Podcasts about team as

SHOW NOTES: This week next level entrepreneur Shelley Willingham and I talk about the importance of building the right “Dream Team” Highlights from the conversation: Shelley Willingham: ● She worked with Fortune 500 companies on multicultural marketing, helping them achieve non-offensive or stereotypical campaigns and recognizing the increasing power of minorities and forgotten segments of the population. ● After the market change, she went through a rough time being broke. With some soul searching about what was going to be next for her, she turned to entrepreneur coaching. ● She then founded her own agency and company, in which she supports her clients with marketing and putting together digital strategies. ● Business strategist and digital marketer. CEO of Vision and Passion International, LLC. (VPI). Within the VPI portfolio are Douglas Alexandra, a digital marketing and brand activation firm and Pretty & Powerful, a movement to empower women. The Importance of Building a Team ● As you get started, you need to know what’s the direction you want to go. Is it going to be a huge business or will it be on a smaller scale? Your team should be designed to meet your expectations in the long run. ● From the start, put some money aside (about 20%) to reinvest in your business. That can be the amount you invest in your team. You’ll also get a notion of when you can afford to hire someone. ● It's not a cookie cutter approach. Evaluate which are your needs. It’s not just skillset, it’s also personality. Your team is an important part of your company, so you want to make sure each piece fits comfortably. ● Think about the process, what you do every day. Write it down and figure out how long it takes you to do certain tasks, what are the steps involved… When you are ready to hire someone, you’ll have an expectation of how long it takes, expected results. For professionals may or may not take them less, but you know what you will be paying them for per hour. You’ll know what you will be investing in. Catch up with Shelley by visiting her www.douglasalexandra.com You can also follow them on social media at: IG: shelley_willingham FB: https://www.facebook.com/shelleywillinghamh LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shelleywillinghambusinessstrategist/ See you on the next one! Hosted by: Dr. Maiysha Clairborne Looking for a Coach or Mastermind to Join? Ready to Take Your Career, Business, and Life to the Next Level? If you want to Learn more about Dr. Maiysha's coaching, courses, and masterminds. Visit www.DrMaiysha.com. Choose from of our Free Mini Online Masterclasses on Mindset Mastery, Manifestation, and Next Level Entrepreneurship Right on the Home page to start your journey now.

Due to the very nature of sudden and/or violent deaths, many things can and do go wrong in the first few hours after discovery.  Death scenes have a way of bringing together many individuals with various responsibilities and experiences.  This unique group can consist of uniformed officers, detectives, crime scene investigators, forensic experts, coroner investigators, medical examiner investigators, as well as prosecutors and police administrative staff.   These scenes may also have fire and EMS staff or other agencies trying to do their jobs, not to mention families and onlookers.  Because of this often chaotic scene, errors can happen. Let's look at the ten most common mistakes of a death investigation. 1. Improper Response and Arrival to the Scene First, responding officers may not correctly respond to and secure the scene and the immediate surrounding area.  Uniformed officers may not stop or detain people leaving or milling around the scene. Further, while waiting for investigation and CSI teams to arrive, it's not uncommon for first responding officers to gather to close to, or directly in the crime scene, inadvertently contaminating evidence. Here are a few other examples of errors from the first responding officers. Failure to notify investigators soon enough, or at all; assuming the cause of death is a suicide or is natural, eliminating the need to treat the scene as a crime scene; failure to detain all persons present at the scene, which might include the suspect; or they may fail to separate possible witnesses and obtain initial statements.  Also, failing to make an initial determination of the scene boundaries leads to an insufficient area of protection. 2. Failing to protect the Crime Scene In all death investigations, but even more so in a homicide investigation, crime scene contamination can be and is a significant problem.  No other aspect of these investigations is more open to mistakes than the preservation and protection of the scene and subsequent evidence. Paramount to any investigation is ensuring by the first officers on the scene to isolate, protect, and maintain scene integrity as the investigation follows its standard path.  This includes the monitoring of paramedics and EMS personnel in the scene as well as identifying them for a future interview.  Officers must also watch family members or others in the area to ensure they are not contaminating the scene.  After a perimeter is established and is locked down, officers should start a log of everyone entering and leaving the vicinity and the reason why they are there.  Also, officers should be observing and taking notes of activities occurring in and around the scene. 3. Not Handling Suspicious Deaths and Homicides All unattended death should be looked at and treated as suspicious, and an experienced officer/investigator should go to the scene.  These deaths should be treated as homicides and crime scenes until the facts prove otherwise.  Too many departments allow untrained patrol officers to conduct basic death investigation with the assumption of suicide or natural death and with the idea that it is unlikely to be a homicide.  Without training, officers could likely miss-interpret a staged or altered scene. If the scene is not handled correctly from the beginning and is later found to be a homicide, valuable evidence can be lost, and the integrity of the scene is compromised at best and at worst, non-existent. 4. Responding with a Preconceived Notion It is imperative that investigators not allow themselves to respond to a death scene with any preconceived conclusion about the case. It’s common for investigators to get sent to a scene and given information based on the initial call.  If the call came in as a suicide and the initial officer who responds arrives with the mindset of suicide, it is common to treat the death as a suicide and thus shortcut any other investigation.  It looks like a suicide, so it must be a suicide, and no other investigation is conducted.    This type of preconceived investigation results in fewer photographs being taken, witness statements not being completed, evidence not being searched for or collected, and the integrity of the scene is destroyed. It's not only suicide this can happen on, but reported natural deaths and accidents can also inadvertently be short cut if responding officers conclude their investigation based upon the initial reported call.  If then, at a later time, the death becomes suspicious, the officer's reports and any investigative documentation will be lacking valuable information needed for future investigations.  The tendency is for the uniformed officer to write the final report and collect the evidence necessary to fit the narrative given to him by the initial call.   5. Failing to Take Sufficient Photographs In today's world of digital photography, photos are cheap and easy to obtain. Back when I started in this business, we used Polaroid™ instant photography and 35mm film cameras.  These were expensive, and some departments wanted to limit "unnecessary" photographs in an attempt to stretch the budget. That's not the case today since hundreds of photographs can be taken and stored nearly free of charge. Photos are a way to document the scene and to freeze that scene in time. They are used in court when necessary and may prove or disprove a fact in question.  Therefore, it is vital that photographs be taken of the entire scene, area, and location where the crime took place, including any sites connected to the original crime. Remember, you only get one chance at your first chance to document a scene. 6. Failing to Manage the Crime Scene Process The investigator in charge should oversee the investigation and scene documentation. He or she should ensure proper chain of custody and documentation of evidence. They are in charge of maintaining scene integrity. Never allow officers to use the restroom within the residence, or take food or drink from the kitchen. Never allow smoking in the investigative area, never bring food or drink into the scene from an outside source, and always keep non-essential personnel out of the scene area. Designate an area for them to congregate if needed, but it should never be inside your primary scene area. Lead investigators must also direct crime scene personnel on where and what they are to collect. Many CSI staff are well trained and have a good idea of what needs to be done. However, since each scene is unique, the investigator in charge must ensure evidence is adequately searched for and collected. The victim's body should always be inspected and searched for trace evidence prior to being moved or taken from the scene. Not doing so can result in loss of valuable evidence and leave many unanswered questions.  Also, and I cannot stress this enough, do not allow anyone to cover the body with anything found at or near the scene!  I've arrived on death scenes to find victims covered with blankets officers found on beds, sheets from nearby laundry baskets, or coats covering victims' faces to preserve their dignity.   If the body is found outdoors, barriers should be used.  Using anything to "add" to and subsequently alter the initial crime scene is always harmful to the investigation. Don't do it and don't allow it. Always stop and look around the scene; look up as much as around. See what is missing or what isn't.  What looks right about the scene, and what looks wrong?  Is what you are seeing matching what you are being told?   Never leave a scene until you are confident every answer to any question you may have has been answered or documented. Remember, this is your only first chance. 7. Failing to Evaluate Victimology Victimology is the collection and assessment of any significant information as it pertains to the victim and his or her lifestyle. It is imperative that investigators know the victim and that they complete a victimology study. You cannot properly investigate a death without victimology.  Failing to have a complete picture of the victim will preclude you from developing motives, suspects, and risk factors unique to the victim. These risk factors are usually regarded as high, moderate, or low and based on lifestyle, living conditions, job skills, neighborhood, or anything specific to the victim.  This information includes areas such as personality, employment, education, friends, habits, hobbies, marital status, relationships, dating history, sexuality, reputation, criminal record, drug and/or alcohol use, and physical condition as well as facts about the area they grew up in and if different, the one they resided in at the time of their death. Ultimately you need to find out, in great detail, who the victim was and what was going on at the time of their death. The best source of information will be friends, family, employers, and neighbors. Your goal is to get to know the victim even better than they knew themselves. 8. Failing to Conduct an Efficient Area Canvass Properly First, understand the terms "area canvass" and "neighborhood canvass" may be used interchangeably.  They are interviews conducted in the field, as opposed to statements taken on the scene or in the station. I will admit that conducting an area canvass can be tedious and very time-consuming. Sometimes, hundreds of contacts can be made without unveiling one shred of usable information. However, it is that one exhilarating jewel that is occasionally discovered that makes the process so rewarding.  There are right and wrong ways to conduct an area canvass that will yield better results for the efforts put out.  Ideally, patrol personnel and plainclothes detectives should perform separate canvasses.  Some individuals respond more readily to an authority figure in a uniform, while others prefer the anonymity of the detective's plain clothes.  Since it is impossible to know who will respond more willingly to either approach, both should be employed.  This technique will give the investigator the greatest chance of getting vital information.   The canvass may be conducted in an area near the crime scene or, conceivably, hundreds of miles away from it.  In the aftermath of a bank robbery, for example, the getaway vehicle may be located several counties, or even states, away.  Two canvasses should, therefore, be undertaken: one at the original crime scene (the bank) and one at the secondary scene (the vehicle).  If a suspect is developed, it may be advisable to perform an additional area canvass in the neighborhood where that person resides to learn about his/her reputation and habits.  A complex case may require that a number of area canvasses are completed at various locations.  The primary goal of a neighborhood canvass is, of course, to locate a witness to the crime. It is this promise of the elusive witness that motivates the investigator. However, it is not only the “eye” witness you seek.  On occasion, it may be just as significant to discover an “ear witness."  Someone who may have heard a threatening remark heard gunshots or even heard how and in which direction the perpetrator fled. This information can point the case in the right direction.  A witness who hears a homicide subject flee in a vehicle with a loud muffler, for example, could be furnishing a valuable lead.  Likewise, intimidating or threatening statements the witness may have overheard could refute a subsequent claim of self-defense.  In an officer-involved shooting incident, a witness who hears the officer yell "stop, police!" or "drop the gun!" is invaluable to the investigation.   Just as crucial as the eye-witness or the ear-witness is the "witness-who-knows-a-witness."  Even though this person may not have first-hand knowledge of the crime, he or she can direct investigators to a person who does and is, therefore, of great value. 9. Failing to Work Together as a Team As with any crime scene, cooperation is critical among differing agencies. But with a death scene, this cooperation is ever more important and ever more strained.  Due to the increased severity of the scene, the spotlight, and egos, these scenes can become a disaster quickly. Therefore teamwork is vital, and it is the lead investigator's role to set a tone of cooperation and teamwork.  One of the most significant issues in a major case is the failure to communicate information to those working the case. Some agencies seem to want to keep what they know to themselves. This primarily occurs from egos and "turf wars," which will compromise an effective outcome.  Everyone involved in the investigation has information gathered from the jobs they were assigned and a lack of communication or an unwillingness to share information discovered for evaluation can prevent the entire team from finding the truth and bringing the case to a conclusion.  It's imperative to remember that the cases you work aren't about you, but are for the victim, the family, and, at times the protection of society. A baseball game is won when everyone playing does his or her job and supports every other player in getting their job done. Imagine the bottom of the 9th, the game is tied and the next ball's hit to the pitcher who misses but scoops it up sits down, and refuses to throw or let anyone else take the baseball from them.  The pitcher did their job and pitched, but the refusal to share the "scoop" with their teammates resulted in a complete failure for everyone. 10. Command and Administrative Staff Interfering One of the most frustrating mistakes at a death scene investigation is when command staff shows up on the scene with their own agendas which have nothing to do with the actual investigation. Sometimes it's for political appearance or simple curiosity. But unless they are an actual part of the investigative team, they should not insert themselves into the investigation. In many instances, because they're at the scene, command ranking personnel feel the need to direct the investigation. Consequently, they will have investigators running in different directions which have nothing to do with the primary investigation. The result is the loss of cohesive and central command and major miscommunication. Many times, in these situations no one is willing to step up, make decisions, and take control for fear of making the boss mad. The chaos continues and the investigation is compromised, and when the outcome is delayed or not favorable, the command personnel directly responsible for the chaos will not see that they were the cause, but rather, the blame may fall on the lead investigator. Conclusion Death investigations are not always simple step by step cutouts. They require real attention and specific actions to protect the investigation integrity. Many of the mistakes mentioned here are from shortcutting and not taking seriously the gravity of the scene you are working.  Our job as death investigators, regardless of what function that is, is to get the truth for the victim and bring justice to anyone responsible for their death, if in fact, anyone is responsible.  Developing and following strict procedures at every death scene will ensure that investigations are worked properly, and evidence is not missed. 

Due to the very nature of sudden and/or violent deaths, many things can and do go wrong in the first few hours of discovery.  Death scenes have a way of bringing together many individuals with various responsibilities and experience.  This unique group can consist of uniformed officers, detectives, CSI, and forensic experts, medical examiner and coroner investigators, as well as prosecutors and police administrative staff.  These scenes may also have fire and ems staff or other agencies trying to do their respective jobs. Not to mention families and onlookers Because of this scene, chaos errors can happen. Let's look at the ten most common mistakes of a death investigation. 1. Improper Response and Arrival to the Scene First, responding officers may not correctly respond to and secure the scene and the immediate surrounding area.  It's not uncommon for the uniformed officers to not stop or detain people leaving or milling around the scene. Further, it's common that while waiting for investigation and CSI teams to arrive, first responding officers gather and congregate to close to, or in the scene inadvertently contaminating evidence. Here are a few other examples of errors from first responding officers. They may fail to notify investigators soon enough, or at all, they may assume the death is a suicide or natural, and there is no need to establish a crime scene; they may fail to detain all persons present at the scene, which might include the suspect; or they may fail to separate possible witnesses and obtain initial statements.  Also, failing to make an initial determination of the scene boundaries leads to an insufficient area of protection. 2. Failing to protect the Crime Scene In all death investigations, but even more so in a Homicide investigation, crime scene contamination can be and is a significant problem.  No other aspect of these investigations is more open to mistakes than the preservation and protection of the scene and subsequent evidence. Paramount to any investigation is the assurance by the first officers on the scene to isolate and protect the scene as well as maintaining scene integrity as the investigation follows its standard path.  This includes the monitoring and supervising to paramedics and ems personnel in the scene. These personnel must be identified for a future interview.  Officers must also watch family members or others in the area to assure they are not contaminating the scene.  After a perimeter is established, the scene is locked down, and officers should start a log of everyone entering and leaving the scene and the reason why they are there.  Also, officers should be observing and taking notes of activities occurring in and around the scene. 3. Not Handling Suspicious Deaths and Homicides All unattended death should be looked at and treated as suspicious, and an experienced officer/investigator should go to the scene.  These deaths should be treated as a homicide and a crime scene until the facts prove otherwise.  Too many departments allow untrained patrol officers to conduct basic death investigation with the assumption of suicide or natural death and with the thinking that it is unlikely to be a homicide.  Without training, officers could likely miss-interpreted a staged or altered scene. If the scene is not handled correctly from the beginning and is later found to be a homicide, valuable evidence can be lost, and the integrity of the scene is compromised at best and at worst, non-existent. 4. Responding with a Preconceived Notion It is imperative that investigators not allow themselves to respond to a death scene with any preconceived conclusion about the case. It’s common for investigators to get sent to a scene and given information based on the initial call.  If the call came in as a suicide and the initial officer who responds arrives with the mindset of suicide, it is common to treat the scene as suicide and thus shortcut any other investigation.  It looks like a suicide, so it must be a suicide, and no other investigation is conducted.   This type of preconceived investigation results in fewer photographs being taken, witness statements not being completed, evidence not being searched for or collected, and the integrity of the scene is destroyed. It's not only suicide this can happen on, but reported natural deaths and accidents can also be shortcutting if responding officers make the conclusion of their investigation based upon the initial reported call.  If then, in fact, the death becomes suspicious at a later time officer reports and investigation will be lacking valuable information for future investigations.  The tendency is for the uniformed officer to write the final report and collect the evidence necessary to fit the narrative given to him by the initial call.  5. Failing to Take Sufficient Photographs In today's world of digital photography, photographs are cheap and easy to obtain. Back when I start in this business, we used Polaroid instant photography and 35mm film cameras.  These were expensive, and some departments wanted to limit "unnecessary" photographs in an attempt to stretch the budget. That's not the case today, hundreds of photographs can be taken and stored nearly free of charge. Photographs are a way to document the scene and to freeze that scene in time. They are used in court when necessary and will prove or disprove a fact in question.  Therefore, it is vital that photographs are taken of the entire scene, area, and location where the crime took place, including any sites connected to the original crime. Remember, you only get one chance and your first chance to document a scene. 6. Failing to Manage the Crime Scene Process The investigator in charge should oversee the investigation and scene documentation. He or she should ensure proper chain of custody and documentation of evidence. They are also in charge of maintaining scene integrity. Never allow officers to use the restroom within the residence, or take food or drink from the kitchen, never allow smoking in the investigative area, never bring food or drink into the scene from an outside source, and always keep non-essential personnel out of the scene area. Designate an area for them to congregate if needed, but it should never be inside your primary scene area. Lead investigators must also direct crime scene personnel on where and what are to collect. Many CSI staff are well trained and have a good idea of what needs to be done. However, each scene can have unique situations, and the investigator in charge must ensure evidence is adequately searched for and collected. The victim's body should always be inspected and searched for trace evidence prior to being moved or taken from the scene. Not doing so can result in loss of valuable evidence and can leave many unanswered questions.  Always stop and look around the scene; look up as much as around. See what is missing or what isn't.  What looks right about the scene, and what looks wrong?  Is what you are seeing matching what you are being told?   Never leave a scene until you are confident every answer to any question you may have has been answered or documented. Remember, this is your only chance and a first chance. 7. Failing to Evaluate Victimology It is imperative that investigators know the victim and completes a victimology study. You cannot properly investigate a death without victimology.  Failing to have a complete picture of the victim will preclude you from developing motives, suspects, and risk factors unique to the victim. These risk factors are usually regarded as high, moderate, or low and are based on lifestyle, living condition, job skills, neighborhood, or anything specific to the victim. Victimology is the collection and assessment of any significant information as it connects to the victim and his or her lifestyle, these include areas such as; personality, employment, education, friends, habits, hobbies, marital status, relationships, dating history, sexuality, reputation, criminal record, drug, and alcohol use, physical condition, and neighborhood of residence as well as where they grew up of different than where currently living. The bottom line is, who was the victim and what was going on at the time they became a victim. The best source of information will be friends, family, employers, and neighbors. You need to know the victim better than they knew themselves. 8. Failing to Conduct and Efficient Area Canvass Properly I will admit that conducting an area canvass can be tedious and very time-consuming. Sometimes hundreds of contacts are often made without one shred of usable information being unveiled. However, it is that one exhilarating jewel that is occasionally discovered that makes the process so rewarding.  Most criminal investigation courses and books talk little about an area canvass, other than to suggest doing one. There are right and wrong ways to conduct an area canvass that will yield better results for the efforts put out. Ideally, patrol personnel and plainclothes detectives should perform separate canvasses.  Some individuals respond more readily to an authority figure in a uniform, while others prefer the anonymity of the detective’s plain clothes.  Since it is impossible to know who will respond more willingly to either approach, both should be employed.  This technique will give the investigator the greatest chance of getting vital information.  First, understand the terms “area canvass” and “neighborhood canvass” may be used interchangeably.  They are interviews conducted in the field, as opposed to statements taken on the scene or in the station. The canvass may be conducted in an area near the crime scene or, conceivably, hundreds of miles away from it.  In the aftermath of a bank robbery, for example, the getaway vehicle may be located several counties, or even states, away.  Two canvasses should, therefore, be undertaken: one at the original crime scene (the bank) and one at the secondary scene (the vehicle).  If a suspect is developed, it may be advisable to perform an additional area canvass in the neighborhood where that person resides to learn about his/her reputation and habits.  A complex case may require that a number of area canvasses are completed at various locations.  The primary goal of a neighborhood canvass is, of course, to locate a witness to the crime. It is this promise of the elusive witness that motivates the investigator. However, it is not only the “eye” witness you seek.  On occasion, it may be just as significant to discover an “ear witness."  Someone who may have heard a threatening remark heard gunshots or even heard how and in which direction the perpetrator fled. This information can point the case in the right direction.  A witness who hears a homicide subject flee in a vehicle with a loud muffler, for example, could be furnishing a valuable lead.  Likewise, intimidating or threatening statements the witness may have overheard could refute a subsequent claim of self-defense.  In an officer-involved shooting incident, a witness who hears the officer yell "stop police" or "drop the gun" is invaluable to the investigation.   Just as crucial as the eye-witness or the ear-witness is the "witness-who-knows-a-witness."  Even though this person may not have first-hand knowledge of the crime, he or she can direct investigators to a person who does and is, therefore, of great value. Hearsay Rumors, innuendo, and gossip may not have a place in the courtroom, but they are certainly welcome tidbits that help navigate any investigation.   The type of approach the investigator uses to cultivate this information can often determine how successful he will be.  In certain situations, it may be necessary to coax and cajole the witness. In others, it may be beneficial to appear to confide in the witness and reveal some "inside scoop" about the investigation. This works particularly well with the neighborhood "busy body" who will derive motivation from being "included" in the case.  Also, remember that in certain situations, an area canvass may more resemble an interrogation than a simple interview.  Eliciting information from a witness, who is not predisposed to furnish it, is the essence of any area canvass.  In high crime, drug infested neighborhoods retaliation for "snitching" to the police is a real-life possibility that must be appreciated.  Witnesses who refuse or are reluctant to cooperate with authorities may have ample reason for their trepidation.  That is why each person approached should be provided with a contact number and assurances that they may remain anonymous. 9. Failing to Work Together as a Team As with any crime scene, cooperation is critical among differing agencies. But with a death scene, this cooperation is ever more important and ever more strained.  Due to the increased severity of the scene, the spotlight, and egos, these scenes can become a disaster quickly. Therefore teamwork is vital, and it is the lead investigators role to set a tone of cooperation and teamwork.  One of the most significant issues in a major case is the failure to communicate information to those working the case. Agencies seem to want to keep what they know to themselves. This occurs from egos and turf wars, which will compromise an effective outcome.  Everyone involved in the investigation is after the same conclusion. Each member has a job to do and has information gathered from that job; this information is combined and evaluated to set the direction and ultimate conclusion of the investigation. A baseball game is won when everyone playing does his or her job and supports every other player in getting their job done. 10. Command and Administrative Staff Interfering One of the most frustrating mistakes at a death scene investigation is when command staff shows up on the scene with their own agendas which have nothing to do with the actual investigation. Sometimes it's for political appearance or simple curiosity. But unless they are an actual part of the investigative team, they should not insert themselves into the investigation. In many instances, because they’re at the scene, command ranking personnel feel the need to direct the investigation. Consequently, they will have investigators running in different directions which have nothing to do with the primary investigation. The result is the loss of cohesive and central command and major miscommunication. Many times, in these situations no one is willing to step up and make decision and take control for fear of making the boss mad, so the chaos continues and the investigation is compromised, and when the outcome is delayed or not favorable, the command personnel directly the chaos will not see that they caused the confusion but rather the blame may fall on the lead investigator. Conclusion Death investigations are not always simple step by step cutouts. They require real attention and specific actions to protect the investigation integrity. Many of the mistakes mention here are from shortcutting and not taking seriously the gravity of the scene you are working.  Our job as death investigators, regardless of what function that is, is to get the truth for the victim and bring to justice to anyone responsible for their death, if in fact, anyone is responsible.  Developing and following strict procedures at every death scene will ensure that investigations are worked properly, and evidence is not missed.  Reference: Vernon J. Geberth, Practical Homicide Investigation Fifth Edition, (CRC Press 2015) . Coroners, Medical Examiner Investigators, Police, and Forensic students. This hybrid course looks at death investigation from a combined perspective of law enforcement and medicolegal death investigations. MLDI online Academy is a Nationally Accredited online training designed to teach all aspects of death investigation and scene management. Unlike any other coroner training today,  this course offers a blended learning style combining online self-paced video training, along with opportunities for live interaction with instructors several times throughout the program, and a unique private Facebook group open only to students of Coroner School™ where everyone can interact and ask questions. MLDI online Academy is a six-week guided course with certified instructors. However, at the end of the six weeks, you still have access to all videos, downloadable material, and the private Facebook group. You can return to the online school anytime to finish up the courses or as a refresher in certain topic areas.

    Do you know the difference between leading a team and managing one? In this episode of Enlightened Entrepreneur Podcast, Bernadette Johnson speaks about leadership development, as well as leadership strategies that will help business owners set the stage for implementing collaborative approaches within their organization.   Key Questions Asked: How did Bernadette get started with her business? What would be the two rules that business owners need to follow in order to succeed in developing the leadership team and the collaborative strategy that they do in their organization? How does Bernadette create that environment for collaborative approach? What has been her journey like in running her own business? How is Bernadette marketing her own business today? Knowing what she knows now if Bernadette were to do it all over again, what would she do differently? If you were to advise a new start-up, what are some of the mistakes that you have observed about running a business that they can avoid? How can people´s transition from being that worker into that leader?   Highlights of Lessons Learned: Key Skills To ensure an easy and smooth transition of her clients’ business, Bernadette says scaling the execution of the work that they do is important. Aside from that, scaling the strategy of how they do the work and then scaling the people to make sure that they have the right ones in place are important as well. Business owners must look at where they are now, where do they need to be, and then all the work will be about filling the gap, so it’s important to set up systems for people to learn. The first skill business owners must learn is to understand the difference between cooperation and collaboration. Collaboration requires a level of trust, vulnerability and requires authenticity. Business owners should act as the leader, defining what collaboration is and setting expectations as well as feedback.   Leading a Team As a leader, it is important to keep a beginner’s mind and to always be curious in order to create an environment of a collaborative approach. One thing that helped Bernadette over the years was getting out and trying different things and trying new models and strategies. Her biggest lesson in the last five years is learning the importance of having the right balance between working in the business and working in the business. As a leader herself, Bernadette advises that we have to get to a point of being able to let go, meaning to look at what we can take off our plate and then either outsource or give to someone of which have the right skills for those things. Another thing that business owners need to understand the difference between leadership and management. Management is about maintaining, leadership is about creating a vision to follow.