Actively Building the Best Team Possible

Speaker A: Foreign.

Speaker B: This is the executive navigator. And every month we drill down into the dynamics and best practices of navigating two things, uh, that we navigate as executives. The first is talent management, and that's the technical term for the people side of your job. And the other thing we navigate is the job market ourselves because inevitably, uh, we will all find ourselves, uh, looking for that next position at one point or another in our careers. And we do this because people issues. What we know is that people issues are the kinds of things that keep you up at night. And I am joined by my colleague Rich Kidd. And we call ourselves the Talent Doctors. Rich, why do we call ourselves the Talent Doctors?

Speaker A: We had to come up with some name, uh, Chip. But the truth is we have applied ourselves and earned these doctorates and we spend our time working with people and talent and, uh, sometimes how to make that talent better and in some cases how to find new talent.

Speaker B: Uh, make it better or find better talent.

Speaker A: Yeah, make it better or find better. I like that. Yeah. It's about improving organizations. And you know, I'm pretty passionate about mission and so I only work with mission driven organizations, whether it's a business or a church or a nonprofit. And I just want to see them, uh, accomplish their mission because the world's a better place when they do.

Speaker B: And it looks like you're calling in from a space where there's plenty of rules on the walls to keep you on mission. That's ah, yeah.

Speaker A: If you break One of these 613 rules, Chip, I am fully empowered to write you up. So just we may have to zoom in. But yes, uh, we're going to keep track of 613.

Speaker B: That sounds like Old Testament stuff or something.

Speaker A: Oh, maybe that was.

Speaker B: Yes. Yeah, I don't know. But anyway, we're not talking about that today, everybody. What we're going to talk about is the idea of taking an active approach to leading the talent function in your organization as opposed to a reactive approach. And, um, Rich, organizations hire you to help them fill key leadership positions in their ministries. And I'm just wondering, take us on a little tour of the cases, the use cases. How do you get it? What leads to them calling you? And I'm wondering in the back of my mind how many of those, those scenarios are actually reactive versus kind of proactive. Um, yeah.

Speaker A: What do you think? Well, my favorite type, I actually had, um, an exploratory call today, uh, on something on this topic, but is a leader who says there's a function our organization is not accomplishing. I want to build out that capacity, and I want to hire key people to do something we're not doing at all, or we've only done it a little bit, and we really want to build that out. So we helped a very large nonprofit build out, uh, their major gift space. They had done quite a bit on regular giving, they'd done quite a bit on sort of acquiring new, uh, recurring donors. But they really just didn't have that major gift officer role down. And so we helped them build out that capacity. Multiple, uh, uh, positions. Um, in this case it was also development, which of course is the revenue function in the nonprofit space. But as much as I love that, a lot of the time it's because there's like a train wreck or something happened. Somebody got fired, um, and they need a new head of school now, uh, somebody retired. And somehow this 40 year veteran, nobody saw it coming. Right. Like, I'm not quite sure how that happens, but, uh, you know, uh, it's like that guy with the swing line, red swing line stapler in the basement of the office. You know, it's like, you know, suddenly his job is gone and you're like, okay, we could have figured this one out before, but it is often, sadly, um, it's reactive, not proactive. And that gets tough. Um, but obviously we're there to serve, we're there to help. But I kind of wish that I had somebody like you to help them manage a little further upstream to be more proactive in their, um, talent moves.

Speaker B: Yeah. Let's drill into this because this is my observation that most like the case that you opened with today is that's a great case like that. That's, that's the way it, you know, we're, we're growing our organization. We need to make a strategic hire and expand our capabilities. Like, that's wonderful. Um, but I think that's rare. I think most of the time it's, there's a reactive posture to hiring. It's like even when it's a termination, it took forever to get to that point. Like, you know, and everybody all around is avoiding that person and rolling their eyes. They've been doing that for five years and then finally, you know, we make a move. But it just, it just seems like, um, the approach that most Christian nonprofit takes to executives take to this piece is that it's almost like they believe that I'm sort of stuck, maybe providentially assigned to the people I have, and I just have to make do. And they. It's so different than what people do in business. So what do you think is behind this kind of reactive default, let's call it a reactive default to managing talent, uh, in a faith based nonprofit.

Speaker A: I was doing a little bit of research to sort of test my assumptions because like you, I have the sense that, you know, in ministry and you and I have in common that we have been in full time vocational ministry as well as in business, as well as in the nonprofit world. So I've sort of seen all of it and my.

Speaker B: Still trying to find that industry that will keep us for the long term, I think.

Speaker A: I apparently had a vocational counselor who was ADD, uh, Dr. Roper. And I, um, have. My sense is that, you know, you're kind of socialized to be nice in the church. Um, you know, so I, I saw a deacon who was walking around in shorts with long dark socks on. And in my head I'm like, okay, he looks like a dork. But I was socialized to say, well, brother, bless your heart, thank you for your faithfulness. Right. Like we're not, we're somehow trained that when we observe reality that we have to reframe it in this sort of nice Christianese way. And you know, the truth is, my anecdotal, uh, uh, assumptions were true. Uh, Chronicle of Philanthropy says that nonprofits have a tendency to give poor performers too many second chances. Um, what they said is that it makes it harder to terminate them later. For me, it feels like grace. Right. As a Christian leader, you want to extend grace. Um, but it's not a grace to leave the wrong person in a spot too long. I call it sloppy agape. Right. You think that you're being kind, um, but you're really not kind because as you said, everybody around them knows the person's not the right fit for the role. And you think you're helping, but really you're even hurting that person. Because the place that they do fit convinced everyone has worth, value, experience, that's going to make them a fit somewhere. So you're really keeping them from a place where they would be able to make a difference with how God has wired them. Yeah.

Speaker B: And to all our listeners out there who are not from the south, when somebody says bless your heart, it's not a compliment, right? That's right. It's important to know. Um, so when you talk about this, there's some downsides to this kind of may maybe just call it conflict avoidance approach. This low expectation. Like, like we hire people, we just kind of hope it works out. So it's low accountability. Uh, you Talked about the opportunity. Like it has an impact on team, team morale. It has an opera. It's also has, it's an opportunity cost for that person because they, they are, you know, it's like if you're walking around with like food in your teeth, uh, you're. That. You become that. You're that guy, you know, that everybody knows. And you, you know, it's kind of like this awkward thing. And it's not really, you know, we're far afield from speaking the truth in love, uh, at this point. Are there any upsides to it?

Speaker A: That is a really good question. I mean, uh, look, I do believe in people and the capacities that they have. There are times, um, where workplaces are a relational cultural fit. And so there are people that you would say, well, you know, I'm not sure they could get a job anywhere else, but somehow they have learned to work within a particular community. Um, and for me, I mean, just being very personal. One of the challenges of business is that it's fundamentally different from church in that community celebrates the most vulnerable and the least and sets their expectations to affirm and care for the least, whereas business is a little bit more survival of the fittest. And so I do see in certain, uh, uh, organizations a blending where they do give people longer runways. They do give, I mean you could even say progressive discipline. You give them uh, chances for retraining, opportunities, uh, to redeploy and, and that can be grace so that you're not just throwing people away if they don't completely match up to your expectations. So I do see a, uh, people centered approach, uh, is part of servant leadership. And so some organizations really do a good job of over time training people and growing them, uh, more than they would have in just a pure business sense.

Speaker B: No, I think that's true. And I think, you know, we have, well, the truth is we have competing values. Um, you know, and uh, I, uh, don't want to jump into that in a minute, but I just, I think the truth is we do. But it's possible with some grace and some patience that um, we may be able to find the right lane for somebody. And that's, that's. That's demonstrating godly compassion to them. And it's, it's an important thing to do and we should do it, um, so that. I think that, so that, that could be, that could be the upside of it. I think. I do think there's an expect. There's two other things I think feed this whole thing. So one is there's an expectation of community when you work for Christian ministry. Um, and it's tricky, right? It's not a family, it's not a church. Um, but it's. You know, there's still part of the family of God. So there's. There's this dynamic that we're all brothers and sisters. And even if. Even if I fire you, Rich, you're still my brother. So you may. You may be happy with me as your brother, but, you know, we're still brothers. That doesn't actually change. But so. But I do think there's an expectation of community that. That really, really effective organizations sometimes find hard to deliver on. Um, and the other thing that I think, uh, that's part of this is that there is a scarcity mindset in a lot of nonprofit spaces where we just think we just have to. We have to make do with what we can get. And, um, again, sometimes it's like, maybe there's some truth in that, and then other times, maybe there's not. Thoughts on either or both of those?

Speaker A: Yeah. You know, it. Honestly, the thought that came to my mind, nonprofit leaders, generally speaking, hate firing people. They just don't like it. And so you and I have worked together on projects, uh, in outplacement, where we actually come alongside that leader and give them a robust option that both preserves mission and organizational, um, clarity. But it also builds into that person and gives them kind of a chance for a new start. And what that means is, you know, they're paying us a fee, and we take that person. You take them through an amazing, you know, assessment, battery of tests, coaching, etc. And then often on the other side of that, I'm deploying that person in a totally different organization. The times that that's worked the best, I just, I think, are great because the leader feels better because they know the person is taken care of. The organization feels better because the underperformer is not there anymore. Um, the individual feels better because they've sometimes been retrained, new focus, uh, a new elevator pitch, as you would say, and they find a new place to serve. So that's the best case scenario, I think, uh, maybe nonprofit leaders don't know that's out there sometimes.

Speaker B: Yeah, that's probably true. Well, great. I have four things I want to work through here as we think about moving from the default, which is reactive, to a more proactive, proactive approach to this. So the first is that, um, especially if you're the senior leader, you have a responsibility to your funders and I would even say to the Lord to field the best team possible, um, and not tolerate things that we would say are mediocre performance, a lack of accountability. Um, we character things. I mean, it's hard. In fact, I mean, you said nonprofit leaders don't like firing people. M. Most business people don't like firing people, too. Those are the things that business CEOs pull me aside and want to talk about. The people who like firing people are sociopaths. It doesn't. It doesn't matter what world they're in. Um, but it's a stewardship idea that you have a responsibility. I think one of the things you steward is not just the funds that people provide for you to do the work that you do towards mission, but it's also the people. Um, and so that's a responsibility to see, to try and not try, really to think through. A big part of your role is to get the best team on the field. So that's the first idea that it's a stewardship principle. And because if you allow, like, that poor performer to stick around, it impacts everybody else and it wastes donor money. Like, when you start to think about it that way, you're really not. You're not. It's not. Well, I don't want to hurt that person's feelings. Well, that's true. M. Good. You shouldn't want to hurt their feelings. But you're choosing between, am I going to make them comfortable or am I going to honor and love all these other people that are being impacted by them directly or indirectly, uh, because of the inefficiencies they create? So it's. You're really choosing. You're choosing who to lose, so to speak, or who to neglect. Which is a terribly negative way to say it. But it's like, this is getting into this idea that's part of our responsibility as leaders.

Speaker A: Um, to me, it strikes me, you know, I'm on boards as well as in that executive seat. I think that's one of the board's most important responsibilities is, you know, we talk about the river, uh, the river banks, right? The. The mission and its limits. And we have, of course, only one, uh, employee, the CEO. But we're making sure, as a board, if we're engaged, right? And a lot of times nonprofit boards, they don't pay anything. So you just see that as a chance to socialize or a chance to support one of your favorite charities, uh, with your time, talent, and treasure. But your most important service is making sure that the CEO does exactly what you just said, chooses the best people to carry out this mission. And I know some large nonprofits who have a group of people who have come together and said, look, we want to make sure you have every resource possible to get the best quality people to execute this mission. We believe in the mission that strongly. And, you know, they raise millions of dollars. Just. It's like, you know, uh, this Kingdom enterprise where they want to give that CEO the capital that they need to get the best people. I wish more boards thought of themselves that way, but that's, I think, the best way to look at it.

Speaker B: Yeah, because that whole stewardship responsibility goes all the way up the chain to anybody that's making hiring decisions. And I've told boards, including boards I've been on more than once, the most important thing we do is select and sort of direct that senior leader, whether it's a senior pastor or executive director or CEO, whatever their title might be. So that's really important. It's a responsibility. It's part of the responsibility. We can't duck it as leaders, we have to embrace it. It's part of our calling. Um, next two, number two and three. And these, they're principal. They're kind of, um, they're kind of principles, um, that are coming, uh, from. From observation and learning. Um, and they, they probably at least one. They both. I mean, we could, we're. We're seminary graduates. We could come up with verses for them. But I won't. I won't do that right now. But here's what they are. Uh, first is that a high performer has. It makes an outsized contribution that they, they are three to ten times more productive than even an average performer. And, um, this is something. Some of it came from the Netflix book, which is really a great book about team culture. Uh, and I've also observed it like good people when they move on. It's like it takes two or three hires to fill their role. And compared to an average performer that you have to remind all the time that you have to correct all the time that you, you know, they don't do their work. And then other people just realize that Sally's not going to do her work, so I'm just going to do it for her. Like, it's so different. So a high performer makes such a. You're thinking about, I'm investing Kingdom, uh, capital in this person. And it's like, I'm going to get 5x the work of an average person. So you want to get high performers. That's point number two. For me. And then the third, uh, point is also is more so. And that idea that high performers make an outsized contribution, that's an evergreen principle. You know, that's. I mean, I'm sorry. I can't help it. Jesus talked about the good soil is 100x, you know, and it's so different than. Than. Than the bad soil. Like that does nothing. So, like, this is, this is idea that there's differentiation is. Is. Is baked into creation. The other is. Is more current. It's not evergreen. It's just what's true right now. There's a time for everything. Ecclesiastes. I just can't, you know, Rich, you're bringing out my memories of preaching class. I don't know why.

Speaker A: Spit that stuff out.

Speaker B: For those of you guys who don't know, Rich and I went to seminary together. We, we. We. We've. So it goes back. But, um, so this is the timing piece. Right now, it's a buyer's market for talent. You know, right now, certain, uh, industries, including nonprofits, are contracting, and that means they're letting people go. And it's. It's an opportune moment to, to get some great, great players on your team. And, um, and so, you know, the old saying is timing is everything. Uh, but this, this is one of those moments where it's like, if you're leading strategically and you take seriously your responsibility to put the best team on the field, you should be really looking at your team and thinking that, do I really have the best people? And I'm curious about this one from your vantage point, because I think, and I've heard this from, from people, especially in the nonprofit space, they just think, we could never get somebody better than we would than we've already got. Like, we could never get somebody better than this average performer. And I think you would probably say, no, that's not really true. That's your whole. That's your. Like, the value you bring is you're able to go out there and find that exceptional fit. So. Comment on that, Rich. I think it's really interesting. It's that how do you. Do you bump into this scarcity mindset, and given this idea that right now it's kind of a buyer's market, what would you encourage people to do as they assess potentially upgrading specific positions on their team?

Speaker A: Several thoughts. I mean, so I work with nonprofits, uh, at every phase, from just startups, which are more idea than anything, to very large nonprofits that are multinational and have revenues in the billions with a B. And so it's hard to characterize all of those in the same way. But what I do see is that after the season of when a founder is leading a nonprofit, that there is a professionalization that needs to take place if that nonprofit is going to continue to grow in its ability to accomplish its mission. And sometimes in that startup phase, what you're looking for are people who will do what the founder tells them to do. They're not really strategic, uh, thinkers, or they just have to be available. And it doesn't. That's not bad. That's just the sort of the nature of the beast. And there's this charismatic driving force and they're doing the thinking and they're, you know, chasing after the dream. And, you know, I've worked for several of those people. Um, when you move to that next phase though, it. You have to start thinking about your people in different ways. And it's not a matter of micromanaging them, it's a matter of releasing them into their giftings. And so sometimes the people who are the power brokers, if you will, who are still running the nonprofit even though the founder is not there, they still think of themselves as kind of this US Foreign no more that we've always done it this way. They tend to have this sort of small organization mindset and they're doing salary comps in the city where they're based rather than a national comp. That's why we have a national international database that we check what other comparable size and type organizations so that they're not sort of pot bound. If you think about growing a plant, sometimes it stays in that pot too long and gets pot bound. It needs to, needs to be replanted so that, you know, you have room to grow and develop maybe that hundredfold good soil back to your. Back to your parable mind. But I find myself speaking to those people and say, no, you got to stop thinking of yourself as a small local nonprofit. You're doing something that the whole world needs or the whole nation or the whole state, whichever it is. So you have to, you have to scale up and find people that, that are beyond where you've been, not just sort of helping you keep doing what you've been doing. And that's a mindset change that can sometimes be hard, to be honest.

Speaker B: Yeah. And it's the scarcity mindset. It's almost like a poverty mindset. Sometimes it's like we just can't. And everybody knows that nonprofits aren't going to compete with the biggest Earners in industry. Everybody knows that. That's not a, that's, that's a, that's a foregone conclusion. But, um, yeah, I wonder on this one, especially given the timing, like right now, um, it's a good time to look for talent.

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker B: That. It's. That there's a faith element to this. That. Just saying, you know, we need to believe God for bigger and stop. Stop saying no.

Speaker A: Yeah, well, I mean, I'm thinking of all these faces. Of course, I can't, I can't tell you who I'm talking to because it's confidential. But I, uh, The biggest reason why, uh, nonprofits can't attract and retain great talent is compensation. There's no question about that. But at this time, there are some people out there for whom compensation is not the number one issue. Uh, I was just talking with someone who sold a company, had multiple millions in P and L responsibility, hundreds, even thousands at times of people who rolled up under his supervision. And he's saying, look, I think God is calling me to make a difference in the faith based world. I'm looking for a place to serve. And honestly, I will live on whatever the Lord gives me. I mean, you know, it's a little easier to say when you just sold your business. I understand that, but there are people that, um, who are saying, look, I want. Time is short. I want to make a difference. Now. Other people are dislocated for other reasons. I just have been talking to people this week, even who used to work at USAID. Uh, um, huge dislocation. Only 5% of that group stayed on at the State Department. There's a mass, uh, influx of talent right now that have managed millions of dollars, hundreds of people, and they're looking to make a difference. Um, it's a great time for nonprofits to pick up great people, I think.

Speaker B: Yeah. So don't say no and start to look. Ah, so we have three ideas for one more. So it's our responsibility to put the best team in the field. Um, uh, high performers outperform everybody else 3 to 10x. Like, they make a huge impact. So you want to get them. Um, now is a great. Now is a great opportunity to be looking, um, for upgrades to your mix of team members. And the fourth idea, uh, is that if you can evaluate people consistently, um, it makes it much, much easier to make these decisions. And I think people, we feel like sometimes it's subjective, uh, we start to bake in all these other things. Well, like they're putting their kids through college you know, all the, all the other, all the ways that we, or they've been here so long and some of our donors really love them or, you know, whatever. We kind of talk ourselves out of even really coming to peace in ourselves as leaders about where they stand. And we use a really simple grid for evaluating employees. And um, and uh, everybody will be seeing it on the screen, but I want to just briefly talk about how it works. So we think about evaluating employees based on two axes. And the horizontal has to do with performance. Everybody that you hire has to do something. They have to produce something, they have to send out newsletters, or they have to deliver food in the soup kitchen, or they have to do something. They have to produce something that's performance. And so on that scale, they could be poor performance or great performance or somewhere in the middle. So that's sort of why you created the job like you wanted to problem solve. The other axis, the vertical, is behavior, and it has to do with culture. And, um, does their behavior on, uh, a normal basis align with what we expect? And I don't know what your, your. I don't know what mission leadership is like, but whenever we get on a call at VOCA and we haven't seen each other in a while, we always ask each other how you're doing. And you know, everybody's asking, how was your Thanksgiving? That's the first question. The first question is not, have you gotten any more clients? Or how did that engagement go? Or whatever. Like, that's just part of our culture. It's personal. And, um, that's what we expect. And somebody who doesn't do that, that would feel alien to us. And so every organization, your organization, those of you listeners out there, you have expectations of behavior. And so part of evaluating your people is figuring out whether or not their behaviors, the way they work with everybody else on your team, aligns with your expectations or not. And so this creates this very simple two by two grid for evaluating everybody on your team. And um, so people who are poor in performance and poor in behaviors, it's really obvious what you have to do with them. You have to move them on. You have to. They're not doing their job and they're damaging your culture. Wait, wait, what?

Speaker A: You don't just wish and hope that they'll change?

Speaker B: Oh, yeah, the wish strategy. Yeah.

Speaker A: Um, I've tried it many times.

Speaker B: Wishful thinking. I call it sometimes the seduction of wishful thinking, which I see in business as much as I do in Christian nonprofits. Maybe that can be another episode um, but yeah, so you let them go. Poor performance, poor behavior, alignment. If they're high in both of them, like their performance is great and they're really aligned with your behavioral expectations, you need to find a way to reward them. And you may not. Like, like we were just saying, you may have limited amounts of financial ways you can reward them, but you can give them more responsibility or even just praise. Just calling them out in front of everybody, celebrating very specifically the things they do. Uh, you want to reward them. High performance and high, high behavioral alignment. Now there's two more groups, two more categories here. And I'm just over simple. I'm simplifying, I am oversimplifying it because people could be like on the borders. And it's, you know, that's, that's, that's why this is art and science and why it deserves prayer and discernment. And it's, it's not just a simple formula. But if you have people who, um, align strongly with your culture, but, uh, their performance is before is poor, these are the kind of people you invest in and train if you can. And you kind of referred to this case a little earlier, like having grace, giving people a chance, seeing if we can find a lane for them. Um, you know, hopefully you have the capacity to do that in your organization. You may not always, but hopefully you do. You know, um, and even in the cases where people, where organizations, uh, pay for outplacements so that a person who. Maybe they worked out for a while, we see this sometimes. Like a person works out for a while, but as an organization grows and becomes more, more professional, more demanding or the scale or scope expands, that, that person, they can't keep up on the performance side, but they're great person. It's really. This is really a hard situation, but you want to help them onto their next thing. That's, that's loving them. Well, in that scenario, so, so people who are low in performance but high in culture or behaviors, then you want to try and develop with them, work with them, be patient with them, find the lane for them. The most dangerous person is the person who is high in performance but low in behaviors. Like, they're great at whatever they do, they raise lots of money for your organization, but they're toxic. You know, like that's, that's the most dangerous person. And you, you have to let them go too. Um, and because they, they compromise, everybody's watching you as the senior leader. How do you deal with that person? And if you don't deal strongly with them, first, you know, you, this is, we're not, by the way, when we talk about letting somebody go, we're not talking about you just suddenly ambush them with a text. You know, like, that's not what we're talking about at all. We're talking about a process of accountability and warnings and all that kind of thing. Uh, that they're so, they're not surprised. But the high performer, low behavior person is so dangerous, they undermine your credibility. They undermine the credibility of your organization, your culture. And they suck momentum out of it, you know, for the whole team. And they, they have to be like O2. Um, usually sometimes that can be remediated, but those are the rare cases. So my bigger point here is have a grid. Use our grid. It really, it's very simple, it's very clear. You can plot everybody on your team and then it defines your talent strategy for moving forward with that person. And then you have clarity. And it's so much easier to wade into these kinds of issues with clarity than it is just trying to make a gut decision based on kind of some impressions, some random feedback you've gotten, some things you've observed but maybe not followed through on. What's your feedback?

Speaker A: Well, my response is, gosh, do I love a good four quadrant analysis. I think the world would be a much better place if we had good four quadrant analyses to help us understand it. I just keep seeing faces in each of these quadrants. I had a friend, uh, whose business I knew pretty well and I knew he had made a strategic decision to put a new leader in a management role. And I showed up at that location and five minutes into the conversation I was like, oh gosh, uh, this guy is not the right guy. He was excellent. He had incredible experience. I knew exactly why he got hired, but I was like, he's not their culture. I mean, just not their culture. Um, in this particular instance, the business was known as a, you know, a Christian owned business. There were certain values that went along with that. The guy had dropped like three or four F bombs, had made a sort of sketchy comment about one of the people that were in, in the store. And I'm like, oh my gosh, this is, this is so not going to work. Even though I could see his, like, I could see his expertise. It's just to your point that not aligning with the culture. And I told my buddy, I was like, hey. He goes, yeah, we figured that out. So it took a while, but they got him through. I didn't offer him an outplacement I should have. I should have. But in this instance, he made the right decision. But it's a great analysis. It is pro people in that, that whole quadrant of training says, you know, we want to help you be a good steward of what you have. We're going to help you get there. And you know, um, I see my role as a leader in providing good training materials and a track to help people succeed. And so a lot of our management time I'm spending saying, okay, remember, here's our process. The reason why we do this process is xyz.

Speaker B: We.

Speaker A: Here's where we're not quite getting there. Let's work together to get that. Do you see that? And then I'll ask for feedback from the team. Our team is much like yours. It's very collaborative, very personal. Um, prayer is a big part of our culture, but learning is too. And so I'll ask for input from the team and say, hey, who has had an example or an experience that would help our newer worker? And then they share from their own experience and we all benefit. Right. And so that training quadrant, I think is huge. I love this four quadrant analysis.

Speaker B: Yeah. And that's like, that's great. Well, I'm glad you do. I mean, I'd be hurt if you didn't and then you'd have to fire me. So that's.

Speaker A: I'm hoping you provide. You have necklaces and like bracelets and coffee cups with it all gold thing. Yeah, I would personally buy one.

Speaker B: Not. Not happening.

Speaker A: Uh, we need talent. Dr. Swag.

Speaker B: Yeah, that's not. No, I'm not Dr. Swag. Talent doctors. Not swag doctors. Um, okay. This is the kind of thing, Rich, that we help executives do at voca. We, we help them build the leaders they need for the future. And, um, and we give them simple tools like this and then help them implement them over time and, and give them feedback so that these become part of the rhythm of how they lead. So these are some thoughts that we've shared today. Just about how do you shift from a reactive view or approach reactive posture even towards your talent, your team mix and take an active role. Um, and we're really. Why are we doing this? Why are we talking about this? Well, we're talking about it because there's lots of wasted kingdom capital on mediocre performance and cultural, and sometimes even toxic cultural alignment at work, uh, in Christian workplaces. Uh, and a bigger idea perhaps is that avoiding the truth is just. It's really not loving people. It's not loving the people that you've been stored to be responsible for. So, um, it's time to lean in, I think, to this talent function, this talent leading function. For those of us who are executives

Speaker A: of Creative Christian Ministries, we often say clarity is kindness. Um, that's not the same thing as saying, I want to kick you in between the eyes, and you're going to like it. It's not an excuse to be a jerk. But clarity is kindness. I have worked with organizations where they see problems, but they think to me, they're playing a game of kick the can right M. They're going to hire a new CEO or hire a new C and say, oh, that person's gonna fix it. But you know what I see is that if you sort of delegate all those problems down the road to someone else, then when that leader comes along and let's say that they fire three people that you should have already fired, um, this is not theoretical. It's a real story. Guess, um, what? That new CEO, everybody hates them because they came in and fired their.

Speaker B: Set them up for success.

Speaker A: Yeah. And so then that trust, you know, everybody's kind of. Every leader has kind of a trust account. They've already drained it in their first year because they're doing things that should have gotten done, you know, long time before. And so you, you sabotage your own leaders, and they become the unintentional interim. I've seen that, uh, too many times. So it takes courage. Um, it takes honesty with yourself. It takes facing fear. Nobody likes doing things that are hard, but, uh, it's worth it, and the mission demands it. So I'm with you. Um, we want to honor our calling and do what God's called us to do.

Speaker B: Excellent. Well, Rich, you're here to help people as they want to look at what's possible in terms of adding people to their team, upgrading capacities for new seasons, hiring new executives. That's what you guys do. We're here to help bake in the disciplines that you need to manage and lead well on a day to day basis. And, um, both of us are honored. I think we get to work with some amazing people doing amazing work. And, um, we help make that work better. So, um, we'll close our episode here and encourage, uh, everybody to pass this around to friends and colleagues that could benefit from it. And we'll see you next month with another episode of the Executive Navigator.

Speaker A: Thanks, Chip. We'll talk to you all soon.

Speaker B: Thanks, Rich. And make sure you follow all those rules on the wall behind you. I think that's really important.

Speaker A: I think he broke number 323.

Speaker B: Uh, numbered. It's obviously federal government stuff.

Speaker A: All right,

Speaker B: Something.