Latest / Integrity at Scale™ / The V/I Table: When Culture Rights Itself Through Turnover

Transcript

The V/I Table: When Culture Rights Itself Through Turnover · Integrity at Scale™

• Taylor and I have had three resignations in the past month. People with different hire dates, but with basically the same exit window. From the outside I think that looks like instability, but from the inside it really feels like something clarifying itself. I am Dr. Tara Vossenkemper. You are listening to the Culture Focus Practice podcast, and this is the VI Table or the Visionary Integrator Table. Our focus today is on culture writing itself through turnover. When several people leave at once, it probably feels like something is breaking and it might mean that something is breaking. But my take is that in a living system, in a living practice exit can be a form and a reflection of clarification. Taylor and I are gonna just talk through a series of questions. We'll do six questions, we'll run through a scenario, and then we will end our time with 📍 you. Oh, cool. Question one. When multiple exits cluster within a short window, what does that signal to us as visionary and integrator? So I obviously didn't know this was gonna be the topic, although a part of me assumed that we would talk, you know, just because it's relevant and I was just thinking back on like, the times when we've had resignations or we've had people leaving, particularly kind of in groups because we have, we've had kind of clustered exits from time to time. I think there's a difference between what the feeling is mm-hmm. And what it's signaling, because the feeling is panic. It feeling like it's catching, like. It's an infectious disease it's gonna permeate the rest of the staff. And we're gonna have this mass exodus, um, which obviously has implications about like Sure. The financial stability of the business, but also the morale. My initial like gut punch is always how's the staff gonna feel about this? Like, what's the team response gonna be? And it's like a nervous energy about it, but what I think it should signal, or what it like actually signals rather than what the feeling is is that there was some sort of misalignment. I think you have to dig deeper in this specific circumstance to figure out what that misalignment was. Is it a misalignment on the part of the practice, the part of the people, their roles? You know, if this is happening across like your clinical team, your ops team, it's probably not role specific. But there's something when it's not just a single person, when it's actually a group of people, a cluster. Particularly in this circumstance, a cluster of people and such quick succession. Mm-hmm. Ending around the same time. It should give you pause to reflect on like, what's the common thread. There's likely some common theme. Mm-hmm. Um, happening. But you can't know. I mean, maybe you have an inkling because you know these people, you know, and so maybe you have a guess, but just on its face you can't know like, oh, well this is obviously this thing or this thing. Mm-hmm. Um, it's like a, it's a moment to reflect on, ooh, what's happening here. There's something that wasn't a fit for some reason. Mm-hmm. Yeah. It's funny that you said panic. I think two things. I mean, I have more thoughts, but I can understand the panic. But it's interesting to me that. I have felt that panic before, but not in all cases of departure, you know what I mean? Like, I don't think that I have felt any panic in this process, like this recent resignation. I don't think there's been panic, and I don't know if that's because we also have basically the same amount of people starting. So it feels almost like a net neutral. Yeah, that I'm sure that is part of it. And also if there is something about like the signal piece where It's almost like the practice signal is more clear and so the people that want to stay will and the people that don't want to stay won't. That to me ends up feeling relieving, I think, where it's like, oh, like this is what it's designed to do. Like we're at this point now where we're getting the outcome of the intentionality of the design and like the vision and all of the stuff that we spend so much, mental and emotional energy on. I also think that if we were not as healthy as a practice, I would feel panic or maybe like we're hot off the heels of doing our annual retreat, our first ever annual retreat. And I had an incredible experience. I think the global feedback is that it was a really meaningful and, enriching and reconnecting and maybe even reparative experience for people. And it left us all with the feeling of us like, we're doing this, we're in this together. If that wasn't, you know, less than two weeks removed from the time of this recording, then maybe I also would feel panic. So it might be that there are just certain things that are in place right now that don't leave me with the feeling of like, ah, fuck, what are we gonna do? And instead it's like, oh, the signal is this is what it is supposed to happen. Like, it shouldn't be that every single person that's with us right now is gonna be with us as we continue to grow and evolve. Like my assumption is that people will leave. You've said that to me before, that you, your assumption is that people will leave. I don't know. I think that is hard for me to like remember or to latch in on. I think it's my attachment style. Mm-hmm. I'm an insecure attachment. Like that I am too. Well, historically I feel like I'm probably earned secure at this point, but yeah, historically it's preoccupied for sure. Yeah. So, Early days in particular, I was way more worried about people leaving way more, maybe panic stricken, way more like, no, stay here, you know? Yeah. And I'm not saying that I don't have feelings about the process unfolding or people leaving like it Yeah. But it, yeah. But I, I don't think panic feels like one of them at this point. I do agree with and resonate with what you were saying in terms of like, the people who wanna be here wanna be here and the people who don't, don't. And also like, I don't want people to be a part of things, if it's not the right fit for them or for us. Mm-hmm. Like if, and if they're feeling that this isn't a fit, or that something's off, then they're either gonna talk to us about that and try to problem solve because they wanna be here, or that's going to be data for them that mm-hmm this isn't for me, or they're not gonna be interested in talking with us or interested in trying to make it a fit. And that also is reflective of mm-hmm. Well, then, yeah, like, this isn't a fit for you. And there's no like, morality around that. There's no like, negativity around that. But it's this idea that like, you can't be everything for everyone. Mm-hmm. And like, we are not gonna be it for everyone. Maybe that's a controversial take, but I don't wanna be a place for every person, like where every person can be, you know? 'cause not everyone is gonna be aligned and thinking specifically in terms of like our values and our culture. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Even thinking about, the hiring process piece and like, what are the things we assess and what are the things that we currently don't that we should, that we need to be, that we need to be sort of, tweaking and trying to pay attention to, and. That in and of itself, in my mind, not only the hiring process, but also the steps within are all designed to kind of weed out the wrong people, weed out the people who don't actually fit. Whether that's like, oh shit, this is too much. I don't wanna do this, that that's the wrong fit person. Like immediately, like the process itself by nature of existing is weeding out somebody or they get into it and we're like, oh fuck, this person is super defensive. And also very little ownership, very little receptivity to feedback, very little fill in the blank, you know, whatever that is us. Like that's us saying like, oh yeah, I don't actually know if this is it. We've had people withdraw after even I feel like even seeing the outline for the skills portion of the interview, sort of the chunky one, you know, people are like, ah, this might, this is too much. I dunno if I can do this and by too much, like it's not a big ask, it's just a couple of hours. And honestly, the people who go through it and have fun, that's data in and of itself. You know, like, yeah, it should be enjoyable. Like it's talk and shop, you know, that's really all that it is. So it, I feel like, um, I don't know why I just end up thinking about the hiring process and it's like, okay, so if there are clustered resignations taking place and the signal is like. The system is cleaner, the system is more clear, and therefore there are people who see it and say like, this isn't it for me. Is there also anything about our like, hiring process and the people who are joining that we need to, you know, look at and assess and say, okay, the people who are leaving, and I think all of us do this. The people who are leaving, are they people we would hire again right now? Like, are they the right fit people? Did we miss something? Or is there something about like, them being here that didn't really fit? Did we feel that lack of fit too? So maybe that's like the question. And then from there, that kind of informs the hiring process. I don't like when people go straight into like, well, they just weren't a fit. That's them and it's almost like in a dismissive way rather than if they're not a fit and they made it into your group. What does that say about your hiring process? Like, that's on you, bro. Like that's on you. So what do you need to do to shore up some sort of process so that the person who you deem as not a fit doesn't get allowed back in? There's something in there that feels important to me. Like people leaving shouldn't be a, now we're gonna attack their character and shit on them. It should be, if you don't think they're a fit, then reflect on yourself and your own processes. It should always be a moment of reflection. Like ultimately. Mm-hmm. It is always the failure of Yes. The practice, the owner, I would say the owner, but the practice and the owner. Yes. Mm-hmm. The systems that we've put in place. Mm-hmm. Um, because either your hiring isn't shored up your onboarding could be fucked up and they felt, you know, lost or confused, not clear. There's something in your policies or your processes that aren't right. You know, there's just so many things along the way, but ultimately, whatever the reason is that the person is leaving, that's on. Us, the practice, the owner. Yeah, that's an interesting, I think that radical accountability is probably uncomfortable for people. Mm-hmm. Because it can cost a lot to be reflective or even I'm thinking the emotional cost or the time cost to be reflective it so overwhelming. Like, well if my hiring process is wrong, like where do I even start? Like how do I fix this? Maybe there's like a personality type or a tendency, that you can maybe identify like, that doesn't fit with our, or whatever. Mm-hmm. So then the question like, how do I even assess for that in the first place can feel like really big and overwhelming. And so maybe the answer is, well, they just weren't fit. They were always gonna weed themselves out. That's much easier. Like that's much easier and simpler and to use your language, like emotionally taxing, costly, yeah. To do that. Yeah. But it's also like, for me to hear that, it's like, well, fuck, I don't wanna go through, because the process to hire and onboard and then integrate someone into a system Yeah. Is so intense. Yeah. I mean, even from like the front end coordinating, you gotta coordinate schedules to get all the interviews to happen, and then you gotta coordinate them starting, and then you gotta do all this onboarding and have all of these meetings. Because really, if you're doing it well and intentionally, you're putting a lot into it. And so I think by that, the kind of flip side of that coin of like, it's emotionally taxing to reflect it's also like incredibly costly not to, because you're going to continually find yourself in this position where people who are not the right fit are getting in. And ultimately you are costing yourself money and resources because it costs a lot of money to hire and onboard people. And we are finding, we're seeing right now that hiring is already really difficult. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I think you know this about me. Maybe it's not obvious. I don't know. I would much rather front load the work so we cannot have to deal with it later on. So the idea of the hiring process, for example, if something is off with it. If there's a little whatever, we need to tweak this, we need to adjust it. It has to happen. Like, okay, then I'm gonna spend the hours that I need to right now. Plus I'm a lean into pressure animals. So for me it's like, if there's a problem, I wanna, like, what is it like, alright, let me look, you know, like, I'm gonna like push into that pressure. I think also if this happens, you have a mass exodus or a small exodus, whatever, you multiple clustered resignations and you think, oh, I need to look at my hiring process. You take the ownership of like, okay, well clearly something's off on our end. If this many people who I'm now saying like, well, they just weren't a, they were just lazy. They just weren't a fit. They just blah, blah blah. This is on me. Then like, okay, well I need to do something on my end. From that point, what I don't think that equals is mass overhaul of what is. It just can mean that you look at the process and figure out is there a place where I can like pepper in an additional thing that we're currently missing? How did these people who I, again, I'm saying am not a fit, get through the process, at what point could we have potentially caught that they were less of a fit than what we initially thought? You know, it's like, you don't need to do you, I, we like, there's no need for a mass overhaul. I think it just means like, well if you've got a signal that something is working, but you still don't really feel like these folks should be hired again, let's say then maybe it's both. You might be relieved, let's say about the resignations and also still wanting to look at the hiring process to figure out there's something missing. What is it? Yeah. Like something slightly off. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think anyone should shift into like throwing the baby out with the bath water mode. Yes. Yeah. We gotta overhaul everything. Like speaking from experience, like I think. On the whole, our hiring and onboarding Awesome. Is great. Yeah. We've been very intentional about it. We put a lot of work into it. But that also just goes to say like, there is always space for refinement and tuning and tweaking and being responsive to what is the feedback? What is the data telling us? Mm-hmm. Like, let's look at the picture and if we need to make a fix or a change or an adjustment, we should. Yeah. And also as your practice grows, you're gonna have to continue to make tweaks. Like, I don't think it's set. I think it's like as your practice grows and evolves, then you're probably gonna have to keep tweaking, like making micro adjustments to processes that feel stable. I feel like that could honestly be a whole topic. Mm-hmm. For another time. 'cause I'm just thinking like even in , a recent mastermind, what I was feeling was frustration on the part of someone who was basically like, well, I just created this thing and now I guess I'm just gonna have to redo it. And essentially we're working from the assumption that it's, once you create it, you don't have to go back to it again. Mm-hmm. And that's missing the point entirely. It's actually inverse of that. Like, everything that we create should be. Steady. Mm-hmm. And consistent, but also like your word permeable or flexible. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Nothing is off the table. Everything is open for refinement change, getting rid of, I mean, sometimes you do need to get rid of things. So anyway, that came to mind of like, yeah, if that's the perspective you're operating from, you're just setting yourself up for heartbreak. You're always going to be very frustrated and very overwhelmed. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Agreed. Yeah. The word dynamic comes to mind, like, your system should be dynamic where they're always responsive, not that it's set in stone. You know, that doesn't 📍 fit. Okay. Question number two. How do we tell the difference between instability and calibration? I think it starts with creating the foundation, mm-hmm. Of being dynamic to use your word, and setting that up as an expectation with everyone involved. Like being really clear about how we are going to be constantly, like nothing's off the table and not only are you telling people and setting that up as an expectation, but you're also like demonstrating that. Mm-hmm. Over time. Like a small, kind, funny example is that not 30 minutes after I sent out the updated final 2026, policy and procedure in clinical handbook to the team we came up with new changes to it. Mm-hmm. Minimal, but still like adjustments to what was just sent out. Yeah. Mm-hmm. When I sent the documents out to the team or let them know that they were gonna be coming their way, I said like, these are subject to change. Mm-hmm. And I said, I in fact changed something just before sending this out. Mm-hmm. And you will probably be getting updates from me in the next month. And so it's like, if that's it, that's it. Like it's mm-hmm. It's naming what it is. It's demonstrating that in action. And I think it's also just understanding that too from like a leadership perspective or like a, a vi perspective that that's not a reflection of failure or mm-hmm. That you weren't thorough or thoughtful the first time around. Mm-hmm. It's like that unknown third variable. There's always gonna be something that either we haven't thought of or hasn't come up because it hasn't been relevant or, you know, whatever. Yeah. And so I think calibration is being open. Ready to receive whatever data is coming in, and then being able to use that data to make a decision. I think to be clear, that data and that decision doesn't always have to mean change. Mm-hmm. Sometimes you can take in that piece of information or that piece of data, and you take it in, you think about it, and it doesn't result in any kind of change. Yeah. The difference is that calibration is possible only when you're coming from a foundation of intentionality. So if I'm bringing this into like, more concrete terms, like our values or being really firm and clear about your core values, which is not to say they don't change because mm-hmm. Ours do and have. Yeah. But I'm thinking like the core values, the purpose, the niche, like your focus. You have your foundation there and you have your foundation in terms of like, I think even too, like processes and policies. Mm-hmm. Again, open for refinement, open to change at any point. And also relatively foundational and stable consistent. Yes. Mm-hmm. And so you cannot have calibration. I think about calibration is always in relation to a baseline. So you have to have a baseline to be able to calibrate. If you don't have that baseline, then it is just instability. It is just like being reactive rather than responsive. Mm-hmm. That creates instability. This thing happened, I'm gonna make this change. This person doesn't like this thing, we're gonna change this. Yeah. That's the thing. It's not letting the data or the feedback control you mm-hmm. But letting it be a piece of the puzzle that you're looking at entirely. And so maybe that piece of the puzzle actually changes. Oh, I was looking at it from this direction, but now with this piece of the puzzle, I see that maybe my point of view, my vantage point should be different. And so then I can calibrate in that way. Maybe all calibration starts as instability because there isn't really anything that you're comparing it. Like there is no baseline. Even way back when, like in the beginning stages of the practice, I think it probably was way more unstable. Like it felt like much more instability. And then as processes got clarified, and honestly I feel like EOS is a huge part of. Us having a consistent structural foundation. Sort of like an externalized system in place. The ability to like contain them, like language them operationalize, like give examples, now, they're contained and like they live here and these are all the different ways in which they influence us. I agree with everything that you're saying. And I think it's like, oh yeah, no, EOS gave us the ability to have this foundation. And then from there we have like a cross-reference point. We have this canvas, we have this like, oh, we know what this design looks like. We have something in place that we all know like what it is and what to expect. And even if we have strong feelings about something, like let's say the clustered resignation happens and we all fly into a panic, it's almost like it doesn't matter because we're not gonna react to the panic. We're gonna go back to the system itself and say, okay, well let's. Look at this. Do we need to do anything different? What's in place? What did we miss? What do we need to do? Is there something to fit? We're gonna look at the system itself rather than respond to how we are reacting or how we theoretically would've reacted or did react or whatever. I think what you're saying is that, that there might be some instability and it probably will actually initially start. Yeah. It probably is gonna start that way. And there are things, you can do and resources and tools you can utilize to bring some stability into that. Yeah. Um, instability. But over time actually that will turn into calibration as you're able to create more of these. Structures, whether that be your hiring process or your people clarifying your roles, your accountability chart, like maybe the hiring process is great, but you don't really have anyone at the helm of it. And so it's being applied but as your business grows and as you thoughtfully work on creating structure and stability, that it becomes more calibration than instability. Yeah. And you know, what I'm just thinking about is the process when you start to shift. There's this question, I've implemented EOS and, um, holy shit. Like now there's all this stuff happening and it feels a little bit chaotic. It's a transitional phase where you're going from, let's say not very much clarity, groundedness, foundational stuff, structure, et cetera. You implement some structure and then it feels like everything catches on fire. And you're putting out fires and then all of a sudden you've got these like clustered resignations. My thought is at that point, if I was in that space, or people who might be in that space, they might say or feel. This is not fucking working. Like this is way worse. And my thought is, but it's not because now you have a signal that the start of what you're doing is effective. Like these people who are leaving probably would not wanna be part of a well-oiled machine, a well run practice, a practice where there is accountability and there is structure, and there is clear expectations and, you know, dot, dot, dot fill in the blank. So it feels like instability and maybe chaos. But the reality is like, no, this is actually the start of you doing the, I don't wanna say quote right, things, you know, end quote, but kind of like the start of you doing things that are better for the group and the practice, and quite frankly, your fucking mental health insanity. Yeah. It's the concept essentially of like when you start putting up boundaries, oh gosh, gosh, it's going to, you know, it's gonna reveal essentially people in your life who can hang with boundaries and who can respect and appreciate a boundary and the people who can't. Yeah. And so that initial period might feel like this is coming out of the woodwork, or maybe this isn't the right boundary. Maybe, you know, maybe whatever. When in actuality, no, that actually is really beneficial for the long-term health of your practice. Mm-hmm. And it's kind of like, I think in terms of, this specific situation with, I'm not talking about like our specific people, but when you have people leaving an organization, there is a flavor of like people weeding themselves out to it. Mm-hmm. Like if you're really clear about who you are and someone doesn't like that, then they're not gonna wanna be around it. Mm-hmm. They might fight against it, they might try to change it, they might try to push back, they might try to make a fit for themselves in it, but ultimately mm-hmm. They're not gonna have a good time, you know? I mean, neither are you. And so ultimately, ideally, honestly, that person kind of weeds themselves out, kind of realizes, hey, this actually isn't for me and I'm gonna go find what is. Mm-hmm. And this is not the, the purpose of this podcast today, but also I think the flip side of that is that sometimes. The vi the leadership has to make that determination. Oh yeah, sure. You know what I mean? Mm-hmm. You're not always gonna be in a situation where people are really self-aware and reflective and decide this isn't for me. Mm-hmm. Sometimes leadership has to come to that point before the person can get there. Mm-hmm. But yeah. I think when you're clear about who you are and what you're about, ultimately that's going to be the like, oh, I think about when we calibrating factor. Yeah. That is the calibrating factor. Mm-hmm. It makes me think about when we were making some changes to the accountability chart in clarifying a leadership team member's role. And we essentially started putting more things in place of this is what this role actually means, and this is what we need out of this role. And that person, they left because they didn't want that talk about, you know, EOS that gets it once it has capacity. Mm-hmm. They didn't want that. And so that person kind of self-selected out as we became more clear about what the rule was and what we expected out of it. Yeah. Yeah. 📍 Okay, next question number three, what does right people, right seats actually mean when a practice grows and matures? Also clarifying right seats is taken directly from traction and EOS, which may or may not be a Gino Wickman concept. I don't know if you got that from like Jim Collins or something. I don't remember. But we absolutely use right people, right seats at our organization. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I think it actually takes on kind of a new flavor or a different flavor when in context of the organizational growth because it's that same piece of like nothing is off the table. Yeah. I'm thinking about someone who been the right person. Someone who is a values fit understands the values, exemplifies the values, is on board, like, you know, wants to be a part of that. Mm-hmm. Um and the seat is clear. We've defined the role. We've put parameters in terms of like compensation, expectations, everything. And that person is like, hell yeah. This person is the right fit. Mm-hmm. For this practice and for this seat. The seat is clear. The person is right, right person, right seat wash forward three years down the road, maybe the needs of the practice have changed, and that role needs to evolve. Yeah. Or maybe it needs to go away. Yeah. Then you have to to use the word of the day, calibrate. And I think that this is where EOS helps a person diffuse from the emotionality of it all. Mm-hmm. Um, because it kind of just puts things in really black and white terms of analyzing. First is the seat, right? Are we sure that this is the right seat? So maybe you're making adjustments to the seat, boom, the rule is different. Maybe we're having some added responsibilities, maybe we're changing some responsibilities. Mm-hmm. And then you determine like, yeah, that is the new seat. So then you kind of have to start over and see, okay, now with this new seat, is this person the right person? The right person for the seat? Yeah. Maybe nothing has changed in terms of Yeah. They are definitely still the right person for our role culturally. Mm-hmm. Culturally. Yeah. We're the same as we always have been. Nothing's changed in that regard. Mm-hmm. But is that person still the right fit for that seat? Yeah. Um, and the answer might be no. Yeah. And so then, yeah, that's a really uncomfortable place to be. Mm-hmm. Then you basically have to decide, well, is there a seat for this person? Hopefully there is. Yeah. Hopefully that makes sense. And then that can be an easy, relatively pivot, but maybe not, maybe there's not a seat for that person and so they might be culturally the right fit for your practice. Mm-hmm. But there's not a seat for them. Yeah. That actually makes sense. Oh yeah. That's a rough place to be. Right people write seats. It always, um, I'm gonna say it's the same. And by that I mean the concept is the same across the board. Like regardless of how big or small you are, how much you grow and evolve, the notion of right people, right seat remains the same. The seats will change, period. The seats are gonna change as you grow. In my mind that's part of being like dynamic and alive, is you can't start with these five roles and expect that to carry you to the fucking promised land. You know, it's like no. If you want your organization to, you know, grow times five, those five seats are not gonna be the same, when you get to that point. And also they're not going to be the only seats that you know are in place. You're gonna need more. In essence. I love this. I like the idea of this seat. The accountability chart. The arrangements we have right now are responsive to our needs, like responsive to the needs of the group, and also the stages of growth that we are either approaching or actively in. You know? I think what I'm thinking about, like what's coming up for me is of course, the seat itself can change over time. Even let's just say integrated role or visionary role, like, the major responsibilities, sort of the main functions, I had at the inception of taking on this title, and same for integrator, are absolutely different now than they were when that started. And there's some stuff that's the same, but like also different. Like the role itself is very different in practice. So you have the seats themselves, not only can they evolve and change or maybe even like get split up. So now one seat becomes two and you have like counterparts to something. But then when we're talking about Right people, we are of course talking about culturally is this person a right person, a right person right now, might not be a right person in a couple years. Like it could be that their needs and wants have changed, like their desire to be a part of a group, their desire to be in the role itself. So could be values wise, if you were to do like a values analysis, you still get all, you know, they're exceeding baseline expectations. But then when we get to gwc, that gets it once at capacity to do it. That's specifically about person in seat. And so it might be that they get it, they don't want it, or maybe they don't have capacity 'cause of life circumstances, you know? Or it could be that, like what Taylor was saying. The seed has evolved in such a way that we say this person is not the right person for that seat. Like their unique ability doesn't fit there. Like that's not it. So what does right people, right seat actually mean when a practice grows and matures? I don't know if I like the language of this question. I think it just means that we remain flexible, like our accountability chart and the people who are within the various seats of the practice, all of it is not up in the air. It's nebulous, you know, but it's like up in the air in terms of it's flexible. What is right now will not be, if we double in size, like it's gonna be absolutely different. And that, that's expected. Like I just did this accountability chart. Now I have to like re-up it and it sort of feels like I'm failing at doing this. I don't necessarily like commitments. So for me, the idea of like setting an accountability chart and like, that's it forever oh my God. That's harder than setting one for right now, knowing that next quarter we can just look and make adjustments if we need to. Like, it's responsive, you know, it's alive in the same way that the practice is. I think that if you typically have a cultural fit, it's more likely that the person doesn't want the seat anymore or their circumstances have changed to the extent that they don't have the capacity to do that seat anymore. That's really what it kind of feels like. Or if the seat changes enough and evolves enough, they might not have the capacity to do the other thing that you're now wanting. I appreciate that distinction, because that's actually a counterpoint, honestly, to what we were talking about at the beginning, which is that it's always a reflection on you as the practice owner or as the leadership team or whatever, when someone decides to leave. And I think that this is kind of like a caveat to which is that it might not actually, especially in terms of a cultural fits. Mm-hmm. If they were a cultural fit through and through and circumstances change, life, circumstances change, you know, whatever capacity, like you're saying, I think it just is. Yeah. Yeah. Mm-hmm. It just is Or whatever's going on in that person's life like, just like we wanna be responsive to the data and the feedback, the idea of the living practice. Mm-hmm. We are all also people who are existing in an ever changing world. Yeah. I'm a great example. . What my life looked like and my expectations for my roles in my job when I started here five years ago. Very different than where I'm at now. Three children later. Yeah. Yeah. Three unexpected children later. Life happens. I'm gonna also piggyback and say, I'm glad you're bringing this up because it does feel important to maybe clarify that with that first question. The signal or the multiple people leaving, et cetera. And you know, an owner saying something like they just weren't fits anyway. That hardcore is cultural in my opinion. Having that response and they just weren't fits anyway. That's not about the system or the structure at all. It's a clean break almost, you know? But like, well, that they weren't a cultural fit. Okay, then that's on you, bro. Like that is on you. If you're letting people who aren't cultural fits in, that's your responsibility. Yeah. So I appreciate you saying that. And then I was like, Ooh, maybe let me clarify here that I do think there is a distinction. I agree with you. There's a distinction between a cultural fit and needing to like, you know, assess your processes versus there's a seat that's evolved and the person doesn't want it anymore. That's very different. There might need to be like, nothing. It could be like, god damn, like this is calibration. Like, we need to do this thing and this person doesn't want the seat. There are great cultural fit. Well, you know, sorry. Yeah. Like so long. Yeah. Yeah. That's, that part stinks. That part. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Okay. I'm gonna keep 📍 going. question number four. Where does informal influence operate alongside formal structure in any organization? Mm mm. I'm thinking about this in kind of two parts. Like informal influence coming from or on the part of leadership and also, being intentional around culture and morale. I think that becomes some of the informal influence, but also some of the formal influence is kind of the flip side of that. We are all parts of a whole, so there's like the whole, but then we're all parts of the whole and so I'm thinking about maybe someone who actually isn't a cultural fit. Maybe you thought they were, but turns out that they're not. Mm-hmm. So, you know, something about your screening process, your filtration process was off. That person can informally influence the people around them. And so I'm thinking about that. It kind of is both like from the side of like the practice having informal influence, um, but also the people within the practice informally influencing each other. Yes. I think sometimes I hate to be a fence setter, but I think sometimes you can create informal influence through your structure, your formal structure. Yeah. So I'm thinking about, for example, as part of our onboarding process, we have our DCO. So we have people, they watch videos. But then they also have weekly hour long touch points with our DCO. And the advertised formal purpose of that is to like, integrate whatever they're learning or picking up from the onboarding. But I think some of the informal influence that comes into play alongside of that formal structure is the relationship that starts to develop Yeah. With that employee. Probably, hopefully. And this is not an unintended consequence. This is a intended on purpose. Consequence. On purpose. Yeah. Like it's intentional. Yep. But ideally they're feeling seen and appreciated and like, you matter here, you're not just a number. Mm-hmm. Like we could just shove you in a room and say, watch all these videos and let us know if you have questions. But our DCO or director of clinical operations takes the time to meet with them weekly for an hour at least to make sure that questions are being asked and answered. So it's like we have these formalized structures in place mm-hmm. That are for the benefit of, like, I'm thinking of our clinical team leads. It's a support structure. And while there are often formalized responsibilities or tasks that those CTLs are engaging in, it's also this net like continuing to create this net of connection. Yep. Amongst and between staff. Mm-hmm. Um, and so I think I don't know if I'm like really answering your question, at least I am in my brain. Yeah. Yeah. I think you are. But I think your, your formal structure can and should have a lot of informal influence baked in, in terms of like culture and morale. And some of that comes from having the right people in the right seat just by osmosis, there's gonna be a lot of informal influence kind of in the way that we want. It's essentially saying like, we are all a part of this, this is what we believe in. Mm-hmm. Um, and it's not like, let me give you a lecture on our values, but over time they're seeing the evidence of our values playing out in interactions in the hallway or mm-hmm. At the top of meetings before the agenda starts. And we're all just chit chatting, or maybe in some of like the formal structures. At the retreat, an employee shared a story with me about a recent interaction that they had with our DCO regarding retention. And the employee said, like, I came in with a lot of anxiety and a lot of basically like ready to fight. They like have a lot of feelings and thoughts around retention. Mm-hmm. And so they kind of came in ready to  not have a great meeting essentially. Mm-hmm. And the way that our DCO approached by basically saying like, here's what the data's telling me. What do you think about all of this? Totally disarmed this employee. And this story came up because the prompt was what was your proudest moment of the year? And this was what they shared. They shared that this meeting with our DCO was their proudest moment of the year because they felt totally disarmed by the DCO and the way that she approached this topic of retention. And so my point in saying all of this is the formal structure was we're meeting about retention. Mm-hmm. The number was off, let's talk about it. But the informal influence is the way that she approached having this conversation with this employee in a way that reflected our values. And also I think that we have our core values, but then I think there's kind of a subsection of leadership values or leadership approach in terms of LMA and how we are engaging with people. Yeah. Yeah. That was reflective in this meeting in the way that the employee felt heard and seen mm-hmm. And cared for. And not just like you're in trouble. Mm-hmm. You're a little kid and I'm gonna talk to you about why you're in trouble. Mm-hmm. This person felt like a mutually respected peer. Like, let's talk about this number and let's talk about this number in context of your entire practice. Yeah. I think, when I read this question, where does informal influence operate alongside formal structure in any organization? My immediate response was everywhere. Like it operates fucking everywhere. And to me, this speaks to the importance of bringing the right people on and ensuring that you have at least culturally like GWC setting that aside cultural fit. You need the right fucking people because there's gonna be informal influence that's everywhere like that that to me is something that is entirely uncontrollable. Like the extent to which it happens, how it emerges. Like I don't have any idea who's gonna, have influence or not. I don't know. I have no idea. But what we can do, and this is then sort of getting at what you were talking about, what can we do? Well, we bring the right people on. So even if there is informal influence, if we trust that the people who are with us are with us, they know where we're going, they're on board, they align with our values, they live them out actively, they want to be a part of it. They wanna be here. I don't give a fuck if they've influenced good. Have influence, please, like influence anybody who joins us. I want more of that, you know, but also what do I know that is important or what do I think is important? Well, I think the belongingness is important. So even in our onboarding process, that's what we designed it for. That was one of the core things that we designed it for is belongingness and safety. That's on purpose because we wanna make sure that people feel they're with us, like you're with us now. That feels like also informal influence. So I absolutely agree with you. I think it is from the structures that you have in place, and also I think that. You get it from the people that you have too. Yes. Which speaks to the importance of having the right people a part of your business, like hiring the right people basically. Yeah. There's like that number or whatever, like you spend more time Oh. With the people at work than you do with your own family. Yeah. Like if you're working like a traditional mm-hmm. You know, nine to five, 40 hour, week, whatever. Mm-hmm. Um, whether or not statistically like that lines up, we are spending, your employees, the members of your practice are spending a significant amount of time with each other. And Yeah. We're talking about from the perspective of the visionary integrator, we are not the people that they're spending the most time with. No, not at all. Yes, we are in fact having the least amount of time. I mean, ideally if you have all of the supports in place to do the work that you need to do as the vi Yeah. You're spending the least amount of time with people. Yeah. And so it almost just further highlights the importance of being really clear about who is a cultural fit and making sure that your filtration system is like, I think about we're having concerns about like our water at our house, and we have like a whole house filter, but we also have yeah, a reverse osmosis filter for our drinking water and it refines it down to like the smallest particle possible and like is your filtration, like a butterfly net and then it's just like a lot of shit getting through, or is it like an RO filter where it's literally down to the whatever in particle is being filtered out so that you're truly only getting the purest form of your water. I think that's to kind of come full circle what I was trying to get at, at the beginning in terms of like, you have the influence through the intentionality behind the formal structures. Yeah. And also from the way in your words, that leadership or people who are more plugged into formal structures, approach things from a perspective of like belongingness. Mm-hmm. But you also have the informal influence that is always going to be at play. Just amongst the Yes, amongst the people. We're constantly influencing each other all the time. Think about how the more time you spend with people, you can like start to pick up some of their mannerisms. Yeah. It's happening constantly. Yeah, I know. I've picked up, you know, some of yours. Yeah. Um, it's like we're constantly being influenced by the people around us, for better or for worse. Yeah. Yeah. And so you wanna have good people, good people, meaning like cultural fits, rightness of fit. When you don't have that, then there's the possibility that that influence is starting to seep outwards as well in terms of any number of things, can be influencing other stuff. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah. It sort of feels like, how do you set things up in such a way that you trust the system that you've designed, including the people that you've brought on because there's no way to control it all. You know what I mean? So it's like, okay, well it said earlier something about, I like to front load the work. I think this is part of, like I don't know about like a reason why, 'cause I think I'd be prone to doing it anyway, but this is one of the benefits in my mind, well, if I front load this and I'm real thoughtful and intentional here, then down the line, I don't have to worry as much about that. Like, if we have all the right people here. I don't have to worry about toxicity seeping through the practice. It's likely not gonna happen, if all the right people are in place. Yeah. Yeah. There's also like a protective factor too that like, if something does kind of get through the filtration process. If the majority of your staff are the right fit, they're not gonna be influenced. Yeah. Or they're gonna see this thing for what it is. Yeah. Um, or even like try to counter influence. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I know we have staff who are very, like, hyper aware of the environment and the effect that people in the environment have on the environment and on each other and mm-hmm. It's also that idea of like pro-social behavior. You know, you put kids with like higher levels of that behavior with kids who have lower levels of that behavior and their influence. It kind of brings up the average. Yeah. I think it also can't bring down the high achievers in terms of pro-social behavior. I don't know if that's true or not. Oh, I don't know. I would be surprised, but I don't know. But yeah. But overall, it brings up the average. It's a positive influence on those, you know? Mm-hmm. I don't know the right words, but underachievers, lower performers, whatever. Yeah. I wanted to say this like keeps popping in my head. There's something here also about. Autonomy and micromanagement. Like, if we can be intentional about design and then fit people, you know, that means there is less need to micromanage. I'm not going to micromanage. I can't even manage myself. Like, I'm not gonna be able to micromanage people. We don't need to micromanage people because we have the system info. And that's not to say we don't need to manage period. Of course, leadership and management, you know, getting accountability, but management is not the same thing as micromanagement. And the more we micromanage the less  autonomous people feel, I want people to feel and have autonomy. I want them to have some freedom to be able to have informal influence and experience, you know, make decisions within the realms of like these constraints or within the confines of this system. I don't want control over everything. Like I want system. Yeah. Shared ownership to be Yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It started with you. Yeah. And then the people grew and the place grew and it became mm-hmm. A collective, it became more group ownership in terms of, you know, I think you've even said this before to our team. Like, it's not just the responsibility of leadership to maintain and uphold the values. It's actually, it's all of us. We all have a responsibility. Yes. We all have a part in like, making sure this continues to be a place that people wanna be in, and that we're all holding up these values and living out these 📍 values. Yeah. Okay. Let's do one more question. So instead of doing six, we'll do one more question, then we'll shift to scenario. How do we avoid reacting by tightening control or adding unnecessary structure? This is after like the clustered resignations, 'cause that's, you know, the theme for the day. So how do we avoid reacting by tightening control or adding unnecessary structure? I love this question. Yeah. 'cause I think for a lot of people, that might be, the automatic reaction Response. Yeah. The response is, well, we've gotta. Again, we gotta make a change. We gotta do something different, because we gotta prevent this from happening again. Yeah. Whether that's because of, you know, these were people I really valued, this is gonna be a loss to our team in terms of culture or in terms of leadership or experience, or like a big part of that potentially is also the financial hit that mm-hmm. Especially a cluster of resignations might have on the practice. But you know me, I'm always gonna take it back to parenting. Like, what do we know about effectiveness? Authoritarian parenting is not effective. And it's certainly a tightening approach, a fear response mm-hmm. Is definitely not gonna be effective. In terms of a good leadership with adults, I mean, like people know what it is. People are gonna smell it, they're gonna feel it when a response or when something is born out of fear. Mm-hmm. Adding unnecessary structure like that just sounds like a nightmare to me because ultimately when you're adding unnecessary and additional structure, that's who maintains it. Yeah. It's you. Yeah. Uhhuh. So it's like well now I've got more to upkeep in the policy manual. Yeah. Now I've gotta train people on this new structure. I gotta implement it and I gotta explain it, sort of, you know, a tracking system in place, you gotta track it. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah. But I'm also thinking, you would really have to sell me on a specific situation for me to say, like, adding structure is probably the right response. Mm-hmm. Especially in terms of what we're talking about. Like someone leaving. what kind of structure would you add other than I think maybe adding structure in terms of something with your hiring process. Well, I think the question is more about avoiding it, like how do you avoid tightening control or how do you avoid adding unnecessary structure and response? Yeah. How do you avoid doing it? I mean, I feel like you need to have some level of emotional self-awareness, like Yeah. You know what I'm saying? Because if it's happening and your response is, let's just go with panic, because I think we all have been there. Yeah, yeah. Panic or fear or whatever. Let's say it is this panic, like, I need to make sure this doesn't happen again. You know, and then you go to like, initiate a series of sweeping changes or something where you tighten the reins or, I don't know, add three different fucking policies and they all overlap and say the same thing six different ways. That to me is like, oh, cool. So your fear is officially like running the show. That's what it is, like the panic and the fear, not that it's not real, but it's now in charge. Like that's what has just happened. Yeah. Yeah. I think it goes back to like the thoughtful reflection piece that we were talking about at the beginning. Like if you're tightening control, adding structure to your point, that's likely a fear response in some way. Yeah. Let's assume that it is, and that it's not a result of accurate, thoughtful reflection. Yeah. Yes. So we're assuming that the tightening control and the adding unnecessary structure is directly tied to panic fear response. Yeah. Essentially what you're talking about is reactivity versus responsiveness. Yes. You know? Mm-hmm. We don't wanna be reactive. It's not that emotion can't play a part in what's happening. Like, I have emotions, like you said earlier, I have feelings about mm-hmm. The people who are leaving. Mm-hmm. And those feelings, those emotions, I think by acknowledging these are here and then moving on, they haven't impacted any of our decision making in the wake of this chain, this cluster of resignations. Mm-hmm. You said that there's only one maybe policy that I'm thinking of, like, Ooh, maybe we should implement this, but I'm not even sure about it. Yeah. And it's not something that then causes undue constraint on systems or people. I'm recognizing like, oh, I have some feelings about certain aspects of this, this aspect. Yes. One key little piece of this departure, that feels like data. Do we need this additional policy? I think we're probably on the same page about what that thing is. Yeah. Because for me, that thing was relevant for two of the three. And so that is like, oh, okay there's a trend, there's a theme. It's not personal. It's like global. It's like, oh, actually I can learn something from this experience in this kind of like back to back nature. Maybe we do make an addition or a tweak, but to your point, it's very small. It would have no impact on anyone currently employed. Mm-hmm. It would be relevant only for future hires. And would just be a small tweak. All of that to say how do we avoid tightening control or adding structure. Yeah. Tightening control or adding unnecessary structure. Yep. Yeah. I think it really is about reflecting and if you're like, assuming you're watching this because you're a practice owner or you're involved in leadership, I think it's also you avoid doing these things by discussing these things with your integrator, you're visionary or with your leadership team. Mm-hmm. I'm coming in, 'cause it, let's be honest, it's gonna be me of the three of us in terms of leadership. Yeah. It's probably gonna be me coming in with feelings, you know? Sure. If I'm coming in, I have all these feelings, I'm so anxious, I think we need to put these three things in place, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Like one, we're gonna discuss it, and two, you all are gonna see that for what it is and be able to say like, yeah, no, actually there's nothing. In fact, I think, maybe not in this exact situation, but there have been situations where I come in and I think that's the nature of the integrator role, the people who are drawn and good in that role are very kind of risk averse. Mm-hmm. And can kind of see, like I say, I'm the Chucky finster to your pickle. I see threat around every corner. And so my role is to see the threat, anticipate the threat, and try to protect through structures and through systems. Mm-hmm. That is gonna be my inclination. And so then by having thoughtful reflection and discussing change, that's going to be another kind of, again, filtration point of does this make sense? Is this like this little tweak? Yeah. I think this might make sense. Adding in all of these things, whatever that might be, making all these changes, adding these new policies, where is that coming from? Mm-hmm. What's the effect going to be? And is that truly going to get at preventing this happening in the first place? Mm-hmm. And I think my response to myself would be likely, no. It's going to signal to your employees honestly, a lack of trust. Mm-hmm. And potentially instability. Yeah. You know, like if I'm panicking, maybe they should be panicking. Um, but two, is it even going to get at the issue? Like if my intention is to prevent this from happening, is this really going to prevent this from happening? Well, if what we were saying at the beginning about why this might be happening is true, probably not. Probably we need to focus on who's, who's coming in, how are we determining who the right person is? Mm-hmm. That's probably not gonna happen. Or be more refined through adding more like policies or tightening control. Mm-hmm. Um, it could come from clarification. Mm-hmm. I don't think it's gonna have the intended effect. Yeah. You said two things this is not verbatim of course, but avoiding reacting by tightening control or adding an unnecessary structure some of the things I think comes down to is awareness of your own emotional state. Like not letting certain emotions in particular run the show. I think there's also then being able to trust your systems, leaning back, relaxing back into what's been built. I think there's also if there is a policy or something that you're questioning, you know, how I feel about this, I am pretty much unwilling to do anything that directly erodes autonomy of employees, unless it's like absolutely necessary. I know how important that is to people. I have 0% interest in taking away autonomy for no reason other than I'm afraid like, fuck you, Tara. I don't care. Like, you're just gonna be afraid. Like just deal with it. Trust your systems and also don't institute something or implement something that basically only serves to penalize other people for no reason. Yeah. Especially again, if you can trust your systems and your people mostly like you're assessing, I'm not saying don't assess your systems, don't assess your processes like your hiring process if we're gonna go that route. But what I am saying is you assessing the system isn't the same thing as instituting policies that then negatively impacts all the people around you. Just because you don't want this same thing to happen again. Because then you're gonna end up getting more of the same. Yeah. Goodness. I think that, that's just for me, the other piece too. Not like checking yourself, but like self-regulating whatever emotional stuff is coming up, but then also trusting the system slash not creating something that's going to erode autonomy for basically no reason. Yeah, I think it's also trusting each other. Yes. Like in terms of your bi or your leadership team, trusting each other and also like not feeding into the emotionality or whatever might be coming up. Yeah. Because I think that could be a temptation. Especially if the emotion is like, well, they weren't a good fit anyway and good riddance and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Like, yeah, I think there could be the temptation to further feed into that. But ideally, hopefully you have a strong leadership team or a strong VI dynamic where, you know, you can let me have my feelings or I can let you have your feelings, and then we get back to the matter at hand. Or be able to say like, yeah, you know, I think ultimately what is important here is this, you know, those feelings, they're there, they exist and they actually have no bearing on how we move forward. Yep, yep. Yeah. And having a leadership team period, but I think especially a strong vi relationship is super fucking helpful with that. Yeah. Yeah. 'cause like it's naive to think that we're not gonna have feelings, especially when there's a cluster. I mean, even if like, let's say quote unquote best case scenario, there are people who ultimately are not a good fit for the practice. Mm-hmm. It's still, like I said earlier, like there are impacts on the practice. Like there may be impacts on morality. Yeah. Um, there may be impacts on finances. Mm-hmm. For a myriad of reasons. You might have, and I might have emotions about what's happening. That's normal to be expected. And like, I hope, and I trust that you can hold those things for me and I can hold those things for you and also be able to say, great, let's move on. Yeah. Like, I feel that way too, or I see that and that makes sense. And now we can move on. Yeah. It doesn't change like what we're doing, where we're going. No, it, yeah. Basically it's like, oh yeah, no, really Not at all. Yeah. Yeah. Mm-hmm. 📍 Okay. Speaking of moving on, let's do the scenario. Let's do it. You ready? Okay. I'm gonna read this out loud and then we will just, you know, riff from there. Okay. Scenario, a growing group practice notices that within a single quarter, several team members decide to leave. Their roles are different, their timelines in the organization are different. There is no dramatic event, no public conflict, and no clear singular cause, yet the pattern feels connected at the same time. Leadership has been clarifying core values, tightening role expectations, and increasing accountability. New hires who are aligned with the clarified vision are stepping in with energy and buy-in. The leaders are left asking. Is this turnover a warning sign? Or is it a signal that the system is becoming more defined? I think the answer's obvious. It's so obvious. Yeah. Yeah. It's exactly kind of what we've been talking about. It's the self-selection. Like, it's that idea that the more clear you become both under your internal understanding, and then therefore in the way you are clarifying structure and communicating with everyone about this is who we are, this is what we stand for, this is where we're going. Then you're gonna have people who see that and say, yep, I love that. I'm here for it. I'm in. Mm-hmm. Or you're gonna have people that say, yeah, I don't know about that. Mm-hmm. That process might happen over time. My guess is that for the majority of people, it's not gonna be like a I quit, like, that's it. Mm-hmm. You know, it's gonna be a slow build and I imagine like, um, I don't remember much from my education growing up particularly in the science world, but one concept from biology. I don't know what it is, man, but it has just stuck in my brain. It's the concept of Brownian movement and it's essentially like how smell like happens. Yeah. It's basically all of these molecules are bouncing off of each other and that's how they like dissipate basically. 'cause they're bouncing and they're spreading and they're moving as they're bouncing off of each other. And so I imagine like every employee is kind of like one of these molecules and they're gonna keep bouncing off of mm-hmm. Maybe this new role definition and this new value or they're gonna start bouncing up against these things and maybe they'll float over here and be around other stuff that hasn't really changed or doesn't feel different, but then they'll bump up against something new. So my point in saying all of that is probably, for most people, especially if it's like a, Hmm, I dunno, I dunno if that fits. I don't know if I mm-hmm. I don't know if that is where I wanna go or I don't know that I like that. It's probably going to be a gradual realization of this isn't for me. And I think also from a practical standpoint, very few people are in a position to just quit a job. Yeah. Yeah. You know, you gotta find, you gotta find another job. Most of us need our income. And so maybe it's clear to someone, and maybe it's clear to you too, that maybe I got questions. It probably is clear to you honestly. Mm-hmm. If you know your staff and you understand your people. You likely can think of a few question marks on your team. Mm-hmm. Most people are going to be more middle of the road if they're not a fit. I think there's gonna be very few situations in which someone's, like immediately upon hearing a new role or clarification like, this isn't for me. I'm out. It's gonna be a gradual thing over time, as they're mm-hmm. Interacting with things to come to a point of self-selecting. And to me, that's what this scenario sounds like to me. It sounds like an organization that has become more clear and more intentional, more purposeful mm-hmm. About who they are and where they're going. And I think most people want to live a life of integrity and a life that is authentic. And so at some point it's not going to feel good to be in a place that you don't feel aligned with. Whether that is like, I think for some people that might be a really conscious. Process. Mm-hmm. I think for some people it might not be a conscious Yeah, I agree with that. I think probably more often than not, it might be more subconscious or more unconscious of, something feels different, I don't wanna be here anymore, and maybe I'm not gonna dig deep to say why, or maybe I'm not gonna, you know, self-reflect whatever, but the result is gonna be the same, which is that people aren't gonna stick around. Mm-hmm. That, to me, is probably the hardest part in that. Um, I feel weird about saying this out loud because I'm not gonna say it's true all the time, or that I'm killing it, you know, I nail it all the time. But I feel like there are these moments where I might recognize like, oh, you don't wanna be here. But it's like, not even in the brain of the person who I'm thinking it about. You're not mad about this, that you're telling me like, I'm frustrated about X. No, that's not it. Sure, you might be frustrated about X but there's an undercurrent of you don't like the direction, like you don't like what we're doing or, or what we're about anymore. You wanna do something different or more, you don't want this thing. I hate that. I hate that space. It's just this weird like liminal space where I'm sort of like, uh, I know this is probably happening and dot, dot, dot, just gonna wait to see, you know, sort of this like hurry up and wait situation. Yeah. Because like, what's your responsibility there? Like you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make a drink. Yeah. Yeah. Unless that person is engaging in like, misconduct, mm-hmm. Or things that are harmful or directly contrary to the practice. Yeah. You're not gonna get rid of 'em. I didn't even think about that. 'cause I'm thinking it's less about like, do we get rid of them? It's more like, I think you're on your way out and you're not aware of it yet. Mm-hmm. So do I ask you about this? Like, do I bring it up to you? It's just this weird sort of in-between, and if you do ask a person that, 'cause I'm thinking back to the person on leadership where it was like, I don't know if you want this. Mm-hmm. They, the answer was like, yeah, no, I want this. And so anytime I have brought this up in the past to people with one exception years and years, this is before you were on the team actually so many years ago. Nobody. Has agreed, but then they all end up still leaving. It's like, no, you don't want this. Yeah. Like, you don't want this thing, and that's okay. Yeah. But it's like seeing it before they are like tuned into it. Yeah. And i'm just thinking like, oh yeah, no, that, that space sucks. I think part of why it sucks is because there's nowhere to go with it. Yeah. It's just, yeah. It's just there. Mm-hmm. I think I would say like, kind of along those lines there, I don't know that a single exit has been a surprise Yeah. Agreed. Yes. I'm trying to think through like, the people who have left, I truly don't think we have ever been blindsided or gobsmacked that that person is leaving. Maybe the timing, you know, maybe the timing mm-hmm. Felt surprising. Sure. Um, but I don't think a single person has left where we've not actually even said, I think that person might be on their way out. Don't think they'll be here by the end of the year, next year or whatever. It feels like a slightly different conversation too, which is what do you do if you think that somebody might be on their way out, but they're still performing, like they still technically hit the cultural fit. You're not really sure if they want it. Like your gwc answer might be like, they don't want it, but they're still like, actively learning you know what I mean? To me there's this like weird limbo that can't actually be captured by a full people analyzer. Yeah. And it sort of like, don't have anything to do with it. It's like, well, I guess we discontinue, I think you write it out. I'm assuming they're not having a negative impact on culture. Yes. They're not having a negative impact on other people. Like you said, they're performing, they're bringing in revenue. They're completing the tasks that we're giving them to do, like they're doing the job. Mm-hmm. I think you just write it out. I don't think there is anything, you know what I mean? Mm-hmm. Certainly not worth terminating that person. Yeah. Mm-hmm. And that person is not honestly aware or ready to have a conversation because I do think that it can be really hard to have that conversation. Mm-hmm. Um, when there's all of these power dynamics. People may not feel like they can be fully transparent and honest. Mm-hmm. For fear of retaliation. Maybe someone really needs this job and they know like, this isn't for me, but I can't afford to not have a job. Mm-hmm. And so that then means I can't afford to be fully honest about my experience either with my employer or potentially myself. You know, so I just don't know what there is to be done. I think in these circumstances in the past where we kind of have this inkling or this like, yeah. Yeah. I don't think it's a fit. I think we have tried to do things to maybe like put some additional supports in place, like mm-hmm. It's kind of thought process you always go through, which is kind of testing. Is it anything on us? Is there anything within our control that needs to change? Is there anything here? So like, does this person need some more support? Maybe they don't feel clear about their role? Yeah. Do they need some clarification? Are we, so due diligence. Yeah. Are we giving them the right clients? Mm-hmm. We kind of run through like all of the things is us. Yeah. Is it us? And if the resounding answer is like, no, or like it could be a few of these things and we put some things in place and does it really change? Yeah. Then I think you have to wait either for performance to dip and then that becomes a different issue conversation. Mm-hmm. They become culturally toxic, which again, that becomes a separate conversation. Separate issue. Yeah. Or they just have to come to that realization in their own time, on their own. Mm-hmm. Or like we kind of talked about earlier, maybe they don't fully come to the realization that, you know, like I don't fit with the values or I don't like the vision, but we all know when it's time to move on from something. Mm-hmm. We might not understand the why behind it, but like, you know, when you're not happy. Yeah. And so you find something else that you think will make you happy and that's their process. Yeah. I think that you said earlier with the scenario, the core question is, you know, is this turnover a warning sign or is it a signal that the system is becoming more defined? I feel like both of our responses were like, obviously like duh, you know, but it's the system becoming more defined. And as you were talking, there was something about like people don't just quickly decide like, fuck this, I'm out. You know, like, I quit. I agree with you. A and B I think that people think that they decide that they're done and they don't realize how long they've actually been in a processing state. And then there's a thing that maybe happens at the group, you know, maybe it happens at the business where there's something instituted or another person is given, like a role that one of the people leaving says that they wanted, or what have you, you know, whatever. And then that is the metaphorical straw on the Campbell's back. Yeah. You know, and so it's like, well, this is why I'm leaving. But the reality is no, that's not why you're leaving. God. I feel like I'm like, not pandering, but like belittling people by saying. But yeah, I don't mean to, I don't mean it like this, but I don't think that people are always in tune with the process that they're in before the point at which they have like something big that happens that. Is like the, you know, deciding point for them. Yeah, yeah. And then it's like, holy shit. Like this person got that role. Oh, I'm done. I don't wanna, I'm done. I quit. Yeah. And it's like, oh, cool. But you already were contemplating this for months now. It's been this process. This was just the final straw. And that's okay. You know, it's both things. It's like, oh yeah. So our signal is clear, our systems are more defined. Our roles are getting filled in the right ways. And you have realized as a result of this that you're done. That was enough for you to finally come to the full acceptance of like, I'm, I'm done. Like I'm good. Yeah. I'm gonna bounce. It makes me, it makes me think of like an intimate relationship. Like Yeah. Yeah. When it ends, it's usually not one isolated event. Fuck. No. Even with intimate partner violence, it's not usually one. It's like it's an ongoing No, it never is. No. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's continual. Yes. There's been a low hum for a while of Yeah. Discontentment. Yeah. And maybe over time, especially if you're feeling that discontentment, you become more sensitive too. You know, the things that you don't like or that aren't happening mm-hmm. The way you would want them. And then it builds and it builds and it builds. And if nothing changes, then yeah. One day someday something happens. Or either something happens or to really draw out the metaphor you know, you've saved enough money to leave the relationship, you know? Yeah. Like, maybe you do make a decision that this isn't for me, but the timing isn't right. You know, maybe you have to secure another position or, um, what have you, you know, the life circumstances aren't right at the moment. And then mm-hmm. They become, you know, right. For you to make that change. Yeah. What a hard place to be in. Even for like, yeah. I'm thinking about even for employees, which sounds fucked up 'cause we're coming at this as leadership, you know, which is like I've said to you before, even I've had multiple people actually tell me unsolicited, which is really nice to hear that, you know, they wanna be with me until they retire. And I love the sentiment, like it means a lot to me. And also I think. Yeah, we'll see. Like, we'll see. I hope so. You know, it's like, yeah. Cool. I hope so. And also, yeah, you're fucking human. This business is constantly growing and evolving. Yeah. Like, we'll see what happens and no harm, no foul. If it doesn't work out, yeah. I would love it to, but I'm not gonna hold you to that 'cause, you know, like, come on, Tara. Be real. Be here as long as you wanna be here. Yes. Actively wanna be here. Like actually and actively wanna be here. We want you here. Wanna be here. Yeah. Be here as long as you want to and you can be, because if you don't want to, I wish you the best, but I, yeah. I don't want you here. Like, if you don't wanna be here, I don't want you to be here. Yeah, no, same for you and for us. Like, for Exactly, yeah. For the organization, for me, and for you. Mm-hmm. Like exactly what you're saying. Like, being in that liminal space doesn't make sense. It doesn't feel good for anyone. It's like, you know, it's like when you know the vibe's off, like everyone can feel it. Like we can all feel Yeah. That the vibe is off. Yeah. Um, so like, I wish you the best. Yeah. I truly like, I genuinely want, I wish you the best. Mm-hmm. And I want you to be here as long as that makes sense for you. Mm-hmm. And for us. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah. Agreed. I don't think I have anything else. I think I'm all wrapped up. Anything feel significant enough to Hi Bebe, to carry forward. What feels here, what's sticking, here we go. What feels most important to carry forward as we continue bleeding inside of a living system? The through line or the takeaway is when you spend the time and the energy to be clear and purposeful and intentional about who you are as an organization, as a practice and what you're about. Um, one, don't be surprised when, or if that results in people leaving. It's not a reflection or a poor reflection that you've done something wrong or that you're not clear, or that maybe we're still off base on who we are or what our values are. But that, that actually can be a healthy marker of the clarity. Trusting in, who you are, who you've said you're gonna be. And I mean, like, not like trust yourself, but like your organization, you and your leadership team have put in the work to put in these structures and clarify these values. Like be confident in that. Sit tight with that. Mm-hmm. It's not you, it's me. It's probably not you. Like if all of these things are true, if all these things are solid, clear, it's probably not you. Yeah. Um, and it's not personal. It's business. Like, it really isn't like mm-hmm. We love the people. I care about people and it's not personal. If it's not a fit, it's not a fit. Yeah. And that's okay. It doesn't have to be this big emotional thing. Yeah. And it's not a bad thing. Like it's ultimately it is not necessarily a bad thing if people are leaving your organization. Yeah. That in and of itself is not inherently a bad thing. You know, it could be an indicator that something's off. Sure. It should be, it should be a moment or a period of reflection. But even that is like, it's a gift, you know? You know, like, yeah. It's an opportunity to reflect and consider are we strong? And if not great, like, let's figure out how to shore this thing up, how to clarify this thing. There's two things that just keep kind of floating in my head and just throughout this conversation. One is almost like center of mass or like gravitational pull, like that the more dense we become, the stronger gravitational pull is. Feels like that piece. Well, if we are densifying ourselves, then we're gonna pull in people that are drawn to us. Like we're gonna pull in the right people. There's gonna be people floating around who are like, ooh. And like, come our direction. And there's gonna be people who feel kind of repelled, I think by us, where it's like, oh no, I don't like this. You know, and they need to leave. So I'm thinking of gravitational pull and like a sort of a, dense center mass, you know? And then I'm also thinking about exfoliating, like sloughing off skin cells. You know, how much shit is dying within your body every single day? How many fucking cells die? Skin cells, blood cells? Like, we're constantly dying. Like, I mean, sure. Actively we're all, you know, living is walking towards your death. But I mean, like. On a daily basis, there's parts of us that are consistently like being sloughed off or like dying out. And then there's new growth as well, like, um, that's like virus, would we? Yeah. Yes. It's terrifying. It's the same thing. Yeah. And whether it's contained, like Sure. You know, pe some people do control barns, but like in actual forest fire too. Which I feel weird talking about 'cause I'm thinking about the droughts in California and like the west and like how intense and like, horrifying those experiences are. Yes. I'm talking purely from an environmental perspective. Yeah. Not the, the human, the real human. Yeah, sure. Oh my gosh. Yeah. Okay, cool. Um, which I knew and also, you know, just thinking out loud, but I think for me that's the other piece that's sticking with me is I think maybe a need to see the process of people leaving as some form of purification. Especially initially, you know, if you feel like you don't have your bearings or you're just gathering your bearings. You just put systems and structure in place and now people are leaving and Oh, you know, feel like you're all in a tizzy on the inside. Cool. And also maybe it's just about, hey, your message is more clear and now like the shit that doesn't fit is gonna be shed. The more clear you get on your message, again, the more, not only you draw people in, but also still you're gonna be sloughing off shit that doesn't fit. It's done. Yeah. I was gonna say, like maybe nothing new has really happened. Like, maybe you feel like your message about, like your communication about who you are, what you believe in, has been really clear. And so maybe it feels out of the blue, but that goes back to the point earlier of, I think for most people it is a process. Yeah. It takes time. It's like sometimes it's conscious uncoupling, and that can be a process. And sometimes it's unconscious, uncoupling, sometimes it's happening for a long while. Mm-hmm. So you might be like scratching your head and going like, well, our values are the same, our vision is the same. We're steady Freddy in that regard, but likely that change happened within that person a while ago. Mm-hmm. Or like we talked about, like it could be circumstances, it could be that circumstances change and that people felt really, you know, bought into this thing and then over time mm-hmm. That changed for that person. Yeah. For whatever reason. Any number of reasons. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. 📍 Anything else? T dog. Before we, uh, wrap this bad boy, bad boy up. No, I just really appreciate that I feel like the theme is consistently, like something might seem really straightforward or simple on the surface, but it's almost never that way. Yeah. Yeah. There is almost always so much depth. Yeah. And you know, me, I'm a context girl. There's so much context. There are so many things that you want some caveats. Yeah. All of that. Um, and so I appreciate getting to, to dive down into mm-hmm. Into exploring like all the kind of nooks and crannies of this thing or of a thing. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I feel like there's so much more to the conversation also that we don't really have time for. Like, it'd be much longer, you know, it's like Yeah, that'd be crazy. Crazy fucking long. Yeah. I keep thinking like, oh, we could really go down that, you know, I could explore that more. I could think about that more. But I think that speaks to kind of the complex role that we embody as visionaries, integrators. Like yeah. Everything can be and is so nuanced and complex and there often love it is a lot to like dive into and dig into. Mm-hmm. And sometimes you might not have the time or the space or the capacity to do that and that can be really frustrating. Mm-hmm. But I think that's also what draws those of us. Who are in these roles to these roles. Yeah. Is kind of that that hunger for that kind of richness. Mm-hmm. And that complexity. Yep. Yeah. Having things be intentional by design and robust and like multi-layered and multifaceted. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Cool. All right. All right. Right, right. For everybody listening, thank you for being here with us. If you have any inclination to listen more, make sure you subscribe. That way you can get new episodes when they drop or just easily find and listen to previous ones. Also, what I really want you to do is either send this episode to somebody who needs to hear it, or number two, review and rate the podcast because the more you do that, the more we hit the ears of people who need to hear the messages that we're talking about, the things we're exploring. So that's all I got. It's great seeing you. Thanks T dog. Nice to being here with me. See ya. Bye everyone. See ya.