Why Great Marketing Fails Without Great Process with Brandi Starr

Speaker A: Welcome to Market G. Grab some coffee and let's talk about what's working in marketing, who these strategies are designed for, and how to be customer centric while we do it. Hi, this is Leanne with Markigy. Today I'm joined by Brandi Star and uh, you know, I think that we've made a couple jokes about her being a rock star, but I'll let her tell you about why she is utterly amazing. Brandi, tell us more about you to give us your lens for the conversation

Speaker B: we're about to have. Yes. So I am the chief experience officer at Tegrada, um, and I've been here 11 years, which I think at this point is kind of unheard of. But what that means is being in consulting. So we're a revenue marketing consultancy and we work with mostly organizations that are over 100 million when they are going through any sort of transition. So big, small, anything that touches go to market that has a, um, major marketing focus is where we lean in with a lot of the strategy technology and we're very process first. And so through the 11 years that I've been here working with I don't know how many companies, I see a lot of the same challenges and so many companies think their problems are unique, um, whereas I recognize that they're not. Um, and so that's kind of the setup for our conversation. Little bit about me. Um, I am the co author of CMO to CRO, the Revenue Takeover by the Next Generation Executive, the host of the Revenue Rehab podcast, and the writer behind the substack Brandy Star Studios, which is just another place that I get to share all of the thoughts and experiences that I have.

Speaker A: Awesome. And I appreciate all of that because I think that it really shows your depth dimension and the different points of view that you analyze things from. Um, so knowing all that, what is, what is the thing? What is the soapbox? What is like if people aren't doing this, they are just completely missing the boat. Um, you know, what do we need to know going into, you know, this next season of marketing?

Speaker B: So mine is probably an unsexy topic. Um, but it is processing. And I have a strong belief that process is really the growth leader that most go to market executives are missing. And it's because most companies underestimate how much revenue they lose when their process is weak. And so as much as people don't want to talk about it or they only want to talk about it from the marketing ops lens of like, how do we get into the weeds of, of what our Process is. I actually, you know, my soapbox is really elevating that conversation to the executive level to help them understand why they need to lean in hard around process.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. I think that, you know, this is where we have a lot of alignment is that, you know, from, from the way that we approach business is that you fall to your systems. And um, so if, if, if we follow your systems and your process is your systems. Like what, you know, how, how is it that people get this wrong? I think is kind of what I want to hear. Like, like, tell me more about like what you mean in a way that you would describe it to the board of directors or the other C suite people.

Speaker B: Yeah. So what happens is you think about all the different. I won't even look at go to market as a whole. Let's just look at marketing. Marketing, you have all the different teams. Typically you're going to have a content team that's producing all the content. There's often a product marketing team trying to connect what product is doing with again, what the market looks for. You've got your digital marketers that are really focused on some of that top of funnel brand awareness, digital ads, your events team, you have your campaign marketers, you have all these different teams. And in general we are looking to hire the best. And so most companies, they've got the people, even if it's not enough people, they've got people and they typically have people who are really good at the thing that they do. The problem is you have all of those teams who are amazing at what they do. They have their own budgets, they are spending both their budget and their human capital, their resources to, to do the things that they're amazing at. And in most cases those teams are individually successful. The problem is they're working in silos and there is no real process around how these things all fit together. When most people think about process, they think about execution process. And that's where I say they go to marketing operations of uh, we're gonna get this campaign, we're gonna track this attribution, we're gonna do these sorts of things. And that is important. But process actually starts a lot higher in the conversation. And so what ends up happening is there's all this resource being spent to do these things. But when they're not connected, when there's all these silos and they are disjointed, none of them are performing at the level that they could be because they are disjointed efforts. We, which means a significant portion of what's being spent both in time and money. Money is kind of just floating out the window and not turning into that top line growth that companies are seeking.

Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. You know, silos can be one of the most damaging things that we run into. Um, what's can you think of? I know that there's like NDAs and stuff but like think of ah, an organization where you um, a way this play out in real life.

Speaker B: Yeah. So I have one company, they are global tech company. Um, and it's the typical scenario. So they had a content team. Their content team has an annual plan of like there's a framework for the type of messaging, the type of content, all these things that they're planning to produce. They also had a product marketing team that was very heavy on product webinars and helping people to understand what the products do because they're complex solutions. They're not your, you know, 20 bucks a month kind of thing. Like companies are spending you know, 150,000 to couple million dollars with them. And so the products are complex. So there's lots of those things. They have a uh, stellar brand team that does great at you know, really putting out the brand messaging and making sure that they show up at the right events and in the right trade publications and analyst relations and all those so of things. And they also have a great sales team where they have both the proactive sellers that are you know, calling into prospects, they're calling in to current customers. They also have those that are you know, trying to like a little bit of the spray and pray, but really attract new people and supporting the brand efforts. And I'm seeing all the awesome things. But when I look at the campaign managers, I see their planning, their plan of what they're looking at and what they're planning to do does not at all take into account what the content team and what the product team are developing. Marketing is trying to produce campaigns, they're looking at the outputs and they're basically given a bunch of puzzle pieces and they're like try to make this fit together as best possible and they do the best with what they have. But there's no process. And this is the process that I probably see that is missing in most organizations which is around planning. How do we plan at a strategic level so that everybody understands their role. The pushback that I always get and that I got heavy from them, is that such a huge change? Like you're trying to change the way that all of the teams work. And in an ideal scenario, yes, I would love to come through and really streamline the whole thing. But I'm also realistic that that is not something that happens overnight. And so with them, what we leaned into is being able to set up their process in a way that all the teams come together, and then they can continue to work in their silos. And then there's a point that they come together. So what we did was we set a process around planning. Here's what we do annually, here's what we do quarterly, and here are the triggers that say, we need to revisit this annual in between those things that we have planned. So they all come together to plan. Then they can all go on their own to work on all the things, so they can go back to their silos and work on all the things they need to do to support the plan. And then in that there are places where they all come together to say, hey, is everybody on, you know, on target with their timeline? Does this still make sense? What do we have in market? What does the data show of, you know, do we need to pivot? And so they can come back together and then again adjust as needed, especially when it comes to timelines, and then everybody can go back. And what that does is it one makes sure that we are all marching to the same beat in the same direction in a very coordinated effort. It gives us the ability to pivot where we need to, and it makes sure that we, uh, don't have bottlenecks quite often. What will happen is the campaign execution team thinks they're going to get something on this day, and then they get nothing. Then a week later, they were supposed to get this from this other group, and they deliver on time. But that group that was late has now also delivered, and everybody wants their stuff executed at once, and that's just not possible. That is one example where we're still in the process of, you know, moving them to this come together, go apart, um, method. But they've at least bought into, like, yes, this is the direction we want to go. And everyone's bought into making the change. And so now we're working with them in the weeds to figure out exactly what that looks like.

Speaker A: Yeah. And I think one of the strongest elements of this is that come back together moment, because I'm sure plenty of us have experienced, like, a street, like an annual planning meeting where, oh, we're going to take a day, we're just going to go plan, it's going to be a great year, like, hoorah. And then it, like, the follow through just evaporates. And um, you know, the best of intentions are like an intentional, systemic, um, communication process. Um, and so I really think that that's one of the insights that is, is a huge takeaway from this is the process is an ongoing thing instead of like a one and done.

Speaker B: Yeah. I can remember early in my career where things were steady state enough that doing annual planning kind of worked. I can't say it ever like fully worked, but it works better because things didn't change as fast as they do now. But your annual plan, what you came up with by the end of Q1 often is irrelevant at that point and you've got to be able to pivot. And even if you don't have to pivot on the plan, the timing of things rarely goes exactly as expected. And so that's the other place where there's a lack of coordination and communication is, is when anything changes. If we've decided to pivot, if we've been delayed, if we've had priority shift, all those things have to be built into the process so that there is communication and coordination. If I put my two words together of what's most important, it's communication and coordination. And those things are, uh, what bring together a process that actually works.

Speaker A: Yeah. And I think that there's so many ways to make that happen. It's not like it doesn't matter if it's in like a project management software or like in emails or in Slack channels. It's that it exists and it's intentional and that you have the foresight to have that communication, um, like as part of the routine and like a flow of it. Um, so I think you're right also though that like by the end of Q1 it's just like, well, AI has done like 10 different things overnight. Like are you, are you ready for that? Like the, the customer experience is just like the interest rates that everything is so volatile. Um, you know, how, how can teams really plan ahead at that point? Like they, they can, you know, have a slingshot, but it's, it's a whole,

Speaker B: I mean we have to directionally plan at this point. It's like to me your annual planning has to be more of a high level framework of like these are the initiatives we're going to have and a loose idea of what that's going to look like. And then that's where you have those different moments along the year where we come back and say, okay, this is what we thought we were going to be doing in Q1 or for this campaign or for this Product release or whatever it is based on everything we know today. Does that still make sense? In some cases it's yes, we can proceed as we planned. In some cases it's like, yes, but or yes, and where overall still works, but we need to pivot. And in some cases it's just no, and we've gotta toss what we thought in the trash and, you know, go back to the drawing board based on the current conditions. And so when you don't plan for that and you only plan for annual planning, this is where you have everybody's pivoting. Nobody's still just running full steam ahead with that plan. But the initial plan was coordinated. The pivots are not, because there's no process.

Speaker A: Yeah. And that's really where it goes completely off the rails is the pivot is that, uh, there's, you know, a trigger that happens, you know, in the whole, you know, pestle analysis. And then everybody is like, oh, I'm going to fix it my way. And then there's like 10 different ways and they aren't. They confuse the customer, they lack distribution. Everything falls on one person's plate at once, like you mentioned earlier, and it's wildly ineffective.

Speaker B: And I think, uh. And that's where it comes back to, you know, my soapbox topic is I don't think that anybody thinks about this in the context of revenue, because I will say that talking to other, you know, go to market leaders, marketing leaders, CMOs, et cetera, they recognize that some of this is happening. So what we're talking about, what's actually happening, they see that that is a thing. It's not like everyone is oblivious to what's happening, but they don't see it in connection to revenue. So it doesn't move high enough up the list to actually solve. It becomes one of those, like, uh, it is what it is. Like, business moves fast. We can't solve for that. And I think that's false.

Speaker A: Yeah. And that reminds me of, like, a recurring kind of theme of being order takers instead of strategic visionaries. And the amount of money that's just left on the table when you're just taking orders, you're just like, yeah, I can push out that campaign. Sure, I can do that. Ah, email. Okay, well, how's that connecting to a larger message? How does that fit the brand or the roadmap or any of it?

Speaker B: Yes, that is exactly it. Because most of the people that are in the weeds, they know the answers, they know how to do it better, they know what they should be doing, but how things all flow together, they don't have any control. Timing wise, they generally don't have much control. So everybody is just trying to do the best they can.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. And I think you're right that they do see a better way to do it, but they aren't armed with the resources, autonomy or influence to, to change that. And um, what I've seen happen with kind of younger marketers is that they're expected to be strategic and executionary and you can't have one. You kind of can have one or the other. Um, if somebody's busy all day, you know, order taking, it's very hard to allot them the same bandwidth and time to influence the strategy.

Speaker B: Yeah. Because I would say they definitely have the ability, but they don't have the capacity. And a great example of that is I was working with a company who they were spending a ton of money on different events. So they were at a bajillion trade shows and budget was being cut and so they were looking at spend across marketing around, you know, where are things going? And, and I'm like, okay, which of all the ads you're running which perform well? They could answer that, no problem. Like, here's the campaigns we ran that worked well. Here's what we gleaned from that. When I asked about the events, it just was crickets. And they were like, well, we can tell how many net new names we got from every event because we track what lists they come from. I'm like, yeah, but. And then what? Like how many stay engaged, how many turn into opportunities, how many actually turn into business? And they're like, oh, well, we can't track that. And when I talk to the marketing ops person and I'm like, hey, when you're getting these lists, what are you doing? You know, like. And when I talked to her, I didn't need to solve anything. She knew exactly what needed to happen in order to easily be able to answer the question that I was asking. But nobody had ever asked her the question around, is there a way we could do this? And basically it was very much if she was given a little more information on the front end, she could set it up in a way on the back end that that information would be tracked all the way through, at least to opportunity. But it. And so that's an example of one of those scenarios where her day to day was do do do, do do do do. And there was no space for her to think outside of something she was directly asked. But because I was now Directly asking it created just a moment. And I mean we met M for an hour, so it's not like we spent a ton of time, but me just asking and giving her the space to give it half a thought. She quickly rattled off how we could solve that. And so in that scenario, if we already had the information and their budgets are being cut, they could very easily say we're not going to X, Y and Z events because they don't return anything.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. And I think it's, it's also, you know, there's the asking of the question like you mentioned, but there's also like that, that second part of, um, leadership. Caring enough to follow through on the person that's in the chair's expertise. Um, because I think that that's another thing where I've seen people in different slack communities just get like super frustrated. They're like, this is not trackable. This is not done right. Like I'm not getting enough information from the sales or the event or the blah, blah, blah. I can't do this the way that I think it should be done. And they're stuck doing it in a way that is like sandpaper instead of like a river. And um, I think that you taking the time to have that conversation is probably one of the most impactful things that can occur in setting up the processes is having that curiosity to pull on those threads.

Speaker B: Yeah. And I think in this situation where it will be different than what happens in most companies is because we as consultants have been brought in to solve problems. You know, this broader problem. The recommendation she made gets enough executive attention for it to actually happen. And so very simply, the events team now was required to, when they provide the list, to add these extra four columns in the list and fill that information in. And something that simple, it's, I mean, it's basically like when you get your list, before you send it, add these four columns, fill this in, then send it. But had it not been for the fact that we were brought in to solve this bigger issue and were able to say this is a component, because that didn't solve the whole problem we were solving, but that was a key component. It very quickly became process. Whereas what often happens is even where that marketing ops person or campaign manager or the person that is more in the weeds, even when they're, when they do get asked the question or they make a recommendation, it often doesn't carry enough weight for it to have legs and actually become a thing. Especially when it is cross departmental because this team doesn't Want to cause friction with that team by making them change. And you know, oh, I don't own that. And so then I got to convince that leader and you know, there's all this human dynamics that get in the way of us being able to solve something. And this is again where if we put the attention on process, so bringing it back to my soapbox, if we as leaders put more attention on the process and listen to the people who are in the weeds, then we can solve so many of these problems. We can have the data and visibility that we need to uh, make informed decisions. But because that's the whole job of being an executive is to look at the whole and guide the organization. So when you put process in place, that does include streamlining, you know, getting things done, making sure that we know what we're trying to achieve. So we're tracking the metrics that we need that you know, things carry through, like all of the things. Then you actually start to know where your dollar is going, where your human effort is going, and what return is coming out of that and, and what needles you can pull or what levels, levers you can pull when things aren't going as you expected. Like, you know, where there's process bottlenecks, where there's money being wasted, all those sorts of things so that you can, you know, move. You're sort of like the puppet master of all the teams, you know, which strings to pull so that we hit our revenue targets.

Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. And it really is that that macro level vision with the micro level execution and bridging that gap, and that's something that can be very difficult. Um, I'm thinking in my mind of like the, the types of objections, if you will, that people have to doing this. Um, you know, and I think that one that I've, I've seen, and I'm not saying that it's healthy, uh, but one that I've seen is where people discredit the like salespeople, um, and they're just like, well they're just, they're just salespeople. Like they're, they're just gonna do like blah, blah, blah. And they like almost like, um, are very dismissive of the lived experience of the salespeople. And they're like, well, salespeople just hate filling out fields. Well, is their job to fill out fields or is it to do sales? You know, it's kind of like that like double edged sword. Um, so that would be like one kind of like obstacle or objection that I could imagine people saying is that like, wow, there's just no room for more processes. And it's like, you know, what, what kind of. What does that evoke in you? Like, if you heard someone say that or have you heard someone say that?

Speaker B: Oh, yeah, I, um, have definitely. I have heard that way too many times. And it makes me cringe so much. Because the lack of process is part of the reason why you're stretched thin. Because there's a cognitive load that we all take when there's no steps that we follow every time we have to think about what we should do next. And it's not that I'm trying to, like, dumb things down to where people don't have to think, but we want them thinking about the places where their energy and brain power makes a difference. Whereas if, you know, if someone asks, like, hey, of the deals that closed, uh, you know, of the ones you close, what made the difference? If I have no understanding of that now I'm being asked that now I'm going to spend a bunch of time trying to dig, dig through and look for patterns and all these sorts of things. But if it was a part of the process for me to fill in fields that would later tell me what are those things? And I could even just export those fields to be like, oh, yeah, these were the patterns that I saw. Like, it's simple things that really do. Once the change is in place, you look back and you're like, how did we ever function before that? How did we ever get anything done before we put this process in place? And that is what happens every single time. There is not a single time where I've ever worked with a client or even internally and put in a process that would help everyone. That was very intentional. Like, and that is sort of the disclaimer like, you can't be all haphazard and just over engineer or put process in the. In place for the sake of process. But wherever it is very intentional, it is always effective. And once people start using it, it's very much like, oh my God, how, how did we not do this before?

Speaker A: Yeah, oh, uh, a little bit of work, uh, ptsd. I remember many meetings of, um, getting those processes in place and then, um, someone refusing to do it and like throwing up the, like, oh, well, it's a new process. I don't know, I'm just going to email them, like outside of the process. And so it is that, that change transformation where you do have to get that like buy in or not behavior change too.

Speaker B: Um, and that's where it's Important as the executive to push that change top down. Because if it is known that it's unacceptable to do that, then people won't, you know, we, internally, if someone's going outside of the process, we're not, you know, anal or rude about it, but it's like, hey, here's your answer. And we use guru to document things. Here's the link to the guru card with the steps, like, FYI, this should have gone through slack or this should have, you know, whatever. And nobody is in their feelings about that. It's not like anybody's like, you're doing the wrong thing, like, but it very much is. We are a process oriented organization. Um, and therefore the process matters. And when someone is straying from that, it is a known accountability to be like, here's what you need and here's how this should flow. And as an executive team, we demonstrate that we encourage people to call us out if we're not following the process. And so this is where it really does. As leaders, we have to enforce that. Because if people are comfortable not changing, if they know that change is optional, they're not going to change. Like, change is hard. People don't like changing. They're comfortable with what they know. Even if, with, even if what they know sucks, they're still comfortable in it. And so if they're not pushed to move in the right direction, the whole organization stalls. And when the whole organization stalls, that also means revenue is impacted.

Speaker A: Yes, just strong. Yes. Uh, that's like such a mic drop thing. Um, because it's so true. Like I'm sitting here envisioning the clip of this. Like that is. Yes, like that is exactly. It is. That culture is what is enforced. And if you don't enforce it from the top down, you get what you got. And that doesn't mean that you won't make any revenue. It just means that you are missing out on such a significant chunk of revenue that you could have easily made that, you know, for, you know, that's people's jobs and livelihoods, you know, that that could end up laid off, that could end up getting a bonus if it went right. You know, like these are, there's, there's impact on, you know, not just work happiness, but like financial, uh, gains or losses or you know, like big things. And, and sometimes, you know, it's just, it's, it's that discipline of leadership.

Speaker B: Yes. And I know you talked about. What are some of the objections? I would say the number one objection I get from leaders. So when you're talking about people doing the job, there's all sorts of objections, but from leaders it is because changing the process, you can't always draw a direct line to revenue. It's like it's not so cut and dry of we streamline this process and because of that I can directly show this. And so it is one of those things where you do you have to. I always believe in looking at benchmarks, but it goes beyond just the revenue benchmarks. Look at what's the output per person or what, you know, how much, if it's developing content, how much, how m many more people are we able to get to that? Like you have to kind of look at how can we more anecdotally recognize the impact that we're having? Because there is is no direct line metric of we streamline this process or we, you know, improve this and therefore it is this directly. It happens incrementally over time and those things show up all over the place. There's not like one, you know, it's not like one number. We can be like oh yeah, that's it. And so that lack of direct line of you know, pointing to revenue coupled with the effort that it takes to make change is where it's like, ah, we'll just, we'll keep doing what we're doing. And it's like, it's so short sighted. And you're right, it does lead to people's livelihoods because the first thing that happens when revenue is down is we start cutting things. So you either cut programs or you cut people or sometimes you cut both. And cutting, it's not like you cut and all of a sudden there's more revenue. It's like you just, you're improving your expenses but you're also not increasing the revenue. And so we can't just, you know, cut cost and think that magically less people, less budget is going to produce more revenue. And so it's one of those things that you really have to sort of take the risk or recognize that like this really is impactful. Even if you can't draw a clear line and actually do the things bring the people together. Because that is leadership. Like it's not about doing the easy things. Like when you're an individual contributor, you got to have the skills to do the specific thing. When you're a leader, you have to lead. You have to figure out how do you move all the pieces within the organization to get the most out of everything. The people, the dollars, uh, all of it. And it's like that is the job. And it's so easy to like, not lean into efficiency because that's not the sexy word. That's not the thing that is. You know, it's not run more programs or send more emails where you're like, see, we did a thing. You know, it's being able to communicate to the CEO or to the board why you're investing the time in streamlining this process and improving these things and feeling confident of being able to stand on that effort, that it's going to actually have impact. And that takes guts. And a lot of people just aren't there.

Speaker A: Yeah, they, they, there's a number of reasons. You know, one, maybe they aren't there with confidence in their choices to, um, their fear of retaliation. Um, you know, there's, there's lots of reasons because people are complicated. But as you're talking, um, one of the things that, ah, you know, was coming to mind was also, you know, the, um, the idea that it's. The lagging indicators are lagging. Sure, you, you can't direct. Draw a direct line, but what you can do is, you know, look at the number, like the output within a day. You know, oh, we used to get this much done and now we get this much done, like of the task or whatever. Um, you can look at cash conversion cycles, you can look at retention, you can look at customer satisfaction scores, you can look at employee satisfaction, but all of those are lagging. You are not going to see, hey, today Brandy said this and we implemented this, and then tomorrow, boom, money, right? Like, it's not, it's not piggy bank. Um, so, you know, there's, there's that hard part is, is the, uh, you know, you spoke about like the leadership and the discipline and like that is the job, but so is the patience.

Speaker B: Yes. And I would say I, I'd give it more thought to say it's the biggest weakness. But as you're saying that, I would say it's definitely in the top three biggest weaknesses of leaders is being able to play the short and long game. Like, yes, there are things that you do need to do to move certain levers in the short term, but you can't only be playing the short game. Like, there is a component of patience and consistency that is required in order to really make organizational change.

Speaker A: Yeah, that incrementality builds up over time and if you have no incrementality, then, you know, a year from now, nothing's been built up. It just, it's, it's the tiny one stop in front of the other to the marathon instead of, you know, waking up and teleporting through it.

Speaker B: Yeah. Which, that would be great.

Speaker A: Should be cool. I love that. Supposedly I will do that for us, but that's not the real world.

Speaker B: Oh, yeah, Magic.

Speaker A: Speaking of magic, if you were to think about kind of where the future of marketing is going, um, versus, you know, where you think it should go, kind of like, what does that. What does that bring to mind?

Speaker B: So m. In most periods of my career, I would have a very strong opinion on this. Right now, my very strong opinion is we can't really say. Like, we are in a period where things are changing so fast and so rapid that I think so much of what's going to happen is so speculative. Like, there is, you mentioned AI. That is obviously a huge thing. And figuring out what role AI plays in marketing and where are the humans required and what can we accomplish with technology versus what do we need with humans? And how is the AI revolution going to impact the buyer and how buyers want to buy? Like, people speculate that at some point it'll be AI agents selling to AI agents and that the humans no longer involved. I don't know that, you know, that we're necessarily going to get there, but I am confident that it's going to change drastically and career progression is going to change drastically. There's, you know, I've heard people throw out different theories around what that could look like, and most of them are plausible, some of them are way left. But for the most part, it's kind of like I could see that happening. And, you know, people compare it to like, the Internet and when we first got the Internet and how it was projected to change, but nothing has moved as fast and has created so much change as AI. So my future of marketing prediction is it is going to look drastically different than it does today. But I don't actually have a strong feeling of what that's going to be. I enjoy the debates. That's one conversation I enjoy debating with people on. Like, this is going to be this way, this is going to be that way. Because there's a lot of thoughts and theories that could potentially have legs, but I don't know that any of us can really fathom what it's going to be.

Speaker A: I think that's so fair. It is so turbulent. It's like being inside, um, a whirlpool. There's so much air in the water and there's no way of knowing. Um, it's cool. It is fun to speculate. It's so much fun. Yes.

Speaker B: It's great dinner conversation.

Speaker A: Yeah. There's so much cool stuff going on. Um, so. So I respect that you're. You're kind of in that, like, neutral zone. Um, you know, I. I agree that there is a lot of. Of things on the table and players on the board. Um, and it's just a matter of. We'll see. It depends. All right, well, that brings me to our last question that I'm so excited to hear your answer from. I am. What is a question that someone should ask you, but they don't?

Speaker B: Um, I'm really glad that you told me this question in advance, because I had to give some really good thought to what that is, because as a consultant, obviously, I get asked a lot of questions all of the time. Um, but the one that I rarely, and I would say rarely as an almost never get asked, that more people should ask is what separates change that sticks from change that just gets talked about? Because, I mean, and largely our whole conversation has been about this. But most people and, um, you know, outside of, like, change management consultants and, you know, all the formal training, I'm talking about more practical, like, how things actually work and not textbook. It is one that, having gone through so many transitions with different clients over the last 11 years, I've seen so many things of what moves and what stalls and how often people come back to things. And overall, I would say, you know, that difference is whether you've mapped out the path that change has to take and identified where the friction's going to come in and planned for the friction, and when that happens. And this is, again, why a lot of people bring us in to help with these marketing changes, because we are thinking through those things. But when that happens, you can always move forward at an intentional pace. Now, never say it can be fast. Some organizations have the culture to move faster, and, you know, they have a culture of change, and that works. Some organizations, it's like turning a cruise ship. Like, we need a whole mile in order to make that turn. But, like, really, even just talking about specific changes, it's something people usually never ask. And it is definitely a clear line between actually having change happen and just talking about it. Yeah.

Speaker A: Yeah. And that's, you know, why I think more leaders need to think about, like, the psychology of change and behavior change. Because I think that from what I've seen in, you know, my background is, like, that's the one thing that makes me the most effective is, is knowing how people operate and how to adjust behaviors. And if you if you know where the friction part is, like adherence and follow through and how long it takes. It takes to create a new habit and how people learn through multiple, multiple touches and methods and things. Um, you know, you can identify those friction points and you can see pretty quick that like, hey everybody, uh, this is hr let's just have this sexual harassment webinar. And uh, we've checked it off our list. Like how much does that. How. Yes, please do. Absolutely, please continue doing so. Um, but the places where it's most effective is where it's ingrained in the culture. It's a conversation, it's topped down, it is repeated throughout the year, many times. Um, so yeah, I like that you called that out. Um, the friction points are the points that is the lever to pull.

Speaker B: And I think one thing that I do that sometimes makes people uncomfortable is I have no problem putting the points of friction like front and center. Like when we're doing like roadmaping or doing the four, you know, the two by two grid of like where are things to help roadmap. I actually use little icons on um, my lucid chart to identify. These are the projects where friction is going to be a factor. And in my documentation I will call out, this is the friction that we are expecting. Like it's one of those things that some people always, the fact that friction is going to happen. People want to like keep hush hush and not, you know, address head on. And we got to address things head on. Like if we know and you know, sometimes it's something as simple as I've seen a scenario where like it's a tech change and this team all was hired because they have experience in the current tech and now you're going to rip that out. Like. And so there is some career uncertainty here. If they know they were hired because they knew a thing, then you can start to feel like, okay, are they going to replace me with someone who already knows this other thing? So like that's a friction point that will exist that if we're trying to make real change, we've got to account for that in our change process. And that could look like, you know, we're going to have more training or one on one conversations. Like it looks differently. But in planning the thing, we got to call out where the friction is going to show up and plan for that and be very comfortable. Now we're not going to publish that everywhere for everybody to see. Like we called out, you're going to be worried. But at the executive level, like this is a conversation that needs to be had head on. Because it is the, it is the psychology, those little bit of, you know, those little nuances that make all the difference. Because the best laid plans get derailed by these little things if you don't plan for them.

Speaker A: Yeah. And if you have someone that's been like a certain platform champion for their whole career, maybe they don't want to learn the competitor. Maybe their preference is to continue to build years of expertise in that one, um, platform.

Speaker B: Uh, yeah, I was that person. I started my career in marketing automation using Eloqua. And as it lost its dominance in the market, like, the thought of trying something else, it almost felt like cheating. Like, I can't do that. And so it is. There is this thing and you know, you have to come to the point of like, no, like, I'm really great at this thing. It just so happens that I use that tech. That tech does not define me. And so it is, as a leader having those conversations. But it's funny. Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt you, but as you said that, I was like, oh, yeah, that was me. I was totally that person.

Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. No, I said that knowing, um, that there's a lot of people that feel that way. You know, I can think of people that went to a recent summit from one provider, um, that, like, that's, that's their, you know, that's their flag that they, they get to be like, I'm this person so much that this platform has me present at these conferences. And then if you were to have them use the competitor one. Yes. They know globally the workflows and what needs to happen, and they're very good at that. But they don't, maybe they don't want to be like, switching teams. Like, they just don't. Yeah. Um, but that's a friction point. That's the type of executive thing that you're, you're talking about and, and that goes into your entire soapbox of, you know, just the planning and the processes and, and knowing intentionally where you're trying to go. Um, so that you can figure it out.

Speaker B: Yeah, exactly.

Speaker A: Awesome. Well, um, if somebody wants to find you, what is the best way for them to get a hold of you?

Speaker B: Uh, I am super active on LinkedIn. Um, definitely let me know you saw me here, because like Most people, my LinkedIn inbox is definitely a ton of people trying to sell me something. Uh, but BRANDY STAR On LinkedIn, you will see my smiling face. Uh, and I also have a substack which is also under Brandy Star. Uh, where I share a lot more of this experience that I'm seeing with clients and being able to allow my learnings to help other people.

Speaker A: Awesome. And if you're only listening, it is Brandy with an I and star with two Rs. So I want to make sure you can spell. Um, I appreciate it. Yeah. Um, and my name, once again, Leanne, if you haven't met me. Um, thanks for listening, but, uh, my email is infoarkigmark I G y dot com. Um, it always helps me out when people, like, review, subscribe, click links, follow up with my guests, and tell them how great you thought it was. Um, everyone loves the positive reinforcement. So, um, thank you for joining me, Brandy, and I appreciate the time you spent.

Speaker B: You are welcome. I have enjoyed the discussion. Thanks for having me.

Speaker A: Thanks.