from the software room, you're used to this flexibility of changing a few lines of code and being everything changing. Now, when you get a hardware guy onboard and our hardware guy's name is Craig, when he comes to work -- CHARLES: Or gal. CHRIS: Yeah, or gal, of course. When they look at the same problems you're looking at, they're like, "Hold on a second. Let's step back. Let's test this." There's this quantitative slowing which you need to have as hardware because once you build a PCB, a circuit board, you are now stuck with that board for the next month or so because it takes a while to make another one so get that right before you jump around and do all these changes. My first advice would be is get help. There's no shame in going out there and you might be surprised. There are so many people out there that want to join in. If you have a good idea, there's plenty of people who want to contribute. CHARLES: Would you say that there are communities out there like the software communities where you have meetups? Some of the software meetups are just fantastic, where people are so welcoming and they're just so excited to share the information that they themselves are so excited about. CHRIS: Yes and there's the same thing as on the hardware side. You would definitely go to a few hardware meetups, there are several in Austin. There's at least one every week and it's a great chance for people to tell these kinds of stories. This is a maker type community so they welcome these ideas because that's what fuels their enthusiasm. Every time someone is doing something new, they want to hear it. That's the change now. This decade has happened to where you can go out and buy a few modules and make your little device. Then there's the next big step of turning it into going from prototype to hardware but you can get all those kinks out without having to make your own printed circuit boards, without having to have a huge firmware background. Just knowing a little bit of tech and a Raspberry Pi, you can test out your inventions at this early stage without having to invest all this money and these other things. There's never been a better time to do it. I would leave your listeners with is if you got something swirling around your head, get a Pi, get a little Arduino and do it. There's nothing stopping you. CHARLES: Yeah, it's shocking how affordable they are. CHRIS: I don't even touch on China, by the way but that's the next step. CHARLES: That's the great thought that I want to leave everybody with but I actually have more questions so we won't leave everybody with that. We'll keep on going because I want to talk about China and I want to talk about something that was in there. You've touched on it a couple of times when telling your story how you go from this just do it, get it out there, get it into people's homes, just get the Version 0 out, just buy an Arduino, slap together something terrible, that is at least one millionth of the dream that you have and you've taken your first step on that odyssey. That's a very common story in software. The way that we develop software too is have these agile methodologies and these techniques to reinforce them, testing, continuous integration, continuous deployment. How does that play out? A fascinating subject to me personally is how do you do that in the context of hardware. A question that I love to ask is how do you do things like ensure quality? How do you do integration testing? How do you have a deployment pipeline if you've got these Peeple devices out there on tens of thousands of doors globally? How do you push out a bug fix or a feature update? What's the automation around that look like? CHRIS: The over-the-air updates are your friend. If you're going to make a hardware device, I recommend making a Wi-Fi enabled device because then your firmware is not locked, then you can do over-the-air updates. That has been a lifesaver. We've done maybe a dozen software updates to our device to date, sometimes little changes, sometimes big changes. But what happens is any time the Peeple device wakes up, it says, "Hello, server," and the server says, "I got an update. First, let me give you all these images." Give me the code. The devices are constantly upgradable, just like you'd expect with software. Now, with some of these Bluetooth devices, you can't do that. You've got to go out the door being ready to go with no issues. It's a friction point to tell someone, "Your headphones can't work now. You need to plug it into a computer. You need to download this firmware upgrade. You need to update the firmware doing it by hand." That just isn't going to fly in today's consumer market so I would recommend if you can, make your device a hardware Wi-Fi device, get a Wi-Fi module in there and that opens up the world to you on doing a lot of these updates, to answer the last part of your question. CHARLES: You mentioned China, since you're touching on the manufacturing process or just the market over there or --? CHRIS: Yeah, be ready to fully commit. I've been to China, maybe four times now. I have a 10-year visa. It took a while to find the right partner and you've got to be boots on the ground in the factory for a couple of weeks just getting the whole line up. It's a whole another product when you're at the manufacturing stage. You're making all these little test things, they've got to hook up the boards to certain devices, they've got to put the firmware on it, they've got to do these things. It's a whole another job. That's why when you do these Kickstarter. They say, "We're going to be out in three months," and then six months later, "We're still working on it." I have a lot of empathy for this because I've lived it. You think, "I've got everything done. My hardware works. All I have to do is team up with someone to just make it and with them, we'll ship it." There's a whole another level to just a manufacturing piece and you can't really learned. There's no real textbooks to learn this because every factories are different. Our factory is right north of Shenzhen and we talked to some US manufacturers but they just weren't competitive to be in the discussion so you pretty much have to go overseas and then you have to sit down with them and just a little bit of communication difficulties can bring down a whole manufacturing line so it's very important that you're very hands on and you see your product all the way to package. ELRICK: That's interesting. I know of it but I never really thought about it because I was really not in that position. What are some of the higher level of things that you should look out for when evaluating a manufacturing partner? CHRIS: We talked to about a half a dozen before we decided on our manufacturing partner. The big one for me was cultural fit. I talked to some of the big ones like the one that makes the Apple phones, we talked to them for a while and I just found that I would say, "We would like to do this or we need this," and then the next week, they'd be asking a question, "What about this?" and I'm like, "Oh, you didn't understand what I was really asking," so you would lose weeks just by tiny misunderstandings. I found a manufacturing partner that has a subsidiary here in the US and my main contact grew up in the United States but he also goes to China every other week. Having that kind intermediary made everything so much easier. The communication was never an issue. I was able to get things done almost twice as quick with the other manufacturers I was talking to. In the end, they also came up with a great price so it turned out to be a win-win. I would recommend talking to the bigger manufacturers but spend a lot of time on the smaller ones and really figuring out is the communication up to snuff to really make your product. It's huge. CHARLES: What a story. I'm really glad that we got to have you on the podcast, Chris because you have the story that starts from literally slapping a Raspberry Pi and an accelerometer and speaker and apparently a bunch of other things on your front door and with an extension cord and walking a continuous path to where you're flying back and forth between China and Austin to inspect and ensure your assembly line and making a real product. It demonstrates that it can be done by the fact that you have done it so I think it serves as an inspirational case for a lot of people out there who might think that this is something that they might want to do. Or think that they're capable of. Thank you so much for coming and talking about Peeple. Everybody, you can go ahead and check it out. It's Peeple.io, right? CHRIS: That's correct. CHARLES: All right. Also, is there anything else that you'd like to announce other than the magic, which you're going to keep a lid on? CHRIS: Yes, I know I'd appropriately teased everyone about that but you can go to our website. If you go to Shop.Peeple.io, we're taking preorders for this next magical version, the Peeple Version 1.1, I guess I'll call it. I would like to add just before we go is if you're going to endeavor to do something like this, make sure you have a very understanding family because they couldn't have done it without a wife and kids that understood my craziness and allowed me to have just a complete mess of our house for, I guess, for three years now. CHARLES: Thanks again and thanks everybody for listening to this episode. You can get in touch with us on Twitter. We're at @TheFrontside and you can always find us on the web at Frontside.io and there's a contact form and we'd love to hear from you, for any reason whatsoever. Thanks, everybody and we'll talk to you next week.

BankBosun Podcast | Banking Risk Management | Banking Executive Podcast
Sun Tzu and Woody Harrleson Help Banks with Revenue Creation

BankBosun Podcast | Banking Risk Management | Banking Executive Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 25, 2017 20:23


Sun Tzu and Woody Harrleson Help Banks with Revenue Creation Narrator: He learned strategy by playing chess with his older brother. Narrator: Kelly Coughlin is a CPA and CEO of BankBosun, a management consulting firm helping bank C Level Officers navigate risk and discover reward. He is the host of the syndicated audio podcast, BankBosun.com. Kelly brings over 25 years of experience with companies like PWC, Lloyds Bank, and Merrill Lynch. On the podcast, Kelly interviews key executives in the banking ecosystem to provide bank C suite officers, risk management, technology, and investment ideas and solutions to help them navigate risks and discover reward. And now your host, Kelly Coughlin. Kelly: Greetings, this is Kelly Coughlin, CEO of BankBosun, helping community banks navigate risk and discover reward in a sea of risk, regulation, and revenue creation threats. Today we are going to talk about marketing strategy, tactics, and revenue creation. BankBosun has a program for banks called Tactical Ecosystem Marketing. It is the results of three years of research and discussions with marketing experts and community bank executives. It’s a program guaranteed to generate new revenues from all bank business lines. And get all the banks’ centers of influence – that is those people and companies who influence and recommend banks and bankers – get them fully on board and engaged to help you get new customers. Guaranteed. How you might ask? Spoiler Alert: By primarily promoting them – your clients, prospects and influencers – and their businesses and services -  and then secondarily promoting your services and yourself. In 2014, I started researching ways that complex financial technology or financial services companies could be more efficiently and effectively marketed and closed. I use the terms efficiency and effectiveness carefully and intentionally, because they imply a reduction in time, as in shortening the sales cycle; reduction in expenses, travel, entertainment, and other direct business development costs; and reduction in effort, as in reducing the days, months or years it takes to close a deal. This was the challenge and, believe it or not, I actually figured it out.  But first it requires some attention to strategy and tactics and then a discussion on marketing and revenue creation. I have invited my friend Chris Carlson to join us in a few minutes. You see, Chris is one of my favorite people on the planet. He is a lawyer and an actor. Not one of those Hollywood elite actors though – he lives in South Minneapolis. But I think he has a small part in a movie coming out this summer. Chris has been very helpful to me in helping me craft my message and public speaking skills and style to conform not to dull and boring business standards, but to the stage and theater standards. Not that you need to be an entertainer. I certainly am not. Rather, you need to be your true and authentic self. Chris is terrific with this. So I asked him to help me with my messaging on this. And I thought, let’s do it as an interview and a podcast. I know you have heard plenty of people talk about strategy…and some business people use strategy and tactics interchangeably. In war, if you do that, it can be life threatening. In business you can sometimes get away with blurring the two with the result ranging from financial and operational inefficiencies to the ultimate penalty in business…death through bankruptcy. I don’t like to blur them. Because I think it is critical to achieving success to define your strategy and constantly be revising your tactics to implement that strategy. In short, strategy describes the destination and tactics describe the specific actions you will have to take along the way. Generally speaking, strategy doesn’t change that much, but tactics will constantly be adjusted and modified. When I lived in Seattle, I used to have a sailboat. I loved participating in sailing races. There was one race in the winter of 1985. I think they called it the Frostbite Series. This taught me at the age of 25, the real difference between mission, strategy and tactics. There was some heavy weather on the Puget Sound…probably around 25 knot winds. The mission was to have no more or no less a crew suitable to lead, navigate and operate the boat in that competitive situation and in that weather condition. Round each buoy and finish the race in the shortest time; and win the race. Before the race we developed our strategy on buoy placements and how we would round them; wind direction and speed and what sails we would need; and the number of boats, competition and the starting line placement and how we would approach the start. In a sailboat race, if you have a lousy start, you will have a very difficult time making up that time lost. Taking too much risk to cross the finish line ahead of the gun and have to circle back and re-cross could cost you five minutes. In a sailboat this can be painful. Our tactical decisions went something like this. We added one more crew to the boat. We used a starting tactic where we went to the finish line two minutes before the gun, and sailed perpendicular away from the line for one minute. And then we tacked and turned around and started sailing back to the start line. The tactical theory here is that if you sail away from the start for one minute, it should take you more or less one minute to return to the start. If it takes you more, you are late, if it takes you less, you are early. I liked that starting tactic. We decided to not fly the spinnaker because it was so windy. The cost of that decision was a loss in boat speed. But the gain was that we expected others would be more aggressive and fly their spinnaker and either struggle with that during sail changes or perhaps experience a knock down. We adopted a more conservative tactic and hoped our competitors would be more aggressive and get hurt by that. The end result was while we were winning the race, but because one of the buoys had blown free during the gale storm, the race was canceled. We actually chase that windward buoy for about 90 minutes past the original placement of it until they finally notified us by radio the race had been canceled. This one race taught me so much about the relationship between mission, strategy and tactics. In this race our mission never changed. Win the race. Our strategy was defined at the beginning based on conditions and competitive landscape. But our tactics were constantly being modified and adjusted and corrected to deal with the ever-changing conditions and our competitors’ reactions to those conditions. It taught me to not get caught into myopic thinking about how we win a sailboat race. The concept of not flying our spinnaker seemed so very foreign to me at the age of 25. Now, at 59, it makes total sense. In 1980 a Harvard business school professor, Michael Porter wrote a seminal article, “Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors". Commonly referred to as Porter's Five Forces. Porter maintains there are five undeniable forces that play a part in shaping every market and industry in the world. If you haven’t created your own, Five Force Analysis, you need to do so. I love doing these things.  This will help you determine how to modify your strategy and tactics based on your competitive landscape. And always update it at least annually, if not quarterly. So in summary, strategy and tactics work together as means to an end. There are a number of good quotes on strategy and tactics. More on strategy than tactics actually, because frequently the same principles in strategy apply to many, many areas including war, sports and certainly business. I just finished reading the book, POWER by Robert Greene. He even claims that there is strategy and tactic in romance. He quotes the 17th century French poet, Francois La Roche Foe Cou. I bet I butchered that name. Sounds a little like….Well anyway…“A reasonable man in love may act like a madman but he should not and cannot act like an idiot.” I love that quote. Many of the concepts in strategy, apply to many if not all human endeavors. But tactics are more specific to a particular business and industry. There are hundreds of great quotes on strategy and tactics ranging from Caesar in the war versus the Gauls to Norman Shwarzkopf in the first Iraq war. I certainly have a couple favorite quotes on strategy and tactics including this one by Sun Tzu: Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. But my favorite quote on strategy and tactics especially for smaller banks with limited capital and budgets competing against big banks and big brokers with much bigger capital and seemingly unlimited budgets. It’s a quote by Napoleon, one of the most brilliant military strategists and tacticians, ever. Napoleon said, “The amateurs discuss tactics. The professionals discuss logistics.” I’m going to repeat that. “The amateurs discuss tactics. The professionals discuss logistics.” To me this plays exactly in to my core message in this podcast of revenue creation strategies and tactics that are both effective and efficient. Napoleon is saying, I don’t want to talk about tactical ideas that can’t be implemented, because of logistical constraints…only those we can actually implement. For community banks, this means, let’s not talk about big picture ideas that we cannot afford. Rather, if you have ideas that fit in our budget, then terrific. If not, let’s not waste each other time. Well, rest assured, if you keep listening to this podcast and other video and audio content we have produced on BankBosun.com you will see or hear that these meet the Napoleon standard referenced above. It is a discussion on tactics that are logistically feasible and reasonable for all community banks. So with that in mind, I think I have my friend Chris Carlson on the line. I’m gonna start with a quote from a director who actually despised actors…recall Chris is an actor. Let’s see if Chris can identify the source: “I never said all actors are cattle; what I said was all actors should be treated like cattle.” So with that said, Chris time to come to the slaughtering pen…can I hear your best moo cow imitation? Chris: I’ll try to give you my best moo cow imitation. But I’m first need a motivation. What is my cow trying to communicate? Kelly: First of all, can you identify the source of the quote? What is the source of that quote? Chris: I don’t know. It would have to be some sort of director. It can’t be Woody Allen, because he likes actors. Kelly: Alfred Hitchcock Chris: Alfred Hitchcock, that would make sense. What is my cow trying to communicate? I mean, because it could be Moo (uplifting). He’s trying to solicit an answer from the other cows. Or it could be Moo (forcefully). Like, move out of the way rancher, because he’s trying to cattle prod me into a slaughtering pen. Or it could be maybe a seductive Moo, that wants to get something going with one of the other cows. Kelly: Let me hear that seductive one, again. Chris: Moo, Kelly, Moo. Is that good? I mean. It’s not as good as a pugilist. You can do a good impression of, can’t you? Kelly: What I thought you would do is just like a Mooooooo! Chris: Oh wow! See, that’s why I’m in a nationwide movie opens tomorrow and you’re not. Kelly: Why, ‘cause mine was just too kind of stereotypical? Chris: Well I don't think they'd put your picture on the poster with Woody Harrelson peeing in a urinal. But they did for me. Kelly: Did they? What's the name of the movie? Chris: Wilson. I haven't seen it yet so I can't speak to the quality. But Woody Harrelson is pretty good. Kelly: Alright that is terrific. Chris: And I will not be mooing in it. Kelly: So let's get down to business. Chris you heard my introductory statements, or as you actors call it, a soliloquy. What questions do you have about what I'm doing or how do you want to start? Chris: As an actor you know I want to know how to make money. But you’ve got these kind of inventive ideas with generating revenue as you call it. So why don’t you fill me in and let me know if I can get in on it. Kelly: As I mentioned earlier in 2014, I started researching ways that complex financial technology or financial services companies could be more efficiently and effectively marketed. Technology, the Internet, and mobile devices have enabled many businesses to operate more efficiently and effective in my mind…I think of Uber and many other kind of virtual companies. Many of these companies don’t even have a human being available to sell, support or service. They pride their business models on the ability to open up a sales funnel and close a deal without ever having to talk to or “touch” the customer. Those are “air quotes” under touch. Build a technology platform. Offer it to consumers. Make it easy for the consumer to pay for the services. And collect the money and deposit it. And spend more to capture more consumers and more money. No human interaction at all. If any of you have had to deal with Uber for ride sharing or Facebook or LinkedIn for advertising, you know exactly how challenging it is to talk to somebody there. In their minds, they are the perfectly fine-tuned efficient and effective revenue generators. I use the terms efficiency and effectiveness carefully and intentionally, because they imply a reduction in time, as in shortening the sales cycle; reduction in expenses, as in travel, entertainment, and other direct business development costs; and a reduction in effort, as in reducing the days, months or years it might take to close a deal. This was the challenge and, believe it or not, I actually figured it out. Chris: Well wait a minute though. I mean hasn’t digital marketing and especially social media don't they help with efficiency and effectiveness. That has to have been a good thing, isn’t it. Kelly: Well, yes. In part, it has. Here’s how I see it. There really are two ways we develop business relationships: directly to the buyer and indirectly to the influencers of or to the buyer. The combination of customers, prospective customers, and influencers of customers plus the other businesses and individuals that also sell services to members in that ecosystem, comprise the total ecosystem. All require an investment in time, expense, and effort. Social media like LinkedIn has helped us stay easier connected to buyers and influencers. And this ease has certainly helped with efficiency, as it doesn’t cost much to connect on LinkedIn or Facebook. But in terms of effectiveness, it doesn’t quite get it done in that it really just the beginning of the relationships. It’s more like an advancement of the old days of giving somebody a business card and they stick it in their rolodex. And hope they remember you some time. Do you even remember what a rolodex is?? Chris: Yes, I do remember what a Rolodex is. It's a thing you wear on your wrist, right? Kelly: That would be a Rolex. Chris: Rolodexes are no longer. How do you parse that problem? What's your way to phrase the big dilemma? Kelly: The reality is the method by which we initiate business relationship has changed a bit with social media and email. But developing the relationship, hasn’t really changed that much. We make contact. We connect. We get them in the funnel. Then we do some mix of pounding them with emails, and sending them articles about our products and services or information that we think they would find interesting and useful. We might call them on the phone. Maybe get a face to face. There is always a challenge to deliver sufficiently good and interesting content to get the buyer motivated to accelerate their sales cycle with you. And there is always a struggle to keep your product and your company top of mind to the influencers of the prospect. This all takes time, expense, and effort. And also a patient CEO, board and shareholders. Chris: Well wait, wait, wait. What did you figure out? What did you figure out in terms of efficiency and effectiveness that you were talking about earlier? Kelly: It was my experience as a sales and marketing professional and as a CEO and manager of sales people and responsible for revenue creation, that sales cycles were dreadfully long; sales messaging was painfully repetitive and uninteresting; and there were constant and continual struggles to come up with a new excuse to call a prospect to see where they were in the sales cycle – hot, warm, or cold; and to make sure the center of influence still remembered you as the go-to company for a client referral or recommendation. We’ve been exploring this and we’ve developed a revenue creation strategy that solves the problem of efficiency and effectiveness. We call it Tactical Ecosystem Marketing. It utilizes the cost efficiencies of digital marketing, especially audio content that is produced and syndicated on iTunes, google play and YouTube; coupled with connecting with the client on social media and promoting THEM…not you. At its core, Tactical Ecosystem Marketing is a marketing strategy whose primary focus is not to promote your company and your products, rather to promote your CUSTOMERS’ and PROSPECTS’s company and products. The secondary focus is to promote YOUR business and YOUR products. And the same applies to the Centers of Influence.  You focus on promoting THEIR business and THEIR products and a secondary focus on YOUR business and your products. How do you promote them? Through your own audio podcast program. It delivers high quality content for your sales people to distribute and discuss with your clients and prospects. High quality content for your ecosystem members to distribute and discuss with their clients and prospects. It’s one big fat happy symbiotic ecosystem. Everybody wins. It’s highly effective. It’s very efficient. It’s very Sun Tzu. You attack your enemies’ weakness and avoid their strengths. This strategy and tactic does just that. Chris: So, Tactical Ecosystem Marketing is a revenue creation strategy. And the tactics are designed to help community banks create, publish and syndicate on websites, YouTube, iTunes and GooglePlay and all those other things. And they promote all the products and services of the bank’s ecosystem, as well as its members. Kelly: Yes, Chris. It’s kind of like Tactical Ecosystem Marketing is a way a community bank can pay it forward and in return good things will happen. Well, we're up to the twenty-minute mark. Is there anything you want to add about what you're doing with Narrative Pros these days with you, Chris.   Chris: We're just trying to help people like you Kelly make their point and connect with their audiences. Some people don’t have the gift of gab like you. So, what we do is we try to help them come up with a clear way of conveying their message and do it in an authentic and genuine way. Unfortunately, you do not have need of our services. You're a master and we respect that. Kelly: Hmmmmm, I don't know. I think I have paid you a few dollars over the years to help me Master those skills though. Chris: That's true. You're one of our star pupils, so I will accept that. Kelly: Chris, I appreciate your time. Take care of yourself. Chris: You too! .Narrator: We want to thank you for listening to the syndicated audio program, BankBosun.com The audio content is produced and syndicated by Seth Greene, Market Domination with the help of Kevin Boyle. Video content is produced by The Guildmaster Studio, Keenan Bobson Boyle. The voice introduction is me, Karim Kronfli. The program is hosted by Kelly Coughlin. If you like this program, please tell us. If you don’t, please tell us how we can improve it. Now, some disclaimers. Kelly is licensed with the Minnesota State Board of Accountancy as a Certified Public Accountant. The views expressed here are solely those of Kelly Coughlin and his guests in their private capacity and do not in any way represent the views of any other agent, principal, employer, employee, vendor or supplier.

The Drama Teacher Podcast
Putting on a play your administration doesn't like

The Drama Teacher Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 18, 2016


Episode 168: Putting on a play your administration doesn't like Sometimes you want to do a show on a tough subject matter. Sometimes your administration doesn't want you to. In this episode, teacher Chris Evans talks about his experience producing a play on gun violence. How did he communicate with his administration? What was the response? What advice does he have for others? Show Notes Clowns with Guns Chicken. Road. Episode Transcript Welcome to TFP – The Theatrefolk Podcast – the place to be for Drama teachers, Drama students, and Theatre educators everywhere. I'm Lindsay Price, resident playwright for Theatrefolk. Hello! I hope you're well. Thanks for listening! All right, this is Episode 168. You can find any links to this episode in the show notes which are at Theatrefolk.com/episode168. Surprise, surprise! Today, we are talking communication – the communication of a play to an audience that's got some tough subject matter, all about communicating tough subject matter to both a receptive audience and a not receptive audience, and also the communication that has to happen between a teacher and their administration about doing a play with tough subject matter. The title of this podcast is: “Putting On a Play Your Administration Doesn't Like – How That Is Not an Impossible Situation.” We recently published a script by Teacher Chris Evans called Clowns with Guns. It is an unflinching look at gun violence in schools. It's one that many people were offended by when it was done, including Chris' administration. So, what was that experience like for Chris? How did he keep a positive communication going with his administration and with all those involved with the show? You don't need to hear that from me! Let's hear it directly from Chris! Let's get to it and find out. LINDSAY: I am talking to Chris Evans. Hello, Chris! CHRIS: Hello, hello, hello! LINDSAY: Hello, hello, hello! Tell everybody where in the world you are. CHRIS: I am smack dab in the middle of the state of Montana – Great Falls, Montana. We're about 90 miles north of the capital of Helena. We are on the plains. It's a beautiful 91 degrees and humid. LINDSAY: All the good things! CHRIS: Absolutely! LINDSAY: There are folks who are very attracted to 91 and humid. CHRIS: I was born and raised in Downtown Phoenix, Arizona in July. My mother never lets me forget that. LINDSAY: So, there's no excuses for you – no excuses for you. CHRIS: This is jacket weather right now, so… LINDSAY: All right then! All right, everyone, put on your jackets and we're going to start this. Actually, you know, put on your jackets, strap yourselves in. We're going to have a very – I think – interesting conversation – I think – a necessary conversation for a lot of folks out there who might be in the same shoes or they're afraid to get into the issues. What we're going to talk about today is doing a play that your administration might not like you to do – or, more strongly, does not want you to do. Chris, you were in this situation. CHRIS: Yes, I was. Basically, the backstory in this is I was looking for a play to do at our state thespian convention which happens every February here and I can't consistently do a theatre form play. Otherwise, the secret's going to be out. And so, I decided to write one and I started, this was around the time that mass shootings here in America were just happening almost daily. I was angry about it so I decided to start writing a play about what seemed to me was acceptance of these shootings happening in America. I wanted to tie it in with a class lesson on absurdity and satire. And so, the play – Clowns with Guns (A Vaudeville) – was born. Essentially, it takes place in a circus atmosphere, with iconic characters, and a group of audience that I call the Goobers decided to come see the show and they're happy to see the show.

Totally Professional Support Podcast
Totally Professional Support Podcast - 001 - July 2016

Totally Professional Support Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 12, 2016 24:28


Totally Professional Support Podcast 001   Sonia Caprari and Chris Dabbs CHRIS: Well hello there and welcome to Totally Professional Support’s first podcast ever! My name is Chris Dabbs and I will kind of be your host and with me I’ve got Sonia Caprari, say hello Sonia. SONIA: Hello. CHRIS: Hello. I’ve got Sonia Caprari who is basically the person for Totally Professional Support who deals with all sorts of things and helps lots of small businesses to be able to accomplish their administration tasks properly. So I’m sure I didn’t do you justice there Sonia so do you want to explain exactly what Totally Professional Support does? SONIA: Yes I will. I will start by saying that I’m a virtual assistant and a lot of people as soon as you say that sort of go, “Huh, what does that mean?” CHRIS: Exactly, what does it mean? SONIA: Well I can provide you with administrative support sat at my home office so I don’t have to come to your office, I can do everything that needs to be done from my desk at home. CHRIS: So hang on a second, so I am an employer and I need some – well obviously you will go into what sort of administration tasks you perform – but I need some whatever done and you will be able to do that for me from your own office and not have to come to my office. How does that work? SONIA: There are so many things online now, the software doesn’t really get installed on your computer at work, it can all be done remotely. So that’s how I manage to work from home because all my customers use software that I can access from anywhere. CHRIS: So what sort of software are you talking about there? SONIA: Well predominantly I use email management software which means… CHRIS: So like…sorry, is that like Outlook and things like that? SONIA: No Outlook is completely different. Email management software such as Mail Chimp and A-Webber or Constant Contact, they are the three systems that I can use. And what we do is we use them to send out bulk emails, so things like newsletters, people do e-zines, they send out reference emails or emails that they want their customers to read that contain information that is useful to them. And obviously sending out offers, high value gifts – things like that so you’re engaging with your client, you’re engaging with your customer on a constant basis. CHRIS: Okay, so what you’re saying is like…I guess it’s sending out newsletters to your client base. SONIA: Yes. CHRIS: Oh right. So when I get a, I don’t know, an email from Microsoft or something saying that I subscribe to Microsoft products, would I like to buy another product or we’ve had a change in a product or something like that; they send that out to tens of thousands of people I guess and you manage that for other companies. SONIA: Yes I do, that’s exactly it yes. CHRIS: That would be useful; I think I could do with a service like that actually, to be fair. I’ve got loads of clients and I hardly ever email them properly and that’s completely due to lack of time. SONIA: Well…oh sorry. I was going to say that this is the problem that most people have, it’s a lack of time to collate the information, to get your emails in one place and then to be able to sit down on a regular basis and work out what you’re actually going to send to your customers – so what is it that they want to read from you. There’s a fine line between bombarding them with information and being there on the outskirts so if they ever need you they remember who you are. CHRIS: I think that’s one of the problems, I mean i unsubscribe – I guess this is the kind of thing you are talking about as well about mailing lists – is that I unsubscribe from so many emailing lists because I get three or four emails a day from some people. And I suppose that is not something that you would become involved with I guess that is your client. Okay, let’s have a chat then about how your particular email services or your email management services have helped people. I mean I’ve looked at your explainer video as I say the one that is on your website, which is really great by the way, it just looks so cute. Looking through all the services, you talk about Mail Chimp which you mentioned earlier on, so what happens with that then? I mean so I would, as an employer, would say to you, “First of all here is my account details, you can log in there” and what happens from there? SONIA: Well I can have a login as the client or I actually do have my own Mail Chimp account, I can actually go into the clients email account and set me up as part of their account. So I don’t actually have to log into their own specific account all the time, I can actually access their account through my own. CHRIS: Okay, like a management account or something. SONIA: Yes so you don’t have to leave out passwords and things, especially in my case, if I have another VA that’s working for me I don’t want to give my client’s details to her so I set her up in a different way through her own mail chimp system and therefore she never sees the client’s password. CHRIS: That was a question I was going to ask because you know the privacy of all of these email accounts is paramount, isn’t it, because isn’t there a problem with data protection or something like that? SONIA: Yes you want to make sure that, if you have people working for you, you protect your client and make sure your client’s customers – your clients information – is well protected. CHRIS: Yes I think the penalties, if I remember correctly, for letting your information leak are quite severe nowadays aren’t they? SONIA: Yes. And Mail Chip has a policy anyway that anybody on a list should be there because at some point they’ve given you permission to be on that list, you can’t just spam people. CHRIS: Exactly. So the list, if I remember correctly, whenever I’ve signed up for things I put in my email address and that sort of stuff and then the system – whatever system it is I guess – sends me an email to verify that I have actually requested to be part of that mailing list. SONIA: Yes, Mail Chimp doesn’t actually do that, A-Webber does but Mail Chimp doesn’t. CHRIS: Oh okay, does it not? SONIA: No, Mail Chimp actually believes that you have put these people onto a list because at some point they may have subscribed to a product or a service or they may have filled out a lead page and given you their details. So you are clicking a button in Mail Chimp to say, “Yes, I have permission from this person to use their details.” CHRIS: Oh okay. SONIA: But as I said, A-Webber works in a slightly different way and it does send out a confirmation email. CHRIS: Well it would be interesting, for our next podcast perhaps, to talk about the differences between Mail Chimp and A-Webber you say? Is that the other one? SONIA: Yes. CHRIS: …the differences between those and any others that you think are relevant to our listeners. Okay, now I suppose one of the things that I’ve noticed, we’re talking about mailing lists and all that sort of stuff here, is that there’s some big change coming up – immediately I think there is isn’t there? – in terms of being able to use a return address or something complicated like that. What’s all that about? SONIA: What it is is it’s actually taken effect now, I’ve been telling my clients for months to sort out their email address. So what’s happened is that Gmail and Microsoft have made a policy change, which means this policy change affects the deliverability of your emails if you’re using email management software. So for example, if at the moment you have yourcompanyname@gmail.com... CHRIS: So totallyprofessionalsupport@gmail.com? SONIA: Yes, for example. And you use that email address when you set up your list in Mail Chimp or A-Webber – this will be a policy that is going to take effect throughout everything. CHRIS: So InfusionSoft and all those sorts of shopping carts and all that sort of stuff I guess? SONIA: Yes, anything that is sending out bulk emails to people. So if you’re using as I said, totallyprofessionalsupport@gmail.com, what will happen now is that it’s not going to like that email address because all of these domains…I don’t want to say to people it’s not going to work, your email will be delivered to your clients but they can’t guarantee that it will be delivered to every client. This policy changed is called DMARC and what it does is it looks at the email address that it’s coming from and if it’s not coming from a proper domain name, so I have a domain name that is totally professional support, if it’s not coming from that domain name and it’s just coming from a Gmail account or a Hotmail account or a Live account, it looks at that and thinks it could possibly be spam. CHRIS: Okay, why would they think it’s spam? SONIA: Well in reality if you have a company, you’ve set up a business, you’ve got a website, why are you not using an email that has the same branding as your website domain name? Why are you not doing that? So in reality I’ve got a Gmail account but it’s my personal Gmail account, so I use that for personal emails which is fine because sending an email from your own Gmail account is not bulk sending, you’re just sending emails to whoever you’re sending them to. but I am talking about business accounts, I’m talking about people who are sending bulk emails through a particular email management system, the email management system will look at those email addresses and think they’re spam – that is really what it comes down to. CHRIS: Oh okay. So basically, if you use one of these email management systems and you set it up where it is joeblogswidgets @ gmail.com and that is the address that people see in their email – Outlook or whatever it is. When they receive the email it says “From: joeblogswidgets @ gmail.com” the chances are, what you’re saying is Gmail, Microsoft and all those sorts of people, that email that arrives from that address – in other words from a free address like Gmail – is going to be put into the spam folder and therefore you could end up with your clients not receiving your message at all just because of that. SONIA: Absolutely yes because up to now a lot of spam emails have been created, haven’t they, through Gmail accounts or Live accounts or AOL accounts, Yahoo… CHRIS: Hotmail. SONIA: Exactly, how many people have received an email from a friend with a Yahoo account and it turns out to be a virus? So what it’s trying to say is, “Well if you’re running a legitimate business you should have a legitimate email address.” So you cannot now send bulk emails using a free email address that is really what it comes down to. CHRIS: And you can help, obviously, your clients to make sure that they’re not going to fall foul of this new system by auditing their Mail Chimp setup. How would you go about that? SONIA: Well with my current clients obviously I’ve alerted them all months ago to this and slowly, slowly they’ve been changing their email accounts so they’ve actually got a proper domain name email that can be used in Mail Chimp or whatever. If you haven’t done that yet you need to go back to wherever you purchased your domain name because more than likely you’re given a free, or number of free email addresses anyway when you sign up for your domain. And I think the problem people have is they don’t understand this bit when they set up their website so they end up going to Gmail or somewhere, creating an email account because it’s much easier than doing it through their actual domain provider. CHRIS: Yes I know what you mean because obviously putting in all the settings and all that sort of stuff can be a real pain in the…well backside really I guess because it can be quite complicated. You’ve got IMAPs and POP3s and all that stuff so I can see why people would go to a free service like Gmail or Hotmail or Live or whatever it is to do that. So I can understand that. But you would be able to guide somebody through setting up their email, what is it, server or an account? SONIA: You need to obviously…I don’t know how many people I’ve spoken to who said, “But I don’t know how to get into my domain” uh well I can’t help you there I’m afraid, if you can’t remember the login and password that is a bit of an issue. CHRIS: That’s true, they would have to go back to their domain supplier and request a new password and stuff. SONIA: Yes they would. But if they don’t want to do this themselves then I could certainly do this for them but they would have to give me their login details so that log into their account and then I can have a look from there to see whether they do have a free email address or whether they have to pay to set one up. CHRIS: So really, this could be pretty much a nightmare couldn’t it for people? SONIA: I think it could if you don’t realize the policy has changed because what will happen is a lot of your emails are going to end up going into spam boxes and your customer will never receive the email. CHRIS: Which of course they’ve slaved and worked really hard to make it engaging through the content, through the design and everything else and then it’s just completely wasted and they’ll be scratching their heads thinking, “Why does no one respond to my emails?” SONIA: Well yes and I am going to start looking at people’s stats over the next month, this has only taken effect within the last week, so in the next couple of months I will have a look at that for my current clients and see whether it has gone down with the people that haven’t changed their email addresses yet. CHRIS: So you can actually check out the response rate and the open rate… SONIA: You can see who’s read them, you can see whether they’ve clicked them – there is a little bit of data you can collect from that. Looking at what we’ve done already and looking at what will happen after the first of July it will be interesting to see where the customers have changed their email addresses versus the customers that haven’t changed their email addresses. CHRIS: Yes absolutely. So what is this called again, DMARC? SONIA: It’s called DMARC; the point of it is that…a lot of providers did this a while ago, so people like Hotmail it did actually happen a while ago. It’s Gmail and Microsoft, the two biggest, who have now said, “Right, that’s it” 30th of June it actually to effect. And that’s it, it’s done, it’s happened. CHRIS: Right. And all of this is to stop people from sending spam out really because, as you said before, it’s easy to pick up a Gmail address, easy to setup an account of this, easy to pick up a mailing list of people – which you shouldn’t be doing of course, really you shouldn’t be using any old email list, you should have people who’ve subscribed to your own list – and then they just send out lots and lots of spam, millions of emails a day. SONIA: If you look at your own inbox, your spam box, and I look at mine, I can see the amount of rubbish that goes in there. And unfortunately sometimes people do have a free email account, you don’t receive their emails and the reason for that is because they are being thrown in the spam box, especially if they’ve sent a lot out in the course of day it’s quite feasible for them to end up in a spam box or be stopped because of maybe an attachment that’s in it or something that has been put into the email. So you have to be aware that it’s all very well and good having a free email account but I would only use that now for personal use. If you have a business you should be using your branding for sending out emails so people can recognize you instantly. CHRIS: And actually if you think about it I guess this will help people to understand the implications of your emails being marked as spam and what you can do about that as well. Is that something that you can help people with? So in other words designing their text in their emails and their subjects for the email, which I think also has an impact on this stuff doesn’t it? You know, so that it’s not picked up as spam by whichever email client someone’s using like Outlook or Outlook Express or whatever. Can you help them with that? To make sure that it’s all friendly for the email clients? SONIA: Of course yes. We do try to put relevant subject lines in and not ones that are going to cause an issue. CHRIS: So what sort of ones would cause an issue? I mean I always think that if you see an email that says “Open this!” or “Watch that!” or “This will be great” or something like that, they’re always going to be picked up as spam because who would normally write an email like that? And who would normally put the subject like that? I think that would be a bit strange wouldn’t it? Am I right in thinking that or are those things okay? SONIA: I usually say to my clients if you’re going to use a subject line with such a big exclamation mark at the end of it like “Open now!”, then you should maybe follow that up with the name of your company or you start the subject line with your company name and then you put “Open this now!” CHRIS: So that would make it easier…that would make it more sensible, or sorry, the system would look at it and think, “Okay well that’s probably real because why would there be that name in there.” SONIA: I understand why people want to use a subject line that has that impact because you’re hoping that the person that receives it will actually open it, but yes I think that the subject line is important. CHRIS: Okay, so let’s have a think about exactly how you can help your clients or potential clients or existing clients or whatever, to make sure that their emails aren’t being wasted. You know I know from my own points of view, I work very hard to create my mailing list, I make sure my website’s good, I make sure that all the communication that I send out is interesting and people join my mailing list because they want to know more about me, they want to know about the services I offer and it’s hard. You build up all of these people one by one and then this DMARC comes along and potentially throws all of that out of the window just over one simple mistake that I could make. So can you explain how your system, or sorry, the Totally Professional Support’s system would make sure that that doesn’t happen for somebody? Does that make sense? SONIA: Yes it does. What you need to do is you need to login to your email management software and you’re going to have to make some changes to your lists. CHRIS: This is in Mail Chimp or A-Webber or something right? SONIA: Yes because as you’ve set a list up and you’ve added subscribers to it over a period of time, your list will already have the email address that it’s going to be sent from. So if you need to change your email address because of this DMARC process then you need to go to every single one of your lists and change the email address to a new email address that is part of your branding. So don’t forget, you need to go and log in to your email service provider and check to see whether you have a free email account that you can actually create yourself an email account if you don’t have one already. CHRIS: Based on my domain name already? SONIA: Yes, based on your domain name already. And then once you’ve done all that you can then go into Mail Chimp or A-Webber and change the email address from the old one to the new one. CHRIS: What happens if I haven’t got time for that? Can you do that for me? SONIA: Of course I can, of course, just give me a call. CHRIS: See now this is the power of a virtual assistant because I can call you, you don’t have to come to my office to do all this do you? You can do it from where you are you said earlier on. SONIA: I can, I can do it sat at my desk. CHRIS: And not in my office so that’s a good thing. So basically I save, I’ve got to think of all this from an employer’s point of view; I save money on your travelling, I save money on having a desk space for you to use whenever you come in and there are all sorts of things. And of course, because you’re a contractor, I would also save on any employment costs as well – PAYE, that sort of thing, insurance costs and things. SONIA: Exactly CHRIS: Alright, okay. And how do you charge? Do you charge like hourly or weekly? How does that work? SONIA: I can charge hourly, it depends on the job that I am being asked to do. Most of my customers are on retainer packages which means they buy a package of hours from me and that makes it a little bit cheaper for them to use me. CHRIS: That’s useful I guess, but also, if someone’s away on holiday or sick or something like that and their tasks need to be covered – and I suppose depending on what your skillset is – you could cover those tasks. SONIA: Yes definitely. CHRIS: Oh that’s interesting. I have to talk to you about some other bits and pieces; social media management I think is something that really is something that causes me a lot of problems because there is so much of that social media that needs to be managed in terms of Facebook and Twitter and Google Plus and Pinterest and whichever other ones there are. But is that another service that you guys provide? Please say yes! SONIA: It’s certainly something we can help you with yes. CHRIS: Excellent. Okay well Sonia I tell you what, tell people how they can contact you – you know your telephone numbers and emails and all that sort of stuff – and we’ll go from there. SONIA: If you want to email me its sonia@totallyprofessionalsupport.co.uk, my website is the same www.totallyprofessionalsupport.co.uk, my mobile number is 07526 992 184 if you want to call me. CHRIS: Fantastic. And I guess that if people go to www.totallyprofessionalsupport.co.uk they can sign up for your mailing list so they can get more details and obviously be told when your podcasts are coming out and so that they can subscribe to those. SONIA: That’s right yes. CHRIS: Well everyone thanks very much for listening and we hope that the DMARC system is now completely explained to you. It’s quite an important thing if you want your emails to get through to your clients or potential customers that you fought so hard to build up in your mailing list. You really need to make sure that you’ve changed your from email address from a free one that you may have set it up with. So in other words bill @ gmail.com or fred or bellinda or lucy or whatever @ gmail.com, change it from that and change it to your own domain name’s email address. So in other words change it to bill @ totallyprofessionalsupport.co.uk, otherwise you run the risk of your emails not being delivered to your recipients and that can’t be a good thing. Now Sonia I hope I got that right, is that right? SONIA: You did, yes you did. CHRIS: Hey I’ve learned something, fantastic. And also, the thing I’ve learned is that if I need any help with administration tasks, you guys are the people to call. Okay so thanks very much for that, as I said, my name is Chris Dabbs and that was Sonia Caprari from Totally Professional Support and this is Totally Professional Support’s first podcast. Join us for Sonia’s next podcast where she’s going to be looking at something else that’s really relevant to small businesses and how they can really push forward their marketing by using a virtual assistant like Totally Professional Support. So thanks very much Sonia, is there anything you want to add at the end? SONIA: No thank you. CHRIS: Okay, well thanks very much and bye-bye. SONIA: Bye-bye. www.totallyprofessionalsupport.co.uk www.thepodcaststudio.co.uk

Unity Body MOT Podcast
Simon Wellsted - founder of Unity Body MOT - co-hosted with Chris Dabbs Unity Body MOT Podcast 002

Unity Body MOT Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 28, 2016 38:27


Unity Body MOT Podcast 2   Simon Wellstead and Chris Dabbs     CHRIS: Hi there and welcome to the Unity Body MOT podcast. Welcome to show 2 of the Unity Body MOT podcast with Simon Wellstead. SIMON: Hi there Chris. CHRIS: Hello, and me Chris Dabbs. This week’s podcast is going to be slightly different to last week’s podcast where we discussed how the Unity Body MOT system can help fitness professionals and other people working within the fitness industry to really help their clients make sure that any exercise that their doing is the best thing for them. Now Simon, I understand this weekend you’ve been pretty busy with talking to potential new clients and other people with the fitness industry, is that right? SIMON: Yes, it’s been a fascinating weekend Chris. It was a three day seminar with my business coach who specializes in fitness and exercise and health professionals. And I was there in the capacity of having an exhibition stand and talking to probably about 250 people over the weekend, it was a really massive experience for me listening to fit pros and exercise pros, listening to what they do, how they work with their clients and enabling me to help them understand how we could help them serve their clients in a bigger way. CHRIS: Oh wow! So basically you were talking to people about how Unity Body MOT can help their business, and I guess in turn, help their clients – is that right? SIMON: Yes, absolutely. It’s all, at the end of the day, about them helping their clients in a bigger way so their clients feel as though they’re being served better and say, “Wow, that guy is great” or “That girl’s great, go and use them.” That’s essentially what I was doing so it was a really enlightening experience for me working and talking to so many great people in the fitness industry and enabling me to understand their needs in a better way. CHRIS: Okay, well it’d be great to actually talk about what happened at the conference to really understand how people saw how your system could help them to be able to grow their business and help their clients. So what was the main question that people asked you? SIMON: It’s a really interesting question Chris. The questions were not particularly specific because people don’t know what they don’t know. And what we teach and present and coach fitness pros in is very new to them. So the first question that I generally got was, “Simon, I love the introduction that got done for you and I’ve been watching your video that you’ve got on there and I understand you’ve got a free CD to take away, but actually, what is it you do? Can you explain it to me in my context of my business?” So we’d then start by talking to them about what they did, understanding their clients. So it was a reverse questioning situation that I went through because everybody I work with works differently, they have different clients, those clients have different needs. So it’s not a case of one size fits all, which is actually a phrase I use a lot. CHRIS: If it’s not a case of one size fits all then does that mean that people who work in a specific part of the fitness industry, in other words maybe a personal trainer rather than a fitness professional or any of person within the industry, would benefit more from the Unity Body MOT system? Or do you think it benefits everybody equally just in different ways? SIMON: The latter definitely Chris, it benefits everybody but in different ways because, as I said, they all have different clients with different needs and everybody’s training is slightly different. So a personal trainer will have a slightly different training to a Pilate’s instructor to a sports coach to a running coach or somebody who does group exercises at gyms which is mat based in a studio. They will have different requirements/different needs and the important thing is to realize that once you understand that client better you can give them a better service. You can advise them more effectively and ultimately, hopefully, the goal of this is that the client gets their objectives achieved in a quicker time or more successfully or more safely or whatever it is they want to do. CHRIS: I see, so let’s rewind a little bit there then, let’s try and narrow this down to a specific type of trainer or fitness pro. So let’s have a look at a Pilate’s instructor; how would a Pilate’s instructor be able to use the Unity Body MOT system to deliver a greater range of benefits to their clients? Is it as simple as that – by using the system? Can that actually happen or is it complementary to Pilate’s? SIMON: Totally complementary, I know never step over the line and say I’m doing training or a course specifically for Pilate’s people, I love delivering what I do to a mixture of people. Having said that, a Pilate’s instructor is specifically taught to help improve people’s posture, help them move better, and if they’re working in a therapy context, help them get out of pain if they’ve got back pain – which is very different to a personal trainer who is there to perhaps deliver performance improvement, weight loss, increase somebody’s stamina if they’re training for something or just generally be fitter. So there is a difference and once a Pilate’s instructor understands the information that we present, they understand that need to have good posture, need to move more flexibly, need to move more smoothly in a different way. They’ve got a toolkit of extra knowledge, so if they see somebody struggling and is clearly not responding to an exercise series that is being given to them in the way that the Pilate’s instructor would hope, maybe they could go to their bag of tools and say, “Okay, let’s look at this in a little greater detail. I’ll take a different tool out of my case and work out why what is happening is happening” and therefore give them more understanding so that the client doesn’t get frustrated that things are not working for them. I ran a course in Hertfordshire back end of 2015 and I think I had 3 Pilate’s instructors on that particular course. There were personal trainers and other fitness professional there as well. And we teach them some tools, including a slightly different exercise model that they can employ with their clients, and the feedback I got the next morning was that two of the Pilate’s instructors had taken that exercise model and actually delivered it to their clients that very morning. And the response was that the clients felt much better after it and they were then able to do the other exercises that the Pilate’s instructor was trying to get them to do more effectively. It felt more easy, they were able to get into positions perhaps from a postural point of view or move better. So the Pilate’s instructors had taken what we’d instructed them in, taken the new exercise model and ideas that we’d presented, given them straight away to their clients – which was absolutely fantastic – and had reported back instant benefit. CHRIS: Wow, so what you’re saying is that the Unity Body MOT system gives somebody knowledge that they can use immediately and really get results for their clients immediately. It’s that quick? SIMON: It is that quick. What we’re teaching is actually more a change of mindset, a change of the way to think about a client’s issue. So if you give a client something to do, it’s not quite working for them as well as you or they might hope… CHRIS: Because they’re struggling or…? SIMON: Great, because they’re struggling; then we give them a toolkit that allows that analysis to be done to say, “Okay, why is that happening? Ah, okay, maybe that is happening instead. Now I can understand that and I can change what I’m asking the client to do so it’s appropriate for their body.” CHRIS: It enables them to really think about how some of the information you’ve given them enables them to do something different for their clients so quickly that the client – it’s probably imperceptible to them – it’s so smooth and such a transition. SIMON: Absolutely, that’s a great description. CHRIS: Right, oh wow. So okay, for Pilate’s instructors it’s allowing them to step back and have an overall view of what is happening. And to be able to change their advice to their clients in a way that would benefit them much more quickly. And what about sports coaches and things like that? How would it apply to them? How can they benefit their clients? Is it equally as quick? SIMON: it’s really great that you picked up on sports coaching because I did run some coaching up in Sheffield a few weeks ago and we had two sports coaches actually present. One was a running coach and one was actually a coach for the Great Britain climbing team. I didn’t understand that Great Britain had a climbing team but hey. CHRIS: We do have a team, but that’s fantastic though isn’t it, that we have a team climbers? Brilliant! SIMON: We do, and obviously from a sports coaching perspective, they are more interested in improving performance, improving technique and trying to get them to be able to run better, run faster, run longer, or in the case of climbing which I learned a lot about over the weekend, to help them climb faster – it’s all clock based climbing that they do so they have to basically get from A to B but it’s vertical. CHRIS: Who would have thought? SIMON: And we had some really great discussions because the tools that I present in training are just as equally valid for improving taking somebody up from performance level A to performance level B in whatever they do. So I’ve got colleagues and friends of mine who work in the same area and work with tennis player or work with golf players. And obviously we’ve talked about running and climbing, it is a very big area but it is all performance based. And they’ve got a greater understanding now about their client’s body so if they’re seeing, in the case of the running coach, that somebody is running in a particular way and struggling to get over some kind of threshold that they’re trying to deliver against, whether that be speed or whatever it might be, they can now take a step back and say, “Ah okay, hang on, maybe this is happening so I’ve now got a toolset of tests I can do that will tell me whether something different is happening.” But before the training they would have never known that something different could have been happening or was happening. CHRIS: So you’re really enabling these coaches and fit pros to know more than they didn’t know, if that makes any sense. So in other words, really they didn’t understand precisely how they could help somebody or know what the problems were that somebody had. And just through the initial phases of the Unity Body MOT program, you are actually them to help their clients to make those tiny incremental changes that make all the difference. And I suppose a few very physical types of sports including, as you say, the climbing team for GB – who would have thought that we were a) any good at that, b) actually in it in the first place and c) that yes, every single part of the body has to work in such a way as to be able to literally claw back every single millisecond of climbing a vertical face I guess? SIMON: Absolutely. CHRIS: That’s incredible! So for the climbing team, let’s have a look and try and understand exactly how you helped their trainers and their coaches to help the climbers themselves. Is there something specific you can share with us on that? SIMON: Yes, I mean I’m not a climbing expert, but I had these discussions with the gentleman who was on the course and we were talking about the fact that when you’re climbing you’ve got to have a massive amount of coordination and strength between the fingers that are obviously gripping a particular place and the lower body which is going to help you move up to the next point on your war. CHRIS: Pushes I guess, isn’t it? SIMON: Absolutely, and that is coordination but it’s also strength. So the tools we were delivering would give a different dimension as to why they might be struggling to get from A to B in a particular way given a particular obstacle on a particular wall. They might have a problem with their foot, there may be an issue with their pelvis, there may be an issue their nervous system which is not allowing them to have the flexibility, strength and mobility to deliver that type of movement in that particular situation. CHRIS: Okay so if they had to, I don’t know, I’m trying to think of how to explain this in a climbing term; but if they’re climbing up just normally, I guess any climber can do that properly, I’ve seen some of those very difficult maneuvers where there’s a ledge that comes up on top of them or above their head and they have to… SIMON: I think they call those an overhang. CHRIS: Oh, so overhang. Oh so the overhang, and then they have to kind of flick themselves over. And that sort of maneuver, I guess, really does need to be trained for – it’s not just something you come across and just do through innate skill I guess. How would Unity Body MOT help that particular climber to train for that? I mean are you talking about being able to weed out the people who aren’t able to do that particular maneuver or helping people who find that particularly difficult to make it easier for them to then do that maneuver – if you see what I mean? SIMON: Certainly the latter, it’s finding out what in the body is blocking or providing a blockage for them to do something that they need to do that they can do and that they maybe can be able to do well. But this is all about fractions here, so we’re saying taking them from A to B but that’s actually taking where A is already pretty damn good – they may be completion climbers, or completion runners or competition tennis people – but it’s basically finding that next level. And there may be something within the body, which is maybe not visible to the human eye, which is inhibiting them being able to make that step in terms of additional performance. CHRIS: Yes, so we’re looking at the physicality again here rather than the mental state of any training or any sports person. That’s fascinating really. Okay let’s try and not talk too much about the elite athletes and let’s go back down to basics and really look at, say me, because I’m basic believe me; but me in a gym situation with a personal trainer. Is there a way for a personal trainer to sort of identify that knee issue without me knowing that it actually exists? I mean can they spot it because of my gait for instance? Is that something that the system trains them for? SIMON: Yes absolutely and that’s a really interesting example. We now know that well over 90% of knee problems have got nothing to do with the knee, but what it has got to do with is something that is actually not visible to a personal trainer or anybody really. CHRIS: That sounds strange, how does that work then? SIMON: Well the vast majority of knee problems come from your pelvis not working properly. CHRIS: So what, are you saying it’s referred pain from the pelvis or just because it’s just putting somebody out of kilter? SIMON: It’s not a referred pain because referred pain is where you have pain in place A and pain in place B. What we’re saying is somebody may, after exercise, report some pain in their knee. But that actually could be to do with something not working in the pelvis and there actually isn’t any pain or any symptoms in the pelvis at all. We’re just talking about, “Does the pelvis do its job properly?” Is the pelvis doing its job properly and that’s one of the things we train personal trainers to pick up on because a lot of body functions in exercise and performance are obviously managed the pelvis. It’s in the center of the body, pelvis means basin – it’s the bucket of the body – it’s where everything from the top comes down to the pelvis and everything from the foot upwards comes into the pelvis. So it’s not surprising that a lot of issues stem from the pelvis. But it’s not just a case of looking at the pelvis and saying, “Oh it’s tilted or it’s not doing this or it’s not doing that from a visual point of view.” We actually teach the personal trainers to work out precisely how is or is not working. And then that’s going to deliver a lot of information about somebody’s pain in their knee or pain in their foot or lower back problems or shoulder problems. So the knee is a really good example, we now know that the vast majority of knee problems don’t stem from anything actually happening in the knee, they stem from something else in the body not working properly. CHRIS: Okay, so I kind of understand that really the podcast isn’t the place to give real instructions on how to overcome any particular knee problem per say. But I guess that actually makes a lot of sense because the Unity Body MOT program is about enabling the personal trainer to look – I guess it’s the old phrase – look outside of the box rather than looking at the knee and saying, “Oh yes you’ve got a problem with your knee, you can’t do this exercise or that exercise.” But what you are enabling people with is the tool and the power to step back and to really assess a client’s situation, would that be about right? SIMON: Yes, that’s brilliantly put actually Chris. We’re about changing a mindset and being able to, you use the phrase ‘take a step back’, and use some strategic thinking which will be new to the vast majority of fitness professionals. CHRIS: Oh yes, and foreign as well I would have thought. SIMON: Absolutely! So we’re saying that just because you can see a problem somewhere, you used the perfectly good example of the knee but it could be anywhere in the body, we can move on the other ones in a second. But just because somebody’s coming to say, “You know when I do those types of exercises I actually experience this pain in my knee.” – beyond just saying, “Okay you won’t do those exercises because you get a pain in your knee” we give the personal trainer the tools to say, “Okay let’s work out how you can do those exercises more safely, let’s work out how you can do those exercises so they won’t cause an issue with your knee.” Another classic example is tight muscles, who hasn’t got tight muscles? But the way that most fit pros will address that is to actually see that muscle X is tight, let’s pick one – hamstring – it’s one that is commonly very tight in lots of people. The intervention for that would be most typically to introduce warm ups or components of the exercise regime which try to stretch that hamstring to reduce the tightness. Unfortunately, we now understand that there are several different types of tightness and stretching, quite often, is not the answer. But we teach the personal trainer to take a step back and say, “Okay, I can see that there’s tightness there in the hamstrings. Let me work out (using the tools we teach) what type of tightness it is. And therefore, I can then build an exercise program which matches exactly what’s going on in your body.” The net result, we hope, will be less tightness in the hamstrings; but not just by pulling the ends of the hamstrings to make them longer because they’re tight and therefore we’ll stretch them. It’s using a somewhat more strategic approach to say, “Okay, so I know that there are three of four ways that a hamstring can become tight, which one is applicable to you Mr. Client/Lady Client? Okay, I now understand why your hamstrings are tight, now we can move on. CHRIS: Yes from a lay person’s point of view I guess as with anything, even in my industry everything moves forward at a very fast rate, and really your Unity Body MOT system is really like continuing personal development for fit pros really. To make sure that they’re augmenting their own original training that they’ve been through – sweated through – to qualify and get to be able to do everything that they want to do for their clients. And so yes, Unity Body MOT helping in that way by allowing them to step back can only be a great thing for clients. SIMON: Yes, and I think that’s a key point. I mean I’m a trained sports therapists and I learned this information which I now train people in was something I learned, I didn’t learn it in sports therapy training, it was just through circumstances and the people that were coming to me and the sort of people that I met and got involved with and was talking to – peers in the industry – that said, “Actually Simon, the sort of things you’re talking about can be dealt with now through this additional training.” So I learned this stuff through additional training. I’m now basically paying that back to people and saying, “I’d like to do the same for you.” I benefited from it, I was able to help clients in a bigger way by taking a step back and questioning what I’m seeing, what the client is telling me to enable to then move forward. It’s a case of taking one step back to take two or three steps forward. CHRIS: Well exactly, as opposed to just running into it like a bull at a china shop kind of thing and just doing the first thing that comes to mind. Stand back, consider and then action really, I think that’s that. Okay fascinating, absolutely fascinating trying to understand how personal trainers and fitness professionals can help their clients just by stepping back for a few minutes, it’s incredible. Okay, well let’s go back to the conference that you attended this weekend and you were exhibiting at. You spoke to lots of people I bet, how many people were there, 250 did you say? SIMON: Something around that figure, yes. CHRIS: So you had 200/250 people who are all in the fitness industry, and you must have spoken to a whole bunch of those people, and what sort of things were people asking you? What were the sort of the main issues I guess with how they felt was how the Unity Body MOT program could help them? SIMON: Okay, so generally speaking the conversation would start by them not fully understanding what it was that I was doing. So they were coming at it from the point of view of they don’t know what they don’t know, which is great. But then I would generally turn the question round to ask them who they typically worked with – we use the phrase ‘ideal client’ – who are the people that they go to to get on the marketing? Who are they looking to work with most? And then understanding typically what those ideal clients are coming to that personal trainer or that fitness professional with, then we can start saying, “Well okay, so what typical strategies do you currently employ with those clients and are you hitting any brick walls? And a common one is “Yes they’ve got persistent tightness but for the large proportion of them we don’t seem to be able to get rid of that tightness.” Or in the context of a Pilate’s instructor, coming back to the Pilate’s area, obviously a big thing that Pilate’s instructors do is get people to activate their core but in some people the core just isn’t firing. And when I was having the discussions about, “Okay so sometimes the reasons why the core can’t fire is because something else in the body is stopping it from firing.” So understand what that thing is, it could be the pelvis or it could be something else, it could be in the shoulder. But to understand that there is a route forward to help these clients more rather than the client and the trainer getting frustrated, which is quite often what happens, and then they switch off and say, “Well Pilate’s doesn’t work for me, I went to Pilate’s and I just couldn’t get this working.” Or, I went to this personal trainer with really tight muscles and I just didn’t get any benefit from it.” That’s not a critique of the individual or what they did it’s just that there was some information that was missing and I fill that gap of information. We’ve talked about taking a step back and saying, “Okay, what I’m doing is not necessarily performing in the way that I would hope. Right, okay, now let’s use these tools to work out what that is.” The ideal client is the ideal client with the same problems, it’s just that every body is different and reasons why something is happening in that body will be different. It falls into patterns obviously, but it’s having that ability to say, “I want to learn more about my ideal client, my ideal client is a new mom who’s just had their babies and they want to get back into the fitness that they had their babies” is another classic exampl

Bally Alley Astrocast
Bally Alley Astrocast: Episode 0 - Introduction

Bally Alley Astrocast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 3, 2016 52:34


The show's two hosts discuss what will be covered in future episodes of the Bally Alley Astrocast. Recurring links: BallyAlley.com - Bally Arcade / Astrocade Website What's New at BallyAlley.com Orphaned Computers & Game Systems Website Bally Alley Yahoo Discussion Group Bally Arcade / Astrocade Atari Age Sub-forum Bally Arcade/Astrocade High Score Club Episode Links: Bally Arcade / Astrocade FAQ Bally Software Downloads - Cassette TapesAudio Recordings from Bob Fabris Collection Arcadian Newsletter Software and Hardware for the Bally Arcade - A Technical Description Picture of the Crazy Climber homebrew cartridge Picture of the War homebrew cartridge ZGRASS Documentation Arcade Games Based on the Astrocade Chipset Gorf Arcade Game Seawolf II Arcade Game Space Zap Arcade Game Wizard of Wor Arcade Game Full Bally Alley Astrocast - Episode 0 Transcription Adam: Hi, everybody.  My name's Adam Trionfo, otherwise known as BallyAlley on the AtariAge forums.  And I'm here with... Chris: Chris, otherwise known as "Chris." Adam: And you're listening to the zero-ith episode of Bally Alley Astrocast.  See, I barely know the name of it yet. Chris: I think me and Adam believe that we thought up the name Astrocast ourselves, and we came to find out that there had already been one, it just hadn't been started. And I guess it was Rick and Willy (I think it was only those two). Adam: Yup. Chris: And, it kinda sat there for a year.  Hopefully they will be contributing to Adam's podcast here. Adam: I don't think of this as "Adam's podcast." (And I just used finger-quotes, sorry about that.)  This is our podcast.  Chris and I are recording this right now.  Also, Paul Thacker, who is a regular of the Bally Alley Yahoo group (which we can talk about at a later time).  We're hopefully going to do this together at some point.  I wanna sound natural as possible for this podcast.  So, I'm trying to not read anything off a piece of paper.  I don't like the sound of my voice, and the fact that I'm letting you hear it means that I love you guys. Chris: It's a great level of trust he's exhibiting, you guys.  Plus, I would immediately take his script away from him if he had one because... Adam: Oh, thanks, Chris! Chris: Yeah.  Extemporaneous is more fun to do, and I think it's more fun to listen to. Adam: So, in saying that, we do have some notes we wanna talk about. For this episode we wanna basically go over what we want to cover.  Which is what people seem to do in these episodes.  Saying, "Hey, there's gonna to be an episode of a podcast called 'this'."  And, that's what we're doing here.  So, here's what we're going in our podcast number zero. Chris: It was always funny to me, like oxymoron, like: episode number zero. Adam: Right.  Right. Chris: Let's go negative one.  Let's be rebels. Adam: You may or may not know what a Bally Arcade, or an Astrocade, is.  It was a console that was developed in about 1977.  It was released in 1977, but the first units were not actually shipped, for various reasons, until January 1978.  And very few people got them.  They were first released by catalog-only, by a company called JS&A.  Those systems had overheating problems.  Most of them were returned-- or many of them were returned.  JS&A only sold approximately 5,000 units (so it says on the Internet).  I don't know where that number is quoted from.  I've never been able to find the source.  Bally eventually started selling them through Montgomery Ward.  Now, Bally also had something called the Zgrass that it wanted to release.  This was going to be expanding the unit into a full-fledged computer.  This never was released.  The Bally system itself did not come with BASIC, but it was available nearly from the start.  Many people used it.  A newsletter formed around it called the ARCADIAN.  The system has 4K of RAM and it does not use sprites, but it could move object just as well as the Atari [VCS] and other systems of its time period.  It could show 256 separate colors and through tricks and machine language, it could show all of them on the screen at once, but not normally in a game.  Although there are a few screens that did it (but not actively during a game).  The system is fun to play... if you can find one that works.  If you don't already have one, you're going to discover (if you go searching for one) they're not inexpensive.  They're becoming pricey on the Internet because of the overheating problems they had, since the beginning (with the data chip), you will find that if you own [should have said buy] one now, you're getting a unit that "has not been tested," which means, of course, it is broken.  If you find one on the Internet that says, "Not tested," please, do not buy it.  Just let it stay there and let someone else buy it.  And, when they get it and it doesn't work, if they're surprised then they did not read the "Bally/Astrocade FAQ."  We'll go into much greater depth about this system in the next episode.  I just wanted to let you know that's the system we'll be talking about.  It has a 24-key number pad.  It has a controller that is-- is it unique?  Well, I think it's unique. Chris.  Um-hum. Adam: It has a paddle built into the top knob.  It's a knob-- it's called.  And it has a joystick-- an eight-directional joystick.  It's built like a gun controller-style pistol.  It's called a "pistol grip."  It's sorta shaped like one, if you picture a classic arcade-style gun, and then just cut off the barrel.  That's basically what you have.  Something that was originally mentioned, and I think Bally might have called it that for two years, are Videocades.  Videocades are the cartridges.  These were actually also referred to as cassettes.  These are not tapes.  These are about the size of a tape, but they are ROM cartridges.  In the beginning they held 2K and later on they held 4K for Bally.  Astrovision, or Astrocade, Inc., later released some 8K games in about 1982.  Those were usually considered the best games on the system because they had more ROM to spare and to put more features into the games.  Now, BASIC was available from about the third or the fourth month after the system was released to the public.  It was originally called BALLY BASIC.  It did not come with a tape interface, but one was available for it.  BALLY BASIC cost approximately $50.  The tape interface, which could allow the user to record at 300-baud... which is pretty slow.  To fill the 1.8K of RAM, which is available to BASIC, would take about four minutes to load a complete program.  Better than retyping it every time, isn't it?  But, it's not a great speed.  Later on, the system (when it was rereleased), it actually came with BASIC.  It was still called BALLY BASIC, but today to differentiate it from the original BASIC cartridge, most people call it ASTROCADE BASIC or AstroBASIC.  The reason for this is the later BASIC has a tape interface built into the cartridge itself.  This can record and playback information at 2000-baud, which is an odd number because it's not a multiple of 300.  Because when 300-baud tapes were speeded up by a newer format later, they were 1800-baud.  Tapes were available, which meant the user community was able to grow because they could share programs.  It was sometimes a problem for them because I could record a program on my tape drive and I could send it to you in the mail.  And you'd say, "It's not loading.  It's not loading!"  Well, you'd sometimes have to adjust your read and write heads to match it.  Imagine having to do that today?  To having to... uh, I wouldn't want to think about doing it.  So, even if you can believe it, with that kind of an issue, with users having to adjust their tape systems in order to load programs sometimes, there were commercially released tapes.  These have been archived and are available and you can download them from BallyAlley.com. Chris: So, the play and record head on anybody's tape recorder... there was the possibility that it had to be adjusted to play a tape his buddy had sent him because he had a tape recorder with differently aligned play and record heads in it-- I mean, that's something else! Adam: Now, the recorders that were normally used were called shoebox recorders.  These were recommended.  If you tried to record to a home stereo, maybe Chris can understand this better and tell me more about it in a later episode, but you really couldn't record to one and then get that information back.  I'm not sure why.  But, the lower quality that was available from the low-end tapes that were less expensive were actually better.  Just like there were better audio tapes available, which you should not have used for data because... because, I don't know why!  So, ideal podcast length.  In my mind I see about an hour, or an hour and a half.  While I listen to many podcasts, among them Intellivisionaries (and others) that are not short.  And, as has been discussed on the Intellivisionaries, there's a pause button.  So, if somehow we do end up at five hours, please understand that there is a pause button.  If we end up less, you don't need to use the pause button.  Isn't that great?  Technology... right? Chris:  Well, a very good idea that you had was obviously to conduct interviews with some, I guess, what, Bally game writers, people who are really knowledgeable about it. Adam: Well, there's quite a few people I'd like to interview.  If we can find people from the 70s and the 80s, and even now, there's some people who have written some modern games-- at least written some programs for the system. Chris: It would help if they're still around. Yeah. Adam: Something that's interesting, that I wanna use, is that there's actually recorded interviews that we have from the early 80s and late 70s of phone conversations that Bob Fabris did (from the ARCADIAN publisher).  There was a newsletter called the ARCADIAN and it published for seven years (from 1978 to 1984 or 85, depending on how you view things a bit).  He recorded some conversations with some of the more prominent people of the time. Chris: That's cool! Adam: We've made WAV files of those or FLAC files and they're available for download (or many of them are already) from BallyAlley.  But, it might be interesting to take out snippets from some of those and put them in the show.  I hadn't thought of that before, but that's why we're going over this. Chris: Yeah.  Absolutely. Adam: Right. Chris: That's really cool.  We say Bally Astrocade, like we say Atari 2600, but it was never actually called the Astrocade when Bally owned it. Adam: Not when Bally owned it; no.  But after it was resold they had the right to use the name Bally for one year. Chris: Oh. Adam: And Astrovision did do that.  So, for a short time, for one year, it was known as the Bally Astrocade.  And it actually was called that. Chris:  Oh.  Okay. Adam:  But, somehow that name has stuck.  And that is what the name is called.  And many people think it was called that from the beginning.  It was originally released under a few different names, which we'll get into at a later date.  I think of it... I like to think of it as the Bally Arcade/Astrocade. Chris: Yeah. Adam: It depends on how you look at it.  Sometimes I go with either.  Sometimes I go with both.  Sometimes I call it the Bally Library Computer.  It just on how I'm feeling at the time.  So, we also don't plan to pre-write episodes.  You might have noticed that by now.  We do have a list that we're going by, and we do wanna use notes, but reading from a script is not what I wanna do.  I don't want to sound dry and humorless.  I like to have Chris here making fun of me-- well, maybe not making fun of me, but, you know, Chris here... helping me along to give me moral support.  And I enjoy that I'll be doing this with him, and hopefully Paul as well. Chris:  It is strange for you and I to sit around talking about old videogames. Adam: Oh... isn't it!  Isn't it though! Chris: [Laughing]  Some of the sections that Adam has come up with are really interesting.  They sound like a lot of fun.  And what's cool is that they are necessarily unique to a podcast about the Bally console.  For instance, we were talking about the ARCADIAN newsletter.  There's going to be a segment-- it will probably be every episode because there is a LOT of source material.  This segment will delve into ARCADIAN notes and letters that did not make it into the published newsletter.  It's kind of a time capsule.  In some ways it will be fascinating even for people who don't know a lot about the Bally Astrocade because what you're getting is correspondence from the 70s and 80s, before anybody really knew what was gonna happen with the 8-bit era, you know? Adam: There's material in the archives.  All of this material is from Bob Fabris.  He was the editor or the ARCADIAN.  Two people, Paul Thacker and I, we bought that collection from an individual who had bought it in the early 2000s directly from Bob.  It was never broken up, so it's all together in about eight boxes-- large boxes-- all in different folders.  Bob Fabris kept a really, really detailed collection and in great order.  He kept it in that shape from 1978 until, what?, about 2001 or 2002 when he sold it. Chris: Wow. Adam: So the fact that it survived and then someone else bought it and didn't want to break it up and sell it is pretty amazing to me.  We were able to pool our funds together, Paul and I, and purchase it.  All of it has been scanned.  Not all of it is available.  Oh, and by the way, BallyAlley, in case there are some listeners who don't know... BallyAlley is a website that I put together.  It's mostly from the archives of the ARACADIAN.  But, there's a lot, a LOT, of interesting material there.  If you're interested in the Bally Arcade, you should check it out.  It's BallyAlley.com. Chris: Adam is being kinda modest.  He's done a lot of work on this.  You're gonna find archived materials that will make your eyeballs pop out of your head. Adam: [Laughing] Chris: You know, he's... Adam: If you saw Chris, then you'd know that's true. Chris:  Yes.  Absolutely.  I'm recording blind.  You know, he's very picky about high quality scans (as high as possible only).  He's vey meticulous about it.  And I definitely recommend that you guys visit BallyAlley period com.  I know it's a lost battle; humor me.  They're not dots.  All right... anyway. Adam: All right.  Cartridge reviews.  The Bally Arcade... it has a lot of perks, one of them is not it's huge library of games.  I take that back.  It has a huge library of games.  Many of them, as some people may not even know who are listening to this, were released on tapes.  But the vast majority of games, that people would think of as the console games, are cartridges.  The Bally could "see" 8K at once.  It didn't have to bankswitch or anything like that in order to do that.  There was never a bankswitching cartridge that was released for the Bally.  At least at that time.  Since the library is so small, I'm not sure if we're planning to cover a game per episode, or since we plan to cover all of the games (and there are certainly less than fifty, if you include prototypes) and some of them are not games.  Some of them were... BIORHYTHM, so that you could know when it would be a good time to get it on with your wife to have a baby.  You know... [laughing] So, if that's what you wanna talk about and listen to... write us and say, "That's sounds great.  I want you to tell me when I can get my wife pregnant." [laughing]  The other day my wife was taking a look at a game I was playing for a competing console, the Atari 8-bit game system. Chris: I thought you were gonna say the Arcadia. Adam: No, not the Arcadia.  I was playing a SUPER BREAKOUT clone.  She took a look at it and didn't know what it was.  I said, "You know, it's a BREAKOUT clone."  She's like, "I don't know what that is."  I said, "No.  Look at the game for a minute.  It looks like BREAKOUT."  And she still didn't get it.  And I said, "Okay, so you're gonna have a ball that bounces off a paddle and it's gonna hit the bricks up above."  And she goes, "I've never seen this before."  And I said, "Okay.  You've heard of PONG, right?"  She's like, "Well, yes I've heard of PONG."  I said, "It's that." Chris: [Laughing] It's that... except better.  Between you and all of the people you're in contact with from the Bally era, and people like Paul.  People who actually wrote games back then... Adam: Um-hum. Chris: Information about how the console works and its languages and stuff... is that pretty-much taken care of, or are there more mysteries to be solved. Adam: There's some mysteries.  The neat thing about this system was that even in the ARCADIAN, in the early issues, you could get access, for like $30, to the photocopies that were used at Nutting Associates.  These are the people who actually designed the Bally system for Bally.  They did arcade games-- we'll go more into that in another episode.  This information was available to subscribers... almost from the get-go.  So, if you wanted to have a source listing of the 8K ROM, you could get it.  Of course, it came with a "Do Not Replicate" on every single page, but... it was... you were allowed to get it.  You could purchase it.  It was freely available and it was encouraged for users to use this information to learn about the system. Chris:  The reason I ask is that I'm wondering what the next step is.  Whenever I think of this console... do people refer to it as a console or a computer, by and large? Adam: A game system in my eyes.  I mean, it's a console.  People don't think of it as a computer.  No. Chris:  I'll start over.  Whenever I think about this system, what usually comes to mind is the fact that it is unexploited.  And that is perhaps the, not quite an elephant in the room, but that is the only real disappointment about the Astrocade is that there are these amazing, vivid, brilliant, games.  I mean, the arcade conversations on the Astrocade are, for all intents and purposes, arcade perfect.  This was a superior machine.  And yet, players were teased with a handful of astonishing games and then that was it.  So, "what could have been," comes to mind for me a lot.  And the phrase tragically untapped.  What I'm wondering is why nobody has brought up the initiative of making new games.  The last two were arcade conversations.  They were not original, but they are, of course, phenomenal.  I mean, two of the best titles, you know are WAR (which is a conversion of WORLORDS) and, of course, CRAZY CLIMBER.  You were in charge of all the packaging and EPROM burning for those.  I'm not saying... Adam:  Partially.  Partially.  For all of one of them I was, but the other one was handled by a man name Ken Lill.  I did... I came up with the package design and stuff like that, and made a lot to make it happen.  But, I didn't program the games.  No. Chris:  Right.  But I mean, somebody else did the coding, but didn't you have all the cartridge shells.  And you were burning... Adam:  I made sure it all happened. Chris:  Okay. Adam:  Yeah.  I mean, I didn't do all the work though. Chris:  Okay. Adam: It helped that I was there.  Put it that way. Chris:  We're talking about CRAZY CLIMBER, mainly, right?  Because you helped with WAR as well. Adam: Yeah.  I did both.  Yeah. Chris.  Okay. Adam:  Um-hum. Chris:  And you wrote some of the back of the box copy. Adam:  I did all of that.  Yeah. Chris:  As expensive and limited as such a run would be, that's not really quite what I'm talking about.  As having to go through all that to give people physical, boxes copies, I guess.  Another reason why people might not have written anymore Astrocade games is that the relatively few surviving consoles could be prone to overheating themselves to death at any time.  But, then there's emulation. Adam: Right. Chris:  MESS is all that we have, and it's not perfect.  So, wouldn't that be the first step for somebody to write a really good Astrocade emulator?  I would do it, if I knew how. Adam: Yes.  If there's one of you out there who's like, "Who couldn't write an Astrocade emulator?" Chris: Yes. Adam:  Please, would you do me a favor and send that to me tomorrow? Chris:  It's time.  ...Tomorrow... [laughing] Adam: Something that I wanna get at is that MESS does work for most games.  There are a few that don't work.  Some of them used to work and now they're broken.  MESS was updated to make it "better," and now some games don't work.  I don't understand why that happened.  The biggest drawback to MESS is that is doesn't support the tape.  It doesn't support-- it supports BASIC, but you can't save or load programs.  And since they're hundreds... there's probably over 500 programs available.  And there's... many, many of those have already been archived and put on BallyAlley.com.  So you can try them out on a real system, but not under emulation.  And it's quite easy to use under real hardware.  We'll get into that at another time too. Chris: In terms of cartridge reviews.  And I'm only going to say this once.  Thanks, by the way, for saying that this is our podcast Adam: Sure. Chris:  I thought I was just being a guest.   Adam:  No.  No... you're just a gas. Chris:  I'm just a gas.  So, should I help you pay for the the Libsyn? Adam: I think we'll be okay. Chris: All right. Adam: All of our users are going to send donations every month. Chris:  Oh, that's right. Adam: [Laughing] Just kidding there, guys. Chris:  So, I'm just going to say this once.  And you're welcome.  Review is a word I have a problem with when it comes to my own, well, stuff I write.  But now, apparently, stuff I talk about.  Because I associate the word review with critics.  I think I was telling you the other day, Adam... Adam:  Yes, you were. Chris:  I would never hit such a low level of self-loathing that I would ever call myself a critic.  Talk about a useless bunch.  For me they'll be overviews.  It's very picky.  Very subjective.  It has nothing to do with anybody else.  You wanna consider yourself reviews-- totally respect that-- but I don't do reviews.  So, either that, or I'm in some sort of really intense denial.  But, personal reflections on games, reviews leaves out... when you call something a review, it leaves out the fact that taste is subjective.  It's a personal thing.  I can't review food for you and have you think, "Oh, now I like that food I used to hate."  One's tastes in games, music, etcetera is just as personal.  So, Adam was saying that there's so few of them, that we're not going to cover a game every episode.  So, what we're going to do is alternate, so that you don't go completely without game "content" (isn't that a buzzword, a frequent word online now: "content"). Adam:  That is.  Yeah. Chris:  Everybody wants content.  I gotta table of contents for ya.  We're going to alternate actual commercial cartridge games with commercially available tape games and even type-in programs, because there were a lot of good ones. Adam: Most of them were written in BASIC. Chris:  Which is just awesome to me. Adam:  Yeah. Chris:  We were thinking of alternating the games stuff I was just talking about with this: Adam:  The Astrocade system, well, the Bally Arcade system, as it was originally designed for home use, it had two versions.  There was an arcade version, which came out in 1978 with the first game, Sea Wolf II in the arcades. And there was the version that was released for the home.  It had 4K of RAM, while the version in the arcades had 16K (and some additional support), but they use the same hardware (like the data chip). They're so similar in fact, that many of the systems games were brought home as cartridges.  They don't use the same code.  They are not-- you can't run code for the arcade and vice-versa.  You can, for instance, take a Gorf and run Gorf on Wizard of Wor hardware.  It'll look the wrong direction, but you can do that.  The systems are very similar in that respect.  But, you can actually take an Astrocade (and it has been done before) that is a 4K unit, and actually do some fiddling with it, change the ROM a bit, give it more RAM (there's more that you have to do)-- there's actually an article about it, it was written in-depth (it's available on BallyAlley, the website).  And you can make it into an arcade unit.  It wouldn't be able to play the arcade games, but it would have access to 16K of RAM and that sort of thing. Chris:  When you say Sea Wolf II, you mean the arcade game was running this hardware that you're talking about. Adam:  Right. Chris: Much of which was also in the console. Adam:  Yes. Chris:  Okay.  And that goes for WIZARD OF WOR, GORF, SPACE ZAP.  Well, that explains why there are so many arcade perfect home versions. Adam.  Um.  Right.  They don't share the same code, but they are very similar.  The Hi-Res machine could display, in what was considered then a high resolution.  The Bally display in 1/4 of that resolution.  I think perhaps will have the first episode cover specifically the hardware of the astrocade. Chris: So, you are saying that this segment would cover the arcade games that used the astrocade hardware, and I find that really, really interesting (because I never knew that).  I thought that they were just, you know, very similar and some of the same people created the home versions, but I didn't realize that... I never realized they were so close. Adam: So, another segment that we plan to do is called, "What the Heck?!?"  It's going to focus on unusual hardware and maybe even released items, but something that, while it was released through the Arcadian newsletter or perhaps the Cursor newsletter (and maybe even one of the other small newsletters that were around for a short time for this system exclusively).  When we're talking about a released product here, we are probably talking about in the tens-- the twenties.  I mean, new homebrew games get a wider release than games that are considered released back then.  Maybe not the games, but hardware peripherals.  There was something called the Computer Ear which could do voice recognition-- sort of.  But the software for that isn't available, I don't think… maybe it is.  I have the hardware, but I've never tried running before. Chris:  We're also gonna-- I say "we," even though Adam's knowledge about, well pretty-much all of this stuff is much greater than mine, hoping to cover the Zgrass keyboard/computer.  Is that a fair description? Adam:  Yeah.  That's what you would read on the Internet about it.  And if you can call that true, then that's what it is. Chris:  Right.  And not just on the WikiRumor page. Adam:  Yeah. Chris:  It's a very unusual system and it's worth learning about.  See, you don't hear about any of this stuff anywhere else and that's what's really cool about this podcast.  Everything you've got archived, everything you've learned, you just never read about it back then, you know? Adam:  It was available to read about, but not in the normal sources that people read about the Astrocade.  Which would have been Electronic Games and some of the other computing magazines at the time.  But they didn't talk about, I mean, it was mentioned briefly... but only as a product that was supposed to come out.  But, in a way, ZGrass did come out.  The product, the language, ZGRASS, was available.  There was a hardware system, a computer (which could cost upwards of $10,000) that used some of the custom chips that were available in the Astrocade.  It was called the UV-1.  It was-- I'll get more into that when I cover the Zgrass system in some future episode, which is why we're talking about it here.  I would like to discover more about it.  I wanna learn.  I want-- I don't think I can use it, because it has not been archived.  But, the documentation is available on BallyAlley.  I have that.  Maybe I'll go through that a little bit.  It was... something to learn about and share... Chris:  Yeah.  Really cool. Adam:  It's all about sharing, man.  And caring.  Okay.  The Bally Arcade and Astrocade history.  History of the month is something that we are going to have.  It's going to start with the "Arcadians" #1, which was the first available newsletter.  The "Arcadians" was a newsletter that published for just four issues.  And it was published-- and it was only two pages.  The first one, I think, was only front and back.  Then, I think, maybe the next one was four pages, but that was only two pages front and back.  It was really just a round-robin letter.  It predates the "Arcadian."  It was only available to a few people.  These have been archived.  You can read them online.  I'm gonna start there.  As soon as BASIC was released, it took a few months after the Astrocade came out (excuse me, before the Bally Arcade came out).  Once that system came out with Bally BASIC (which required a separate BASIC interface so that you could record to tape), then Bob Fabris, the editor, said, "We've got something we can explore together.  Let's do this.  Let's pool our resources and come up with a way to share information.  That was what they were all about.  They did this very early on.  That's something that interests me greatly about the system, and I want to be able to share that and compare it with knowledge of other systems that were out at the time. Chris:  That's really cool.  I mean, it's one of the earliest systems of any kind, that I know of, that actually did have a community.  You know, that were really trying to goad each other into doing new things and write programs and stuff like that.  I mean, I can't imagine there was an Altair community.  I'm trying to... Adam: There was an Altair community. Chris:  Oh.  Well, but they were all very rich.  And they had a lot of time on their hands! Adam:  ...those switches, right? Chris:  I hope that you're gonna to do a "What's New on Bally Alley" I know I keep going on about this, but that is just an amazing website to me.  You do a lot of updates to it, so when you do add new things to the BallyAlley website.  And, who knows, maybe this will give you a reason to add more things to the website. Adam:  It could.  The website isn't updated very frequently.  I have great intentions, everyone.  So, if you've been wanting to see updates, give me some motivation to do some.  I don't mean send me money.  We, as the two of us (and other people on the Yahoo group), we do like to BS about the system.  But, there's so much information in my archives, and there are only a few people who share it with me.  Basically, two other people.  We're thinking about putting it up on archive.org, but some of it is kind of-- I think it should, might remain hidden from viewers, even though it might be archived there.  Because, it's personal letters that, I think, probably shouldn't be shared.  Because, there's personal information there.  I mean, when I got the collection, there was actually checks still that were un-cashed in it that were written in the 70s. Chris:  Wow! Adam:  Those kind of things I did not scan.  Because I was like… what? [sounds of exasperation and/or confusion], it was very strange to me.  They are un-canceled, unused checks out there in some boxes that were people subscribing to the newsletter.  I'm not sure why he didn't cash the checks, but... they're there! Chris:  So you could have them in the archive, I guess. Adam:  Right.  But I don't think I wanna-- I don't think that sort of information should be shared. Chris:  Oh, I agree.  But, you know, I mean back then a dollar, back then, was the equivalent of fifty grand today.  Don't you love it when people say stuff like that?  It's like... well, you're going a little overboard. Adam:  Right.  [Laughing]  We had to walk up and down the hill both ways... Chris: Both ways! Adam:  ...in the snow.  Pick up the coal from between the tracks. Chris:  Any Cosby reference, I'm on!  What I'm hoping... do you think that Paul is going to take part in some way in this first episode? Adam:  I would like him to.  If we take a long time, then probably. Chris:  Well, I'm hoping we're going to hear a lot from Paul Thacker. Adam:  Paul Thacker, he will definitely join us, at least, for the... if he can't make it into this zero episode, he will be in for the first one.  He's a good guy.  He has helped me-- more than helped me!-- he has... he is in control of archiving tapes.  That is his department.  After I wasn't really updating the site too much anymore (I actually had even pulled away from it), in about 2006, Paul Thacker came forward and he introduced himself to me through an email.  He said he would like to help with archiving tapes.  And... he really, really has.  He's the leader in that department.  He has contacted people to make archiving programs possible.  He has followed up with people with large collections.  He has archived them.  Not all of it is available on the website yet, but it is... it has been done.  They're truly archived.  And, what's neat about Paul he has tapes that were available between users.  If you're familiar with growing up with these old systems, you might have had a computer like an Atari 800 or a Commodore 64.  Maybe you had some tapes that you recorded to (or disks).  You would write a "Game Number 1."   And then that was what you'd name the program-- even if the program was a type-in from a "Compute!" magazine or an "Antic" magazine. Chris:  Oh, you would save it as "Game Number 1" Adam:  This is how these tapes were.  People would write one program on it... maybe, maybe even give it a clueless name, that meant nothing to either Paul or I.  Paul would record the whole side.  Paul would go through and say, "What's on here?"  Paul would find a program.  Paul would find SIX different versions of that program!  Paul would find programs that had been halfway recorded over.  Paul made sure to archive all of that, separately (and as efficiently as possible), document it.  So, something I want to cover... there are so many topics... I should back up here, and I should say that there are a lot of topics available to anyone who is starting a podcast.  Something that has to be zeroed in on (and that's not supposed to be a pun on the zero episode) is that you have to choose.  You have to narrow.  You have to focus.  I am no good at that.  I am not good at that... I can't do it. Chris:  How many fingers am I holding up? Adam:  Chris is holding up a finger, and I'm supposed to see one.  And I'm hoping that is what he was doing-- and not giving me the finger. Chris: [Laughing] Adam:  So, I would like to cover the ancestry of the Bally Arcade.  Something that came up and about 2001, perhaps 2002, is someone named Tony Miller, who was responsible for working on the Bally Arcade when it was created, mentioned that the Bally Arcade's chipset is actually a direct descendent of "Space Invaders" arcade game's... the CPU for "Gun Fight".  Or something to that affect.  I didn't understand it then, I might be able to understand it better if I find those exact posts (which are definitely archived).  Now, "Gun Fight" used the Intel 8080 CPU, which is why the Astrocade uses the Z80.  Because it's compatible... sort of.  The Z80 can run 8080 but not the other way around.  As you can see, my knowledge of all of this is completely limited.  What I just told you, is pretty much what I know.  There's obviously a story there.  If I could find people to interview, if I can dig into this, there is a GOOD story there.  And I would like to discover it and present it. Chris:  Yeah, 'cause that would mean Taito took some technical influence from Midway.  Because it was Midway that added a CPU, at all, to "Gun Fight," right?  So... that's pretty interesting. Adam:  We'll find out, Chris. Chris:  Yeah.  So, I've already talked about writing new games as the next logical step once one has a lot of information about any game system, or any computer (or anything like that).  So, are we going to encourage activity in the homebrew Astrocade scene?  Because, there is a latent one there.  You should definitely cover the two released games that we've already talked about: WAR and CRAZY CLIMBER.  Those were pretty big deals.  The first new Astrocade game since... what?... 1985-ish?  I mean, on cartridge... Adam:  It depends on how you look at it.  There were actually some people in the community, who were just sending cartridges back and forth to each other, who were sharing code in the 80s.  They're not considered released cartridges.  Something that is available to the public… yes. Chris:  In terms of talking about homebrew programming, you can also talk about people who just play around with this system, or even interview them.  What do you find interesting about the… Adam:  Yeah.  I would like to do interviews with people who actually have a lot of experience with the system and maybe grew up with it, which I did not do.  I didn't learn about it until... the 90s.  About homebrew programming: I believe, and I would love to make you guys believe, that homebrew programming did not start in the 90s.  I would like to let you know that homebrew programming has been around since 1975 (in my eyes) and earlier.  The very, very first PCs, and by that I mean "Personal Computers," not "IBM Personal Computers," (alright?)... these systems were programmed in people's living rooms, in people's kitchens.  If that is not homebrew programming, I don't know what is. Chris:  Right. Adam:  These people were learning for the sake of learning.  They were playing for the sake of the experience of touching the hardware, learning the software-- they weren't doing this for work, they were doing this for pleasure.  This is the same exact reason people are homebrewing games today.  They were doing this back then.  An insight that you get to see very clearly is in the in the "Arcadian" newsletters, and in the "Cursor" newsletters as well, is people want to teach other people.  They are about sharing.  They are about, "Hey I wrote this.  This is great.  You guys should type it in and try it out... and if you find out anything about it, let me know what you think.  If you can add something to it… if you can cut off six bytes and add a sound effect, please do that, because there's no sound."  These people wanted to help each other, and through that it is available in archives, and we can look at this and learn today.  I would like to have that happen, so that people of today, people who have the knowledge, have modern computers that can cross-compile and create new games-- that would be neat... to me. Chris:  Yeah. Adam:  It has been neat, went two have been released already.  But, even if new games don't get created, what about MESS?  Let's make that better. Chris:  Before we go any further, I think you should "share" your email address so that you get feedback. Adam:  My name is Adam, and you can reach me at ballyalley@hotmail.com Chris:  You can private message me on AtariAge.  I'm chris++. Adam:  Now we expect to get loads of email.  We are gonna be clogged.  We're going to have to have the first episode be nothing but reader feedback. Chris:  I'm telling ya, we really got a good thing going, so you better hang on to yourself. Adam:  [Laughing] Chris:  That's a Bowie quote.  Well, before we wrap this up, let's cover the obvious thing.  How did you get so involved in the Bally Arcade/Astrocade? Adam:  When I first began collecting some of these older consoles and home computers... I never stopped playing them, but when they started becoming available for a quarter, I said, "You know, why don't I just buy each one of them."  I had a very large collection for awhile, until I finally gave some of it to Chris... got rid of most of it, and... I am glad I did, because now I play the games I own.  What I don't play, I get to eventually.  In about 1994... '93... I read about this system in one of the books I had that was from the early 80s that covered the Zgrass, actually.  It was the system, I was like, "I want to get a Zgrass, that'd be neat."  I don't have one.  I did find out that it was related to the Bally Arcade.  From there... I wanted one.  I found my first one for a quarter.  I picked it up at a flea market. Chris:  Oh. Adam:  It came with a few games.  In fact, I saw the games first, and I was like, "How much you want for these?"  Each game was a quarter.  I think there was four or five of 'em.  Then I saw the system, but I didn't have that much money with me.  I had like a dollar left or something (I'd already bought some other things).  I was talking to a friend that I'd gone with, and he said, "Why don't you go back there and offer him your buck for it?"  I went back, and I said, "How much do you want for the game (the system)?"  And he goes, "A quarter." Chris:  Wow. Adam:  So, I still had change to go by another: 2600, an Intellivision... no... [laughing]  But, I didn't find anything else that day. Chris:  Those were the days before you people let eBay ruin that part of the hobby. Adam:  So, I did know that there was an "Arcadian" newsletter.  But, I was a member of an Atari 8-bit user group here in town.  It so happened, I was bringing it up... talking with someone there, and they said, "Oh, I've heard of that!"  I'm like, "Oh, you've heard of the Bally?"  They said, "Oh, sure.  You should talk to Mr. Houser" (who was the president of the Atari club).  Then he said, "I think he wrote some games for it."  I said, "Hmm.  That sounds interesting."  So, I approached him.  By 1994, there were very few users left in the Atari 8-bit group.  Who was left, we all knew each other very well (or, as well as we could-- even though some of us only knew each other from meetings).  We started talking.  He told me that he'd been involved with the "Arcadian."  He had published tapes.  He had something called "The Catalog" [THE SOURCEBOOK], which I now know was the way most people order tapes (but, back then I didn't).  He kept track of all this, and he still had all of his things.  He invited me over one Sunday afternoon and he showed me what he owned, which was... pretty-much everything for the Astrocade that was released.  We went through it one Sunday afternoon, and his son (who was in his early 20s) shared his memories of the machine.  I fell in love: I thought, "Wow, this system is great!"  While I was there Mr. Houser, his name was Richard Houser, he said, "Hey, you know what... we should call up Bob."  I said, "Bob, who?"  He said, "He was the person who used to publish the "Arcadian."  I said, "... Really?"  He's like, "Yeah, let's call him."  So, he called up Bob.  They chatted a bit (for a while) and he told him who I was-- I didn't talk to Bob.  But, he was available back then.  I thought that was great, so I wrote Bob a letter.  I said, "Would it be okay if I get some of your information..."  Later on, in the late-90s, he gave me permission to do that.  At the time, I just said, "Hey.  Here I am."  What's really neat, is I started sending him ORPHANED COMPUTERS & GAME SYSTEMS (which was a newsletter I did in the early-90s.  After three issues, Chris, here, joined me on board).  I sent them to him.  When I bought the Bally collection from him, those issues that I'd sent to him brought back to me.  Which, was, like, this huge circle... because it came through several people, in order to come back.  I found that really neat. Chris:  Yeah. Adam:  Eventually, with Chris, we discovered the system together.  We played around with it.  What was it...?  About 2001, I started BallyAlley.com.  It doesn't look great now, and it looked worse then.  Now, here I am... having a podcast.  How about you, Chris? Chris:  I never stopped playing all the way through either.  You know? Adam:  Why should've we? Chris:  Well, yeah.  I kept playing the old games through the period when they started to be called "classic" and "retro."  This happened at some point in the mid-90s. Adam:  During the HUGE crash during in the 80s (that none of us saw). Chris:  Yeah... that none of us knew about, except for the great prices (which I attributed to over-stock). Adam:  I didn't even think about it. Chris:  Well, they weren't all cheaper.  Even into '83/'84, I remember spending thirty-odd dollars on PITFALL II: LOST CAVERNS for the 2600. Adam:  Yeah, right.  I got that for my birthday, because it was $30... and I didn't have $30, I was a kid. Chris:  Right.  'Cause... that was about two-million dollars in today's money. Adam:  Also, for us, I think, we went onto computers, like many people our age at the time.  So, we sort of distanced ourselves.  The prices for computer stock stayed about the same, as they had for Atari cartridges, and things like that. Chris:  That's a good point.  Yeah.  In coming across "classic," after I hadn't really stopped playing my favorites (and discovering new favorites, thanks to the advent of thrift shops and video games at Goodwill, and stuff), I'd read that and say, "Oh, they're classic now.  Oh, all right.  If you say so."  I thought that was really funny.  So, by the late 90s, I thought I was the only person on earth (not literally, but pretty close) who is still playing these "old" videogames.  All I had when we started hanging out again, Adam, was an Atari 2600 and a Commodore 64.  That was all I wanted.  I didn't want to know about anything else, I didn't want to know about this new CD-ROM, with the "multimedia." Adam:  So, let's... this time period would have been...? Chris:  This is 1997.  By this point, I had been writing my own articles and essays for my own amusement (saving them as sequential files on 1541 floppies using the Commodore 64).  I wrote a file writer and reader program.  I thought I was the only one doing nerdy stuff like this, but I had fun doing it.  And I was still playing all the old games, picking 'em up for a buck or less, while making my rounds at the thrift shops and at Goodwills and everything like that.  I was in a subsidiary of Goodwill that was attached to the largest Goodwill store in Albuquerque.  I ran into a buddy of mine, from ten years previous.  He and I have been freshman in high school, and then I went to another high school and lost touch with all of my friends.  This guy's name, if you can believe this goofy name, was Adam Trionfo.  The store had an even goofier name: the U-Fix-It Corral, but then it changed into Clearance Corner.  Is that right? Adam:  Correct.  Yes. Chris:  Adam was working there.  So, I'm going through a box of... something... from the 80s.  He came over, "Are you Chris?"  I said, "Yeah.  Adam?"  He and I, you know, sort of shook hands.  I said, "Well, that's cool, you're working at Goodwill."  "Yup."  Then I left, and I never saw him again... Adam:  [Laughing] Untill today. Chris:  Until today.  That's why it really sounds improvised here.  He gave me a newsletter he had written about... old videogames (and they weren't even all that old yet, at the time).  He started ORPHANED COMPUTERS & GAME SYSTEMS (on paper, kids!) in 1994.  I asked him, "So, you write about video games too?"  He said, "Yeah."  We started hanging out playing games... a lot.  I didn't know anyone else at the time who liked to play Atari 2600 and Commodore 64 games.  He eventually nudged me to the Internet (or, dragged me... kicking and screaming).  When I encouraged him to start up his newsletter again, he said he would if I'd collaborate.  We did that for couple of years.  Sent out a lot of paper issues.  Had a ball writing it.  Going to World of Atari 98 (and then CGE 2003).  Using interviews that we had conducted at those to feed the material for the newsletter.  In 1999, it became a website.  We've actually been pretty good about adding recent articles... Adam:  Recently.  Yeah. Chris:  ... which is good for us.  I don't know what any of this has to do with what you asked me.  In 1982, we took a trip back East to Buffalo to visit family.  My mom's sister's best friend had a son named Robert, who was a couple of years older than me (I was ten, he was probably twelve or thirteen).  He was the kid who first showed me Adventure. Adam:  Never heard of it. Chris:  Summertime of '82 [mumbling/talked-over??] I got my mind blown by it.  This same guy, Robert, took me into his basement to show me his Atari computer (I believe).  He said not to touch it, because he had a program in memory.  He was typing in a program and he had a magazine open.  That's all I remember.  I wish I had focused on the model number or which magazine it was.  It looked like all of this gobbledygook on the screen.  I was absolutely captivated because-- who didn't want to make his own videogames?  I'd been playing Atari VCS games since February of '82.  It became an obsession with me, on par with music (believe it or not).  He said not to touch it because he hadn't saved it yet.  I said, "How do ya save it?"  You know what I mean?  I didn't ask him any smart-ass questions: "Okay, ya gonna take a picture of the screen?" Adam:  [Laughing] Chris:  He said, "I save them on these."  He showed me just a normal blank cassette, like you would listen to music on.  That just entranced me: all of these innocent music cassettes hiding videogames on them.   Adam:  [Laughing] Chris:  I learned how to program in BASIC that summer from a book checked out from the library.  I mean, I just really got interested in talking to this new thing.  This home computer: the microcomputer (as it was called quite often).  The "micro" to separate them from "mainframes," because, you know, a lot of our friends had mainframes in their bedrooms. Adam:  Right. Chris.  Then he brought me over and showed me one more thing before we had to go.  This was the Bally Professional Arcade.  I thought it was one of the most amazing things I've ever seen.  We played THE INCREDIBLE WIZARD.  He let me play for a little while.  I said, "This is just like WIZARD OF WOR!"  He said, "Yeah, it is."  I can't remember if he had an explanation, or had read an explanation, of why the name was changed.  That was my only experience with the Astrocade.  I loved the controller.  To this day, it is still one of my favorite controllers.  I love the trigger thing, and I love the combination of a joystick and a paddle in one knob on top of it.  I didn't see another Astrocade until I started hanging out with you again in '97.  It figures that you were able to collect all of that amazing stuff because you worked at Goodwill. Adam:  I didn't use that to my advantage. Chris: [sarcastically] I'm sure you didn't! Adam:  I wasn't allowed to do that. Chris:  Yeah, well, I'm sure you didn't steal it... Adam:  No. Chris:  But I mean, come on!, you probably made note of what came in. Adam:  There was actually a rule that I had to follow.  When anything came in, it had to sit on the shelves for 24 hours before it could be purchased by an employee.  That didn't mean we had to show everyone where it was, but it had to be out.  And, that was true: it was out.  That didn't mean we said...  (because there were people that came in every single day, just like I used to like to go around too).  It would be on the shelf, but that didn't mean it would be right on the front shelf, saying, "Buy me please, Atari game collector."  It was in the store somewhere! Chris:  You put it in the back, near the electric pencil sharpener! Adam:  No, I didn't hide it either.  I didn't want to get in trouble. Chris:  Nah.  I know.  Adam had an original Odyssey with all of the layover-- the "layovers?"  With all the airplane stops.  No, with all the overlays. Adam:  [Laughing] Chris:  Which, is pretty amazing!  You had an Odyssey, with original 1972 Magnavox console, with everything else: an Intellivision, he had an Odyssey 2 (with boxed QUEST FOR THE RINGS)... and... Adam:  I had 43 different systems. Chris:  Holy cow! Adam:  I am so glad that I don't have that anymore! Chris:  That is a lot for an apartment. Adam:  So, now I have a few left. Chris:  Yes, folks, he does have an Astrocade. Adam:  I do. Chris:  He does have all of the original cartridge games for it.  I think you got all of them? Adam:  I had them, but now I have a multicart.  I got rid of most of them.  I feel... I kept some of my favorites.  I kept my prototypes. Chris:  Which is cool.  Obviously, you have WAR and CRAZY CLIMBER. Adam:  Right. Chris:  THE INCREDIBLE WIZARD. Adam:  I think, I have number 2's, because the programmer got number 1's. Chris:  That's pretty cool.   Adam:  Yeah.  But, honestly, I don't care about the numbers on them.  They were hand numbered, because collector seem to like that.  Personally, since I did the numbering, I found it annoying. Chris:  Well, there were fifty sold? Adam:  There were fifty each.  Yeah.  There was a run of 20 for WAR, because we didn't have any cartridge shells.  We got more, and we did the second run.  The run of CRAZY CLIMBER was always 50.  It was released all at once. Chris:  You have number two, and [sarcastically], that's a collectors item.. Adam:  Right! Chris: ...if anyone knew what it was. Adam:  I should have got number 0!  Think of this, this episode is a collector's item already! Chris:  You taught me a great deal about the Astrocade and how it worked.  You've told me some things that I just find...  so cool.  Like, you had to use the screen for code, because part of your available RAM was the Screen RAM, right?  (And still is.) Adam:  Under BASIC, that's correct. Chris:  That's how I became even more interested in the Bally Arcade/Astrocade. Adam:  We are about finished wrapping things up here.  Just for the last few things to say.  We are going to have an episode every two weeks (or so).  So, that would be bimonthly.  I hope you guys... if you have any ideas that you want to come up with, will send in some feedback.  If we get no feedback by the first one, that's okay... because we expect... a couple of people... to listen to this.   Chris:  Thanks for listening, and thanks for inviting me along, Adam. Adam:  Good to have ya! [End of episode]

BankBosun Podcast | Banking Risk Management | Banking Executive Podcast

Kelly Coughlin is interviwed by Chris Carlson. Chris is a lawyer and actor in Minneapolis and applies his Socratic method to extract from Kelly what the heck he is doing with BankBosun. Kelly Coughlin is CEO of BankBosun, a management consulting firm helping bank C-Level Officers navigate risk and discover reward. He is the host of the syndicated audio podcast, BankBosun.com. Kelly brings over 25 years of experience with companies like PWC, Lloyds Bank, and Merrill Lynch. On the podcast Kelly interviews key executives in the banking ecosystem to provide bank C-Suite officers, risk management, technology, and investment ideas and solutions to help them navigate risks and discover rewards. And now your host, Kelly Coughlin. Kelly: Hi, this is Kelly Coughlin. I’ve got my long-time friend Chris Carlson on the line. He’s CEO of Narrative Pros. Chris, are you there? Chris: I am. Kelly: Great. How are you doing? Chris: I’m pretty good. How about you? Kelly: I’m terrific. Chris and I were catching up. We haven’t talked with each other in a while, and we were catching up on what’s going on. Chris had a bunch of questions about what we’re doing at the Bank Bosun, and we thought, “Well, let’s turn this into a podcast.” Rather than me talking to Chris about what I’m doing, he’s going to ask me some questions so it will help him and the audience better understand what we’ve got going on. Chris I’m going to turn it over to you. Chris: All right. Well, I think first up on the order of business is letting everyone else know a little bit more about who you are. I’ve known you for a while, but why don’t you let people know a little bit more about yourself. Kelly: I’m 58, 4 daughters, 4 granddaughters, and I don’t know if you knew this, I have one grandson. Finally a male in the family. Chris: Oh, congratulations! Finally! Kelly: CPA. Went to Gonzaga University. My uncle is Father Bernard J. Coughlin who is President. Go Barney! He’s 92 now, and I always give him a shout-out when given the opportunity. I also got my MBA from Babson. Let’s see, I worked for PWC when it was Coopers and Lybrand, and then Lloyd’s Bank, CEO of an investment and financial technology company that I founded, managed, and sold. I don’t if I’ve touched base with you since I’ve started working with Equias Alliance as a risk consultant. They do bank-owned life insurance (BOLI) and non-qualified plan programs for banks. I don’t think we’ve really touched base since I started with them. Chris: No. It’s interesting. Kelly: Yes, it is. Chris: Speaking of which, explain to me this BankBosun. Am I saying that right? I take it it’s a nautical term. Kelly: Yeah. Technically, it’s spelled B-O-S-U-N on the website, BankBosun, but Bosun is actually spelled B-O-A-T-S-W-A-I-N, like boat swain, but it’s pronounced Bosun. Chris: Okay. Kelly: BankBosun, it’s a syndicated audio program, really, that’s designed to bring together executives all throughout the U.S. who are participating in what I call the bank ecosystem. Chris: Wait. I’m not going to let off the hook here. What does a boatswain do? Kelly: The captain of a ship needs help and guidance and support, so the boatswain helps the skipper, the captain of the ship, achieve its mission and purpose. Chris: All right. Yeah, that’s a segue because I’m connecting the dots as we speak as I listen to you. BankBosun helps C-level execs in the way. Is that right? Kelly: Yeah. That’s correct. We’re not dealing with ship captains. We’re dealing with bank officers, chief officers. It’s a clever play on the words C-officers, sea-level officers. Chris: It is clever. It’s very punny. A lot of puns. That’s good though. It keeps the interest. I’m not going to let off the hook with the other fancy term which is banking ecosystem. An ecosystem, if I remember it, that’s like the jungle. Right? What do you mean by banking ecosystem? Kelly: The jungle is one ecosystem, so technically it’s a biological community interacting within a set relationship among resources, habitats, and residents of the area. By this, I mean the residents of the banking community, so it’s all the residents of the banking community interacting among each other. The area is not defined as a physical definition like a pond or an ocean or a jungle. It’s defined as a business industry, and in this case, it’s the banking industry. Chris: Sure. All right. What do they need? I mean, why them? I mean, given your background it makes sense. Kelly: Why the banking ecosystem? Chris: Yeah, why do they need particular help and why are you the one to help direct that assistance? Kelly: Well, bankers are just fascinating, interesting people, aren’t they? Chris: Yes, yes they are. They evidently need a lot of help. Kelly: Well, I’ve been in the banking ecosystem, if we can keep using and then abusing and overusing that term, since I was 22. I started my career at Merrill in Seattle in the early 80’s selling mortgage-backed securities to the banks and credit unions. That was a good introduction to navigating this ecosystem. I would say that I learned a lot from that. Then I was consultant at PWC, and CEO of Lloyd’s at two asset management subsidiaries of Lloyd’s Bank, and then as a CEO of our financial technology company Global Bridge. Our primary market was banks, so I’ve been in this ecosystem, if you will, for many, many years, and I do find it interesting and fascinating. The 2008 crash, or melt down I should say, and several others that we’ve had in history, emphasize that banks are a foundation or bedrock of the economy. Frankly, they need all the help they can get. It’s good for the economy. Chris: These bankers you’re trying to reach, I’m assuming you’re doing it through these podcasts and other high-tech, and you’re pretty comfortable that they’ll be able to get the help they need through that and not be put off by it? It’s a good way to reach them? Kelly: Well, it’s certainly is not something that historically they’re used to and comfortable with. Historically it’s been print media, download reports, print them, stick them in your briefcase, read them when you can. Half the time you don’t read them, or if you do, you read them on the airplane and then chuck them. It’s not something that they’re used to right now, but I know as a CEO of a couple of companies in my past, that we pulled in so many different directions from different constituents whether it be board members or key customers or regulators, employees, suppliers, consultants, accountants, everybody is pulling at us and yanking at our time. CEO’s, generally, and CFO’s, but C-level execs, they need to extract value from all these different sources of information efficiently and effectively. I really am a proponent of the multitasking concept, so the idea was, “Let’s give them some good information, bring together this ecosystem, give them some good information but in a way that they can do other things.” Kelly: Frankly, we’re right in the middle of sporting season, football season and the World Series. I was actually down in Kansas City for the World Series. That was fun. The commercials are ridiculous in these sporting events especially football, so I figured out a way to multitask during these games. Certainly during football games you can read if you want, but also you can listen and learn too. CEO’s, you run your own company. You got a million things going on. Right? You’ve got to figure out a way to maximize the return off of that. Chris: Absolutely. Yeah. You said earlier that you think that it’s a time when banks have a greater challenge than they’ve had in the past, and with your nautical-themed assistance, give me a sense of why now is a particularly challenging time for banks and how you’re going to be able to help us. Kelly: Well, I like the nautical theme for the Bank Bosun. I’ve sailed for many years. I’ve lived in Seattle in the 80’s. To me skippering a boat was, where you have a lot of moving parts and people and weather and tides and currents and rocks and other boats to deal with and coast guard, the regulator, and it really served as a great metaphor for running a business, but especially a bank. I think any executive that’s been in charge of a boat knows exactly what I mean about that. When you’re out sailing in the Puget Sound or the ocean, you use whatever tools and information you can muster up to get you and your crew and your boat to the next point. There are no guide posts. There are no signs. You have to watch weather, currents, tides, all that kind of stuff. All of those principles apply to skippering a company, but especially a bank. Chris: That makes sense. You sold me on the metaphor. Kelly: Good. Chris: Tell me more about where you’re at right now and what the connection is with your Bank Bosun. Are they okay with this new gig? How do they relate? Kelly: Well, Equias is in the bank-owned life insurance space. BOLI is the acronym for that. I came across Equias and the BOLI industry when I was working on a management consulting project. I didn’t know anything about the industry or the product at that time, but after I finished the engagement I thought, “Man, I need to get into this space,” because I love the asset class, if you will. Frankly, it’s an alternative investment for banks’ portfolios. Now, it has to be surrounded by insurance and you have to make sure that insurance is a key part of it, but at the end of the day, it’s a phenomenal asset class. It transfers balance sheet risk. You get a higher return than treasuries, than municipal bonds, and that sort of thing, but I really do like the asset class. Then it has some benefits for funding non-qualified plans. The thing that I liked about it is it reminded me of my early Merrill Lynch days selling mortgage backed securities. At the time, mortgage backed securities were a new, innovative product. They had a few more moving parts involved, and it required me to simplify the value proposition. You really need to focus on the benefits, which everybody needs to do in any business. With any product, you’ve got to focus on the benefits. I always think of the line, “People don’t want a quarter-inch drill. They want a quarter-inch hole.” Now this is, at the end of the day, a life insurance product. I also love the line by Woody Allen, “I tried to commit suicide one day by inhaling next to an insurance salesman.” There’s always some inherent bias against that. My father sold insurance, and I told that to him when I was about 22 or something. He didn’t find it that funny actually. I find it funny. Chris: It is funny. It’s a funny line. Kelly: Yeah, it is. Chris: It’s funny because the word inhaling is funny. Kelly: You’re going to probably offend somebody. Chris: Probably, but that’s not your target market. Kelly: They’re my colleagues. Chris: Your friends, as it were. Speaking of friends, I haven’t wished you, my friend, a Happy New Year. We’re about a year into it here, and you see all these lists coming out, top movies, top TV shows. Why don’t you give me the top three initiatives for, BOLI, or for the banking ecosystem? Kelly: Okay. Chris: Pick your field. Kelly: Well, I certainly have three, but I’m not going to tell you two of them because I wouldn’t want to tip off our competitors onto what I’ve got up my proverbial sleeve. Chris: Okay. Kelly: Stay tuned. News at 5. Chris: That’s right. Kelly: Let me hear your sales voice say that. Chris: News at 5. Now it’s, News in 5 seconds. I asked you for the top three initiatives for 2016 and you said that you’ll give me one. Kelly: I’ll give you one. Chris: It’s called negotiating? Kelly: Yeah. Chris: Okay. Kelly: The one that I’m intrigued by is a confluence of two things. One is cyber security risk. Chris: All right. Kelly: The other is risk transference of that risk. I want to explore whether it makes sense to pursue a captive insurance program for banks to underwrite cyber security risk. Setup a collective or a community to do that. I think it’s being mispriced now by insurance companies because they haven’t really identified the risk. They haven’t really identified how big the risk is, how to mitigate the risk, and then how to price it. Anytime you have unknowns like that, especially in insurance, you get over, mispricing, I should say. That’s something that intrigues me. Chris: Yeah, it makes sense. Kelly: Yeah. The other two I’m not going to tell you about. Chris: Perfect! In the acting business, we call this dramatic tension, which you’ve done a good job of creating. Kelly: Thanks! Chris: Well it sounds interesting. It’s good stuff. We want to thank you for listening to the syndicated audio program, BankBosun.com The audio content is produced by Kelly Coughlin, Chief Executive Officer of BankBosun, LLC; and syndicated by Seth Greene, Market Domination LLC, with the help of Kevin Boyle. Video content is produced by The Guildmaster Studio, Keenan Bobson Boyle. The voice introduction is me, Karim Kronfli. The program is hosted by Kelly Coughlin. If you like this program, please tell us. If you don’t, please tell us how we can improve it. Now, some disclaimers Kelly is licensed with the Minnesota State Board of Accountancy as a Certified Public Accountant. Kelly provides bank owned life insurance portfolio and nonqualified benefit services to banks across the United States. The views expressed here are solely those of Kelly Coughlin and his guests in their private capacity and do not in any other way represent the views of any other agent, principal, employer, employee, vendor or supplier of Kelly Coughlin.  

BankBosun Podcast | Banking Risk Management | Banking Executive Podcast

Kelly talks to Chris Carlson, CEO, Narrative Pros, about what business leaders can learn from a stage and theater actor about presentations to small and large audiences.   Kelly Coughlin is CEO of BankBosun, a management consulting firm helping bank C-Level Officers navigate risk and discover reward. He is the host of the syndicated audio podcast, BankBosun.com. Kelly brings over 25 years of experience with companies like PWC, Lloyds Bank, and Merrill Lynch. On the podcast Kelly interviews key executives in the banking ecosystem to provide bank C-Suite officers, risk management, technology, and investment ideas and solutions to help them navigate risks and discover rewards. And now your host, Kelly Coughlin. Kelly: I’ve got my friend Chris Carlson CEO of NarrativePros on the line, Chris are you there? Chris: I’m here. Kelly: Great, Chris and I have known each other for many, many years. Chris is an actor at the Guthrie Theater in Minneapolis He’s also a lawyer and an entrepreneur, and I’m a big fun of his. Listeners are saying, why does he have a starving actor, lawyer on here? Before we get to your connection in to the banking ecosystem. A little bit of personal background. Chris: Minnesota residence, most of my life, three kids, I’m 46. I’ve been, as I said earlier acting professionally for 22 years. I’ve been an attorney for about as long. Kelly: Well let’s get into why I have you on BankBosun and your connection to the banking echo system. If you recall, I asked you to give a talk at a conference my company was hosting for banks and investment managers. I think we had like six or seven speakers there over a two day period, probably eight or nine I suppose. You got the highest rankings of anybody in terms of popularity. Tell me why you think that happened and what your value proposition, if you will, to the banking industry is. What was it that resonated with these bankers in that message? Chris: Absolutely, and I to think to answer as many of those question as efficiently as I can, it has to do with the value of genuine connections between individuals, whether that’s one on one or one to many, or many to one. The expertise that I have amassed over the years, is to how to efficiently create that. How to make that efficient, how to maximize the feedback that you get from any communication. Kelly: What does that really mean? Chris: Let me give you an example, bankers are smart guys. They tend to live in their heads when it comes to ideas. They believe if they have a great piece of advice, that that’s the end of their value. That I tell you to invest in stock A, because that will help you. But the real world has as much to do about that conversation and whether or not you say invest in stock A, in a way that is meaningful, whether it makes sense to them. Whether you’re rude, whether you’re cold or indifferent. The value of advice when it’s person to person, which is at the center of any banking relationship, depends on the connection between two people. It’s not whether or not I like you necessarily, but it’s I have to trust you. I have to respect you. I have to understand you absolutely. It has as much to do about that as anything. Kelly: How I perceive you or how a customer perceives a banker. Not necessarily how he really is. Chris: Well actually I would say that the goal is to have them perceive you as you really are, and we are many different people to many different audiences. You yourself are a father, a friend, a boxer. You will behave differently in the ring than with a client. What you need to do is harness what will be of the most value, and make the strongest connection with the audience that you’re in front of. That has to come from somewhere that’s true. One of the things that people often mistake is that acting is fake, and it actually has all to do with truth. If you see a good actor, you get them, you buy them, you connect with them. If you see a bad actor, you absolutely reject them. You don’t get it. It’s not real. Kelly: I think what you’re saying is that you learned this in your acting career. And as a lawyer, you practice this. But you learned this through your acting training to be real. Two scenarios, one is making a one on one presentation, and another is giving a talk to 20 people. What does your advice do in those two scenarios? Chris: My advice hopefully will encourage people to understand that their impact on their audience, whether it’s one person or 20 people, has more to do with how they say their message, and how they’re able to let people connect with them as real individuals. How they’re able to be themselves in a very genuine and authentic way, and then share the advice that they have. Far too often people, I call them left brain professionals. People who think a lot will sit in front of their computer and work on their outline in their PowerPoint and then get up and give it, without really spending much time on whether or not they’re giving it in a way that incorporates who they are. I think you, Kelly, are a good example of an effective delivery. That’s you, when I hear you talking, that’s the same Kelly that I hear when I’m having a conversation with in the coffee shop. People are drawn to that. For a banker to have an interaction with somebody, the more genuine they can be, the more that they can focus on that individual as a human being, and also share with them, themselves as a human being. That will make the advice that they give, that much more meaningful and valuable. In many ways it’s the same thing when they stand up in front of 20 people. It‘s genuine and real and to a degree vulnerable. That has a lot to do with fear that is natural, standing in front of a group of people or a high pressure sale. Anyway that you can wrestle that fear, and you kind of say look, “This is me, and this is what I have to say and I think it would be great if you used it, or bought, but if you don’t I understand.” That’s incredibly attractive for people to be around that kind of energy versus, “Look you really got to buy this and it’s really important to me. I don’t know what I’m going to do if you don’t, if you don’t buy this, if you don’t listen to me.” Even though it is important what the person thinks about you, or whether or not they take your advice or buy it. Showing that, gets in the way of who you are and their comfort quite honestly. Kelly: Give me a couple of takeaways that relate to preparing for a presentation and then three or four related to the actual presentation itself, beginning, middle and end that kind of thing. We’ve got some real solid takeaways, I can put some guiding principles here. Chris: Let’s start with the content, that’s where everyone’s comfort is, and most people will spend 100% of their preparation time working on their PowerPoint slides, and you definitely have to work on some kind of presentation, outline and some visuals do help. Number one, when it comes to the visuals, speaker support, PowerPoint, I would work as hard as you can to get rid of all the words quite honestly and just focus on graphs and charts, and pictures or visual creatures. There is a huge disconnect when somebody puts up a bunch of words on a slide, and reads them, or makes the audience read them. It’s just counterproductive and disingenuous to a live environment. You as the speaker need to be considered to be value bringer and you have to explain these things. I would say as few words as possible on any kind of visual support. The content in what someone says, you should outline in bullet points, words or phrases, but not in complete sentences. Don’t lock yourself into phrasing them, in any particular way. Let yourself react to those ideas and explain them, and that’s come off and it’s very authentic and genuine. Kelly: No words on slides. Chris: No words on slides. I would join the audience in cheering if I were to see less words on slides. It’s easy to do, and I think it’s actually fear. People are insecure and they’re like, ”Ah, I got to put all these words on here.” Well take the words off and say the words to people. Kelly: No words on the slide, that’s number one. What was number two? Chris: Number two outline your points in a way that you can speak to them in a genuine way instead, for example, I have been involved in the banking ecosystem since I was 22. Instead of writing that out and then reading it, you might just have something that says 22. You look at it and you say, “Ever since I was 22, I’ve been working in banking.” Let those words, let you work through the thoughts, so that the words come to you at that time. You have to have good notes but it will force you to pick the words authentically and people will hear that. That’s number two. Number three is when you pick these ideas and when you explain them, pretend you’re explaining them to your 92 year old father, or your grandma next door. In other words avoid jargon, you’ve got to be simple, direct and accessible, and I think that people who work in the idea profession tend to be complicated, inaccessible and you always want to be as clear as possible. Simplicity is not easy, it’s very difficult and working on that simplicity is an incredible investment in giving your audiences, who’s paying attention, a return of interest. They will appreciate you, summarizing things very simply and to button this third point off. Work very hard to summarize the single point that you have to make in one sentence. Imagine that your audience is walking out the door, and they don’t have time to hear your whole speech, what would be the one thing you would want to tell them. If you complain, oh no it’s too complicated, it can’t be distilled into one sentence, I would say to you that your audience is doing that anyways. After they walk out, someone’s going to say, “What did Kelly Coughlin talk about?” “Oh, Kelly is working on this cool BankBosun thing, that it’s needed, it helps out C-suite Executives in the banking industry.” They’re summarizing what you’re saying anyways. If you jump into their shoes and try to say all right, “What is the one takeaway from this? You’re going to help them do that. Kelly: That’s good, I recall again from that conference you spoke at. There was some prep work that you recommended. Chris: Sure, let me focus on one of them. A lot of acting technique or approach is focused on combating the nerves and stress of performing. That we appear, genuine, authentic relaxed. One of the truths of performing in front of a bunch of people is that you are nervous. It’s human, so what we want to do is make sure that we find another truth to counteract that. The best counter measure to stress is breathing. When we’re with our friends, or when we’re relaxed, or when we’re uncomfortable and not threatened, the human being breathes from the belly, they use … we use our diaphragm to pull in breath, and when you’re very relaxed, and actually if you watch your kids when they’re sleeping, you’ll see their stomachs go up and down. Now their stomachs are going up and down because the diaphragm is pulling in breath. When we’re nervous we tend not to breath from our diaphragm, our belly, we tend to take shallow breathes and it makes us more nervous and it changes our voice. Someone who’s really relaxed would sound like this, but if they were breathing … their voice goes up a little bit, and it gets a little breathy, and it’s just not as grounded. We can hear that, we feel that someone has a breathiness to their voice and it’s a little higher in pitch, but if you take a breath, and breathe from your diaphragm, not only does the pitch go down, but you can also project your voice further. You can talk louder. So breathing, putting your hand on your stomach and trying to train yourself to breathe so that your stomach flops out when you breathe in, is one of the most effective counter measures to stress and to get you back into yourself, to being a relaxed confident genuine person. Kelly: Let’s talk about, what are kind of some of the deal killers out there. The absolute be cognizant that you don’t do this. Chris: We’ve already touched on some them. These things would be anything that disconnect you from your audience; that separate you from them. For example, number one, the minute you start reading off of the slide, you’re not being in front of an audience genuinely. You’ve turned towards the screen, you’re reading something that everyone else is perfectly capable of reading. I mean that’s just a fundamental disconnect with one audience. “Hey buddy, I can see the slide and you’re reading it for me and it doesn’t make any sense.” Another one would be reading your speech which is very similar, and that’s telling the audience, “I’m not going to talk with you. I’m not going to share with you my ideas, I’m going to read what I wrote, and you’re going to listen to it.” At which point the audience feel like, well why don’t you just give me them for the reading, so that I can read it. Something that’s kind of fun, that I’ve uncovered, is that the average person speaks at about 150 words a minute. We can understand and we think at about 800 words a minute. That means that there is an attention gap. Every time someone starts talking over a couple of 100 words, where my mind is running circles around what you’re telling me. You always have to participate in that because if you don’t, if you don’t give them something to think about that is helping you, they’re going to think about something else. Kelly: Well don’t the non-verbal clues fill that void to a certain extent? Chris: They can, or they cut against it. Something that I was just doing some research on, hand gestures and body gestures. It’s fascinating, the neuro-scientists have studied it, and we use specifically our hands to make gestures, to help us think of a word, and so if we’re genuinely using our hands it’s because we’re trying to think of how to say something, but if you want someone who has prepared a hand gesture like a politician or a bad speaker. The hand gesture comes at or after what they’re trying to say, not before. In the real world, the hand gesture comes a little bit before what it is that they have to say. That’s what the hand gesture is for. When someone plans it, when someone says, “I think it would be good if I moved my hand like this.” They tend to do it in a way that’s very disconnected and fake, because we can tell that. Instinctively, they do it as you’re saying the word or phrase, or after it. That’s an example of another disconnection with an audience where they get the sense, and it’s an unconscious sense, it’s not, “My, he moved his hands in a way that was not matching with the phrase. Therefore I think he’s fake.” We’re not aware of that consciously but unconsciously we think to ourselves, “Wow this guy is a … he’s a fake, he’s not being real with us.” It’s very common. Kelly: Tell me about what should people do with their hands as a default, and then how should we stand? One foot, two feet, hands in the pocket, hands by the side? Give us a couple of ideas on that. Chris: It’s hard to do, but you forget about your hands. Don’t plan any gestures, let your hands go. Just like I was suggesting with your words to jot a note, and then let the specific words you use to express that idea come out in that moment. The same thing should be with your hands. Let your hands make whatever gesture. If you’re an Italian, outspoken hand gesturing person, that’s what you have to do. Kelly: Even if it’s a distraction I’ve been to talks where somebody will be using their hands, you end up following their hands the whole time. Chris: I would say to you that hands gestures become distracting when they’re not connected with what they’re saying. If they’re connected with what they’re saying, you’re not even going to notice them. You become attracted when they’re not connected. If someone has a non-verbal tick, if they’re just moving their hands and it has no connection with what they’re saying, yes it becomes repetitive and it’s a distraction. It’s just like someone who says, has a verbal tick and says um, um all the time and it’s distracting because it’s getting in the way of um, um what you’re trying to say. Kelly: What about movement on the stage? Chris: Less is more, when you start moving around, there’s a huge temptation because of nerves, the sympathetic nervous system, the fight or flight reaction kicks in, and people want to move and I see this so frequently with inexperienced presenters. They’ll start wondering around the stage, or they’ll shift away back and forth on their feet, and that is not connected with anything they’re saying 90% of the time…99. They’re just moving because they’re full of adrenaline and they feel like they should move. But, if it’s not connected with what they’re saying, it is inherently destructive. Why is someone pacing back and forth on the stage? It’s funny because I’ll get push back on that, people will say, “Well I’m trying to be more interesting and dynamic on the stage.” I have no problem with being interesting and dynamic, I have a problem, if it’s not connected with what you’re saying. When in doubt, you need to practice standing still because you’re going to want to move. Move if there’s a reason, move if it makes sense. For example, if you’re separating a point. In the first situation, the FED needs to do XYZ and I’m going to talk about this for a while. In the second situation, and then you can move on that, that might make sense. That’s an example, but that requires practice and planning. So I always recommend that people just stand still. Kelly: Do you prefer microphone that is attached to you versus attached to a podium, because you’re kind of stuck and glued to the podium, but is that your preference? Chris: Yes, a lapel or lavalier microphone allows you to forget about the microphone and that’s what you need to do with a majority of the technology that’s helping support you. Some microphone on a podium tends to trap you behind the podium, which is bad for a number of reasons. You have a temptation to lean on the podium, you’re blocked and a lot of your body language from the audience. You might have more of a tendency to look down. A lavalier microphones will allow you to just take one step to the right or left of the podium, and to find a comfortable position in front of the audience and be accessible. Kelly: That’s terrific, I appreciate that. Chris do you have a favorite quote to finish off here? I always like to get one Chris: Any good quote. Kelly: Good quotes. Chris: Good quotes. “In law, what place are tainted in corrupt but being seasoned with a gracious voice obscures the show of evil.” Kelly: Good one, Chris I appreciate your time on this, and good luck to you with NarrativePros, and we’ll be in touch. Anybody wants to contact Chris, feel free, Narrativepros.com, is that the website? Chris: That’s it. Kelly: Thanks Chris We want to thank you for listening to the syndicated audio program, BankBosun.com The audio content is produced by Kelly Coughlin, Chief Executive Officer of BankBosun, LLC; and syndicated by Seth Greene, Market Domination LLC, with the help of Kevin Boyle. Video content is produced by The Guildmaster Studio, Keenan Bobson Boyle. The voice introduction is me, Karim Kronfli. The program is hosted by Kelly Coughlin. If you like this program, please tell us. If you don’t, please tell us how we can improve it. Now, some disclaimers. Kelly is licensed with the Minnesota State Board of Accountancy as a Certified Public Accountant. Kelly provides bank owned life insurance portfolio and nonqualified benefit services to banks across the United States. The views expressed here are solely those of Kelly Coughlin and his guests in their private capacity and do not in any other way represent the views of any other agent, principal, employer, employee, vendor or supplier of Kelly Coughlin. .  

Made It In Music: Interviews With Artists, Songwriters, And Music Industry Pros

Interview with Seth Mosley.In this, our inaugural episode, we hear from host, Seth Mosley. He is a Grammy, SESAC, Billboard and Dove award winning songwriter and producer whose credits include For King and Country, Newsboys, Jon Foreman and High Valley. .fca_eoi_form p { width: auto; }#fca_eoi_form_269 input{max-width:9999px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 *{box-sizing:border-box;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_form_text_element,#fca_eoi_form_269 input.fca_eoi_form_input_element,#fca_eoi_form_269 input.fca_eoi_form_button_element{display:block;margin:0;padding:0;line-height:normal;font-size:14px;letter-spacing:normal;word-spacing:normal;text-indent:0;text-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;width:inherit;height:inherit;background-image:none;border:none;border-radius:0;box-shadow:none;box-sizing:border-box;transition:none;outline:none;-webkit-transition:none;-webkit-appearance:none;-moz-appearance:none;color:#000;font-family:"Open Sans", sans-serif;font-weight:normal;transition:background 350ms linear;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_form_text_element{text-align:center;}#fca_eoi_form_269 *:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 *:after{display:none;}#fca_eoi_form_269 i.fa,#fca_eoi_form_269 i.fa:before{display:block;margin:0;padding:0;line-height:normal;font-size:14px;letter-spacing:normal;word-spacing:normal;text-indent:0;text-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;width:inherit;height:inherit;background-image:none;border:none;border-radius:0;box-shadow:none;box-sizing:border-box;transition:none;outline:none;-webkit-transition:none;-webkit-appearance:none;-moz-appearance:none;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_popup_close{display:block;margin:0;padding:0;line-height:normal;font-size:14px;letter-spacing:normal;word-spacing:normal;text-indent:0;text-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;width:inherit;height:inherit;background-image:none;border:none;border-radius:0;box-shadow:none;box-sizing:border-box;transition:none;outline:none;-webkit-transition:none;-webkit-appearance:none;-moz-appearance:none;color:#000;font-family:"Open Sans", sans-serif;font-weight:normal;display:block;position:absolute;z-index:9999992;top:-10px;right:-10px;background:rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.6);border:1px solid #000;color:#fff;font-weight:bold;width:20px;height:20px;line-height:20px;text-align:center;cursor:pointer;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper{font-weight:bold;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5{display:inline-block;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget{max-width:300px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox{max-width:600px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup{max-width:650px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper{float:none;width:100%;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper{margin:20px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper{border:solid 1px transparent;width:49%;border-radius:3px;margin-bottom:10px;position:relative;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_name_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_name_field_wrapper{float:left;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_email_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_email_field_wrapper{float:right;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_inputs_wrapper_no_name div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_inputs_wrapper_no_name div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper{float:none;width:100%;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper input:focus{border:none !important;width:100%;height:auto;font-size:16px;line-height:1.2em;padding:7px 0;outline:none;background:none !important;box-shadow:none;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper{clear:both;transition:background 350ms linear, border-color 350ms linear;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a{display:block;margin:10px 0 0;font-size:12px;}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:450px),(min-height:1px) and (max-height:450px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a{font-size:13px !important;}}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:320px),(min-height:1px) and (max-height:320px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_description_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper i.fa:before,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:focus,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_popup div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_widget div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a{font-size:12px !important;}}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:450px),(min-height:1px) and (max-height:450px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_content_wrapper{margin:8px 13px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a{margin:0;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_form_text_element.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper{margin-bottom:5px;}}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:320px),(min-height:1px) and (max-height:320px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_popup_close,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_popup_close{top:-1px;right:-1px;}}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:768px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper{float:none;width:100%;}}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper{margin-bottom:20px;}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:450px),(min-height:1px) and (max-height:450px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper{margin-bottom:0;}}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_inputs_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_inputs_wrapper{margin:20px 0;}@media (min-width:1px) and (max-width:450px),(min-height:1px) and (max-height:450px){#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_inputs_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_inputs_wrapper{margin:8px 0;}}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_wrapper{border-radius:5px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_field_inner{margin:0 10px;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper{border-bottom:solid 4px transparent;border-radius:5px;padding:0 !important;text-align:center;width:100%;}#fca_eoi_form_269 div.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input,#fca_eoi_form_269 form.fca_eoi_layout_5 div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input{border:0 !important;border-radius:5px;font-weight:bold;margin:0;height:2.8em;padding:0;text-shadow:0 0 2px black;white-space:normal;width:100%;}.fca_eoi_form{ margin: auto; }#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox{background-color:#f6f6f6 !important;border-color:#ccc !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_headline_copy_wrapper div{font-size:28px !important;color:#1a78d7 !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_name_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_name_field_wrapper input{font-size:18px !important;color:#777 !important;background-color:#fff !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_name_field_wrapper{border-color:#ccc !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_email_field_wrapper,#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_email_field_wrapper input{font-size:18px !important;color:#777 !important;background-color:#fff !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_email_field_wrapper{border-color:#ccc !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input{font-size:18px !important;color:#fff !important;background-color:#81b441 !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper input:hover{background-color:#70a01f !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_submit_button_wrapper{background-color:#70a01f !important;border-color:#70a01f !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_privacy_copy_wrapper div{font-size:14px !important;color:#8f8f8f !important;}#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a,#fca_eoi_form_269 .fca_eoi_layout_5.fca_eoi_layout_postbox div.fca_eoi_layout_fatcatapps_link_wrapper a:hover{color:#8f8f8f !important;}FCM001_-_Interview_with_Seth_MosleyYou’re listening to the Full Circle Music Show, “The Why of the Music Business”.Chris Murphy: Hey, guys. Welcome to the Full Circle Music Show. This is Chris Murphy sitting beside Seth Mosley. Hello, sir.Seth Mosley: Hey, man.Chris: We thought since we’re kicking off this podcast that we wanted to speak to the man himself, multiple Dove award-winning songwriter and producer as well as GRAMMY award-winning songwriter and producer, Seth Mosley’s got Full Circle Music right here in Franklin, Tennessee, just outside of Nashville. So without further ado, let’s get right into it, the interview with Seth Mosley at Full Circle Music.Hi. I’m excited. This is our inaugural recording and I thought maybe what we could do for our audience is to give them a little taste as to why is the Full Circle Music Show a show. Why is it a podcast? What was your idea when you decided to start this and what you hope the audience can get out of it?Seth: Yes. I think the big thing for us was just to get around other industry professionals and find out how they’re navigating today’s ever-changing music industry because we know how crazy it is on our end of doing what we do at Full Circle Music. I do believe that there’s strength in numbers and as a music industry united going forward to make sure we’re reeling in the same direction, so to speak.Chris: Yes. It is quite a complex group of questions and thoughts and processes and it’s ever-changing all the time regardless of what industry or genre that you produce or you write for or that you are a fan of; that it’s constantly changing out there from a business perspective. What are some of the changes that you’ve seen in the years that you’ve been producing and song writing as well as being an artist?Seth: Sure. Well, yes. I started out as an artist. That was my entry into the music business. I toured for about three years, pretty full time. We we’re doing anywhere from 100 to 150 shows a year.I got burned out on it really quick and figured out that the part of the process I really enjoy is what we’re doing now which is the creative side where we’re writing and producing and tracking the stuff in the studio. So that’s what I had transitioned into. But since then, there have definitely been a lot of changes. I moved to Nashville probably officially six and a half-ish years ago.Chris: So that’s 2009, 2008, something like that?Seth: Yes, about 2008, 2009, exactly. So right as the market was tanking and everything so I came in at a very interesting time and we hear a lot of doom and gloom surrounding the music industry with sales and streaming and Spotify, Pandora, all that stuff, and how that affects our income. We can proudly say that at Full Circle Music that every year since we’ve been in business has been our best year.Chris: Wow.Seth: And I don’t think that’s coincidence. I have a very positive outlook on the music industry comparatively with a lot of my other peers and people that I work with, I think.Chris: So quickly as a side note, for those that don’t know, what is Full Circle Music to you and to the world at large?Seth: Well, Full Circle Music is a team. It was an effort for me to intentionally come out and say that yes, this is a team support; it’s not just me. And it really always has been from the beginning but even more so now. Right now, it’s a small team but we’re growing and hopefully, in the next couple of years, it’s going to be expanding into having some writers under our roster and some producers and eventually, if it makes sense and we find the right artist to be able to even do a joint venture with a label and help develop in that way.But again, the key word is the right people so we’ve been actually probably going on the slow side just to make sure that, who is in our team is the right people. Right now, it’s me and X. O’Connor is my co-producer, engineer, mixer. He does a good chunk of everything.And then, we’ve got another guy, Jerricho Scroggins, yes, Jerricho Scroggins, that is the name and he’s running the ships. So it’s a lean mean machine. And then we have five or six other guys who do editing stuff for us at any given moment as well.Chris: Well, for a small team, you got a lot of hardware on the wall. I think, that’s probably a good thing then.Seth: The hardware per person ratio, it has been good so far.Chris: Well, building on that, you said that every year that you guys have been doing what you’re doing that it’s been growing. What do you attribute that to when everybody else or it seems like a lot of people out there are just talking about that doom and gloom that you mentioned earlier?Seth: I mean, I think it’s the focus on two things. Number one is, I mean, and this is a cliché, especially in Nashville, our focus is the song. Everything comes back to song writing and that’s the starting point.Production, that’s not to say production isn’t as important. It is. But if you don’t have anything, if you don’t have a good song at the beginning so I think that’s been more of my strength. A lot of people would say they’re a producer or a writer. I would say I’m probably more so a writer-producer, if anything, and that’s why having people like X and Jerricho around are key because their strengths complement for where I lack.So I think that’s been one thing is focus on the song. And the second thing is just the fact that it’s just our why behind why we do what we do is we’re here to serve. That’s our first thing as we’re in a service business. A friend of mine taught me that really early on when I moved to Nashville and that stuck with me. This really is a service business.Chris: And when you say service, do you mean servicing the song, servicing the artist, servicing the label?Seth: Yes. Yes. It’s really whoever is in front of us at any given moment, “How can I serve you?” whether that is the song or whether that’s the artist. The fact is that we are just here to enable and help facilitate artists to pursue their dreams and their careers. So any way that we can add value to what somebody’s doing, that’s our mantra.We’re always here to serve first. We’re not coming into a room with any sense of ego or, “What can we get out of this situation?” but, “Hey, we’re here to serve and give and give and give and give” and it seems like it’s just been, for lack of a better term, the universe’s way of giving back to us. We come in with that mentality and it seems to be working okay.Chris: is there a tangible example of that that you can think of off the top of your head? And if you need to leave names out, that’s fine but maybe something that really shows that service.Seth: Yes. I would say honestly and this wasn’t some brand new concept that we came up with; it was really more something that I learned by seeing how some other peers and mentors in the business were doing, it is just the fact of they don’t quit until they are as just happy.And that’s the same with us. We’ll go rounds and rounds and rounds and rounds and sometimes, actually, I had a conversation with a friend of mine about this and we always have to remind ourselves that Michael Jackson’s Thriller underwent 97 or so versions before they settled on the final.Chris: 97?Seth: Something like 97. I know it’s almost 100.Chris: Wow. Good grief.Seth: But I think that’s one very tangible thing. We’re not stopping until the artist, the label, the manager, and everybody is really, really pumped and signed off and proud to have their names on it.Chris: I was actually talking to Jerricho about this a couple of days ago, this exact topic. Before you, as a producer, writer, a person who is a go-between, when do you get to the point where you say, you know there’s that saying that the customer is always right?Seth: Yes.Chris: Is there ever a point in time where you say, “Well, I understand that but my experience says that maybe we need to go down this path. And then maybe…”, how do you lead that into that conversation if that’s the case for you?Seth: Sure. No, that’s a great question and it could very often be the case where I have – obviously, this is a very subjective business.Chris: Absolutely.Seth: And it’s not a business of what’s right and what’s wrong. It’s really a business of again, I’m putting my preferences, opinions, and even “expertise” aside sometimes to serve what an artist’s vision is because there’s a lot of the times that yes, it probably isn’t the first thing that I would do. That doesn’t mean it’s right or wrong. It just means that I’m helping draw out the best version of them.You said like my expertise on what works and what doesn’t work, that’s been another thing that served us really well is I think we try go on with the mentality of, “Hey, there’s no black and white; there’s no rules; there’s not a ‘this works and this doesn’t work’.”Granted, we do work in some pretty narrow radio-driven formats, and there are things, but here’s the thing. I mean, we always chase the artist’s dream all the way to the moon. Sometimes, I have to pull it back to the earth. We could very easily, in those situations, just like you said, point to the hardware on the wall and say, “Check the score.” I’ve heard some guys say that. I can never imagine personally us doing that.Chris: True.Seth: I think we’re literally probably the opposite of that to a fault.Chris: Well, again, I think that that’s probably why you’re in demand and a pleasure to work with. Because there are a lot of people out there, there are a lot of producers or songwriters that people could go to, so the fact that they’re choosing you, it’s because you bring that unique personality to it that draws people to it.For a producer that’s getting started out there or a songwriter as well, what’s a tip or two that you could point them to when you talk about service and trying to find the artist’s vision if you’re producing a project? What’s something that’s an applicable take-away that somebody could jump into right now?Seth: Well, I would say if you’re trying to learn to get good at your craft of production or song writing or anything in the music business, learn to do that but even more so, learn to be a collaborator. I think there are a lot of really good songwriters that we know that shoot themselves in the foot; that they are the most talented people in the world.But they’d probably be a lot more successful if they just spent a little more energy learning how to be collaborators rather than just saying, “Here’s the idea. Here’s the vibe. Take it or leave it.” I would say focus on that and that just takes a lot of humility, really.So just do some soul-searching and say, “Why am I in this in the first place? Am I in this because I’m trying to scratch some ego itch that I have or an insecurity or whatever?”Chris: True.Seth: So I would say that’s first and foremost because people look for collaborators. They’re not really looking, especially nowadays, for ultimatums.Chris: Yes. That’s a really good point and it makes me think about when you were saying earlier that you were on the road, pretty hard core, for several years and it burned you out pretty badly. Was there a moment in that process that where you thought, “Okay. I’m a good writer. I produce stuff. This could be a path for me more so than being the artist on the road and the tour bus?”Seth: Sure, or the tour van. We ended up in the bus on the very tail end of what we were doing and it’s ironic that yes, as soon as we got into a bus, I was already burned out. That’s kind of whatever you’ve been, shoot for it. It’s still like get on the road and hop a bus and be flying around and doing it that way. I think there was a really clear moment and that was in the beautiful, glorious state of Iowa. Every time we went through Iowa on tour, it seemed like something, the universe was just against us.Chris: Sure.Seth: Like God was saying, “Do not go to Iowa.”Chris: “Just drive around the corner.”Seth: “Drive around it.” So the last straw in Iowa, still probably story number three or four after having broken down there and stuck there in snowstorms and ice storms, all that other stuff, the last straw was we were on tour out there and it was, of course, snowing and sleeting and everything and the van, I think we were outside of Sioux City and we heard a giant bang and we looked around like “What in the world?” and then the van just grinds to a halt.Chris: Oh, no.Seth: We got out and it looked like somebody shot a cannonball through the bottom of the wall, like something literally blew up under it.Chris: Wow.Seth: So it was at that point that we had to call U-Haul, sit there in the cold for two and a half hours, and wait on them to show up. We finally got to the venue and in order to just stay and get home from that that weekend that we were doing it, to drive a U-Haul and run a rental car and drive all night, the choice was do we fix the van or do we just dump it and leave it there with the trailer and say, “Hasta la vista” because we owed money on it and that for me was like, I felt like it was God’s way of saying, “Hey, maybe it’s time to start focusing on something else.”Chris: Sure.Seth: We never went back for the van or the trailer.Chris: Really?Seth: Somebody’s still there with it.Chris: Wow.Seth: It was a tax write-off. That was the moment. And honestly, sometimes life does that where it just makes decisions for you and sometimes, that’s what we need and that’s what that was very clearly because I had been doing production and writing the whole time and was having some success at it and honestly, taking care of our family through that side of things, the financials of touring were not in our favor.Chris: Sure.Seth: But on the production and writing side, I already had some things rolling with these boys and some other projects as well, too. So it was a natural transition and a lot of people say, “You just make the leap of faith out and just switch.” But honestly for us, it wasn’t a leap of faith; for us it was a no-brainer.It was, “Hey, I get to stay home with my wife” and we didn’t have kids at the time but we got to stay home, hang out, didn’t have to go get in the van and drive all night or a bus, and actually pay our bills with this. So for us, it was a bit of a no-brainer and that was definitely the situation that sparked it for us.Chris: Oh, I think that’s a good transition that I’d love to hear. From somebody that’s been on many different sides of the music industry, being an artist and now producer, songwriter extraordinaire, is that process…Seth: Extraordinaire, I don’t know about that.Chris: Okay, then I’ll just that out loud. You don’t have to agree with it but I’ll say it for you; that I think that it makes sense to talk about you may have a sole passion in the music industry or whatever industry that you’re in but the fact that you had many different things going on, you didn’t have all your eggs on one basket, so to speak. Could you speak to that for those out there that are saying that, “You know what? I just want to be behind the boards. I just want to be in a bus and break down in the middle of Iowa like that’s my dream, that’s my passion?” Is there validity in having your eggs spread out or is there also validity in having all your eggs in one basket when you were chasing that dream?Seth: I would say that I would go back to the proverb of chase two rabbits and you will catch neither. I think the moment that we made that decision to get off the road and focus on one thing was like a cannonball. It was like a spark for our career on the production and writing side.Just, it was like, “Okay. Well, there’s no longer conflict of interest. There’s no longer making the decision of what do I focus my energy on? I only focus on one thing.”Chris: Sure.Seth: And it’s the Full Circle Music side so I’m a very big believer in being focused on one thing. I think in the financial industry, we hear a lot about diversify, diversify, diversify.Chris: Sure.Seth: And that is true, once you’ve achieved some success, to protect what you have.Chris: Right.Seth: When you’re in the beginning stages and growing and growing and growing, it’s really, “Put all of your eggs in one basket and watch that basket really carefully.” That’s what I’m leaning towards.Chris: Yes, that makes sense. So watch that basket carefully and then when you get to the point where that’s on autopilot or that it’s running itself, whatever it is, then maybe you can move on to something else.Seth: Yes. And even then, I don’t know that there is ever truly an autopilot. There’s some degree of yes, we can maybe take some time off and stuff will still happen and what not but I think no matter what the case is, if you’re focusing on one thing, that means it’s one thing that you’re not focusing on. You’re taking away from the other side of things.Chris: Yes.Seth: Honestly, there’s always going to be a little bit of trade-off there.Chris: Right.Seth: I think honestly, well, there’s a really good book. Actually, I would recommend it to all the listeners out there. It’s Gary Keller’s The ONE Thing. And we recently went through it and it was really good for me on focus.Chris: Absolutely.Seth: And that applies to people in music or investing or anything in life, to be honest. I’m very big on focus.Chris: That’s great. Do you miss it? Do you miss the road? Do you miss being an artist?Seth: Not for one second.Chris: No?Seth: Every time I see a bus drive by or a van or a trailer, I’m just like, “Oh, thank God that I’m not on it.” I start sweating for the people inside it.Chris: Oh, man. Okay, you got some sort of a response to some PTSD or something from being on the road, huh?Seth: Well, I’m making it sound really bad but honestly, I mean, there is a lot of great things. And probably the biggest thing for me was I met my wife through it. So had I not done it, I wouldn’t have known her and we wouldn’t be where are today.So the universe definitely has its way of circling things back around and then we’re just part of how God used, and I think He used it honestly to our favor on even what we’re doing right now because we’re able to relate with artists in a different way than somebody who’s never been on the road.Chris: It sure is.Seth: We have first-hand experience to say, “Okay. I know. I know what you’re going through. I know how hard you’re working every night. I know what it is to play these songs every night and go to the radio tours” because we’ve done that and we’ve been there.Chris: True.Seth: So it helps us relate in a different way.Chris: Other than just that experience of just being in the trenches for years and doing it and then transitioning to what you’re doing now with the producing and song writing or song writing and producing, what kind of education did you have behind you when you started?Seth: A high school diploma.Chris: Okay.Seth: Where I grew up in Ohio, we had a thing called post-secondary education where you could take college classes in high school. And I did probably 12 credit hours of that so that was the extent of my education.Chris: Oh, wow. Okay.Seth: And YouTube really wasn’t even a thing now and that is a big part of education nowadays. You can learn to do anything you want on the internet.Chris: Sure.Seth: That really wasn’t as much of a thing that was available. People weren’t creating these tutorials and videos of how to do stuff; it was really just diving in and watching other people work.Chris: So really from the music business standpoint, your life experiences was your classroom.Seth: Exactly. Yes. But that’s not to discount – I would say that’s my classroom but the other part of that is just watching other professionals and what can I learn from them. And part of our servant mentality is walking into a room saying, “Hey, what can I learn?” not “What can I teach?”A lot of people graduated from college nowadays that we find, because we have an internship program, and we have some great interns. But we’ve also sensed a little bit of a mentality and I don’t know, it’s just been in the past few years of maybe it is an entitlement thing where people think they’re going to graduate and get hired as a producer or a songwriter and get a job, a publishing deal or whatever it is.That’s really not the way it works. You have to come into a room and show that, “Hey, I’m here to serve and I’m here to add value.” And only then do things start opening up for you.Chris: Yes, that makes sense. So I guess the palm on the wall is great. But if it doesn’t have the experience behind it then it doesn’t speak too much.Seth: Yes, and the heart behind it to serve. I mean, I think nowadays, this is so important. You just have to be going into a room, “How can I add value? How can I add value?” and not “What can I get out of this situation?”Chris: Sure. What would you say to somebody who’s sitting in a music score right now or doing a production licensing or whatever that would look like that’s in the thick of it, that’s listening because they want to graduate in a few months and come in Nashville and be on the Seth Mosley plan?Seth: Yes. No, I mean, we have, me and Jerricho, have these discussions all the time with our interns saying, “Okay. It’s really all about why am I doing what I’m doing?”Chris: Sure.Seth: Because we never want to put off the vibe that, “Hey, don’t go to college; that you’re not going to get anywhere with it.” That’s not what we’re saying at all. It’s more so, “Hey, if you’re going to college, how do you use that to further and get closer to where you want to be?”Chris: Absolutely.Seth: And really, it’s all what you make of it. It’s all what you put into it; who are meeting; who are you serving; what kind of experiences are you getting out of it; what are you learning. So I would say if you really feel strongly that you’re using that as something to get closer to where you’re going, keep on and finish strong.Chris: That’s great. Yes.Seth: But I would also say on a more down to earth, realistic, because we’re definitely a realist over here, on a realistic note that don’t think that just because you do graduate and get that diploma that it’s going to mean that you’re going to get hired right away.Chris: Sure.Seth: Maybe that’s one in a hundred or one in a thousand situations. But you’re going to get hired because of who you are and what dynamic you add to a room. If you have a diploma, maybe that’s icing on the cake but that’s definitely not what we look for in a company or in a student or somebody to hire.Chris: So just to nail it down, what are you looking for when you’re reaching out to find either an intern or the next employee? So for someone out there that’s like, “Oh, okay. I get what stuff he’s saying but maybe what are a few things that I need to be working on to make sure that by the time I’m ready to strike, I’m ready to go?”Seth: Well, I think and not to keep saying the same thing and be a broken record, but we look for servant hearts. That’s the first and foremost thing. Second thing is yes, I mean, there’s got to be some raw talent there. And again, that’s all subjective, too.Chris: Sure.Seth: But we have to at least really dig and connect on a creative level. Otherwise, it’s not going to work that way. And the third thing would just be work ethic and enthusiasm for it because it’s not a business that really lets you have typical 9am – 5pm, most weekends off.I mean, we try really hard at Full Circle to have a pretty normal semblance of a normal life for me and for the guys that work with us because I think that’s important for balance. But that’s definitely on the beginning, maybe not the norm.Chris: Yes.Seth: It’s a little more the exception. So I would say just you got to know what you want to do and have the work ethic, have the enthusiasm to stay up all night and grind it out until you get good because it really is about that 10,000 hours and putting that in. And if even that, I’ mean, I’m still feeling like as we cross our 10,000-hour threshold like man, I’m still learning everyday and I feel like if you’re not, you’re just getting further and further behind.Chris: Sure. Seth, this is great, man. In one of the opening episodes of this podcast, we both sat down and talked that we wanted to really hear from other industry professionals and their heart and their desire and their expertise so that can be something that others can grow from.But I’m grateful that you’re willing to sit down with us today and give your heart and I know that you’re going to be giving that a lot because you’re going to be sitting at the microphone everytime.But to hear from you and to see where you’ve come from and where you’re going and I think the biggest take-away is the fact that you said when you walk into a room, you think, “How can I serve?” Or, “What can I give not what can I get?” so to speak.Seth: Yes.Chris: I think that’s huge.Seth: Yes.Chris: And so I appreciate that. But is there anything else you’d like to leave the audience with as we step away here?Seth: I mean, I would say, the other big thing is yes, serve but it’s also, it’s a kind of piggyback on what we were saying earlier. If I could put any title behind it, it’s no plan B. I think the people who have a fallback plan are going to do that fallback plan.Chris: Absolutely.Seth: At some point, you got a wife and kids and you got to do what’s responsible for them especially when you’re on the frontend. If you’re single or young or married or whatever, you just grind it on, figure out how to make it work.Another friend of mine who’s in the industry who’s been in it for a long time, that was his advice in his panel, to a bunch of Belmont, probably 200 Belmont song writing students.He had them raise their hand and say, “Hey, who has a plan B?” Probably 75% of the room put their hands up. And he said, “Okay. Get out now.” And he wasn’t saying that to be mean. He was just saying, “Hey, that’s the reality.” If you have a plan B, you’re going to do the plan B.Chris: Yes, sure.Seth: Honestly, I didn’t know growing up or in high school what else besides music I would do. It was just the only thing that I felt like I knew how to do and the only thing that drove me and get me happiness and satisfaction. Obviously, as life progresses, you develop those things. But honestly, not having a plan B is the best thing in the world for you because you’re going to figure out how to make it work because you have to.Chris: That’s great. Seth, thank you so much, man. I really appreciate it.Seth: Yes.Chris: Hey, we hoped you’ve enjoyed this episode and will join us again soon on the Full Circle Music Show, The Why of the Music Hits.Check us out at fullcirclemusic.org/podcast.The post FCM001 – Interview with Seth Mosley appeared first on Full Circle Music. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.