Peer Effect
Best way to scale? Your peers have the answers.
This is the podcast for scaleup founders looking for insightful, actionable wisdom from some of the best operators around. Each week we’ll explore one secret that other founders and experts are using right now and how to implement it.
It’s practical wisdom to build the company AND life you want. Hosted by renowned founder coach and advisor James Johnson.
You’ve survived to £1m, now let’s scale to £10m+.
Peer Effect
Beware Big Name Hires with Eli Packouz of Instafloss
Eli is the Founder of Instafloss. His company has $2.7m of pre-orders and $1.3m in equity, with a product launch happening soon.
But Eli is no stranger to big mistakes.
In 2014, Eli made one of the worst decisions of his career.
He believed hiring from the top down was the right move. But he was wrong…
Backed by the confidence of a successful crowdfunding campaign, he made two hires that cost the company he was building $1m.
After making peace with his mistake, Eli took a step back and hired a marketing executive.
This decision helped his business more than the big-name hires.
Eli and I discussed his process to build a committed team, which not only helped bring the product to life but also ensured its effectiveness in solving a real problem.
He soon understood that building a great team doesn’t happen by chance, but is backed by strategy and making difficult decisions.
In today’s episode, we also talk about:
- The reality of big-name hires and building a team from the top down
- The right approach to a probation period
- The necessity of making tough decisions and letting people go.
Tune in and listen to Eli’s journey with Instafloss. Eli provides powerful takeaways for any aspiring entrepreneur who is looking to build the right team. He offers a practical approach to scaling, and an alertness to potential pitfalls and how to turn a start-up into a thriving, successful business.
More from James:
Connect with James on LinkedIn or at peer-effect.com
People. They see a large company on your resume and you think success, that large company is successful. I want some of that success. Hey, your Facebook is successful.
Speaker 1:Google is successful, all these things I know about. But now when I see people name dropping those sorts of things like, the larger the organization, the easier it is for you to hide behind other people's work. People could sell garbage to some people, but you're not going to accomplish that much. There's a much bigger market in actually solving a problem than there is in pretending to solve a problem. I feel like this probationary period is something incredibly useful because it's let's prove that we made that right. Let's prove you really are a fit. Let's prove that this is actually something that's going to work. It's like dating before you get married.
Speaker 3:So I'm delighted to welcome Ellie to the show today. He's the founder of InstaFloss. They've got 2.7 million of pre-orders already and they've also raised over a million in equity, so they're good to go. Product launch soon. Welcome, ellie.
Speaker 1:Thank you, good to be here, exciting.
Speaker 3:So things are looking quite exciting now, but on this podcast we dropped back to us with a tough time.
Speaker 1:When are we going back to? I think you want to go back to 2014.
Speaker 3:I think from what I've preached out, Mike, what's happening in 2014 for you?
Speaker 1:Trial by fire, learning making the biggest mistakes of at least so far of my business career. You know things that have really it was my first. It was my first company and the very first time that I had scaled a company and you know that comes with searching, trials and tribulations. That hopefully have taken those lessons to my second company now, which is, as you mentioned, instafloss. We're doing incorporating all those lessons into a brand new arena.
Speaker 3:So which particular lesson is this one? What's going on for you in 2014?
Speaker 1:Yes, in 2014, I had recently delivered the first product that we came out with. It was me and my brother. We started a company. We launched a crowdfunding campaign. We did really well and then we got it manufactured. Everything went swiggingly and we started selling. We got up to three million in revenue and it was really just me, him and a friend and so like literally like a garage company, but we got up to three million. We're like, wow, we're gonna scale this. We're gonna be one of the big boys in this industry. We really need to start thinking about how to expand and how to really make something of this opportunity that we finally broke it into. It was a really exciting time.
Speaker 1:But I feel like people, they tend to start a business because they have some kind of core competency and they chase that core competency. So for us it was.
Speaker 1:We were making products in our space, with music technology, and so we made some very cool products and we got to a point where we need a CMO to really take this international to really blow up, get us in all the stores. And we need a CTO because we had a lot of other product ideas and we can't make them all ourselves. We need a higher developers, we need a higher engineers and that sort of thinking just from the get go was a mistake, because I think at the time we're thinking of, this is the company we wanna be, so let's hire from the top down, when in reality it's like well, what are you? What you're doing?
Speaker 1:right now we're really working, I mean we did three million in revenue with just three guys. So what should have been done is thinking about what is too much for you at the moment, what can you delegate, what can you hire someone you know? Build from the ground up, as opposed to having this vision in your head and building from the top down. And that was a terrible mistake for a number of reasons, which I could get into if he wants.
Speaker 3:So just to repay us, you've started this company, the brother and the friend. You've got three million revenue. It's all like this is crazy. I mean, it's like this is going so well and you're going for this big vision and you're like right next step, let's hire this big vision with these key hires for who we could be in the future.
Speaker 2:Yeah, absolutely so, yeah, so that's where we were, and so we did.
Speaker 1:We found a guy who had experience from the CTO's perspective. He had worked for Google. He had worked for what was it? I think it was trying to remember the company. One of the other large ones man so long ago. But he worked for I think it was Yamaha, that's what it was. Yeah, he worked for.
Speaker 1:Yamaha, which is one of the biggest players in the space, leading tech teams, plenty of people working on him, plenty of projects that he had come out with, and so we hired him. Being, like you know, this guy is the perfect intersection of technology in our space that we were really interested in.
Speaker 1:And then we had a CMO who had a lot of experience with various marketing campaigns and you know, just like the A-lister of companies and, just like, this is perfect, we're gonna hire these guys, they're gonna hire teams, and then we're gonna really, you know, blow this up to the stratosphere. But what happened is that these people started hiring a lot of people. They started hiring, you know, way more than we thought we needed to hire. Like well, you need that many engineers or you need this many people in marketing to do this many things and you haven't even, like you know, increased our revenue yet. It's like, yeah, well, it's all part of the marketing build. We have to get ready for this launch and do all these things.
Speaker 1:And you know, six months went by and all these engineers hadn't come out with the product that you know, like, me and my brother had come out with a product in a much quicker pace than they were going at, and we were just a couple guys you know not professionals who were being led by this guy who had worked for big companies, and the whole team and all these people you know being paid absurd amounts, and the CMO, like our revenue still hadn't gone up and he was still promising us like, oh well, you know, it's just part of the rebranding strategy and you know, prepping things in the top of the funnel market, but really it's all gonna come together, you know, in the end and I was, I think I was 22 at the time, if I yeah, I think I was 22. So I was pretty green with all this, you know. I had a core competency.
Speaker 1:I had the ability to come up and create a product, you know, with my brother. But when it came to these things, you know, I didn't have the higher slow and fire fast mentality at that time. And the friend who was working with us was like, hey, look, you got rid of this marketing guy. He's full of shit. You know he does not know what he's talking about. He's given him six months and you know, none of these things he's done are working. I don't buy for a second the whole top of the funnel nonsense. And it's like no, no, look at his resume, look what he's done. You know you have to put your trust into people like this.
Speaker 1:And eventually it caused a rift between me and my friend. My friend actually left the company because of that and a year later the lack of coherent marketing had actually caused a revenue to drop by a million. The engineering was just a boom dongle, had gone nowhere. And it is that point I realized that a lot of times people who have experience in larger companies like people. They see a large company on your resume and you think success, that large company is successful. I want someone that success. Hey, or Facebook is successful.
Speaker 1:Google is successful, all these things I know about. But now when I see people name dropping those sorts of things like the larger the organization, the easier it is for you to hide behind other people's work and the easier it is for your only skill to be bullshit, for your only skill to be corporate politics or something like that, and when you're a small startup, there isn't room for that skill set to actually be useful. And so we took a hard look at that. We're like you know what? This was the wrong idea. So we got rid of the marketing guy, we got rid of the CTO and we started focusing on like no who's?
Speaker 3:not a big manager who?
Speaker 1:actually is going to get in there and do the dirty work. And so we hired a marketing guy who they were like we're not hiring for a CMO position, we're hiring you because we want to know how good you are at this one particular aspect of marketing. And that was the best hire we ever had. He blew us up not just to where we were before, but beyond. We started focusing on hiring the actual engineers themselves, rather than a manager of engineers. And they really turned around the company and we went forward.
Speaker 1:But, that was a very painful experience. I lost a million dollars in terms of revenue, I lost a year of development because we could have come out with a product earlier if it wasn't for this boondoggle by this sort of thing, and I lost a friend throughout the process. So all of that is extremely painful, but it's probably the most expensive education and the most painful education I've ever had, because from that moment on, realizing these things, it's that you can't be caught up in like, yes, you have a grand idea and a grand vision, but in order to get there, you can't focus on that vision.
Speaker 1:You have to focus on the work that needs to be done in front of you right now and you have a very ground up approach of what needs to be done.
Speaker 1:And one of the things that I've actually seen reported afterwards that I read this is like oh, this makes so much sense. Given my experience, one of the number one causes in workplace dissatisfaction is people feeling like their bosses don't understand what they do and are thus making bad decisions based on it, which. You spent your whole career developing a skill set, whether you're a coder or a marketer or whatever, and a boss is way dumber than you, doesn't know what you're doing, and he's like no, no, no, no, no, this is not going to work. You do this and you have to because you work under me and you have to listen to my orders. And then people are forced into mediocrity. Nobody wants that.
Speaker 1:People want to actually accomplish something that is representative of their skill level and their fashion, and so when you hire from the top up, you can not only have the dead weight in your company, which in of itself it could be a problem, but you can poison it for everyone else who's doing the work.
Speaker 1:because now they're listening to someone who's wrong.
Speaker 1:So now, not only do you have a person at the top who was never useful in the first place, but you've also gotten rid of the usefulness of everyone else in that department and of all.
Speaker 1:The developers hate what they do. All the marketers feel like their ideas can't come through, and it's true for any department. So what we do now is we find people who are really good at something and when it comes to the point where they're so good at it that there isn't enough time in the day for them to do more of the thing that's making us money, be like hey look, can you delegate this to someone else? And then, when they do use someone to delegate that to someone else, that person's really thinking like man, I'm glad you're my boss because you're teaching me so many things. And then they expand. And so then, let me see, that was like 10 years ago, that was nine years ago. So I took that and we came out with seven more products with Cigillar Sound, which is my first company, and then, about five years ago, I started working on Instafloss and taking those lessons with me into my car invention.
Speaker 3:Because what's quite interesting about that experience is this kind of seductiveness of the name. It's kind of it must, almost as a 21-year-old. 22-year-old like, on the one hand, like I've got this, I've done really well, but at the same time having someone from Google go can I be part of your company?
Speaker 1:Must be very flattering, yeah it's flattering, but it's also part of, I think you use the word seductive, which I think is phenomenally descriptive here, because when you have that success in your company, what you're envisioning is we're going to be the Google of whatever space you're in. We're going to be the. You know how many times have you heard the pitch we're going to be the Uber of X. You know that's like a cliché now. And then you're doing X and someone's like oh, I'm from Uber and you want to be the Uber of X. It's like, yes, this is the, because you have the dream, the seduction is of where you're going to be, but you know it's almost like. You know it's like, yeah, you want to be a person who will just pretend for a second. Your end goal is to retire on a yacht. Do you think you're going to get there by hiring like a yacht specialist salesman? Like that's not at all the case. Now.
Speaker 1:I do. I do like admit that there is expertise in these organizations and you want expertise from those organizations. But being part of those organizations is not enough to transfer that expertise to you. And so, almost like a blind audition, where, if you want to hire the best musician for your orchestra, the best way to do that is put them behind a curtain so you can only judge them on their music and you're not going to be biased by how handsome they are, you know their sex or their race or any other things.
Speaker 1:You should focus on what this person actually knows and can actually do. So one part of the hiring process now is we like give people a task and we're like we'll pay you for this task. We're going to hire you as a contractor. It's not really work we need done, but it's work that will reveal your skill set here.
Speaker 1:And so the way they perform on that. Yeah, we pay them to do it because number one you know people don't want to feel like they're being taken advantage of in an interview process, like, oh, here's the interview process, so you want to be a janitor in our company, go clean everything for two weeks without pay, like that's not. You know people are going to feel disrespected and you don't want those sort of people in your company anyway.
Speaker 1:And the second thing is that actually, from our perspective, it saves us money because the wrong hire is one of the most expensive decisions you could make, because not only you paying someone, but you're also, you know, losing out on the. You hired them because you had a place where your company can go, so you're missing out on that growth and, best case, worst case, you're actually regressing, and you're certainly regressing in terms of their salary. So we hire them to do something and we judge them pretty much solely based on the work.
Speaker 1:So you know, if we're hiring like a conversion rate optimization specialist, we'll be, like hey, here's one part of our website run some AB tests and then we'll have someone else do a batch and we'll actually run them all at the same time and be like this person's batch of tests were so much better than the other person's batch of tests. So, therefore, we're going to go with this guy because we have some quantitative data that actually shows, you know, the quality of their work.
Speaker 1:And, I think, focusing maybe it's even a mistake to even read their resume and see where they went to school and see where else they worked. You know I still read it, but you know perhaps there is something there to be said that you know maybe you'll actually have better results if you sort of do it blind, don't read their name, don't read where they went, don't do anything, just to be like can you do this work, and then you might get some diamonds in the rough, or you might just get some straight diamonds.
Speaker 3:So it feels like there's really taken some sort of practical lessons on the process from this. One thing I'm curious about is the time as well, which you mentioned sort of higher slow fire, fast and you said that this work, this went on for a year. You lost a friend. What was it? So in a moment before we move on to InstaFlyers, in that moment you had your friend saying this guy's not right and you weren't listening. What was your? What do you think was causing you to disregard his opinion? Hope.
Speaker 1:You know, hope is like perhaps the worst four letter word you could have there. So these days the way we operate is we hire people for something specific and we have like an auto fire clause, or we actually call it an auto hire clause, like you're hired on a probationary period and if you accomplish X, you move into a full-time employment, perhaps with a bonus, perhaps with other sorts of benefits. So this way, the way the contract is set up now, is that we're I'm not going to fire you, you just didn't succeed at accomplishing the thing you were hired for, so you're not on a permanent basis. So it's almost like an auto off rather than an auto on, and I think the way people start off with hiring people is with an auto on.
Speaker 1:I shake your hand, you're part of the company, you're part of the team, you're here forever and now it's really emotionally difficult for me to get rid of you if I'm like, oh wow, that was a mistake, I mean, and it should be emotionally difficult to fire people if they really are part of the team making it happen. So I feel like this probationary period is something incredibly useful because it's let's prove that we made the right hire, let's prove you really are a fit, let's prove that this is actually something that's going to work. It's like dating before you get married. It's like yeah, maybe take this to.
Speaker 1:I shouldn't give relationship advice based off of business advice. This is terrible, pretty much.
Speaker 3:Anyone who gives relationship advice you should probably run away from that. I'll just go through it as you can.
Speaker 1:But think how this is pure conjecture that I am not qualified to say here but think how many relationships, think of how much of a percentage of relationships would be better If you automatically broke up after a certain period of time, if you didn't meet certain criteria like hey, we're supposed to not be fighting and not have arguments about these sorts of things, and a whole list of things that are supposed to be good it's like oh man we didn't accomplish these things after six months, so I guess we can't continue this relationship.
Speaker 1:I think the auto-off is perhaps a much better approach than auto-off.
Speaker 3:I was talking about the interview process. It doesn't finish till month three Because actually you learn so much from the point of offering someone a job before they start. Even in that one two-week period or maybe month period, you can learn a lot like how fast they sign the contract, how reliable it is to give you the details, what do they show up like on day one. You get so much more information points and you can only be I don't know best case 80% confident on day one. But we pretend like, oh, now we're 110% confident. This is it.
Speaker 3:So I really like this auto-off.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's not right to you, it's not right to the company, it's not even right to the person that you're hiring, making false promises well, you're not even sure I'm going to be with you forever when we don't actually know that yet.
Speaker 1:There's less disappointment the better your expectations, the more your expectations align with reality, the less room there is for disappointment. And so when you're starting a relationship, you should be honest, Like hey, we're starting this relationship and there's a lot we don't know about you and there's a lot we want to know about you and we're really hoping we want you to be the right guy for this, but there has to be a period of proof both ways.
Speaker 1:Maybe we're not the fit for you either. So it cuts both ways, and having this period is a safeguard for everybody involved.
Speaker 3:So it feels like there are some themes you're taking forward into floss in terms of, if I'm even like, keep it leaner, higher from the bottom, rather from the top, higher the team. You need now Be very clear about what the expectations are from the very beginning and then, once you're committed, be very committed. Yeah absolutely.
Speaker 1:I think you really nailed it on the head. And then once you are committed to people and they know that you're committed and it's not just fake because they passed this sort of period and they know that. You know that we know we're a better fit you also get like people are a lot more passionate about something that they feel like I know this is a fit for me. I know this is something for me long term and I know that you want me to be here and you're not just hoping that I'm going to be a good fit here.
Speaker 3:So how has that played through in terms of the results? So you've you've taken some great learnings and you've taken I know you've taken some people from business one into business two. How has that just changed your overall approach and impact?
Speaker 1:Well, I mean, I would say that. So, within Staflos, we've been spending five years on R&D in this project, because it is a device that can floss all your teeth in 10 seconds, and while, if you look at our schematics, it seems like an easy and obvious way to do it, there's a lot that goes on under the hood, that has never been developed before, and that's a lot of the more novel your technology and the more components that are to your technology, the more areas that can go wrong, and you know we learned this over the course of many years.
Speaker 1:There was a lot of research we had to do, so there's a lot of ups and downs in this development, and if it wasn't for this selective process that we had before, I don't think we would be anywhere.
Speaker 1:After, like, if you're going through a five years of something super intense, you want to make sure that the people you're doing it with are people who will help you get out the other side, and so, whereas with my first company, I would say that hiring the right people has been pivotal for it to grow and not for a grass, as it did in that one year, but actually get to where you want to go, I would say for instafloss, without the right people here, we would not have been able to get off the ground in the first place, and I'm really thankful for all the lessons that I've been able to learn, all the mistakes and costly, costly mistakes that I've been able to make in my first company, because I think the R&D is a pretty long period of five years of R&D on instafloss, but that is considerably shorter than never if something is impossible, but any amount is considerably less than that.
Speaker 1:So I absolutely credit the team to having gotten the product where it is now and the fact that it works and the fact that we're manufacturing, and the fact that we're manufacturing because of defects, that we're actually going and we could actually do this thing. That pretty much you mentioning it sounds impossible. You're flossing it all teeth in 10 seconds. It's just, it's bonkers. It sounds impossible and without the team in place it actually would be impossible.
Speaker 3:I mean full disclosure, my waves of dentists when we talk about and her first thought was most, she totally believes in flossing. I mean, like, never say to a dentist that they don't believe that it's flossing optional. It's not even as a joke, but the idea that you could like there are products that do kind of which don't seem to work, but this sounds quite exciting, the idea that you could do it in 10 seconds, particularly if it is more effective as well well, yeah, absolutely, you could floss in 0 seconds if you don't care about the effectiveness.
Speaker 1:So to me, the effectiveness of the product is actually fiercely important for a number of reasons. Obviously, primarily, there's an ethical thing it is wrong to sell a product that doesn't work there's also perhaps.
Speaker 1:An element of personal pride like why would I devote my life to garbage? And there's a third element which is just. I think it is a better long term strategy. You probably could sell garbage to some people, but you're not going to accomplish that much. There's a much bigger market, even if you're looking at it as like a total sociopath. There's a much bigger market in actually solving a problem than there is in pretending to solve a problem.
Speaker 1:I mean sure you can see, pretending to solve a problem is a decent market, and if that's all you got and you don't care about ethics or anybody else, then like sure that's a potential, but for me that's not enough to actually pursue.
Speaker 3:I'm presuming that's why you've got the chairman of the American Dental Association. He's evolved as an advisor. Is that right?
Speaker 1:yeah, so it goes back to getting the right people on the team. You know so I have my co-competency, which is coming up with ideas and ways things can work, but there's all sorts of areas that I know that I needed people who were smarter than me and more well-ground than, in particular, things, and so one of the first people I brought my schematics to was Dr Arunas Gorenhas, who is the chair of the American Dental Association Council of Science, and I answered my email for some reason and she's like oh you know, come to my office.
Speaker 1:I actually went to the university where she was doing research and I showed her my schematics and she was like I think that this design would be efficacious, which the definition of efficacious is how well it works under laboratory conditions. But she said what excites me about this is that I actually believe it can also be more effective. So the difference between efficacy and effectiveness is how we know if everyone does it properly, what are the results, and effectiveness is what are the actual results in real life. So something that you have that is 100% efficacious, that you use zero times, is zero percent effective like if you're not going to do it it's not effective and we actually see that for 70% of Americans regularly skid flossing with any device whatsoever.
Speaker 1:So you could say string flossing is efficacious, but for 70% of Americans it's not effective because they don't do it and so we had two goals in mind here, which was making sure that it was efficacious, that when we did it in our testing and, you know, in our lab and everything like that it was actually doing, what it was supposed to do was getting rid of plaque, including underneath the gum line, and disturbing the biofilm, etc.
Speaker 1:But then you also had to make it comfortable and fast and intuitive, because otherwise people won't do it and then it's just not effective. And so you know that was something that she opened my eyes to the research there, because there's a lot of dental research that you know she's been studying this for like 50 years, so you know there's a lot of research showing on what makes something efficacious and what makes something effective as well, and so she is another person who has been entirely invaluable in this process so it feels like he's like squaring the circle, bringing it back around, like there are some people at the beginning like, oh well, having names on your CV, let's say like Google or stuff, isn't always the answer, particularly for a small business, but it does feel that actually going to the right expert for various, a very specific piece of knowledge is.
Speaker 3:Actually still a very good strategy.
Speaker 1:Yes, but so it's like the force false correlations is that you can't think that everyone who has worked for Google is an expert at you know, you know, whatever piece of technology that Google has done that might be relevant for you.
Speaker 1:And so in our case, there's lots of people who are part of the ADA. Pretty much any any dentist who you know has licenses, is part of the ADA. I'm not going to say that every step, they're all equivalent. And sure, she was the chairman of the medical sorry excuse Chairman of the American Delta Association Council of Scientific Affairs, which is more relevant to what we were doing, which was science of product. But what made us trust her and what made us want to work with her or made us keep up the relationship, was not the name, it was the fact that we went to her office and we showed her Schematics and she took out a pen and started crossing things and making marks and then pulled out documents of papers.
Speaker 1:And we're like read this.
Speaker 1:I think this is relevant for this, and then it actually, you know being truly like oh, my god this 90-degree angle, for example, actually reaches further underneath the gunline and a 45 degree angle, so we need to make the jets come out at this angle in order to maximally clean debris underneath the gunline. You know, and showing all the all the research there, and so it's not being so. Oftentimes you'll see expertise correlated, but you have to learn to start correlated with a name brand, shall we say. You know, but you have to learn to recognize the expertise separate from the name brand.
Speaker 3:And it feels like also, don't be afraid to test it goes. It's all you almost did on a microphone level, what you do to all new hires now, which is let's take you on as a contractor. Here's a piece of work, test it All. Right, it was a little less explicit, but that is, and maybe in the early stage it's like oh, you've got Google on your CV. Boy, you must, you must have that expertise. Please come and join me. This is super exciting. So there's no, doesn't? It's not to say that Google person, a person from Google, could not be the right person. It's just that you would put them through a series of proving tests Before Brianna absolutely.
Speaker 1:It's the. In fact, it might be possible that that people who have worked for Google assuming this is relevant to your business that people who worked for Google, maybe at a higher rate, are a better fit for you than people who have not. So let's say, even if it's a crazy split like 80% of people who work for Google might be good for your job, there's only 20% of people who have not worked for Google are good for for your position. What you should be focusing on in the conversation, though, is the information and the skill set. That is relevant, because you might get a 20%. There's still people who are applying to a right for you. If the 20% are right, and if the 80% of the Google people are right and 20% are not, you can't just be like oh you know, I thought there's an 80% chance that you don't even know it's 80%, but you can't just be like oh, you know, there's an 80% chance that that this guy's right, so let's just go with it.
Speaker 1:Anyone who's an expert on something or, you know, has a lot of skill on something, we'll want to talk about that, we'll want to demonstrate that, and you will, as long as you know anything About the subject.
Speaker 1:Yeah, obviously you could be bullshitted right, and that's a whole. Other element to this is like well, how do you avoid being scammed by slick talkers? You know you see this a lot in. I Don't know I see this a lot in, like the nutrition industry. There's a lot of people pushing certain fad diets because most people, rightfully, are not experts in something that you know is not relevant to their job or any things. But then they come to a point in life we're like you know what?
Speaker 1:I kind of want an expert in this, and I saw some guy in take talk saying whatever, and it's very difficult to to actually tease that apart which is part of why you go into a business to exploit some sort of poor competency you have in the first place and expand from there, because as your horizons broaden, bit and bit by more, or more and more, bit by bit, you Will be able to recognize the expertise and others for the elements that that you actually understand, and then you will understand more and you'll be able to.
Speaker 1:Recognize the expertise and other people, and so there's some other benefits into doing the work yourself and expanding the only when you Don't have time to do something, something more.
Speaker 3:I think this room fastening. I think one of the three things I'm telling you is like hire for expertise Define what expertise you need and then test for it. Yeah and if it's, if it's not bad, then it's an auto. It's an auto, goodbye.
Speaker 1:Exactly, you know, that's just how it has to work hmm, that's what I thank you so much for sharing with that.
Speaker 3:It was really really fascinating.
Speaker 1:Thank you. I am glad to share this because I hope that no one else has to go through the year of 2014 like I did. Just a fraction of that. For anybody else, this will have been quite a successful interview on my part.
Speaker 3:Amazing. Well, thank you, that was really really good.
Speaker 1:Thank you, glad to be here.
Speaker 3:As you heard today, coaching opens up a whole range of insights and areas to explore. If you have a potential moment to revisit on the podcast or just want to learn more about coaching, book in for a 30 minute chat with me at peer-effectcom.
