0:00:00 - Michelle Pualani
Welcome to the Her First podcast, a platform to help online business owners, coaches and creators gain the confidence needed to build a successful business while creating a sustainable lifestyle balance. We are here to help you prioritize yourself in business and life. This is part two of our discussion of EOS worldwide. Now, if you haven't listened to part one, go check it out. We'll put it in the show notes. In that episode, Joanna and I had a great discussion about the difference between the integrator and visionary roles.
0:00:29 - Joanna Newton
I really love talking to you about the differences between a visionary and integrator, partly because we both fell one of those roles right. I'm an integrator, you're a visionary, and one of the things I found super helpful like talking through it in a very detailed way was really just starting to understand those like frustration points. I think sometimes, when people are very different or have different strengths, one of the things I think I tend to do is think like why can't they just do it the right way In my mind what the right way is? And I think recognizing that people are different than you and people have different perspectives or different strengths can really help you work with people. It's one of the reasons I love like different personality tests and assessments in general. We have a future episode that will get launched after this where we talk about human design. I think all of these different things are really great tools to figure out how we can work better together and more efficiently and really appreciate each other's strengths.
0:01:29 - Michelle Pualani
Part one of this conversation was such a great deep dive into the inner workings of business owners and how we show up, and so, if you are a business owner as you're listening to this, or you're thinking about getting into business ownership for yourself, one of the most important things you can do for yourself is understand how you work, your strengths, how you show up, how you communicate, what it is that you have to offer, the value that you bring to the table, and so better understanding those things will enable you to be a more successful business owner, make more money, have more time freedom, make more impact and show up for your audience, for your brand, in a way that really aligns with who you are at your core, and so I'm really excited for that human design podcast to come out and for you to also understand, as a listener, all of these different ways.
I can start to tune in, I can start to pay attention, I can start to imagine what it might be if I leaned into what it is that I actually do well and not worry about the comparison. And, as you're saying, joanna, I myself have also thought like, oh well, why can't I do this, why can't I show up this way, or when working with team members why can't they just figure this out? Or how come it's not that easy for them, or it's so simple for me? And understanding that we all have different propensities, we all have different skill sets, we all have different tendencies in which we work, and really what this conversation is about is identifying that for yourself, acknowledging those things and using it to your advantage so that you not only are more successful, you know, on the outside, but you also feel internally more satisfied, more confident and more confident in what it is that you do.
0:03:11 - Joanna Newton
Yeah, and the EOS model is a pretty popular one in the business space and I read the books and really dug into the model for the first time this year and one of the things is we were talking about this topic that came up for me is as I was learning more about it. There were some things that you know, as the kids say, like gave me the ick, like that's what they say Is that what they say.
0:03:34 - Michelle Pualani
That is what they say I think so.
0:03:37 - Joanna Newton
Sometimes I really age myself and that was a moment where I did that. But I think that they're just things that as I was learning about it, I felt we're missing or maybe even problematic within the model and I think some of that comes to a more might not just need to be modernized for, like our current work situation, life's really different than it was Like when you think pre pandemic and post pandemic work very different. I'll also say that I am an integrator, but when I, when I took the test that they have on their website, I was in the 80s or something around the 80s for my integrator score and in the 60s for my visionary score. So I think some of the issues that I have with it I likely come from the fact that I have a bit of both in me. And that actually leads me to my first problem that I kind of see in this model is that there doesn't seem to be a lot of nuance, room for nuance in these roles. When it's talked about in the books, it's very black and white. It's like this is the integrator's job, this is the visionary's job, and there's a lot of not room for nuance. And for me as an entrepreneur and a creator and when I was working in the corporate world.
Well, yes, I have a lot of integrator skills. I want to be able to use my visionary skills. I want to be able to bring new ideas to the table. I want to be able to be forward facing. I'm good at presenting material. I'm good at talking.
Just because I'm an integrator doesn't mean that I'm not great at it. You know what I mean and I can't do that as well, and I think sometimes it's so black and white that we forget that you kind of need a little bit of both. Like Michelle, earlier, before we started recording, you were talking about how you have some integrator in you that makes you a better visionary, because you understand what that integrator's role is. And there's a reality that visionaries still have to like hustle, they still have to get things done, they still have to be accountable for things, and I think sometimes that the conversation around this goes well the visionary has this idea, the integrator goes and executes, and that's just so very black and white when that visionary needs to have that hustle, that drive inside of them, and then it's also on the opposite end of the spectrum. Integrators often can have a need to be creative, to ideate, to present material to cast that vision, and I think there's a world where there can be some nuance in those roles within a company.
0:06:11 - Michelle Pualani
This actually brings up the question for me is that visionary and integrator. There are only two roles, two seats within an organization, which means that there's a whole accountability chart of other folks that fill in other roles within the company. So not everyone is going to be a true integrator, not everyone is going to be a true visionary, or either, or they can fill in other roles. There's the CMO, there's the CFO, the CTO, there's the managers, there's the supervisors, there's the workers, there's you know, there are all different roles of graphic designers and the computer technology people, and finding again where you kind of fit on that spectrum is important. But if you're looking at the business ownership, then identifying the ways in which you are strong. Now I think with the VI they're trying to distinguish and help the CEO and the COO essentially, if you were to label them to given roles within a traditional company, to really help them amplify what it is that they're doing, to really help them lean into their strengths and show up in that way. And I think that, unfortunately, I think that the integrator gets the shorter end of the stick in the relationship right, because it does seem like there's so much more pressure, it does seem a lot more thankless. There's not as much acknowledgement and often, when you look at the examples, coos are often hired right.
They're often the person that a visionary is bringing on to their team in some way. That could be in partnership or that could be in co-founding, but usually a visionary is seeking an integrator if they're already an established business. Like myself, I did not co-found with an integrator. I think Joanna Ewan Brandon did that really well as finding the two roles that fit well to support each other. But for me, I'm seeking an integrator type person to support me in the role, and they won't necessarily be a co-founder or a full partner or anything.
With all that being said, I do think that there is some wiggle room for the integrators to be creative and offer ideas, and I think that they have ideas along different lines, whereas maybe the visionary has ideas for product development, or they have company culture vision, or they have where we headed in the next five years and how are we going to embody that as a brand and as a business.
The integrator can bring in their creativity in the ways that they're successful. So, whether that's problem solving at a systematic level or whether that's with teams, they can be creative. But I understand this no room for nuance, because it does seem like an in the rocket fuel, the visionary and integrator conversation. It does seem very linear, right, like just holding steadfast to those two things and not having any wiggle room within that. But I think that as we evolve and, like you're saying, offer opportunities for some changes or opportunities for embracing the program or embracing this concept and idea, but also making it your own right, making it work for your company, making it work for your identity, making it work for your partnership and whatever that looks like.
0:09:16 - Joanna Newton
Yeah, and I think that models models are often created in these absolutes to help you understand where they're at. You know what I mean and what they are. But I think that, with that lack of nuance there, the reason I think it upsets me is one I've been the recipient of like hurt because of it. But these are also people you know. These are real people with real strengths that we're dealing with. And when you, when a visionary, comes at it like they're the idea person, they're getting this stuff done. You're responsible for executing no matter what. That's actually very dangerous if we're an organization where everyone needs to kind of be able to pitch in and do everything if needed, and if you're a founder visionary, the buck stops with you and you should know how to do everything your team does, and then you should hire people who can do it better than you. And we'll talk about delegation, because I have an issue with this concept when they talk about delegation. We'll talk about this later. But really thinking about being that founder, you should have an understanding of everything in your company and then growing from there, and I do get the need to boil it down to this baseline thing. But people are people. You know, right now at my company we kind of have one person doing every job, but as we grow there will be multiple people doing the same job.
If I have two web developers on my team one day right now we have one and she's absolutely amazing it's likely we'll have two web developers. They both have the same job and the same job description. It's likely that each of them are a little better at something than the other, right Like, and they both are going to have a different flavor to how they work. And it's my job as a business owner, as a leader, to identify. You know, not just those are the web developers. This is their job, this is their checklist. But actually these are two individuals with slightly different skill sets and abilities. How do I make sure they're both operating at their top level? And I think same for an integrated visionary pairing. Sometimes the integrator doing a visionary task is the better thing for the company and sometimes the visionary doing an integrator task could be the best thing for that company.
0:11:32 - Michelle Pualani
I think being able to be flexible is what's important, and identifying and acknowledging that every business is different. It can be treated differently. People are different. You're talking about people here.
Humans are not linear, humans are not just a description of a role and they're not going to stick within those confines either, and I think visionaries do get in and do the work. It just looks different, you know, and I think that really better understanding each other it's what's really important, because, again, I think that visionary role brings so much ego and it has to be checked and it is a problem and that's something that I think, even in the past, when I've hired folks of being frustrated with them not understanding or not executing the way that I imagined it to be. It's not their fault, they're not doing anything wrong. It's just a matter of me checking myself and realizing that the way in which I lead is critically important and I don't know if you're familiar with how to win friends and influence people. There is an example of the way in which you lead, even though you're sitting in.
That visionary role can be very human based. It can be really empathic, it can be really compassionate and it can be in a way that encourages and inspires, as opposed to just. You have to do everything that I want you to do now make it happen. You know, and I think you've had some instances of working with those egotistical visionaries who sit in a seat of power thinking that if I come up with an idea, you just have to make it happen, which isn't the way that it should be.
0:13:01 - Joanna Newton
Correct. Yeah, there has to be some of that forethought, the understanding of the process, like some ownership on the part of the visionary to get what their team is doing and understand the impact of their decisions and the impact of what they're doing, and I think that's really important. The next sort of issue on my problems list I wrote a problems list, by the way, for you, so maybe the writer will listen to this podcast and recognize that this is all correct and at it. But my next issue is that within the model, there is this assumption that the visionary is the entrepreneur CEO. There's this assumption that that person is the one that is the business owner. The integrator is someone that gets hired and I think, again, that's just really limiting.
When you think about business and innovation, you want the most diverse group of people bringing ideas into the world. I mean, I'm an integrator, I'm a business owner. I do have a co-founder that's a visionary. Oddly enough, we both are strong in the other, like when you take the test, I'm 8060, he's 6080. Right, so we both have some strengths in the other area.
But to say that your visionary is going to be the entrepreneur, the CEO, is just very limiting and I think that that is just not a great place to sit, because I think an integrator could totally be a CEO, could totally be the start of a business, because they understand how to run a business and certain CEO type decisions would actually be better made by an integrator. When you think of some of those like higher level long picture how money is spent, which way we should go, someone being super objective and seeing all the things that have to get done would actually be good in that CEO seat. I think that both integrators and visionaries can start businesses. Both integrators or visionaries could be a CEO. The brand of CEO might look a little bit different, right Like, the actual execution of what that looks like might be a little bit different, but I just find that making that sort of stance is sort of honestly, a little odd.
0:15:30 - Michelle Pualani
This actually makes me want to look at some of our big name companies Google, apple, amazon are super high up level and look at their CEO and COO and have them take the test and see how they identify visionary integrator and what those percentages look like. It would be really curious to see how they fit into these. I think that there are a lot of folks out there I was just talking to one this morning that they feel like a COO, but they're able to start their own business and run their own business. Now here's the thing I think that integrators make better solopreneurs than visionaries, and visionaries don't do as well on their own because there's nothing to keep them in check. There's nothing to keep the day to day going.
As far as the title goes, I see where you're coming from and I do think that integrators very much have the ability to start their own and perhaps find a visionary.
I just think, based on the tendencies of ideation or wanting to be kind of the front runner of the face, it makes sense for visionary Tana step into that entrepreneurial startup kind of CEO role. That being said, I do think and I look at especially in the online space with coaches and creators I think a COO is going to outperform a CEO type by themselves, because they work hand in hand. And as a visionary, I feel like I've struggled to keep myself in check and keep myself on the day to day of consistency and really being able to follow through on the projects, programs, marketing campaign, social media, like everything that it takes. So when I look at solopreneurs, I feel like they have a level of integrator capacity that is higher than mine in order to keep on keeping on, and so I think again, just identifying and acknowledging where you sit and you don't have to be the CEO within a company, right, you can choose what that title looks like for you, whether the visionary, the integrator.
I'm Kieris, joanna. Do you within your company, do you have the CEO and COO titles or do you call them something different?
0:17:38 - Joanna Newton
We're co-founders. That's what we are. We have not decided to create a C-suite or anything like that as of yet. I think those are roles we'd want to set up later down the road, when we've grown, have a bigger, more employees and all of that. But I want to push back on this concept of a CEO and I'm going to skip ahead and outline to my problem number six with the accountability chart to talk about this, because you said that the visionary CEO, you said the COO, would outperform the visionary CEO and that the CEO needs someone to be accountable to.
So my question is why in the accountability chart quick update for people who don't know exactly what this is the accountability chart in EOS is this idea that it's not a traditional org chart. It's different seats in a chart of what you are accountable for. So there might be roles that have multiple people in the same box because it's more about what you're accountable for than who you are accountable to technically. But you're still accountable to people and in this org chart the visionary sits at the top, the integrator is accountable to them and then everybody else is sort of accountable to the integrator and sometimes there's multiple levels to this. But in that organization. If the visionary CEO needs that integrator to keep them in check, keep them accountable, then why is the integrator reporting into the CEO? That concept makes no sense to me.
0:19:16 - Michelle Pualani
So I think that he explains this in rocket fuel and I can't quite remember exactly the whole situation.
0:19:20 - Joanna Newton
I watched the videos.
0:19:21 - Michelle Pualani
I never got a good answer, but maybe you have one I am not saying I have a good answer, but here's my thought process on it Is because and he talks about this Gino does in terms of if multiple people are accountable for something, a decision or anything else, then no one's accountable. So there needs to be one person accountable, or one person that things come down to. Because, if you think about it, if you have a tiebreaker situation, if I'm a yes and you're a no, what happens? The checks and balances with that setup don't move things forward. Now, if you do have one person who has the final say, the other person might not be as happy about it, but something happens, the decision is made, it's either a yes or a no and things move forward. But if you have two people who have the ultimate decision making process and they can't come to an agreement, then it doesn't move forward, things don't happen. So essentially, there needs to be that one person who, at the end of the day, has the final say of this, this and this. But I think in the okay. So, talking about the accountability chart, now, just to clarify, you can have one person in multiple roles, but you cannot have more than one person in any one role Because, again, it comes down to that accountability piece.
The buck needs to stop with somebody. There needs to be someone, at the end of the day, in charge of that thing. And so if you're a small business owner or coach or creator and you're thinking about this and thinking like, what's the point of even having an accountability chart for me, ultimately, you're thinking about the way that your company is, in an ideal world, structured, and maybe you don't have that team now, but it'll help you clarify the roles and the tasks that you should be accountable for in your business. So you might have the CEO, you might have the visionary, the COO role, you might have CMO, cto, whatever all of the different pieces accounting, financials. You might be in all of those seats right now, but when you get to the scale in which you're ready to hire, or when you're ready to bring on a team or look for an agency, then you're going to figure out okay, I already know what I'm looking for and who I need to fill in through that accountability chart, but I do think that the visionary needs to be accountable. Here's how I think that this can be possibly managed right.
So I think that the important thing is the accountable pieces that each person role has are different. So the decision making process should be allocated appropriately right? So, for example, if the integrator is responsible for human resources and team management and the visionary is not, the visionary should not have the decision making and all be all buck stops with them in terms of who you hire and who you don't hire or how you manage the team. But if product development and the decision of what thing we're going to focus on when it comes to how the brand is expanding and what do we do next If we come down to do different products, the visionary and the integrator doesn't decide. But product development is under the accountability of the visionary. The visionary has the final say.
I get what you're saying because it doesn't put them side by side, especially if you're a co-founder situation. You know when you're looking at top to bottom, visually it looks like a hierarchy and it feels like, oh, that person is always going to be above me. I think if you clarify it a little bit more appropriately or in the accountability chart even you know you can finesse it you can put the visionary right next to the integrator and the visionary is just kind of horizontally accountable to the integrator, or in that way that might help with that, but I see where you're coming from. When it comes down to it, I think that it's important to think what am I responsible for, what am I accountable for, and what decision-making capital do I have within my role? Versus what is this other person? What is their decision-making capital and what do they govern?
0:23:09 - Joanna Newton
And I think that is a great way to look at it. A quick nod back to the concept of a tiebreaker vote. What's interesting is in the book at least Traction, which is the one I read it talks about the integrator actually almost always being the tiebreaker In the role. Now, having this concept of this person is responsible for this, the buck stops them. If there's a disagreement, they get the tiebreaker. This person, all of those things they get the tiebreaker Totally makes sense.
But I want to take a step back and think about some of the bias that we have, because that chart gets made right. Your idea of flipping them, putting them side by side, is exactly my idea. I think thinking of those roles as mutually accountable to each other. One's not really in charge of another. They're working together cohesively. They have a system that they've agreed upon together that decides what do we do if we disagree. I think that's super important.
But the fact that we are so married to this idea of a structure, of a single hierarchy person, even in this concept where you have CEOs in charge, coo is responsible for getting it all done and that CEO is not accountable to anybody. I think that's something we just need to really be open to rethinking conceptually as we move into more modern workplace. Even just the concept that the CEO is fitting very, very specific criteria and that's the person who is the head of the company, I just think is really archaic and potentially hurtful and harmful to people. Right? We so many things affect how we express who we are and how we lead and how we act, things like our gender, our sexual orientation, our socioeconomic status, our culture, like the culture we grew up in. And the truth is, the concept of a typical CEO is very, in a lot of ways, traditionally masculine and has a lot of traits that are very masculine. And so you know and I'll add, likely like you're a white man in America, right, and we know that anybody can make a great CEO. So when we put this box and saying this is the CEO, I think we are keeping people of color, women, all kinds of people out of that seat.
When we say this is who this person is, this is how it's expressed, because it's going to show up so differently for so many people, and that makes me I'm skipping all over my list that just makes me think about when I'm reading this book. It just feels a little sexist, like there's something about it. When you read about the visionary and integrator role, that just reminds me of like the traditional idea of like a head of household man ie the visionary, and an integrator, the housewife. That kind of just makes me really uncomfortable. And this is not something I've like fully unpacked yet. But when I read these roles and I look at the hierarchy in the chart, it's just like are you setting this business up? Like it's a 1950s house where the man is the face of the family, does all this stuff and the woman is at home making sure everything is done perfectly and gets zero credit? Like it feels a little bit like that to me. Just blowing it wide open, joanna Just blowing it wide open.
0:26:48 - Michelle Pualani
Joanna, just blowing it wide open. Joanna, just blowing it wide open. Joanna, just blowing it wide open. Joanna, just blowing it wide open.
Joanna, just blowing it wide open. Joanna, just blowing it wide open. Joanna, how, it does feel very masculine in this way and of course I mean it's written by men and a majority of the CEOs and the companies that they're dealing with are male dominated. There aren't a lot of female references and the one female reference that I can remember bring to mind is about how angry or aggressive that female leader was with their team. Whether it's true or not, it's not important. The point is that that was one example of a female leader and it's true. I think that as you read the book, we're leaning very much into that patriarchy experience. We're leaning very much into that male dominated experience in the business world. Now, of course, we are consistently fighting for people of color, for women, for marginalized communities to take more leadership roles.
This actually brings up the question for me, more predominantly, of how CEOs are paid at such an astronomical rate in comparison to the rest of the structure of the company. I don't know many COO salaries, because that's not something I've looked up, which now question. I'm totally gonna do that after the show. But when you look at some of your top level CEOs, they're making 20 million, 75 million, 180 million astronomically different than some of the rest of the company and you have to question why that's the case.
Are they really doing that much more work? Are they really performing at that level? Does it make sense for them to be paid at such a high rate as compared to the team members? And you look at this within our administration system too, because my mom is an education instructor and she has been for most of my life. So the public education system or when you look at colleges, when you're looking at administration, they are paid in a very different pay scale than anyone else who is likely doing maybe similar work. I think it brings up a larger question of how we're structuring in general and why someone at the top or someone in that leadership role is being given this head of household, being given the higher level of salary and being given the I don't use the word fame, but in some way the clout of what it is that they're doing, when I'm not sure of what they're doing equals all of those things, or whether it's really warranted.
0:29:20 - Joanna Newton
So someone along the way. I'm sure this would actually be a really interesting thing to actually look at and study. But someone along the way decided what a CEO was and what those traits were that made them a good CEO and knowing the history of business America, I would assume that it was designed off of that, like white male influence and what those characteristics are that look like that, and then to say you need to fit this criteria to be the CEO is asking people to either make themself like a white man to get that job or they don't get it. And I think that's really super problematic. Because imagine for a second, like what a female led society or company could actually look like and what that would be. Even think to like a female led household. How would that be different from a traditionally male led household?
If you think for a second, the female type person is the integrator.
If you have a female led household, you have a household where everybody's needs are met, everybody's operating at their highest level because someone is making sure they have what they need to perform well when decisions are being made. The integrator we say they make decisions as a little less emotional and more looking at all the different possibilities, decisions are made with a little bit less feeling and what's best, and sometimes I just wonder if we've just and I'm not saying that that typical CEO couldn't be the right CEO for a company. What I'm trying to say is I think we should open our minds to what leadership looks like and how different people can run things and run a company Not that we should throw that idea out, but be open to the fact that there are different ways to lead and there's different ways to run a company, a household, a country, a government and I think we're so, even myself. That is something that I'm trying to work on is we just have this vision of what that role is, and I just think it's based in biases that we all have.
0:31:33 - Michelle Pualani
Absolutely. I think that those biases are very strong and I think you're just bringing up a really great. Larger point of discussion is let's change the narrative around what the roles look like within a business and how that shows up. I think it even brings up the point of how are you prioritizing yourself in your business and what does your business structure look like? Is it the way that it is, because you were told that it should look this way? Is it because you've been following steps based off of a marketing person that you maybe don't align with? I mean, these are all questions that I'm starting to ask myself. Did I take a course or program, or did you take a course or program that is meeting somebody else's needs, but maybe not your own?
Just because someone else has been able to do it for themselves, or someone else has been able to fill a leadership position or manage or fill a C-suite level position, doesn't mean that you have to do it exactly the way that they do it, and I think we get caught up in that in so many ways of our life.
We assume, oh, because they've had success in the past, because they were able to do it this way, that's the way I should do it too, and that's how I'm supposed to show up.
And then we morph and change and adjust ourselves to try to fit that, instead of leaning into who we are at our core right the larger discussion of our conversation today, who we are being aware of that person, being aware of our identity, being aware of our strengths, and coming to the table and say this is how I lead, this is how I manage and this is how I fit into this role and this is how I wanna show up in my business and embracing that in whatever it looks like 100%, and that's why I love what you said about the concept of the integrator and visionary side by side whether that's actual co-founders, business partners or a business owner and someone they hired right, just like if you're gonna hire someone to be that other arm, like thinking of it as this side by side and this concept of mutual accountability, and then I think that extends to your team.
0:33:36 - Joanna Newton
One thing I love with all of my heart is when people on my team tell me I'm wrong, you know, if I say I think we should do it this way, and they're like they use their expertise and say, actually you know, joanna, like I think we should do it this way, right, like maybe I'm the Tye Rick or vote in that situation, but one. Creating an environment where they feel like they can disagree with me is super important. Any organization, right you want, because that's how you get the best ideas and then I want them to be an expert in what they do. I feel like I'm mutually accountable to my team. You know what I mean. I'm responsible to help them do their job, make sure they have what they need, make sure they can be successful. They're responsible to me to share their expertise. Sometimes they should get the golden vote.
Just cause I'm the business owner Doesn't mean that they can't say actually we need to do it this way. This is why and I say you're right, go do that. Or even I'm not sure. I kind of think maybe my way is right, but it's not wrong enough for me to not let you try and see it out, and then we can make a decision later. And I think that we have just this idea of leadership and you do this, where I think you can create such like a beautiful thing with this concept of mutual accountability. And you know, I don't know what we're gonna do long term at my company in terms of hierarchy and leadership and things like this, but I love the idea, the idea and the concept of not having us single person at the top of your org chart and what that could look like and what that means to everybody that works with you.
0:35:14 - Michelle Pualani
Yeah, make it a circle or some other expression of what that looks like and how it makes sense, right and how you want to empower your team, because that's what you're ultimately doing, and I think the big word and thing that comes up for me here is respect is having a level of respect and integrity with the work that you do and how you show up and sharing that with the people around you.
I think that, as a leader, it's really important that we respect other people in their roles. It's important to have people in their roles feel empowered to make decisions, empowered to bring ideas to the forefront and empowered to be able to share in the work. That it is that you're doing, which brings up a larger discussion of company culture and having the buy-in of your team members right and having them stick it out with you and move through the difficult times with you and be able to see the company grow and flourish and be invested in the level of success in your business that you're wanting to see, which is a whole larger discussion that we should probably do about team and leadership. I think it's important to find that respect and integrity and to trust in your team members and not just think you're walking around with all of the best ideas and I want to do it this way and controlling the situation, because that will get you very far. It's not a good route. I've tried it.
0:36:34 - Joanna Newton
Thinking about that concept of leadership. That's another thing in the EOS model that I think can really be expanded on is it feels, as you're reading the book, that there's like one concept of what it is to be a leader, and that is like this CEO brand that we're talking about, of leadership. You're giving the speeches, you're cheering, you're cheering on, you're motivating people. You're doing that at this very high level and the model talks about leading versus managing and that the visionary is the leader and the integrator is the manager, working through things getting done. But that just brings you down to that concept of like what is a leader and what does it take to lead, and that there are different styles of leadership in different ways. That that looks like right, like being assert, like that concept of servant leadership.
You're not necessarily the one at the forefront, what that looks like, but you're making sure people have what they need to get their work done. You're encouraging and motivating. There's quiet leadership. There's just so many ways you can lead and again, when you keep coming back to this theme, when you define what leadership is with a few characteristics, you're again limiting who gets to be in those leadership positions and so much of how we lead is influenced by things we don't necessarily control. Right, our culture, so socioeconomic status, like all of those things affect the way we lead. So then when you say this is a leader, check, check, check and they don't match that norm of society, you're limiting who gets to be a leader.
0:38:23 - Michelle Pualani
Oh my gosh, I'm totally understanding what you're saying. I think that when you're painting that picture, someone may identify for themselves or in others. You don't fit this leadership role. Therefore, you are not a leader. Okay, I see exactly what you're saying now.
So, as, especially as a woman, as someone in business, we have so many internal dialogues and conversations and narratives within ourselves, lots of negative self-talk that, oh, I can't do that, oh, I could never do that, oh, that works for that person, but that's not me.
So when you start to look at other leaders and think, oh, they show up in this way, I could never be that way, then you're taking yourself out of the possibility of becoming a leader because you're thinking again I have to do it the way that it's been instructed, I have to do it in this way.
This actually brings up the question of business ownership, and I think that in our human design episode that will be coming out soon, we kind of talk a little bit about.
This is that when it comes to business ownership, oftentimes we think we have to fit this, this, this trait, we have to have all of these things about ourselves in order to be successful, because, again, that's what we saw someone else be successful with and yeah, there's probably a larger conversation that we can have and I know that there are studies that have been done around resilience and grit and critical thinking and problem solving and there are some kind of general characteristics and traits, but a business owner can be multifaceted in all these different directions and they do not have to look the same and it doesn't have to be any one particular type of person. So I see exactly what you're saying now, joanna, is that we're really not trying to fit into a mold, we're trying to break the mold. We're trying to say the expectation is different, we're trying to set the bar differently for each individual person to have a sense of leadership, to be a business owner and to sit in that role and feel confident in that, without comparing themselves. We're saying, oh, I lack this.
0:40:23 - Joanna Newton
It goes with a lot of the themes that we talk about on this podcast, like being your authentic self, like showing up in the way that you are and if you're a business owner, you may hire to fill in whatever gaps you need on your team to make the whole thing work. But all kinds of people can do that. All kinds of people can lead an organization and fill in those things that maybe that aren't their strengths, and I actually think it takes a lot of humility to run an organization. And then when you think to some of the traits that you expect to be the leader, humility isn't often one of them. Right, you're supposed to know where you're going, set the vision, do all of that, but to be able to say, oh, I was wrong or oh you're right, like I think those are fantastic leadership traits and one of the things again this episode will come out in a couple of weeks but we talked with Heather about. I said something about being someone who knows how to get stuff done on their own and she kind of checked my understanding of that and said do you need to do that to be a business owner? And I thought you know, what assumptions do I have about what it takes Like.
I think all shapes and sizes of people and makeup of people can be successful, can be a business owner, can be a leader, can be an executive at a company you know even thinking about.
You know I've served on leadership teams.
The people who tend to be the most prized people on a leadership team tend to be people who speak up a lot or very extroverted or all of these qualities when, honestly, if you figure out a way to really raise up your introverts on the team, who are going to be less likely to speak up and talk, you're going to get a lot better results as a company.
And it's funny, I've always ended up hiring a lot of introverts on marketing teams, which is like not common, but having a mixed group of people. It's so important to get the best ideas run and then when you run that company, you have to make sure you're providing the proper environment so all types of people who process information differently can express themselves Right. Some people need to be told it need to be alone for two hours before they can talk about it, and some people can talk on the fly, and you have to provide the ability for both of those people to lead and show their expertise, and it takes some thinking and breaking down of our biases on a regular basis to recognize that.
0:43:02 - Michelle Pualani
In a team environment, it's really important to acknowledge all of the ways in which those individuals show up. There's a really great communication tool that I've used in my coaching practices and there are four main styles of communication that they break people up into and you have certain levels of these. But there's the facilitator, the decision maker, the encourager and the tracker, and you are like just more, they line them up right, so you are either a facilitator, tracker, decision maker, encourager, or encourager, decision maker, tracker, facilitator, so on and so forth, and then you have what's called the end score, and the end score sits in between the letters and it essentially dictates how well you communicate with other people at that level. So for me, I am very low facilitator, but I encourager, decision maker, tracker, and so I communicate with a lot of different people at that level, but have a more difficult time communicating with facilitators, and so using things like that and tools to better understand your communication style is really important in a team environment, in a business environment Also.
This makes me think of coaching is when you're coaching is understanding who you're talking to and how they're going to best receive that information, Because as a coach, you can't just have the exact same style all the time. Realistically, you're going to have to start to think about how you shift your communication, how you change your questions and how you change your approach based on the type of client that you're bringing in, based on the type of customer or group member in some way. So kind of thinking about how you again treat the individual and consider how the communication is going to be received, how you're going to be able to connect with them, how you're going to be able to get the task done and actually executed, or how you're going to have that impact in a coaching environment and be able to get and elicit what it is that you're looking for from that other person.
0:44:56 - Joanna Newton
And then you think about the ability to communicate the way others need, to hear and give and receive feedback to individuals based on their need. That's leadership quality that I don't think we always will put in that bucket of leadership qualities, but I would say that is a really important leadership quality. Does everyone have that quality? No, and that's okay. You can be a different brand of leader, as long as yourself aware of where your gaps are and making sure you have someone to be that counterpoint and keep those gaps in check. That leads me to my next and actually maybe last. We'll see a problem with that I want to identify with.
The EOS model is around the concept of delegation and team, Because I think that here in my mind the language that I saw used heard red, red, I didn't see. I guess I saw it with my eyes as I was reading the language that I saw being used almost devalued team a little bit. And one of the things that was said early on in the book when it was talking about delegation is that the visionary should be passing on tasks as they outgrow them. The word outgrow was actually used when talking about delegation and that is not how I see delegation at all and that's not how it's played on in my life, my concept, and I've done this in my business and I've done this as a leader in organizations, as the leader For me. I'm a bit of a generalist not saying all leaders need to be generalists, but like I was a bit of a generalist so I could kind of do everything pretty okay, right, and so as I delegate and grow a team and move things on, I'm actually looking for people who are going to do that task better than me. So if it's say, writing sales page copy, I can write a sales page. So when I'm looking for someone to take that task from me, I'm not passing it off because I've outgrown it.
I'm passing it off because there are other things I need to pay attention to you and I actually want someone to do it better than I would do it and focus more on it and really dedicate themselves to that particular craft.
You know I'm finding a specialist who can really nail that task and maybe that's my overall issue with the book. I don't even think the author means any of the things that I'm saying, but that's the problem. There's like an intention to language that's necessary when you tell people, when you outgrow tasks, delegate them. That person that is going to internalize that and think of that person's role is less important than theirs. And that is 100% not true. It's just as important, it's just different. And so this concept of I want you to do a task for me and I actually want you your, since this is your focus you're going to do it better than I ever did it. I'm going to trust your expertise. I'm going to let you tell me no when I've given you bad direction and empower you to really take on that role in a better way than I would do it.
0:48:00 - Michelle Pualani
I like that you bring up delegation and team, because we haven't yet talked about the GWC model, which I really, really love and embody. Firstly, you're right, I'd never thought about it that way. I think that the idea of outgrowing something one is their task, that I want to delegate, that I didn't even want to do in the first place. It's not even a matter of outgrowing them, it's a matter of I don't want to do accounting and financials, just pure and simple. So it's kind of a misrepresentation, right, because the visionary also, when you are in a startup environment like we're talking about a few different things here, right, when it comes to business ownership, not all businesses are the same. You've got your local brick and mortar small restaurant shop type business very different. You've got your online business, which could be digital products, it could be coaching, it could be media. It's very different. You've got your venture capitalist funded tech startups that have a ton of people. So there are going to be opportunities for visionaries to step into a role where they have never done any of the tasks that their team is doing from the very beginning. So it's kind of confusing, I guess, in that way in terms of delegation, because you should be able to delegate tasks that you've not only outgrown but that maybe you weren't even in your scope of work or activities and tasks in the first place. Gwc model though I think that there is a little bit of not considering the person when it comes to the GWC model, and how this shows up is that maybe there's a little lack of finesse and just seeing a person as supportive to the business which I get. So I go back and forth on this because I don't want to be cutthroat, I want to be more compassionate and empathetic, but at the same time, if you're not serving the division of the company, you shouldn't be with that company. So I tow the line and between that masculine and feminine energy of totally not caring and then also probably caring too much. So with the GWC and model, it's get it, want it, capacity to do it For every single employee, team, member, contractor that you have, and even yourself in your roles within that accountability chart is better understanding.
Do you get it? Do you understand what that role is, what that task is, what it is that you're doing? Do you want it? Do you enjoy it? Is it something that you're actually interested in doing? And then capacity, see capacity to do it? Can you do it? Do you have the skill set? Do you have the experience, do you have the knowledge, do you have the awareness in order to actually make it happen and to do it well, to some certain level of expectation?
With that, when you look at the roles within your business and you're assessing a team member, you may look at the GWC and you say no, they don't fit the G, so cut them loose. Or W isn't working out, cut them loose. Now you can reappropriate those people I think, joanne, you just did that recently is take someone who maybe gets it, maybe wants it, but maybe it doesn't have the capacity to do it. Can you find something else within the company or within the team where they actually do have the capacity to do it, and find a different role or a fit for them? So, on one hand, you have to think of your company and your business and you have to protect that.
And a lot of times sometimes we do hang on to team members, contractors, other people, longer than we should, because we let the emotion come into play.
We don't want to hurt their feelings. What are they going to do Now? I have to find a new person, whatever comes up for that when we maybe should be a little bit more intentional about the black and white. Also, I will say that he does bring up the point of it'll likely serve that person better in the future as well, because if they find a role in which they're truly fulfilled in that GWC kind of model or principle, that'll be better off for them in the future as well as better off for the company in the bottom line, which, as I grow within my business, I think that the bottom line is something that I've neglected for too long and been more emotional in my decision making and been more. Oh well, I don't want to hurt their feelings or maybe I messed up about this, so you know I'll skirt around the details or the issues when I feel like I do need to be a little bit more assertive and intentional. So I don't know how that all fits in, but I feel like it was relevant.
0:52:16 - Joanna Newton
No, it was totally relevant and I'll tell you I didn't put this on my list, but it made me think of a thought. So I think there's a step missing before you look at an employee like that, because I think and this comes from my experience like serving on leadership teams and watching decisions like this made all of the time, before you even say there's an issue with an employee or with a task or with something getting done as a leader in a company, the most important thing I think you need to do is look internally at potentially what you did wrong to make that role or that employee or that person fail. Because you have to look at was the job description wrong? Was the training incomplete? Did I just hire the wrong person? Am I expecting too much?
These are really important things. Take away the personal act of having to fire someone for a second for you as the business owner, because if you evaluate that person, saying nope, I don't remember what all those criteria are, so just, they don't fit, so you get rid of them, but you didn't look internally, you hire someone to replace them and it happens again. And you hire someone to replace them and it happens again and you never actually get productive. So, looking at okay, is the job description wrong? Is the training wrong? Have I not communicated this?
Like taking that in first, I think is so important you know what I mean and likely you can make it work with the person in that role. When you think, okay, what happened here? Why did this go awry? Why was this project so problematic? The first thing I do is not look at anybody else. Let's look at myself. What were my instructions? Was there something I could have improved in this process? Now, it could be that person isn't the right person for the job, and that may end up being the final decision. But if you've looked at what you did wrong yourself first, that's going to be set you up for success next, time and I think that is a true leadership quality.
0:54:20 - Michelle Pualani
Right, it's a really conscious way to lead and to show up in your business to own. I heard it I think it was a James Wedmore thing that if you're attracting B team people, you need to look at yourself as a B team leader. That if you want to attract the type of personnel employees, contractors that are going to be A team folks, then you need to yourself be an A team leader. So you need to look at how you're positioning things, how you're presenting the way that you're communicating and owning that, and then needing to shift and make those changes. Also, I think, really go back to our episode on core values, because we did an episode for her first with core values. And if you don't have those core values and pillars within your organization, within your business, within your online presence, even then things are going to get a little iffy and the type of people that you attract are not necessarily going to fit into those core values. So I think when you're looking at team members, when you're looking at this GWC model, it's not just about their role. It's also about how they fit into the overarching identity of the company and whether it is a good fit or not.
Because if from a core value perspective, like I have told my partner, jeremy, and in this new business with TBH and our physical product, that I will always hire based on values over skill set, every single day, because it doesn't matter how good you are at something, if we don't align with core values, it's not going to work, and I would rather have someone who has the integrity of the core values that we have body as a company.
You can learn skills Like you can get the experience, you can take the courses, you can do the things. I can teach you and guide you, and he sees that in his company as well. He co-founded a CIDR company and has been in alcohol production for a long time, and so he's seen a lot of manufacturing team members and has found that the team members that he brings in with skill whether that's an educational degree or they've had other experience in other breweries, cideries, wineries before versus the type of people who maybe don't have the experience but have the passion, have the core values, have the learning capabilities, they always, always, always, every single time outperform anyone with a skill set and the experience.
0:56:37 - Joanna Newton
So I think it's really important to look at the core values and how that person aligns, and whether you yourself, as a leader, are communicating them, and then whether you're empowering and giving them the tools that they need, before you just cut ties and say, oh, it's all their fault 100% and I think through traction, there was a lot of flippancy over firing employees and there is a reality that when you hire someone, if you're committing to them a certain number of hours a month or a certain salary or even a contract basis just a verbal agreement about what you've agreed to work with someone on you do have a responsibility to that person to pay them and to give them notice of changes. And you picked them right. You interviewed them. You thought their skill set was great. I think there was a responsibility to see it out, try to identify what you could do better in the situation, find the right thing for that person and really dig into that. Now, sometimes, at the end of that, it's time to part ways.
I worked at a company once and there was someone who wasn't on my team but on a different team that I was asked to help try to get something from them, because they were, like this person's, on the edge. I don't know why they're not super engaged with their job. So I worked on a project with this person. I really tried to give very clear instructions, training. We had regular check-ins, we had documentations of what was expected and they would come to each meeting not having done anything from the week before, and then we'd give that person another chance and another chance.
And it became very clear when you have very clear expectations. It wasn't even about results, it was just even doing the tasks right. We weren't even looking at the results of their work, just like their engagement in the project, and it just became very clear that that person was not a right fit. And sometimes that happened. It totally happened sometimes. But I think, as a business owner or as a leader in a company, I think you should take your hiring very seriously and if you do fire someone, take that seriously too and respect that that person is counting on that income and you've agreed to it. You might need to part ways because it's not best for your company and, like you said, they can then go find something that's going to be better for them. But in the middle of that, there are bills to be paid, there are things to be doing and you did make an agreement with them. So handling it in the most human-centric way possible, I think is really important. And, yes, sometimes you do have to part ways. Sometimes it is the right thing to do. But I think it's something to take really seriously and not flip it like oh, they don't meet all the things in the box gone right, like, I think, having some heart in it is important and I think sometimes this is something that I've dealt with personally a little bit.
Everyone knows not everyone, but lots of people do like Maslow's hierarchy of needs, like your base level needs, there was a time in my life where just that bottom pyramid of needs food, clothing, shelter were really difficult for me to come by.
There were times where what I was going to eat the next day was unsure. I was unsure of I'd be returning old things, hoping to get money back so I could buy groceries. This is something I've dealt with and as you move up in your hierarchy needs and get towards that self-actualization standpoint, I think sometimes it's really easy to forget what it's like to not have those needs being met. And if you have employees that are making a lower pay rate or they're part-time, they're having a lower hourly rate wage because that's the value of the task that might be a fair wage for their job, but pulling the rug out from under them when you've agreed, sometimes you forget. Like if I were to not make the same income one month, I would be okay because I have savings, I have things set up, but it's taken me a long time to get to that point and I think sometimes, as you have those needs met, you forget what it's like to not.
1:00:44 - Michelle Pualani
As we start to wrap up this episode, I think that's a really good note to end on is identifying I've been thinking about these things too is that when we don't have certain needs met, it will affect our mental capacity, it'll affect our emotional capacity, it'll affect our ability to show up and work and with certain tasks, or even in our businesses. And so, as you're listening, if you're feeling like bills are tough, finances are hard, I don't know where the next client is coming from. I don't know where the next sale is coming from, knowing that that can sometimes bring you down in other ways. So don't question whether you're competent, don't question whether you have the skills, don't question whether your message and your products and your programs are needed because they are. It might just feel like you're carrying that burden right now and it's then affecting your ability to get up and go. So it'll affect your motivation, it'll affect your productivity, it'll affect your focus and kind of thinking about how you can start to mitigate that, whether that means finding a more reasonable expectation or an opportunity or maybe putting in a little bit extra work and sometimes actually just showing up a little bit differently.
If you've been trying the same thing for a long time and it's not working. This is something that I'm dealing with right now. Stop hitting your head against a wall. Pivot, do something else, try a different tack, give it a different approach and start to think a little bit more critically about okay, let me take a step back. I've been in it every single day. I'm hustling, I'm doing the work, I'm showing up, I'm being consistent in this way, but maybe that way isn't again what's right for you. So take a step back, do a little reflection, realize there's nothing wrong with you and how can you start to maybe shift, change or involve what it is that you're doing, what it is that you're focusing on, so you can get past this hurdle and move beyond that sense of scarcity or that sense of pressure that's coming from that, and open up the creativity and open up the abundance and open up that channel for opportunity.
1:02:46 - Joanna Newton
Thank you for sharing your final thoughts. I think my big takeaway for this, and what I want to leave people with, is that it's up to you to define your brand of leadership, the way you want to run your business and what that looks like, and that there are so many models and different people giving advice and telling what to do, and there are some great best practices to look at and reference, but at the end of the day, it's up to you to decide what you want to put out in the world and that, when you're making decisions and thinking about the way things should be, to not be afraid to ask why was it done that way and is that the right way to do it? Because just because it was done one way does not mean it has to be done that way over and over and over again. I'm giving you snaps.
1:03:40 - Michelle Pualani
I totally agree, love it. Thank you for ending on that note. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, share it with your friends and leave us a review. We'd love to hear from you, so give us a little shout out on social media if you're listening. Thanks for tuning in and be sure to catch our next episode. You're going to want to tune into it. It's all about human design and how you can leverage that in your business to your own unique qualities. That is one thing you can do today to prioritize you in business and life.
