Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Unbound is a weekly podcast, created to help you achieve more as a leader. Join Chris DuBois as he shares his growth journey and interviews others on their path to becoming unbound. Delivered weekly on Thursdays.
0:00
Innovation lessons from failure and creating a culture of innovating. All on today's episode. Are you leader trying to get more from your business in life? Me too. So join me as I document the conversations, stories and advice to help you achieve what matters in your life. Welcome to unbound with me, Chris DuBois. Berto passionates is an innovation expert who has delivered projects improving GDP for several leading brands and countries with a master's in industrial engineering and management. He's co founded Norway's largest lean startup community, as well as a as founder, man, I'm just gonna restart that I see already stumbling. Look at that. Alright, clap clap racer. BRUNO passionates is an innovation expert who has delivered projects improving GDP for several leading brands and countries with a master's in Industrial Engineering and Management has co founded Norway's largest lean startup community, as well as founder Institute, Norway. BRUNO has 10 plus years working across defense, manufacturing, education and finance to help companies innovate profitably. And today we're gonna dive deep into that, Bruno, welcome to Honda.
1:11
Chris, so happy to be here.
1:13
All right, let's, let's get right into your origin story. Take it from there.
1:19
Okay, I gotta keep this short and sweet. Which might not sound when I started opening with when I was a little kid. But it is important. So what I often say for me where I am today, I had the good fortune of having parents that allowed my curiosity to flourish. So you know, education systems, you know how they are, they're not really supportive of, you know, kids that have a lot of questions that are seen as troublemakers, you know, asking why this? Why that? Why does it have to be like that, I had the good fortune of having parents that did not punish that. And that encouraged it. So, you know, from there, I was able to study, you know, whatever my parents could afford. And I started in industry engineering, that's understanding, you know, how machines work, how people work in machine systems, etc. And from there, I was just curious about, okay, how does the world work, what makes a product successful, what makes an idea innovative, and somehow, you know, from my humble beginnings engineer, I ended up traveling the world helping different companies bring their ideas to life, I love my work, because it enables me to remain curious. And its challenges challenges me at the same time, something better happens in the world. So that that's the origin story at a very high level.
2:42
Awesome. Well, so let's get right into a question about innovation. With how, how can leaders kind of identify and neutralize those my corporate challenges that they face to when resisting like innovation.
2:56
So it's, it's a huge topic, I'll try to drop few interesting and practical things. And then let's explore, you know, whatever you think is most relevant or interesting to you, and people that will be listening this as well. So innovation is one of those words, you know, if you ask 10 people, you're gonna get 20 definitions of what innovation is, I don't think definitions are important. But what is more important is to have within an organization a shared definition, so you do not need to have my definition of innovation or Chris's definition of innovation. But if you're a group of people working in an organization, you should definitely have a shared definition, I'll share mine. And you can use this inspiration or we can use whatever definition of innovation you want. So for me, innovation is something new, that creates value. New doesn't have to be new to the history of mankind, because we are quite inventive, it has to be new for you, the innovator, and it has to be new for your customers. So if you're taking something in a market that's already established, but your customers never heard of it, hey, that is still innovation, especially if you never did value is it's funny that we have to talk about it. But you know how for the last 1015 years, there's a lot of talk about customer centricity, think about the customer customer value, etc. Very important. But somewhere in the process, we forgot that there has to be value for the organization as well. I cannot tell you how many entrepreneurs and corporate innovators stumble on that blog, because they come up with ideas that customers want to buy, but they're irrelevant for the success of the organization. And just to give you an example of a large European telco company, they had a team working on a very, very interesting idea for three years. After two years, they built up a venture that was bringing in 14 million euros on annual recurring revenue basis. Now, any startup would kill for those numbers like wow, you know, 40 million euros every year. That company not even a blimp on their reporting because they're operating in billions of euros. So that venture that was built over three years, those talented people could have been developing products and ideas that are at the scale at the level that's relevant for that organization. So for something to be innovative, the value has to be bi directional value for the customer value for the organization. For those listeners that are more in for impact, or social impact, environmental impact, the value doesn't have to be financial, it can be value on the environment, you know, positive impact on the environment, positive impact on the social costs, etc, etc. Now, we have definition of innovation on the side, and we can discuss what can leaders do, leaders can do a lot. But let's start with two things that leaders are best at doing, and they can impact the most. When we talk about innovation, that has attractive returns, there are some myths that we have to bust. When people talk about innovation, they like radical transformational, disruptive, you know, bring me those unicorns, etc. That's horrible. If you're just investing in such ideas, you're going to be burning money away. most attractive returns lie in investing in small, incremental improvements, adjacent innovations. Imagine you have an existing product portfolio, adding a little change to it, or a small sub service to it is much more likely to bring in attractive returns compared to doing something you never did in the past. And the customers never used in the past, because you have the expense of building internal capability and competence. And you have the cost of educating the customer. So you have the two biggest risks that you have to handle. So as a leader, please do not focus just on the sexy ideas focused on all the ideas that can be delivered right now, on the short. That's one. Another one is people think, and this is this is my bias. So I'm a Croatian living in Norway, and I work with companies all over the globe. And I can see a distinct difference in a work culture, for example, between North Americans and Europeans, like North Americans are so competitive, which is good, but they have the tendency to build heroes, you know, those Paragons, like the hero leader, the hero, innovator, they go against the grain, they fight the bureaucracy, and they they're triumphant at the end. That's brilliant. But if you're a leader, those people are going to find their way you do not need to help them. You don't need to help your superstars, you need to help everybody else in your organization. In other words, environment that you create in your organization has much more impact on long term success of your organization, then those superstars because they come and go, you cannot influence them. There's no superstar machine or factory or something. You know, they're the outliers. Don't focus on them focus on everybody else, if you can increase the average. Wow, that's, that's a really great success, compare and focusing just on this heroes, Rockstar, superstars, ninja samurai, or share persona, whatever is the the term term of the week. Now, these two things are something that leaders are fully in control of like, what kind of ideas do we invest in? What kind of people do we give attention to? That those are the things once you point out, you have no excuse? Why you're not focusing on this instead of something else. And this applies the same doesn't matter if you're an SME, family business or conglomerate, because you as a leader, you're in charge. Nobody else you have the responsibility, you have the accountability, people will look up to you. Even Even if you try to have the family feeling or we are all equals, that doesn't erase your responsibility for the well being and success of the organization. I just want to pause here for a moment just to hear your thoughts a little bit.
9:01
Yeah, so I got a lot of thoughts. He gave me a lot to work from. So I think on the on the first part of not just making like those big looking for those big ideas and saying like this, is it like we're just looking for these? I think Jeff Bezos, honestly it was in 1997, one of the shareholder letters, differentiated type one doors versus type two doors, and viewing them as like, almost, it's a one way door versus a two way door. And so like when you're making these decisions, it's like, is this a decision that we can actually come back from and if you're saying we have to innovate really big, there are some of those innovative ideas, right, that you're going to open that one way door and you can't turn back like you've spent so many resources trying to figure this thing out that you're stuck, versus the two way which is smaller ideas, right things that you can actually come back from and you can do a lot more of those and not impact the overall business negatively. And so like Yeah, I agree. 100% Why would we not do more of those? But then I wanted to go and this is going to lead in to my next, the actual question here, when you're talking about focusing on like the kind of the bigger like organization, right, not just your superstars, because yeah, they are going to do their thing, they're going to be superstars. Regardless. I like viewing the culture of your organization as the standard of your organization, because that's really, as a leader, you get to set the standard, and people like us do things like this. And that's what brings it up. But now, okay, now we're getting to the question where I find with a lot of teams, right? They're looking for either innovation, or efficiency. And they exist on different ends of a continuum, where you can't necessarily be 100% innovative, and still be 100%. efficient. And so you have to find like that balance for your organization to see how innovative can we be while still maintaining our efficiency? How do you go? Or like, what how do you view that? You can disagree? It's fine. But then how, I guess, how would you go about, like working with a company to find where that balance is for them? Like how much innovation is maybe too much?
11:04
It's funny, Chris, because I, I just finished a few weeks ago, I wrote a big article on differentiating between innovation and improvement. That's another way to phrase like innovation versus efficiency, etc. And the thesis I put there is that how to phrase it nicely. I think it's nonsensical doorway, but I understand why it's happening, because we're applying different lens to compare things that they shouldn't be compared. So for example, let's use your risk efficiency. When we talk about efficiency, we have efficiency of the innovation process, which is not the same as efficiency when we talk about executive executive daily operations, right. So we would have different measures. To me, I would try in my experience, not to pose them as one continuum and ends on that single continuum, but rather to parallels. And they're not two parallels that run alongside each other and never touch but rather, they criss cross, you know, imagine like a suicide curve. And they're going over each other. When we're talking about efficiency of innovation process, what we're talking about this controlling the inputs, because real innovation has inherently uncertain outcomes. Other operational procedures will have certain outcomes, if you do specific activities, specific specific outcomes are going to be achieved. Therefore, efficiency is tightly controlling these activities, procedures, etc, keeping the costs keeping the speed, keeping the quality, keeping the safety and control, so the output is consistent. So we can sell it deliver whatever whatever to it. Now, that starts little bit falling apart for the innovation process, if you try to apply the same thing, when we're talking about the efficiency of innovation process, the most important measure is speed of the innovation process. What I mean by that is, ideas are very short lived, like people get too stuck, too hung up on their precious ideas. But ideas are, if you imagine a stack of papers, they're papers that you crumple and throw away, you shouldn't be spending hundreds, if not 1000s, of ideas on a monthly basis. So what you must focus on from the efficiency perspective for the innovation process is the time it takes you to work out an idea, test an idea and decide if you discard it or not, like you said one way two way doors. So you want to go to those two way doors as quickly as possible and identify any idea that looks like one way door, because that might require more work. So when we reframe and start focusing, okay, efficiency looks different for the innovation process, then we can start bringing in some of the practices from let's say, traditional business and start applying them to innovation business, in let's say, a more helpful way compared to you know, traditionally, hey, let's calculate discounted cash flows, let's can pull it MPVs, let's calculate all of that stuff. Yes, for innovation, that would look a little bit different. So that needs to be that needs to be happening. Where people get stuck. And after that I'll let you share your thoughts is they get stuck on the concept of quality. Because one thing that we have found in practice and research is that the speed of innovation process is much, much, much more important than the quality of innovation process. And when people hear that they think, Oh, does that mean we can make crap? Like, can we just make bad products and ship them fast? And you heard that, you know, because Facebook popularized it move fast and break things and in Lean Startup people were talking about minimum viable products that people started thinking, hey, that's something that's partial or Better whatever. No, no, no, no, we are talking about quality of the process itself. In other words, it doesn't matter if you use design thinking Lean Startup, customer development, whatever is popular methodology of the day. What matters most is what I spoke just few minutes ago that once Chris or Bruna has an idea that in two weeks, we can test it with 10 customers if you're in b2c, or if you're in b2b, that you need to test it with at least three to five potential customers who are ideally economic buyers. That's what it means. So it doesn't really matter if Chris uses I don't know, customer interviews in a specific style. And if Bruno is doing something completely different for customer research, what matters is that both Chris and Bruno quickly test that idea and decide what to do with it. Next. How's the cleansing? making sense so far?
16:00
That's aligning Well, right? So we care more about the outcome of what we're doing, and just trying to maintain that speed so that we're actually we're and you can see this with whatever I've had ideas for articles popped in my head. And if I don't sit down and start writing out that article, right now, it's gone. Like, I'm never I'm never going to pick it back up. And the idea is gonna get worse, actually, over time. Versus if I just put it out, like, wrote it, put it out there, see what works, right. And now that gives me some insights for my my next one. And even I think the fail forward argument, right, that a lot of people say like, oh, let's just break things like No, no, you want to be able to identify what you're potentially breaking. So that it actually teaches you something for that next experiment, so you can move fast,
16:43
you're absolutely on spot, absolutely on spot of people started fantasizing failure a bit too much. It's just happens that failure is one way to learn. It's really not about failure. It is about learning. If you can learn from failure of others. That's, that's the best thing.
17:06
Right? Yeah. And then I think, exactly because they like fetishize is I don't know if that's a word, but they, they, they lean into, like failure so much. But like, even with success, you can learn a ton of things, right? It doesn't just because you're successful somewhere doesn't necessarily mean the opposite wouldn't be a failure, but at least gives you direction to be able to plan out your next is, hey, this work? How can I iterate on this? In order to take that next step? So yeah, I love it. Let's go. So actually, let's go into that. I have, okay, so in business, right, you cannot improve what you don't measure. I believe you also can't measure what you don't define. And so I love that you started the episode with your definition of innovation, because it's like, we need to be able to find it if we're going to be able to measure how we're doing right? And so how do you kind of work with businesses to make sure that we actually have strong definitions for what we're doing so that we know we can create that sound hypothesis and, you know, create good tests that were for innovation.
18:11
I'll try to keep this short, because I could probably talk quite too long about it. Okay. So with few things here, let's start with definitions. Usually, when we get terms or something, we can look we can look them up either in literature, or whatever is the professional trade publication, etc. As I said, stepping definitions is partly social processes well, because in the room, we have to have a same understanding of the definition, and then agree on it. Because again, I cannot tell you how many times I come into company and if I go not even between departments, but in one department, r&d, procurement, sales, product development, and I asked him, okay, doesn't have to be innovation. Agile is another popular term doesn't even have to be one of the popular terms. It can be basic stuff like strategy, like well, what is what's what's the strategy of this organization, in your own words, and then I started getting, you know, many, many different answers. So people have to remember, defining things isn't just a technical exercise, it's also social exercise to make sure to communicate again and again and again. Now, when it comes to running experiments, designing experiments and learning, you know what we said not failing fast, but learning fast. The most important thing is to start from the learning goal. You have to define what is it that you want to learn? You said that nicely. In order to measure something, you first have to define what you want to measure. So you cannot start let's measure this or that figure out what do we want to know? Let's say I mean, this is this is maybe too high level exercise, but if we say we want to be successful, okay, but what is the measure of success? Is that revenue? Not really right revenue would be like somewhere a second third level measure of success might be a beta might be profitability, margin return on assets if you're a specific type of company. So those could be kind of top level and then figuring out for my type of business, okay, what what does feed into that? But let's go, we were talking about innovative ideas. So you could start to get what is success for this idea? What what would make it a success? And we could start humble, we could start with a number of customers, how they're behaving, etc. And then we could ask a question, okay, how do these people make their buying decision? That's my learning goal. And then with that learning goal, I could start designing a bunch of small experiments, I could start designing Okay, first, we have to have qualitative interviews, to figure out customers journey or to figure out in general, how are they using our product, whether they're trying to get done with it? When I done that, then I could have another set of qualitative interviews, where I would dig deeper, where I would maybe either speak with more people, or maybe I would ask different questions, I would start asking them to rank different pains, problems, jobs to be done, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So I could be working in iterations. But without always going back to as a Northstar is my learning goal, what do I want to learn? When I have what I want to learn everything else I can design and that ties into what I spoke earlier speed of learning, more important than the quality of the innovation process itself, the faster I can learn and get to my learning goal, the quicker I can move forward, or even better discard. As a leader, you know, you have succeeded in creating good environment for innovation, when your own people are coming to you and saying, Chris, you're my boss, I've been working on this idea for three weeks. And I don't think it's a good idea. I suggest we discard it and go to the next one, then I know Chris is a really good innovation manager or leader that supports innovation, because that is a success. From the organizational perspective. As I said earlier, you have to cycle to hundreds of ideas, you cannot cycle through hundreds of ideas. If it takes you six months to work on one idea, that will not work. And people people are afraid of that approach. Because they're like, Oh, what if we discard next zoom? Or next Airbnb? Do people know how zoom happened? It was a guy that what was WebEx that didn't get supported? So he left the company and built zoom. If it's good, it's going to come back, it's extremely unlikely that you're going to discard it unicorn and that it's never going to come back. That is so so so unlikely. You're much more likely to burn and waste people's time by allowing them to work on ideas for six to 12 months, when they don't stand a 1% chance for being accepted by the organization. Yeah, like?
23:04
So I'm actually working a lot in decision making right now. And just figuring out what how do we make better decisions? How do we make them quicker, right, get all the information that we need in order to make a sound decision very fast. But one of the things I've realized is pretty important, right from the start is saying what do I want to learn from this decision? Or what do I need to learn from this decision this way, as soon as you have that information, right, you make the decision. But now as soon as I know, I get what I want to learn from it, or what I needed to learn, I'm ready to make the next decision sequentially. And so I don't have to wait for someone else to tell me hey, you need to make this decision. Now. It's like, No, I just hit the next kind of milestone, right to know that this is coming out. And I feel like there's this translates pretty well to the innovative kind of model of like, Okay, what did what do I need to learn from this test? And then as soon as you have that, it's like, I can move on to the next test now. Right? So I love that you're referencing that.
24:00
What's really interesting from a perspective of both decision making, and it doesn't have to be just innovative ideas, it can be any strategic decision is from the real options theory, which basically teaches us that once we have identified our options, our strategic choices, etc. There is a fine balance between learning. How long should you delay before making the final decision? Because there is there is a cost if you exercise your option too early, and there is a cost if you exercise it too late. And that's that's really interesting, because in some cases, you are better off if you recognize before everybody else what is happening. You could be better off just waiting for some time. But it has to be deliberate waiting, not accidental because you were clueless, and you ended up waiting but you know you spot something before everybody and then you decide okay, I should wait. I shouldn't reveal my cards too early. but that is that's probably going too much into geeky territory.
25:04
No, I mean, I love it, I use I, one of the things that I work with some of my coaching clients on is called the 4070. principle where, or rule, I guess, where we don't want to make a decision until we have at least 40% of the information that we need. And we don't want to wait until we have more than 70%. Because then we probably waited too long. But what I find with a lot of entrepreneurs is that they either wait for everything to be perfect. And so they're in that 70 to 100% realm, and then they've missed opportunities, right, they've closed a bunch of doors, because they, they just took their time. And then for the other side, there's some entrepreneurs that thinks speed is security, and they'll make a decision before they have half the information that they should, they should have at 40%. And, and now they're just not making sound decisions in general. So honestly, real real options theory, I think, is what you said, I gotta look into that more. So that's the first I'm hearing about it. So now I'm excited, I do get to nerd out with you. So let's talk about some of the frameworks that you use to approach innovation. Right? When you're working with a company or a country. How are you going in and essentially say, Hey, guys, this how we're gonna approach being innovative.
26:17
I like practical and pragmatic approaches. So it's, it's kind of you know, you have all these frameworks, books, etc, approaches, etc. When it comes to innovation, it is to an extent simple, especially because developing innovative ideas is very difficult. It is a very humane activity. It's Chris who has ideas is Bruno who has ideas, it's not our companies that have ideas. That means if if you want to make your organization more innovative, you have to help your employees exercise their creativity easier. That's that is the starting point. And when it comes to especially larger organizations, governmental organizations, etc. I know it's ugly to talk about it, but I don't have the raw or haven't found the correct words. But we still live in the world of hierarchies that we still have, we have executives, we have managers, we have middle managers, we have frontline people, etc. We cannot escape that. Why am I saying that? Because this, these different groups of people have different jobs they're doing for the organization, they're not doing the same type of work. The organization could be, you know, I don't know, they every company wants to create their product to sell to their product. But the CEO has different job than the person working and producing dairy, the job of the CEO is to sell the company to set the direction to motivate the leadership team. That's their job. They don't have the same job as the operator on a dairy farm, whose job is to create the best dairy product possible. But they all want to satisfy the same customer. Why am I saying that? From the innovation perspective, executives main job is finding ideas, finding money, finding time finding resources, and clarifying the direction. The worst thing I hear when when leaders come to me and they're like, oh, Bruner or people are not creative, we must do this hackathons idea turns we have to bring in our people all when they bring ideas, they're not relevant. It's not their fault. It's your fault. If I go talk to these people, and they don't know, what's the strategy of organization, it's not their fault. It's your fault. It's in your head. And just because it's in your head and the top leadership people had and they can maybe talk about it, why are you assuming that everybody else will speak about it the same way. And the same thing happens every time. I asked them, if I know, walk, walk out of this meeting room that we're in, go around the corner and just stop first person. And as the very simple question, like, what is this organization's strategy? What's your number one thing that you're trying to get done this year? Do you think they will give you the same answer as you? Everybody goes? Yes. And then I go and do it. And never the person gives the same answer. They're not completely, you know, of the bowl. That would be weird. But it's so important. We spoke about definitions, what half an hour ago, this is the same thing. So the leadership's job in this case, is to really clearly define, hey, this is what we're trying to do. And this is how innovation plays in this picture. To give you an example, organization users they want to be number one, this blah, blah, blah, okay, but then specifically, say, we see innovation contributing to increasing profit margin of our products by 30%. We see innovation contributing to generating 50% revenue within five years. Now, these are still high level, but you're clearly communicating. These are just examples. By the way, don't don't those listening they're not the best measure separate. But if you Do you say this to things and you're clearly communicating to your organization that you're looking for innovative ideas that will generate higher profit margins. So you're not looking for low cost ideas, you're not looking, for example, race to the bottom. And then you can go and detail it, detail it out more. For example, in Scandinavia, a common constraint is we do not want ideas that depend on opening physical branches, because trend in Scandinavian businesses is a reducing physical footprint. So by doing that, by clearly communicating that you cannot complain that your people are coming up with irrelevant ideas. So that's, that's for the leaders, then we have the middle management that, again, has different jobs, because the top management doesn't really operationalize, that's an ugly word. They don't implement strategies. Again, leaders don't implement that. They set direction and they motivate and lead, it's people that do all the hard work, then they need the translator, that's the middle management that people like to looking for nice sorts, people like to complain about middle management, and they are the restaurant, but they're the translators between the levels. They're the ones working and doing all the dirty work. And they're under appreciated and innovation system, they're so important because they match the resources, they open the pathways, because the frontline employee doesn't necessarily know everybody in the organization. So it's the middle management that connects them that works like an orchestrator. And finally, to me, the most important job for for the frontlines, and all the people close to the customers are developing ideas, nothing else should stand in their way. They should have everything available at hand, the worst tumors, doors, things, okay to do bad things, to bad things, to bad things. So one is sending your frontline employees, you know, to fancy schools or bringing in speakers or people like me to like fire them up and talk open this beautiful world of innovation to them, and then just stop and that that's pure torture. It's like, what, I don't want to make sexual metaphors. But you know, it's it isn't that like, you get someone all up and ready and pregnant, then you just leave them hanging there, you know, horrible, horrible, another horrible thing is organizing those ideas towards you know, collect your ideas, idea boxes, etc. And then never replying to anyone. That's extremely quick way to kill innovation culture in your organization, but also to kill the motivation and drive an energy. And don't be confused. People do not get hurt. If you say no to their idea, they get hurt if they don't hear back. It's not a problem. If you say no, it's no because a B, C, it can be a short, polite, no. But if they never hear back, then they're never going to contribute. Again. Now I sound like I'm ranting. So I'm gonna stop here.
33:03
No, that was a great rant, and actually a great place for us to just start wrapping up and move to move the end. Man, this has been a fantastic conversation. So first question I have for you as we wrap up is what book do you think everyone should read? In
33:24
today's world? I do think that for Marcus Aurelius is a really good book on stoicism. It I mean, it really survived it survived the, what's few 1000 years now? I think it is we're very much ready to read we are not. It's fascinating how much is still recently it's because none of us are really Caesar right. And he was a Caesar. And it's basically his personal diary meditations from, from him. It was a personal diary of himself, reminding himself to kind of ground myself, listen to people, you know, don't forget, you have to listen to others, despite you being a Caesar ruling over over an empire and kind of just taking everything as it comes, it is what the thing is, etc, etc, etc. So I I do think it is something that's valuable to everyone, even those that find themselves a bit harder, maybe, you know, like, those that consider them tenacious and they can overcome anything. I still think it would be a useful read and there's so much to be learned from that reading and rereading it again and again. And again.
34:36
Cheers. What is next for you professionally?
34:45
Professionally, so I've I've always been doing too many things because I'm so curious. And as I said, being independent, was a choice. So I always get to work on really exciting and difficult projects. I never know what's around the corner but I've been I'm very proud helping an organization in green energy space, bringing big revolution to the market. Unfortunately, I cannot say more more than that, but it is going to make a world a better place on a significant scale. It's it's a real problem we have to solve. So
35:20
yeah, it's great. Finally, where can people find you?
35:25
The easiest way to find me is on online. So www psec.no. Chris is going to have it you can always reach out to him. He has all my personal details, even my phone number. Everything I spoke about today, everything I shared is available on my website. I write a lot. I publish articles, videos, webinars, white papers, everything and it's all for free. No tricks, no nothing. I had the good fortune of having access to good education. So I said, the smallest thing I can do is just just give back. I know it's not going to hurt my business, because I've learned that people are too lazy to apply all the best practices, so I'm not concerned. But if you're one of those that that really is doing the work. You will find everything you need on the website and I'm happy to help whoever has a good question.
36:20
I Bruno thank you for joining me.
36:22
Thank you for having me curious.
36:27
If you enjoyed today's episode, I would love a rating and review on your favorite podcast player. And for more information on how to build effective and efficient teams through your leadership visit leading for effect.com As always deserve it
Transcribed by https://otter.ai