Podcasts about pm it

God’s gift is His offer of salvation. We must claim that gift to be saved. Ridge Road Church of Christ – www.ridgeroadcoc.org – Facebook: facebook.com/ridgeroadcoc – Twitter: twitter.com/ridgeroadcoc – Instagram: instagram.com/ridgeroadcoc – YouTube: http://bit.ly/rrcocyoutube #God #Jesus #church #cross #greatest #bible #sermon #heaven #christ #christian #churchofchrist #ypsi #ypsilanti #michigan #love #grace #faith #worship #gospel #pray #christianity ... Read more

(PUBLISHED 9:35 PM) It's happening! It's happening! The SHIFT! A shift in consciousness out dis B&*%#! Peace & Blessings, ~Shanda --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/everybodysgotastory/message

RetroLogic - Episode 16 Welcome to RetroLogic! I'm Dan Caporello here with John Cummins. RetroLogic is the official podcast of Block Fort Retro, the place to shop online for high quality, clean, authentic retro games. Visit Blockfortretro.com Nintendo Powers various issues from 251-270 up now #gamingforguru (what did you buy? And what did you play?) John Bought - New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Banjo Tooie John Played - Celeste and Hydro Thunder DC Dan Bought - Yoshis Island SNES. on the hunt for a Dreamcast.   (The price is RETRO)ChrisHL94 lot (Crossplay) ExcitebikeSuper Metroid   (This day in gaming history)31 Years Ago (January 11, 1990) Genesis             Herzog Zwei 16 Years Ago (January 11, 2005) GameCube Resident Evil 4(break) (Old News)   (Community Questions) ChrisHL94 I was wondering what @everyone would consider the best year for game releases? It could be just the year your favourite games were released or just the best in terms of quality games released that year.   Frosticles43

John McArthur was live. Yesterday at 8:07 PM · It’s “LEARN & RESPOND” WEDNESDAYS at TRUE GOSPEL Join in & Share with EVERYONE‼️ Genesis 21 East To Read Version Sunday’s AFTERMATH

  December 2nd, 2019  |  The Hockey Betting Podcast The latest edition of The Hockey Betting Podcast has Brian Blessing and Cam Stewart taking a look at games for Monday, December 4 and Tuesday, December 5, 2019. There are five games on the NHL schedule for Monday with three of the road teams favored, including the defending Stanley Cup Champion St. Louis Blues at the Chicago Blackhawks. Listen to the latest edition of the Hockey Betting Podcast to get all of Brian and Cam’s picks. Monday, December 2nd, 2019 NHL Betting Odds * Opener           Teams           Time   6.0 New Jersey Devils -133 
Buffalo Sabres 7:05 PM   -125
 Vegas Golden Knights 6.5 New York Rangers 7:05 PM   -205 New York Islanders 5.5 Detroit Red Wings 7:35 PM   -132
 St. Louis Blues 6.0 Chicago Blackhawks 8:35 PM   5.5
 Los Angeles Kings -135 Anaheim Ducks 10:05 PM * Odds at the time the podcast was recorded The first game on the NHL schedule on Monday has New Jersey visiting Buffalo with the Sabres listed as a slight home favorite. Both teams have struggled recently, so this may be a game to avoid. The Vegas Golden Knights have not played as well this season as they did a year ago, but they are listed as road favorites in New York on Monday as they visit the Rangers. Listen to The Hockey Betting Podcast to get all of Brian and Cam’s picks, including their thoughts on this game. The biggest favourite on the Monday December 2nd NHL schedule has the New York Islanders visiting the Detroit Red Wings. The Islanders are laying 2-1 on the road against a struggling Detroit team that has lost nine straight. It is a high price, but it is tough to like the Red Wings right now. The Blues are road favourites in Chicago on Monday night. The Blues have won three straight, while the Blackhawks have dropped two in a row, but this one won’t be easy for St. Louis. Listen to The Hockey Betting Podcast to get the picks on this game from Brian and Cam. The Monday schedule concludes with the Los Angeles Kings visiting the Anaheim Ducks. It is an ugly match-up, as these teams are competing for the bottom of the Pacific Division. Tuesday, December 3rd, 2019 NHL Schedule Team           Time   Arizona Coyotes Columbus Blue Jackets 7:05 PM   Minnesota Wild Florida Panthers 7:05 PM   Vegas Golden Knights New Jersey Devils 7:05 PM   Toronto Maple Leafs Philadelphia Flyers 7:05 PM   New York Islanders Montreal Canadiens 7:05 PM   Carolina Hurricanes Boston Bruins 7:05 PM   Tampa Bay Lightning Nashville Predators 8:05 PM   Dallas Stars Winnipeg Jets 8:05 PM   Ottawa Senators Vancouver Canucks 10:05 PM   Washington Capitals San Jose Sharks 10:35 PM It is a big slate of games on the NHL schedule for Tuesday, December 3rd, with 10 games, including the Carolina Hurricanes at the Boston Bruins. Make sure to listen to the Hockey Betting Podcast to get all of the picks from Brian and Cam on the Tuesday NHL schedule. The national TV game on Tuesday has the Tampa Bay Lightning visiting the Nashville Predators on NBCSN. Neither team has lived up to expectations this season, plus Tampa comes in on a three-game losing streak. Listen to the latest edition of The Hockey Betting Podcast to get all of the insight and hockey picks from Brian and Cam.

  November 11th, 2019  |  The Hockey Betting Podcast The latest edition of The Hockey Betting Podcast has Brian Blessing and Cam Stewart taking a look at games for Monday, November 11 and Tuesday, November 12 and they glance at one of the games on Wednesday, November 13, 2019. They also take a look at the Toronto Maple Leafs and the upcoming schedule for the Leafs. It may not be easy for Toronto in the next couple of weeks, as they face a very difficult slate of games. Cam said that Mitch Marner is out for four weeks and that although it is not panic time in Toronto, there is cause for concern. Listen to this week’s episode of The Hockey Betting Podcast to get all of Brian and Cam’s insight and hockey picks. Monday, November 11th, 2019 NHL Odds Opener           Team           Time 6.0
-175 Arizona Coyotes
Washington Capitals 7:05 PM 6.5
-245 Ottawa Senators
Carolina Hurricanes 7:05 PM The Washington Capitals are favored at home against the Arizona Coyotes, while the Carolina Hurricanes are big favorites against the Ottawa Senators. Cam said that Carolina is going to win their game against Ottawa, but he doesn’t like laying the big price, so he is looking at making a parlay or simply laying the goal and a half with the Hurricanes.  Brian and Cam point out that the Washington Capitals are playing a high scoring style of hockey and that playing the over in Washington games is the way to go right now. Tuesday, November 12th, 2019 NHL Schedule Team           Time Florida Panthers Boston Bruins 7:05 PM   Columbus Blue Jackets Montreal Canadiens 7:05 PM   Pittsburgh Penguins New York Rangers 7:35 PM   Colorado Avalanche Winnipeg Jets 8:05 PM   Arizona Coyotes St. Louis Blues 8:05 PM   Detroit Red Wings Anaheim Ducks 10:05 PM   Nashville Predators Vancouver Canucks 10:05 PM   Edmonton Oilers San Jose Sharks 10:35 PM   Minnesota Wild Los Angeles Kings 10:35 PM It is nine-game schedule for Tuesday, November 12 in the NHL and Cam has quite a few plays on the Tuesday card. He starts the action off with a play on the game between Florida and Boston. Listen to the latest edition of The Hockey Betting Podcast to get Cam’s picks. Cam also said that he will be putting Montreal into a lot of his parlays, as the Canadiens host the Blue Jackets on Tuesday. Brian is looking at playing the total on the game between Colorado and Winnipeg. Cam leans to Colorado and the game over the total.  Brian and Cam also consider the game between Nashville and Vancouver, with the Canucks suddenly struggling, having lost four straight.  Cam also points out that the Minnesota Wild are no longer a team that goes under the total. He is looking at taking the Wild and the over in their game against the Kings.  Brian and Cam consider the game between the Washington Capitals and Philadelphia Flyers on Wednesday and Cam thinks the total on this game should be 7.  As they wrap up the latest edition of The Hockey Betting Podcast, Brian points out that the next two weeks will be critical, as teams decide whether they are truly in the playoff race. Make sure to listen to the latest edition of The Hockey Betting Podcast to get the full breakdown of all of the action on Monday and some insight into some teams, including the Toronto Maple Leafs and Vegas Golden Knights.

Shawnna Sumaoang: Hi, and welcome to the Sales Enablement PRO podcast. I am Shawnna Sumaoang. Sales enablement is a constantly evolving space, and we are here to help professionals stay up to date on the latest trends and best practices so they can be more effective in their jobs. I would love for you to just introduce yourself, your title, and your organization. Patrick Merritt: Sure. Hi, my name is Patrick Merritt. I’m a director of sales enablement at Puppet. SS: Excellent. So, Patrick, so glad we’re able to connect today. One of the things that I heard was that you’ve mentioned in the past that you coach people not to go into sales enablement because it’s a challenging role. From your perspective, what does it take to be successful in sales enablement? PM: It takes a lot of things. I think you have to really love the job. It’s not a job for the faint of heart because there are a lot of challenges. You have to love working with salespeople and you have to equally love working with marketing people, and you have to know how to get people across the entire organization to pull together and work together to enable the sales team. You can’t do it by yourself. Even if you’re on a team of sales enablement professionals, you have to rely on resources across the company in order to effectively do enablement. So, I think the other thing that’s really important is you have to have pretty thick skin. One of the things about a job in sales enablement is because it’s still not a role where companies just go, “oh yeah, we absolutely have to have it,” right? It’s not like a finance team. Everyone has to have a finance team. Sales enablement isn’t mature enough and enough people don’t get it that that’s just a standard, “hey, we have to have sales enablement.” So, you’re constantly in this position of having to defend your value. A common question is: what’s the return I’m getting on my investment in sales enablement? Which, I think, is actually not the right question to be asking, but we can dive into that deeper. But you have to have a combination of all of those things and you also, I think, the other thing that’s really key is you need to be willing to take risks and be willing to have something you try to fail, and then move on from that. SS: Absolutely. You called out some of the challenging aspects of the role, but how have you overcome some of these? So, for example, alignment and collaboration across boundaries. What are some of the ways in which you’ve overcome those? PM: Lots of trial and error and painful conversations. I’ve been doing this for over ten years, and I’ve learned a lot of what not to do and I’ve also learned what to do. But I think the key is people love to feel like that they have value. When you are trying to pull in someone from another team, for example, “hey I need a sales engineer on this project so that I can do this enablement program, I need their expertise.” I’m going to talk to them and just be very transparent, saying, “we do not have the expertise, I need your expertise, I’ve got an outline of what we want to do on this program but I know that your input will make this better, so are you willing to step up and work with me to do this?” I have found that once you establish a rapport with the different groups and obviously once the enablement team is viewed within the organization as adding a lot of value, then it becomes a lot easier. For example, where I am at, Puppet, now we have a team of four people and pretty much everyone knows if there is something that needs to be done, they could throw it our way and we will make it happen. They also know if it’s not our area of responsibility, we’ll just say no, and so I think establishing clear boundaries helps as well. But it’s the collaboration aspect and getting people pulled in from the other parts of the org is just required in order to be successful. SS: Absolutely. So you mentioned saying no to asks that are not sales enablement’s responsibilities. I’m just curious to hear from you what and how would you define sales enablement’s responsibility within an organization? PM: Great question. Fundamentally for me, I boil sales enablement down to one thing and that is changing sales behaviors. If you don’t change sales behaviors, then you don’t get different outcomes. And so that’s what sales enablement is all about. How do we guide and change and shift the selling behaviors of the organization? How do we guide and change and shift the sales behaviors of the individual sales reps? Because that’s when you make an impact and that’s when you make a difference. So, to me, that’s a fundamental aspect of sales enablement. And then the other way to think about it is that if you define sales productivity as something that you want to drive. So, here’s the outcome you want, you want a higher sales productivity rate, that’s our goal. You can break productivity down into two things. It’s about sales efficiency and sales effectiveness. Sales efficiency – that’s the sales ops team’s responsibility. Their job is to make all the processes as efficient as possible to make the sales reps as efficient as possible so that they have more time to actually sell. Effectiveness – that’s sales enablement’s wheelhouse. That’s their responsibility. In my role as director of sales enablement, I need to make sure that when our sales reps are out having conversations with customers and prospects that those conversations are effective. I need to make sure the sales reps know about the product and they talk about it in a way that’s effective in all their communication vehicles. So, that’s the two kinds of core things that I think are fundamental with sales enablement and I think that that often gets lost because, unfortunately, I think enablement was not the right word to use. You know, enabling sales reps is just buying them more drinks. I mean, right? That’s enablement. And unfortunately, we fall into that trap of we’re going to enable them. No, I don’t want to enable them. What I want to do is I want to change their behavior so that we drive higher sales productivity. That’s my goal in sales enablement. SS: And I think that’s absolutely the right goal. You mentioned earlier that you have about a decade of sales enablement experience across a variety of organizations. Within some of those organizations, I would love to understand what are some common key steps that you took in establishing the sales enablement function? PM: Great question. So most of when I was at Serena, that was first, just establishing the function. No one knew what it was or what it could be. The way I describe it to people is in my 7 ¾ years doing sales enablement, which we called sales-readiness at the time actually because the term hadn’t really been coined and adopted. I rebuilt the sales enablement program there three times from the ground up, because we did something. I saw that these things worked here, this didn’t work and then I just burned it all down and built it back up. When it comes to a lot of organizations, because they are timid in their investment in sales enablement to begin with, the only thing they’re going to do first is hire one person. They’re like, “yep, I’m going to hire one sales enablement person.” And then what they’re going to do to make it effective: they’re going to do something really clever like give them zero budget. In case you weren’t paying attention, that was a joke, right? And that’s what happens. So here you are in this Han Solo role – and literally Han Solo, Chewbacca is not even here yet, you’re all on your own. You’re the person who’s supposed to do all the enablement for the company. Well, first of all, even if you have a team of 10 there is still too much work to do, so you have to be just laser-focused and have very clear priorities. For me, as an example coming into Puppet – again I was coming in off of Jive Software where I actually had a team – I was coming in as the sales enablement person. The company didn’t understand it except for my boss who knew what it was all about, but just as an organization they didn’t get it. And so the first thing I had to do was say first off, this is what sales enablement is, here’s the foundational framework, we’re going to put a foundation in place, we’re going to make sure of that, then we focus on these kinds of pillars of things. We’re going to focus on onboarding, so that’s all about, how do we ramp up new reps as quickly as possible? We’re going to focus on another pillar called ongoing education. How do we make sure that we continue to up-level and keep the skills of our existing sales reps improving? Then there is a pillar of peer mentoring and coaching. What are we going to put in place as a framework so that sales reps learn from other sales reps? Because look, that’s the best way for a sales rep to learn. If they hear another sales rep is successful, they’re like, “what are you doing? I want to know,” right? You need to establish a culture of peer learning and then eventually coaching, but you don’t start with coaching. We can come back to that. And then there’s where do the reps find all the content that they need to do their job? What is the marketing collateral? What are the sales tools? What are the sales aids, and how do they find that? And do they have one place to go to? Because none of that existed when I came to Puppet, so that’s a great example of how I’m going to outline where we’re going to go to, and then this is what we’re going to build, and this is what I’m going to build over time. And where I started could be different from where you start because it all depends on what’s the biggest gap in your organization. When I came to Puppet, as an example, the onboarding program consisted of a Google Doc that said, “here’s a list of people you should talk to, and here are some links to things you should go read.” Not a very effective onboarding program, right? But that wasn’t the first thing I started on. Why? Well, because we were onboarding one new rep a quarter. I can do a handholding with one new rep a quarter. I don’t need a well-structured onboarding program for one rep a quarter, so I’m going to set that aside. The most important thing was that there was no single place for people to find content. They literally were sharing the standard PowerPoint presentation for the company. How you got it was you asked another sales rep to email it to you. There were things in Google Docs, in Confluence, in Salesforce, in just everywhere, scattered. The most important thing for us was establishing a single place where they can find all the content. Because I didn’t have any budget, what that came down to was taking Confluence and morphing it into something I don’t think it ever was intended to be, and that was our sales home. And that was, “here’s your one-stop-shop, this is where you go to find all your stuff.” I launched that in the first six months. That alone was just a huge project and it took a long time to pull all that together. But that established a foundation. Now you know where to get the content, and then that freed me up to then go on and say now I need to focus on the onboarding because we are starting to scale, our hiring plans are coming in place, and I can’t do this Google Doc as the onboarding method. So a bit of a longer story I think for you, but that’s an example of how you have to start from nothing and then build it up. SS: I love the Han Solo analogy. That definitely got a laugh out of us over here, so I might have to use that again sometime. I do want to follow on, though, because one of the obstacles that you mentioned was securing investment in sales enablement. Obviously, sales enablement cannot be done on a constrained or zero-dollar budget. I would love to understand from you how you’ve overcome those obstacles within these organizations and secured the budget justification that you needed to actually advance sales enablement within the org. PM: I have no shame and so I just beg and plead. That’s how I got my first $30,000 in order to actually go get a system that wasn’t designed for onboarding, but I morphed it into something for onboarding. I mean to be fair, that’s what I did. And then the next example was we kept saying we wanted to do something with our channel partners and they wanted me to do some enablement, but I said I am not going to do it. I’m not going to do it until I get this budget because I can’t as an individual be successful supporting the channel partners as well as supporting our direct sales team. So, you have a choice to make. You want something for the channel partners. I’m happy to do that but in order for me to do that, this is what you need to give me in order to do that. So it was basically, it’s not me, it’s you. You have the choice on what you want to do, and that choice is you’re going to have to give me this money. I have done all the research. I have scoped it. Here’s how much we are talking about. Here are the budget, guidelines for it, now you decide. And so they decided, “yeah, we want to go do that.” Great. They got me the money and I went and did it. The way to eventually get a good budget, especially in an organization that just doesn’t get sales enablement, there are a few little tricks, so I will share those. The first thing is that most sales organizations, they have a budget for sales training, right? They always have some budget for sales training. So, when you partner with the head of sales and you establish the right relationship, you basically spend their money. That’s what I did when I was back at Serena. I actually started the role in marketing and then they asked me to move over and report directly to sales, which is where it should report. And the head of sales at the time, he said to me only half-jokingly, “look, here’s the thing I’ve realized is that you’re spending all of your time training all of my people and you’re spending all of my money to do it, so why don’t you just come work for me.” So that’s what I did. Now back to current days with Puppet, over a period of three years I had continued to build on this foundation every year. Every six months, I introduced the next new big thing and established enough people in the company that at the drop of a hat, I could contact them and say, “hey, I need help doing this, can you help me out?” And they’re like, “yeah, no problem man, great, let’s go do it.” So I had this group of people and we had done all these great things, and then it was like, “Okay, now we get it. We understand the value of sales enablement and we need to invest in it.” And that’s how we went from a team of one to a team of three and then a year later, we added a fourth person. It’s also how we got, let’s just say, a six-figure budget. So we went from zero budget to a six-figure budget in a single year. So those are my tricks. You know, bake sales work sometimes too. That’s another way to do it. SS: Carwashes. I’ve heard those work too. PM: Carwashes. But, yeah, you’ll beg, borrow, steal – all that. All those things work. SS: Thanks for listening. For more insights, tips and expertise from sales enablement leaders, visit salesenablement.pro. If there is something you would like to share or a topic you want to know more about, let us know. We would love to hear from you.

Show Links The Day They Invented Offices Episode Transcript TODD WERTH: Hi, I'm Todd Werth, the CEO and one of the founders of Infinite Red, and I'm located in a very sunny Las Vegas, Nevada. KEN MILLER: I'm Ken Miller, I'm CTO of Infinite Red, and I am based in the east bay, the bay area. JAMON HOLMGREN: I'm Jamon Holmgren, and I am just north of Portland, Oregon in Washington state in Vancouver, Washington, and I am the Chief Operating Officer here at Infinite Red. CHRIS MARTIN: Excellent, so let's start with just defining from each of your perspectives what remote work is. JAMON: For me, a lot of people think remote work is like working in your spare bedroom, or something like that. Which it often is, it can be. But remote work is really more about the ability to be able to do your work at full capacity kind of in a place other than one centralized office. A lot of companies are built around having an office in an office building. I had a company like that before, where everybody is in physical proximity. But remote work is about being elsewhere, and distributed. TODD: Remote work is not, as Jamon said, working from home. Although, I work from my studio here in my house in Las Vegas. Really remote work is working on whatever you're particularly working on at this time in the most efficient place that is efficient for you. For example, some of our team members work in co-location places, because they enjoy being around other people. They work maybe in coffee shop, or that kind of stuff. Personally, I need pretty quiet environment. KEN: I would actually shift the rhetorical frame around this slightly, and say that for us, work needs to happen someplace where you have the resources you need. And what we're calling remote work is just an acknowledgement that for certain kinds of work, a growing segment that I would say is kind of centered around the tech industry, where being next to the people you're working with physically just doesn't matter. Not that it can't be helpful, but that it's no longer required. To the point that we have started referring to non-remote work as commute work. JAMON: Yeah, I love that term. KEN: Meaning instead of saying well there's this normal kind of work where you drive into an office, which we've come to accept as normal. And recognizing that that's actually a phenomenon that's less than 100 years old. It's saying that like there is this thing that developed when you have a car, and before that, the train, where you could live some place that's relatively far away from where you work. Move yourself physically into that office during the day, and then move yourself physically back. And we're saying let's move the office out to where the people are, instead of moving the people to where the office is. That's really the core for me, right? That it's more to do with do you have the resources you need? Meaning do you have a good internet connection, do you have someplace quiet to work that is conducive to the way that you think? And less about where your body is. JAMON: Ken's exactly right. And what we found is that people sort of gravitate to where they work best. One of the things that's a little challenging is this perception that people just kind of slack off, and things like that. But really, people want to work efficiently. They want to find a place where they feel comfortable, like Todd said before, it's quiet. It's not a lot of interruptions. CHRIS:So when Infinite Red started out, was it a remote company to a certain degree? TODD: Yes. JAMON: No. TODD: Yes. KEN: It depends on where you start counting. It depends on which of us you're asking- TODD: Yeah, because- KEN: Because we were two companies before we started. TODD: Yes, there was Jamon's company, which he ran for 10 years. They were not remote. Infinite Red, the previous Infinite Red before the merge, and we became the new Infinite Red, we started out as 100% remote company on purpose, and our intention was to remain that way for the life of the company. JAMON: Yeah, and it was kind of an interesting transition for us. Because we were not remote for sure, and we were all working in an office here in Vancouver, Washington. It was right about the time that I met Todd, and I don't remember exactly to be honest, whether it was influence from Infinite Red that kind of moved us toward remote, or whether we were ... I know that I had some employees asking about it already, so that was certainly a factor. But the other Infinite Red, the original Infinite Red being a model was really helpful to us, for ClearSight, because Todd and I shared a lot of information, and he would tell me about things that he was passionate about, and one of them was obviously remote work. And we were able to start transitioning that way, and by the time the merger happened, we were pretty much all remote, except for me. Because I was building a home, and living with my in-laws. So I didn't really have a great spot to work, so I ended up staying in the office for another year. TODD: Yep. Ken and I originally discussed, I've worked throughout my 20 years of being a software engineer, I've worked in the office full-time. I've worked partially remote, and I've worked 100% remote. I personally feel that in the office full-time, or 100% remote are the two superior options. I don't like the hybrid view for many reasons. So we were very specifically going to be 100% not 99, not 98%, but 100% remote for everyone for all time. KEN: I feel like I should mention something ironic, which actually proves the point a little bit, which is that as we speak, I am in the same room as Todd, which is in his house, and we are here because it's my daughter's spring break, and we just decided to come and visit. But as far as the team is concerned, there's zero difference. They don't care, it doesn't matter, the only hassle is that we had to set up fancy microphones set up in order to make this work. Right? Which kind of proves the point, right? Which is that when everybody's in their own room, there's actually a lot of things are much simpler. Yes. We don't discount the benefits that can come from being in the same room sometimes, it's just we don't value it so highly that we're willing to sacrifice everything else on that altar, which is what tends to end up happening in commute-oriented companies. JAMON: Ken wrote a really great article on our blog, The Day They Invented Offices. It's a hypothetical conversation between a real estate developer, and a knowledge worker, like an engineer. KEN: It's satire. JAMON: And it talks about a world where basically if offices were not invented, people worked remotely by default. But the real estate developer's trying to convince the knowledge worker that they need to change to a commute company. And all of the benefits that that would entail, and all of the costs as well. TODD: Yeah, it's interesting, because when you do that thought experiment, you realize how ridiculous it would be to go from default remote working situation into a commute working situation, because you'd have to build trillions of dollars worth of infrastructure to make it work. So it was fascinating. I do want to say one thing, Ken mentioned that he was sitting in my office, which he is. I feel him breathing down my neck at the moment. Even if, and we actually have a physical office in Vancouver, Washington, which is in the Portland area. Very few people go there. KEN: It's a mailbox with a couple chairs attached. TODD: But sometimes people will go there and work, and anyone on the team is welcome to do that. Or Ken is in a situation. But we have a basic rule where even if you're physically next to someone, we still work the same way. Meaning we don't have a meeting where Ken and I are talking to each other in person, and everyone ... All the remote people are second class citizens where they're not seeing our conversation. We're looking at each other, and we're making body motion, that kind of stuff. So we still work as if we're remote, even if we're physically in the same location. CHRIS: That's really interesting too, I mean what kind of discipline goes into keeping things where everyone can be a part of it, not just defaulting to that person to person conversation when you're in the same room? TODD: I'm in charge of discipline. We tried writing things on the chalkboard many times, it did not work. Detention seemed a little juvenile. So we went to the old classic of cat of nine tails. KEN: Keelhauling. JAMON: Yes. KEN: Yeah. As an escalation. TODD: To answer your question seriously, which I have difficulty doing, there are a lot of difficulties. Fundamentally, they come from the fact that a lot of people have not only never experienced remote work, have never seen it. We're too many generations removed from the 1800's, when almost everyone worked at their house, basically, and their house was downtown. Your parents didn't work that way, your grandparents didn't work ... they've never seen it in existence. So they really don't know how it works. Not only they don't know how it works, their family definitely doesn't know how it works. And probably the number one problem we have is family, and friends, local family and friends not respecting that the person's actually working. One of the tricks I tell people, and it works pretty well, is just tell your family member that your boss is getting mad at you, or your boss wants you to do something. Because even if you're remote, everyone understands the boss. And just throw me under the bus, it's totally fine, and that seems to work. But that's part of the biggest challenge, is family not respecting your space. JAMON: I think Todd touched on something really important, and that's that this is actually not that new. That was the default way to work. People didn't commute to work. They worked on a farm. KEN: Maybe they walked down the street, but in most cases, not. JAMON: This idea that we have gigantic super highways, and huge transit systems and stuff, just to move people from one location that they could work to another location that they could work for no apparent other reason, it's a little bit mind boggling. Now I understand, I understand why it came to be. Remote tools, which we're not going to talk about much in this episode, but remote tools have not historically been that great, and the experience has been pretty bad. But that's changing, it very much is changing. TODD: The industrial revolution when people started working at factories, and started commuting, and the transportation revolution that facilitated a lot of that. Most of human history, work was not separated from life. Their work life didn't make sense, because you're either relaxing and drinking lemonade, or you're making dinner, or you're sweeping your house, or you're pulling out the potatoes in your backyard, if you're a farmer. The reason we have work life balance now, is because work can be fairly distressing, and you need a break from it. But typically back then, let's say you're a blacksmith, your shop would be on main street, and your house would be behind your shop, or above your shop. So your children would live within feet of where you worked, and where your spouse worked. Whether your spouse worked in the home, or did other things. So your children would eat all your meals with you, they would go to school, school is probably pretty close if they were older. If they were younger, they would eat your meals with you. They'd be around your work, they would see work going on all the time. It just wouldn't be work, it would just be normal, for instance, if you're done with your particular task today, and there's a customer coming in who wants something built for their wagon at two, you might hang out with your children, do some housework, or just play games, or whatever. And then when your customer comes in, you go into the shop, and you service that customer. The industrial revolution made it where adults had to start to pretend to work so they didn't get in trouble. JAMON: So my six year old daughter had an assignment at school, and one of the questions was where does your parent or guardian go to work? And she wrote, "The gym." Because to her, that's when I left the house, was to go work out at the gym. TODD: That's so awesome. KEN: The phenomenon that you're talking about Todd, where the industrial revolution began this process where people started working out of the home, there was a really good reason for that, which is that it was the beginning of humans having to collaborate in a large scale way on bigger problems than they had had in the past, right? Before that, the only place where you would see really large scale collaboration like that would have been I suppose- JAMON: Warfare? KEN: What? JAMON: Warfare? KEN: Warfare, yeah. That's the place where people would leave the house, and collaborate in large numbers, that was really it. JAMON: Yeah. KEN: Maybe large farms, I don't know, you could kind of consider that. But culminating in the 20th century, where that was the norm for people to go and collaborate in relatively large numbers some place away from their home. It enabled them to solve problems that you couldn't solve without involving that many people. And of course, we don't want to give that up, and so that's what the modern remote telecommuting company does, is it creates this new kind of collaboration layer, and we've been very deliberate about how we construct that. And I think that's one of the places where companies that kind of dabble with remote tend to fall down, which is that they have all these inherited ways of collaborating that you do when you're in an office together, and some of them don't work anymore. You can't just tap your coworker on the shoulder, you can't just go and like sit next to their screen. You can't all pile into an office on an impromptu basis. So you have to reconstruct habits, technologies, whatever, that can replace those things, and augment them. And we think that, overall, you end up with a better result having gone through that effort of being deliberate about that. And that in a generation, no one will think about these things anymore, because they will simply be the inherited defaults that people who work in an office together enjoy today. And we sometimes meet in person, right? Once a year we get the whole team together, the executive team comes together more often than that. It's not that we don't value that, but we think of it is as a luxury. TODD: Well, it's not necessarily a luxury perhaps, it's important socialization. So Ken and I actually discussed, we went over a pros and cons, like what's good about working in an office? Or in a cubicle, or in hell? What's good about that? Well, you're around other people, and every answer we came up with that was good was all social. It had nothing to do with actually producing any kind of work product. And I basically tell people I commute to socialize, as opposed to commuting to work. So instead of commuting to work five days a week, and socializing one of those days in the office at an office party or something, I work remotely, and I commute to the office party once a week. Not our office, but just local friends, and that kind of stuff. JAMON: It's kind of a funny thing, but yeah, you want to hang out with your friends, not necessarily just with your coworkers. And that may sound kind of weird, and the environment we are now, where often you do make friends with coworkers, and that's all great. But your social life can be something that is a little more deliberate outside of work. KEN: It's not like we discount the social value of people working together in an office, like I enjoyed that when I did it. But I think you're seeing with the rise of WeWork, and similar places, like just in the last five years I've seen the number of co-working facilities explode. And I think that that's part of the same trend, which is that you can have that experience without having to drive for an hour each way, every day. TODD: Yeah. One of our team members, Darin Wilson, he works every day out of a co-location place, and he walks for 10 minutes to the co-location area. That for him is the most efficient, he enjoys that, and that works out well. It's a great example of what works for one person doesn't work for others. I would not like that personally. I also don't like listening to music when I work, other people do. When you remote work, if you like to listen to death metal at extremely high volumes, well have at it. It's great, it's wonderful. KEN: Just turn it off before you get on Zoom please. TODD: Yes. So one of the things I think we shouldn't overlook is some of the great benefits of working say in a cubicle. I would probably estimate 99% of all the funny videos, cool things you find on the internet, were created by extremely bored people sitting in a gray cube. I call them employee fattening pins. So the zombies will appreciate this lifestyle. Not that I dislike commute working, I hope I haven't given off that vibe. JAMON: Not at all. CHRIS: How does remote work make a more engaged worker? JAMON: You know, you have to work at it. There isn't just this appearance of working, right? The only thing that really surfaces is what you actually do, not what it looks like you're doing in your cubicle, right? And because of that, the only way to tell that you are working is to actually work. TODD: Well to actually produce work product, to be more specific. KEN: Yes. JAMON: Actually produce work product, exactly. And we go to great lengths to try to not tie work specifically to time. Because while an eight hour work day is pretty normal, and generally okay, if there are ways to accomplish your work more efficiently, you should be rewarded for that, and not penalized for that by having to sit in your seat for another two hours. It's more about stripping away the appearance of work, and turning to the actual product. TODD: One of our team members moved from Reno, Nevada, to San Diego, California. She moved over a weekend, Friday she worked, and Monday she worked. From the team's perspective, absolutely nothing had changed. Although, she moved I don't know how many miles that is. Hundreds, tens of miles. So that kind of stuff is uber cool. One of our new team members said, "I'm going to New York for a week, can I still work?" And I said, "I assume you can still work in New York. I haven't been there in a few years, but I imagine they still allow that." Turns out they do. Strangely. So I'll tell you a personal story of mine. After I eat at lunch, I don't know if it's my digestive system, or whatever, it sucks the energy out of me so bad. When I worked in a smaller place where people trusted me, I would just kind of take a little nap in my chair. When I worked for bigger companies where such things were frowned upon, I would sit there for two hours from say 1 o'clock to 3 o'clock, trying my best to keep my eyes open pretending to work, and sort of reading Facebook. It's just stupid, and I did that when I was 34 years old. It's just stupid to have adults behave in this way, it really is. JAMON: Yeah, we don't look at that as some sort of a weakness. TODD: Nowadays, I did made a little bit of fun, that's fine. I really enjoy the siesta. I'll go take literally an hour nap after I eat, and then I come back refreshed, and I get lots of work done. And I tell people, I'm going to take siesta, there's no shame in that whatsoever. JAMON: And I think that's important, when the CEO's doing it, it kind of gives people permission to work in the way that is most efficient for them. TODD: Exactly. I personally believe it's super important to have 100% of people remote. The CEO on down. A lot of companies out there that claim to be remote, they're partially remote, and that's fine. I'm glad it works for them. But when you're CEO, and your other executive team have to use all the same tools, remote tools and everything that everyone does, it's not fair, but it's true. Those tools get a lot better. It's true. So if you have the CO sitting in an office, and they don't have to experience the horribleness that is a poly comm conference call, then it's never going to improve. CHRIS: What are some of the common misconceptions of remote work that you often have to explain, or even defend? TODD: Oh, there's lots. One, you're not really working. That's the biggest thing. Two is that you're probably doing your laundry, playing video games, and other such things that people imagine. Those are the kinds of- KEN: Sometimes you are, I'll get to that. TODD: Well sure, sometimes you are and that's fine. But the biggest one if you're at home, people can bother you. Like my mother, which I love very much, she's funny. She comes to visit, and I've worked remote off and on for a long time, so she should understand this by now. But she'll be like, she'll come in and talk to me. And she'll say, "Oh I know you're working," and I have a separate office, so it's very apparent that you're walking into my office. And she goes, "I know you're working so that's fine. Finish your work up, and then we'll talk in an hour or so." And I'm like, "Mom, remember," my mom's retired. I go, "Remember when you worked? You had to go there for eight hours? It was like from 9 AM to 5 PM? It's the same for me, it's not exactly the hours, but it's not like one hour." And so bless her heart, she's going to give me an hour to get my work done, and then we can talk about whatever she wants to talk about. KEN: I think one of the misconceptions that's not a misconception is that it can tend to blur your work time and your personal time. Then one of the things that people say that they like about having a commute and an office to go is that their work time is over there, and their personal time is over here. And I wish I could say that that's not an issue with remote work. It is kind of an issue for the reasons that Todd mentions. Right, it takes a certain amount of discipline to set that boundary. I'm going to make the case that that's not a problem. It is a problem if you hate your work. If you need to like recover from the boiler room that is your work, or the boredom room, or whatever it is that makes your work uncomfortable. That is a problem. I think of this as a feature of remote work, and it echoes what Todd said about it needing to be the CEO on down. Because if it is the CEO on down, the CEO is going to have the same problems that you are. Right? The three of us have the same pressure about when does work begin and end? Are we kind of always working, are we never working? What is that boundary? And it forces the company to either become a good enough place to work that people want to work, and they're not bothered by the fact that it kind of mixes in with their personal life, or die. Like as the evolutionary pressure on the remote work niche, is that you have to be good communicators. You have to be respectful, and you have more ways that you can be respectful, because you're not having to share as much space with people. You don't have fights over what people put in the damn refrigerator. You don't have fights over who's playing what music, and who put up what offensive poster, or all of these things that come when you're forced into this little box together. TODD: The one I really miss is when someone leaves the company, and everyone kind of looks at each other and says, "Is two minutes too soon to go raid everything out of their office?" KEN: Yeah. TODD: And you see these 50 year old people scrambling around like the hunger games, trying to get the better stapler. KEN: The chair, it's always the chairs and monitors. Those are the real prizes. TODD: Yes, and I've worked for places, like I like a very nice monitor. And I always bring my own, because companies never provide that, typically. I've been told, "Oh, we can't have that because if you have a big monitor, other people will be jealous, and so you can't have that." And I'm like, "Well, okay, I'm going to have it. So either this conversation's escalating, or you have a wonderful lunch." JAMON: I think that's something really insightful about this that we'll probably touch on a lot in our podcast, but that is that we're purposely putting these constraints on ourselves that require that we become a better company. That we become a better, we continue to work on culture. We don't have the easy outs that many companies do. And people will look at that and say, "Well, but you can't do that easy out thing that we all do." And we say, "Exactly, we have to do it differently, we have to do it better. We have to work on it." Remote tools are terrible, exactly. We have to go find better remote tools, we have to work on that. Those constraints are good. They're very good. They're healthy. There's something that forces us to continue to innovate, and to self reflect, and look at how we work. I mean the blurring of the lines between personal and work as Ken said, I totally agree. It's about loving your work. And it brings up some positives too, I mean I just spent two weeks in California. We're not at the stage right now where I necessarily want to take two weeks completely offline. I still want to be somewhat available for Todd and Ken. But I was able to be on Slack on my phone at various times. Let's say waiting in line at Disneyland, or something like that. And that may sound terrible to some people, but it wasn't a big deal to me. It was totally fine, and I loved that I could actually take two weeks for my family to be away, and enjoying the sun, which we don't get a lot of here. KEN: In a way, it also makes your vacations more enjoyable, if you know that you're not coming back to two weeks of email. JAMON: Exactly. KEN: Or things that have fallen apart, or who knows, right, where ... yeah. TODD: I love that spin, that's fantastic. JAMON: I don't see it as spin- KEN: Not for me, anyway. I think some people might not feel that way. JAMON: I understand that. KEN: Yeah. JAMON: A lot of people don't, and I am speaking personally here. This is not for everybody, some people totally on the uninstall Slack when they go on vacation, that's fine. For me though, I was on the plane, and I was basically archiving a bunch of emails, and I get into work this morning, and I could hit the ground running, and I'm good to go. What is the real cost of totally disconnecting? The real cost would have been I couldn't take two weeks. I couldn't be away that long. That's what it would have been. I was able to benefit from that, you may only see the downsides, but there's positives there. KEN: And to be clear, this is how it is for us as founders. Right? When it comes to our employees, we pretty much encourage them to mute, or uninstall Slack while they're away. JAMON: That's right, that's right. KEN: They don't have as much need to be sort of always on that we do. Yeah, but for us, it's actually ... I mean from my point of view, it's a benefit. JAMON: But even that, we have some employees that want to travel, and they want to be gone for a couple months. Three months, even. Taking a three month vacation, that's pretty tough, that's pretty tough to do. So with some of them, they may work in the early mornings, or they may work in the late evenings to coincide with their time zone, and then they can be out on a trip for three months. So they are able to continue to be productive during that time. KEN: And that's a perk that Google cannot match, period. That is just something that you cannot do if you work for Google. TODD: Yeah, screw you Google. KEN: Or whomever, right? Any of these companies that expect a physical presence. TODD: We're coming for you, Google. KEN: The point is, so we have one person who doesn't have a permanent home. Right? He moves around pursuing his hobbies, and makes it work. We have other employees who have done exactly what Jamon has said, and they've gone on extended workcations, right? Where they're able to get their work done, and they have the experience of frankly, actually living in another country, as opposed to just being a tourist. And we have high standards for how they get their work done while they're doing that, but because we've had to develop standards that really measure people's impact rather than their face time, it works. TODD: Copyright Apple. KEN: There was a space, you couldn't really hear it when I said it- TODD: Space? JAMON: Face. TODD: Face. KEN: So there was a face, space time. Yeah, right, anyway. TODD: Yeah, we talked about people who want to take longer physical trips around, whether it's around the US, around the world, what not, the benefits. But there's a benefit for another set of people, and I would probably consider myself in that group, as well as some of our other team members, and that's people who choose to live rurally. JAMON: Yes. TODD: We have one person who lives really rurally, and he has a lot of land and stuff, and he can have the lifestyle that he enjoys, and still have a very productive and successful career. Myself, I do live in Las Vegas, but I live in rural Las Vegas. I have a little bit of land. It allows me to live in this way, when I used to have to live in San Francisco, which I enjoyed for a long time, but as I got older I wanted to go back to living on the land and stuff. So for people who want to live rurally, or not just the typical urban or suburban lifestyle, it's fantastic. CHRIS: So when it comes to the client experience of working with a 100% remote company, how do they respond to this way of work? TODD: That's a great question, Chris. Various ways depending on the client. Some clients, that's the way they work, and they love it. Like they see us kindred spirits, that's the way they like to work. Other clients especially if maybe they're more enterprise city type clients and stuff, maybe aren't as familiar with it. We kind of insist on it to be honest, even if the client's local to some or many of our employees, our team. And we just explain it, and we are very articulate in the way we describe how we work. And sometimes they have to have a little faith in us, but after they work through our process, they probably never seen a remote company that works well. I think our company works as well as I've seen. We work with a few companies who are both I think do a good job like we do. A lot of them do not, and I'm very proud to say that quite a few customers who maybe have part-time remote work started opting our procedures, which is a fantastic compliment, and it makes me proud. Because we do spend a huge amount of time thinking about this stuff, and working on it. JAMON: That's actually more common than you think, that we influence our clients in the way that they work. TODD: Can you expand on that Jamon? JAMON: When clients come in, and they experience the Infinite Red way of working, and they see the thought and care that we put into it, and how we're all kind of bought into it, and how we also iterate on it, because it's an ongoing process. We don't have it perfect yet, we're continuing to work on it. They see that things get done, that it can be done well, and that they have the flexibility that remote work affords. It's a pretty neat thing to see them working the way that we love to work. TODD: I don't want to digress, but we use Slack quite a bit for chat communication, that sort of thing. We use email next to nothing. But we have a channel we call rollcall, and the channel is very simple. It's just kind of describe where you are, and if you're working or not. It's analogous to walking in the office and saying, "Good morning everyone, gosh my back hurts, I've been at the gym." And it works really, really well, because it's not forced on people, and people really enjoy the back and forth. So let me just go through this morning's rollcall. One of our team members signed on at 3 AM, and then she went out for breakfast at 6 o'clock. Other people started signing in, one person signed in. It said they laptop issues that they fixed, they explained why. People gave some reactions. Other people just signed in, I said, "Good morning." One person said, "Short break," this is at 9 AM, "Picking up the car from the mechanic." We won't have exactly specific times people have to be working, or available, we want people to be so many hours a day where they can coordinate with other people, have meetings, have work sessions, that kind of stuff. But it's not uncommon people say, "My daughter's having a recital, I'm going to leave after lunch, I'll be back and probably work some this evening." No client meetings, no one's being impacted by that, great, we all give him thumbs up, we say, "Hope it goes well." No one asked if they can do that, no one says, "Hey Todd, can I go to that?" And then around lunchtime, everyone says they're lunching. They might talk about what they ate, some sort of friendly conversation, and you just kind of get a feeling of your team going about their day. And I will finish this long story up by saying it's kind of fascinating. So one of the people I work a lot with is Gant Laborde, who lives in New Orleans. And we work a lot during the day. And when he comes and visits me physically, or I go to New Orleans and visit him, it doesn't feel like I'm visiting a friend I haven't seen in a while. There isn't a lot of chat about how things have been going, it's nice to see you again. Because I've seen him every day for hours, and I just saw him this morning. And by see him, I mean interacted with him either in a video call, or on Slack, or whatever. It doesn't feel like I'm just finally meeting him, it's like we're just continuing what we were doing this morning, it's just we happen to physically be in the same space. It's very interesting phenomena. JAMON: I find it kind of flabbergasting in a way that companies would care about someone taking a break, or going to pickup their daughter, or having to go pickup the car from the mechanic. TODD: Lazy leadership. JAMON: That's exactly right. TODD: I recommend if you're a lazy ... for the lazy leaders out there, or the bad leaders, yeah, don't do remote work. Stick with cubicles, make the cubicles as comfortable as possible to get the worst employees so the rest come to us. KEN: It's probably worth talking about people for whom it wouldn't be a good fit. Obviously there's still plenty of jobs out there where physical presence is implicitly required. Anybody who works in retail, anybody who works with their hands, has to actually physically manipulate things. I think our point has always been that there's just not as many of those as people think. And to be honest, I suspect that over the next 20, 30 years, as robotics and telepresence, and that sort of thing start to really come into their own, that even those sorts of jobs will start to diminish. You already have that even with like medical, the medical field, legal field, things that used to be sort of a high, high physical presence will become more low physical presence. TODD: Surgeons right now are doing surgery with a DaVinci system, both physically, and I think they can do it remotely now. Like they're standing next to it typically, but I think they can do it remotely at the moment. JAMON: What's kind of funny about that is my dad owned an excavation company, and he was one of the first people to get a cell phone, because for him, everything was remote. Like he had to be remote, because he was driving his dump truck to the job site, he had to be there working, and he had to do his office work, because he was like the only guy. He didn't have an office, he didn't have someone handling the paperwork, he had to create invoices on the fly and stuff. So in some ways, some of those blue collar jobs had some of these things figured out way before we did. TODD: That's actually a super interesting point. Logistic companies, or shipping, truck drivers and stuff. They've had to deal with this, I don't know how old you all are out there in listening land, but if you remember Nextel phones, with the automatic walkie talkie feature- JAMON: Totally. TODD: They're useful, very useful. Kind of like an analog Slack, really. So yeah, it's fascinating. A lot of the so called blue collar work has had to deal with this for a very long time. KEN: And it's worth mentioning that even for the core of jobs that will always be physical in person, if you took every office out there that didn't need to be an office, and you converted that to a remote job where people can live anywhere, the reduction in pressure on the real estate market, on the transportation system that would ensue, would make life better for everybody. TODD: Right. KEN: Right? The people who have to commute can commute, because I mean you have this phenomenon as cities grow, where they'll build a new highway, and for five, 10 years if you're lucky, things are great. Because there's all this extra capacity, but what happens in the meantime, is that further down that highway, developers start cramming new houses in, because suddenly it's a doable commute. And then within that five, 10, maybe 20 years, it's back to the way it was, maybe worse than it was, because now there's even more people trying to cram into this road. But if you just snap your fingers, and moved all of those offices out so that that knowledge workers, the people who are working with their brains, and with words, and with digital images, and that sort of thing. And they all scatter to the winds, and live where they want to live, and not in Fremont, or wherever it is that they're living to commute to San Francisco. I feel like, right, maybe like I don't think I've ever seen a study like this, but it seems like it would stand to reason at least that the pressure on transportation would reduce to the point that everybody's quality of life would improve. I don't know, we'll see I guess. JAMON: Yeah, even when you look at something like a dentist office, which is probably extremely resistant to this sort of thing, there's just the robotics are not there yet. And maybe even if they were the trust isn't there yet, with the general public. But how many other people are in that office that don't need to be drilling on teeth? They could be elsewhere. And you're exactly right, the infrastructure, and it's actually kind of happening in some ways. You look at some of the high rises in downtown Portland and stuff, people are coming and living in the city because they want to live in the city, and not because it's next to their office. And a lot of these offices are now being converted into apartments and condos, and being kind of near offices, where you can work from your house. And what would cities look like if every job that could be remote was remote? KEN: I mean yeah, can you imagine a world where the city center is the bedroom community, right? JAMON: Right. TODD: That would be awesome. KEN: Where people live because they want to be next to the cultural opportunities in the city. And the minority of people who actually have to physically work at some job in the city, can live next to their work, because there's just more housing, because like much less of the city is taken over by the kind of white collar workplaces that have been traditional for city centers. TODD: That's actually really interesting to think about. KEN: Yeah. TODD: I imagine somewhere in hell, there is an eight hour bumper to bumper commute, and you're not in a car, but you're literally in a cubicle with a steering wheel. CHRIS: One of the things that I want to go back and touch on is this idea of leadership, and how remote work isn't for the lazy leader. So let me ask the question of the three of you, how has being 100% remote made you a better leader? JAMON: Well, I can speak to my experience going from ClearSight not being remote to being remote. I'm kind of in some ways a forceful personality. I'm kind of a person who likes to move fast, and bring everybody along with him. And in an office, there's actually a sort of almost like a physical component to that. Like the leader's right there, and he's enthusiastic about something. He's moving fast, and he's doing his thing, and he's talking about it where everybody can hear. When I look back at it now, that was sort of lazy leadership. It was. It wasn't necessarily the type of leadership that was people coming along because they were enthusiastic about it, it was more that they were just kind of following the force of nature that was moving that direction. Now that I'm remote, I don't have those physical cues, verbal cues, things like that, to bring everybody along. And it requires a lot more thought and planning around how to get people on board with concepts, and how to get people moving in the right direction. It's a really interesting thing, and it's not something I've totally figured out yet, but it's something I'm moving toward. KEN: I would say that it has forced me to be more explicit about expectations, since you don't have this inherited set of defaults. You have to say, "This is what we expect from you." It's not, "We expect you to come in the office at nine," it's, "You need to be available to clients during an agreed upon window," for example. Or as we had mentioned before, "Here's our productivity benchmark, and this is what we're looking at." You might have to develop some of those in any kind of company, and you should. But our setup, it exposes any fault lines in your expectations, and you have to address them. As Todd said, like if you want to be a lazy leader, don't do it. TODD: I would pile on what Ken said, you have to be able to measure what people, their work output, their work product. That is not easy, even in industries where it's obvious what their work product is. Say they paint paintings, you can see that they painted a painting. That is probably the most challenging thing, and then there's the emotional part. Where if you can't measure their work product, and you can't see them sitting in a seat, you're just going to have to have faith in them, and get over yourself worrying about it. But it is challenging to make sure that you have a semi-accurate view of who's actually being efficient, and who's not. And just not 100% thing. JAMON: That's more on the management side of things. Leadership side of things too is difficult, because getting people to see a vision is much easier when you can just say, "Okay," kind of the Michael Scott thing. "Everybody in the conference room in five minutes." That's a very different thing than what we do. TODD: I think it's challenging, but to be honest, I'm not staying awake at night worrying about those challenges. I find them fairly straightforward, you just have to put effort into it. Keep on walking down that road, and I think it works out really well to be honest. It's not a big deal to me. JAMON: You just have to strike the right balance. TODD: There was a tweet last week where basically it said, "During any meeting, you don't have to listen, just at one point you have to comment and say, 'I think the solution to this problem is just striking the right balance', and then everyone in the meeting nods, and you were involved." KEN: Because it's always true. JAMON: It's always true. TODD: Yes, so that's a running joke here at Infinite Red, where in the meeting at some point someone says, "We just need to strike the right balance." We all laugh. CHRIS: Looking into the future, do you see more and more companies adopting remote work? TODD: It's one of our missions, our side missions as a company, to make it more. It's probably other than software engineering, and software design, which is obviously our main focus of our company. Other than that, probably the number one thing that we're interested in promoting in the world is remote work. So I hope the answer is, it's more I don't know, I'm sure Ken and Jamon have some good insight in what they predict. JAMON: I think that one of the factors that will influence this is I look at my kids, like generation Z. And they don't know what it's like not to be connected, and they don't know what it's like not to be able to just talk to their cousin via FaceTime, no space, and who lives in South Carolina. This is normal to them, this is a normal thing to them, this is a normal way to live and to work. Well, they don't really work, but just to do things. KEN: We'll fix that. JAMON: Obviously for my kids, they're around remote work all the time. But it is a way of life, and I think that you'll also see other things like there are more ways to learn online, versus going to a university and sitting in a classroom. There are plenty of other opportunities for them to get used to this way of doing life. And I think that will have an impact. It may not be moving as quickly as we would like, we would like to see a lot more industries move into being remote work for a variety of reasons. But I think that that is a factor. KEN: I will echo that and say that both my wife and I work from home. And my daughter makes the same face when you say that some people have to like drive to a special place, as when you say that you used to have to come to the TV at a particular time to watch your show. Right? But even before the generational shift, I think it is happening more and more. Ironically, Silicon Valley, which should be at the vanguard of this, is one of the most resistant to the idea. I think that's partly because they've had so much money flowing through, that they've been able to afford the enormous luxury of moving everybody to this expensive place, and then putting them in an expensive office. And to be honest, for a company that is chasing a multi billion dollar idea, and trying to beat their competitors over the next six months, there's a case to be made for doing that. But I think way, way more of those companies think that they are doing that than actually are. JAMON: I actually have a question for you Ken, do you think that this will ... you know you said Silicon Valley is resistant to this, and that's a very location based geo fence there. Do you think that the revolution of remote work will happen irrespective of where people are located, but maybe in a different cohort? A different type of people will bring remote work to the forefront more so than a specific place. Let's say for example Detroit, or something, decided it all of a sudden is all remote. That's probably less likely to happen then- KEN: I think that that's one of the key pieces of this, is like it's like it's creating it's own virtual location. That there's a set of people who don't have the same relationship with place, and that sounds really pretentious kind of. But like they just don't think about physical locations in the same way. The cost aspect of it has caused it to grow in more cost sensitive industries than venture backed startups. And it's not that they don't have those, but I think it's also a certain amount of bias on the part of the venture capitalists themselves, and the kind of people that appeal to them. This is my guess, they will crack eventually. TODD: Having worked in Silicon Valley for 20 years, I do love Silicon Valley, and love San Francisco for sure. But when it comes to remote work, they have an inherent bias against it, because when you endure the heavy cost of relocating to Silicon Valley, and you've got your foot into that door, and you're part of that community, anything that would diminish the rewards from that suffering diminishes you. In other words, it's wonderful being there as an engineer. Everyone you meet is engineers, they're all working on interesting projects. There's a real benefit, I think there's other cities too. Especially some secondary cities like Portland, Oregon, or- KEN: Seattle. TODD: Seattle yeah, and Texas. KEN: Austin. TODD: Thank you. Austin, Texas. I think these are up and coming and stuff. And there's still benefits socially to it, but I think a lot of times they resist it because it diminishes their specialness in many ways. JAMON: Yeah. TODD: And really when we started Infinite Red, and we decided that this will be a remote company forever, and that this is my third and hopefully last company I build, it allowed me to move back to my home state of Nevada without worrying about my career, and that is an incredibly powerful thing.

  Emil Guillermo: The Slants' Simon Tam speaks candidly on PODCAST: "The cure for hate speech isn't censorship...let communities decide, not government." July 10, 2017 6:58 PM It's been a big summer for Simon Tam, musician and founder of the Slants, now trademarked, reappropriated, and unanimously affirmed by the Supreme Court. He also got married recently in his native state of California, so there's been much to celebrate. And yet it seems there still some who aren't cheering his nearly eight-year-long battle to trademark his band's name and use the disparaging term "slant." People of color remain divided since the Slants' victory is certain to allow for the Washington NFL team to continue using its disparaging name.  Tam told Emil Amok's Takeout, he's aware of that and it bothers him.  "It makes my skin crawl, it's terrible," Tam said. But he ultimately feels the decision was a win for all, protecting vulnerable communities who have had no say in the trademark process until this case. "Our identities were used against us," said Tam, who feels it will now be up to the marketplace and our own communities to say what's inappropriate, rather than the government.  "The cure of hate speech is not censorship," said Tam, who believes that the First Amendment allows for a deeper and more nuanced approach than simply to say some words are good, and others are bad.  In recent reports, some Asian American legal groups like NAPABA and AAAJ have criticized the Supreme Court decision. (AALDEF and other Asian American groups joined the ACLU amicus brief and supported the Slants.) But Tam has held steady and rejects the "slippery slope" notion of critics who believe that an avalanche of hate speech will result from the decision. In an open letter to his critics, Tam sees the decision as advancing legit reappropriation. "In fact, now communities can be equipped to protect their own rights and prevent villainous characters from profiting and misleading people with these same terms," Tam wrote. In his open letter, Tam cited the case of Heeb, a Jewish publication on pop culture, granted the registration for their magazine, but when they applied for the exact same mark in the categories of t-shirts and events, were denied for "disparagement."  As Tam points out, it meant when a group of Holocaust deniers sent harassing communications to subscribers, inviting them to Heeb Events, the organization was unable to stop them. "Had Heeb not been wrongly denied a registration, they would have been able to get a cease and desist order. This case now allows a just procedure against other people wrongly profiting from racial slurs or countering the work done by reappropriation." Tam concludes: "Laws, like words, are not always inherently harmful. It depends on how they are used. It is like a sharp blade: in the hands of an enemy, it can inflict pain and suffering. However, in the hands of a surgeon, it can provide healing. The law I fought against was a large sword used by the government to haphazardly target "disparaging" language, but the collateral damage was on the free speech rights of those who need protected expression the most. Like other broad policies around access and rights (be it stop and frisk or voter ID laws), there was a disparate impact on the marginalized."   That logic may still not satisfy those conflicted by the decision, especially when it leads to a result like affirming the use of the Washington NFL team's slur. But the bottom line is still the First Amendment, which Tam is busy expressing in the studio on the follow up to the group's last EP, "The Band Who Must Not Be Named." The new disc will definitely be named, eponymously, the group's first ever under its proud SCOTUS affirmed banner. For Tam, in the name of the broader Asian American community, it was worth it.   Hear the Slants here.   Hear Simon on Emil Amok's Takeout here. *     *     * Emil Guillermo is an independent journalist/commentator. Updates at www.amok.com. Follow Emil on Twitter, and like his Facebook page. The views expressed in his blog do not necessarily represent AALDEF's views or policies.         Emil Guillermo: Oh no, "Hawaii Five-0" and what it means to all of us July 6, 2017 4:18 PM When I first heard about Daniel Dae Kim and Grace Park leaving "Hawaii Five-0," I couldn't believe it. The stars of the long-running TV crime procedural based in the 50th state simply asked for pay equity. They got the cold shoulder instead. Their exit leaves CBS with what it deserves. Hawaii Five-nothing.                                                                                                                                          (photo by Loren Javier) I'm not watching a show with zero Asian American stars going into the eighth season. Really, how do you just let your top Asian American cast members on a TV show set in the nation's most Asian American state just pick up and leave?  It's easy if you don't value diversity. Or to be more specific, equality. Here's the deal the white co-stars get that the Asian American stars don't. More pay. And a cut of the series profits. As if the white stars are the draw that carried the whole show.  They're not. I don't even know who the co-stars Alex O'Loughlin and Scott Caan are. Frankly, I couldn't pick them out in a line at a Panda Express. But, of course, CBS Television Studios, the show's producers, wouldn't budge.  And this is in a show that I would say was equally Kim's and Park's. All this proves is Asian American leverage in showbiz remains zero. Unless you're married to the boss like Julie Chen, who has climbed to the top on the shoulders of "Big Brother." But for the majority of Asian Americans who appear on the glassy side of the camera, the message is pretty clear. Just be happy to get SAG/AFTRA scale. Know your place. Don't overreach. You're the hired help.  As my old friend Guy Aoki of the Media Action Network for Asian Americans told Hollywood Reporter, "the racial hierarchy established in the original 1968-1980 series remained intact in the 2010 reboot: Two white stars on top, two Asian/Pacific Islander stars on the bottom." It's sad that at this time in history, in what should be a vehicle for Asian Americans. this is how Asian American stars are treated. If you can just let a guy like Kim, arguably one of the top male Asian American stars in Hollywood, just leave, that's a major message to someone like me who wants to be the next Victor Wong. Or Amy Hill.  Despite all the window dressing and Asian American stars you can point to, showbiz remains as racist now as it ever was. I'm particularly depressed by this after coming off a short run at the San Diego Fringe Festival with my one-man show, "Amok Monologues."   My one good review made it worthwhile.  Still, I'm a journalist and storyteller by trade. I combined the theater at this juncture in my life because I studied acting and drama a long time ago when I was in college and in grad school. Back then, I even thought about going into acting. But when the only Filipinos I saw played beach boys and drivers, I thought better of my stereotype.   In fact, the best role I ever got was playing the white guy in black theater. But then maybe that's because my college roommate was the director and he owed it to me.   I realized early on that it wouldn't happen for me in showbiz unless I write my own stories. But for me, the urgency of journalism outweighed the lure of show business. I felt the facts needed to be established before I felt comfortable telling stories on stage.     That meant turning to journalism to tell our stories, even with hairspray and makeup, as I did when starting in TV.    I thought TV would provide the right balance between showbiz and journalism. At KXAS in Dallas, I worked with Scott Pelley. (Would he have ended up like me had his name been Pellicito?) At KRON-TV in San Francisco, I worked with some of the most talented folks in the business.    Oddly, my career climbed to its furthest point the more people couldn't see me--- in radio, where I could sound as white as anyone.     But my life in the media shows, you still can't escape what Aoki calls that "racial hierarchy." Whites still control. And if being Asian American is important, or being deracinated sounds hideous to you, you're out of luck.   Some make the compromise anyway, and hang on. Temporarily. But it catches up to you. You are who you are. And that can be a factor in how far you go in media.   Maybe there are enough Asian American anchors around (predominantly women), so you can debate me and insist that things are changing. But that may be all show. If salaries were revealed, like in the "Hawaii Five-0" situation, I bet we're still being lowballed.    So what does it mean to everyone else not in showbiz or journalism? Plenty. If you don't play in the ensemble, or play the lead in fake TV life, don't think you'll get a fair shot in real life quite as easily.  TV helps create the stereotypical reality. When we don't show up in the image-making machinery of our culture, it's much harder to show up anywhere. Did CBS care that Hawaii was the most Asian state in the nation? When a show can get away with dumping its key Asian stars just like that, it will surely embolden those in other industries.  Gains don't come without a challenge. For as long as necessary. Look at American history. And look at the current backslide on major issues from affirmative action to voting rights. "Hawaii Five-0" is TV giving us a reality check, just when we thought we had made some progress. I mean, more than 50 years after the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, you'd figure we would get a break on things that are pretend. But somewhere on top of the heap, someone has made a decision. Paying two Asian American actors what they're worth isn't good business. So Kim and Park are gone. The white fantasy of "Hawaii Five-0" lives on. In the meantime, I'm not watching a Kim-less, Park-less 5-0.  I encourage you to do the same, and to support Asian American actors, producers, and writers in their projects. And I'm doing what others are doing these days. Writing my own stuff. Telling my own stories. It seems to be the only way to beat the racial hierarchy of Hollywood.

How to access Time of Day reporting in Google Analytics to help you decide when the best time to send marketing emails is for maximum engagement.     EXCLUSIVE RESOURCE: Add Drew's custom Performance Over Time report to your company's Google Analytics account! + download the transcribe from this episode. Subscribe: iTunes | Stitcher What day of the week is your audience most engaged with your content? Are they more likely to visit your site in the morning or at night? Performance over time reports are a great way to sharpen your email marketing strategy, arming you with historical data to back up your decisions when it comes to the days and times you send emails. In this episode, Drew covers the importance of Time of Day reporting, talks about a few ways you can use these analytics to grow your business, and shares the link to a Google Analytics custom report he created that you can use, too. Highlights 00:48 – A couple of reasons you’ll want to keep track of your top performing days and times 01:10 – There’s no default view for “performance over time” in GA, you need to create a custom report 01:54 – How Drew sets up his custom performance over time report (click here to use it on your own site) 02:59 – How to analyze your custom report once you’ve created it 03:50 – Looking at the data in a pie chart 04:01 – Pulling out just email traffic from the report to determine what day is best to send your emails 05:57 – A look at an “Hour of the Day’ report Links / Resources Ready to take a look at your Time of Day analytics? Click here to import Drew's custom performance over time report to your own Google Analytics! To learn more about data-driven strategies that grow ecommerce businesses, just . Transcript Prefer to read rather than listen to the podcast episode? No problem, you'll find a text transcribe below, and you can also for later. → Read the Transcript Okay. Today we're going to use Google Analytics to investigate performance according to time. What do I mean by that? That means we're going to investigate performance on our website. It could be visits, it could be e-Commerce transactions or revenue over a unit of time, either hour of the day. For example, how does traffic or conversions at 6 AM differ from 10 PM? It could be day of the week, so how is revenue on our Monday different from revenue on our Friday? It could be week of the year. How is week three of the year different from week 52 if you want to look into seasonality? Why would you want to do this, you're probably asking right now. Well, if you've got your best offer, for example, you don't want to send out that offer on a day during which no one's on the site or during which no one has historically responded to your emails. Those are two examples of why you'd want to know this. If you go to investigate performance over time, Google Analytics, the first thing you may or may not notice is it's not really broken out here on the left hand side. There's no menu item for performance over time. What you've got to do then is create a custom report. Want to save this transcribe as a PDF? No problem, . You click on the customization tab up at the top and you're going to want to click on "New Custom Report" here. I've already built one out called "Performance Over Time" so just to speed things up I'm going to show you how I configured this report. This is the custom report interface. You see you've got a title in at the top, you add content to it in the middle, add some filters and views. Just to go through this quickly, I'm calling it "Performance Over Time" and what I'm going to walk through is day of the week. I want to find out how my revenue through email differs on day of the week, that's the challenge. We'll call it "Day of the Week". Under metrics groups you want to add really whatever you would like to know according to day of the week. Would you like to know about sessions,

(www.mekowilliams.com) The Meko Williams Show (Recurring Video Series) - Featuring sexy Meko Williams in her unique two part weekly hourly show. Live Wednesdays @ 7:30 PM: It's Meko's birthday, and the shoutouts are rolling in from all over the globe and the world of social media! Come and hear all about the celebration of our girl's special day! In Part 2 "Bump It Or Junk It" the focus is the collaborative efforts of our favorite indie Loveshadow. Like we always say, the music is bumpin' and their is always candy for your eyes! (Recorded 11-23-14)

Aired: 3/15/2014 7 PM:: It's a full house as Richard and Joe are joined in studio by Joseph Sorge, author of Divorce Corp, Heather Johnston, La Jolla Architect and her husband David Dickins, La Jolla Environmental Engineer.

Check out a video review that features the best scenes and the best quotes from the movie Halloween. Your browser does not support the video tag. The following was the Cut on Sight: Halloween (2007) posted on 9/2/2007 at 4:20 PM It was only a few years ago that we found out Rob Zombie would … Continue reading Halloween (2007) – The Cut Up #71 →