Full Title: Trillion Dollar Coach. The Leadership Playbook of Silicon Valley Bill Campbell
Highlights
the higher you climb, the more your success depends on making other people successful. (Page 0)
Whereas mentors dole out words of wisdom, coaches roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty. They don’t just believe in our potential; they get in the arena to help us realize our potential. They hold up a mirror so we can see our blind spots and they hold us accountable for working through our sore spots. They take responsibility for making us better without taking credit for our accomplishments. (Page 0)
Excellent teams at Google had psychological safety (people knew that if they took risks, their manager would have their back). The teams had clear goals, each role was meaningful, and members were reliable and confident that the team’s mission would make a difference. (Page 0)
Trillion Dollar Coach belongs in the help- others section: it’s a guide for bringing out the best in others, for being simultaneously supportive and challenging, and for giving more than lip service to the notion of putting people first. (Page 0)
“The first time we met, we talked about business and strategy,” Scott says. “But when we talked again, we got off of strategy and talked instead about leadership and people. The other people I had interviewed had a cookie- cutter approach to developing people. You can have any color you want as long as it’s black. But Bill, he was a technicolor rainbow. He appreciated that each person had a different story and background. He was so nuanced and different in how he approached growth challenges and leadership challenges. I was looking for a way to grow our people in a way I couldn’t. Bill was great at that.” (Page 11)
Steve and Bill became close friends, speaking frequently and spending many Sunday afternoons walking around their Palo Alto neighborhood discussing all sorts of topics. Bill became a sounding board for Steve on a wide variety of subjects, a coach, mentor, and friend. (Page 14)
Venture firms often have “entrepreneurs in residence,” bright, usually young, technologists who work at the firms while they noodle over their next big idea. Why not have an executive in residence, John thought, someone who was seasoned in operations and strategy, to help the firm’s startups through the ups and downs of growth (or lack thereof)? Bill agreed (Page 14)
For those fifteen years, Bill’s counsel was deeply influential. It’s not that he told us what to do— far from it. If Bill had opinions about product and strategy, he usually kept them to himself. But he made sure the team was communicating, that tensions and disagreements were brought to the surface and discussed, so that when the big decisions were made, everyone was on board, whether they agreed or not. (Page 16)
Best friends are the ones who you can talk to about anything and you don’t have to worry. You know they will always be there. Bill Campbell was my best friend. I know that there are only about two thousand other people who also considered Bill to be their best friends, too. But, I was okay with that because somehow Bill found the time for each one of us. He had the same twenty- four- hour days that the rest of us have, but somehow he found the time to always be there for everyone on that list. It didn’t matter to Bill where you were on the list of friends. He would always be there for you no matter what.” (Page 20)
we argue that there is a new breed of employee, the smart creative, who is critical to achieving this speed and innovation. The smart creative is someone who combines technical depth with business savvy and creative flair. These people have always existed, but with the advent of the internet, smartphones, cloud computing, and all their attendant innovations, they can have a much greater impact than ever before. For companies to be successful, they must continually develop great products, and to do that they must attract smart creatives and build an environment where these employees can succeed at scale. (Page 23)
There is another, equally critical, factor for success in companies: teams that act as communities, integrating interests and putting aside differences to be individually and collectively obsessed with what’s good for the company. Research shows that when people feel like they are part of a supportive community at work, they are more engaged with their jobs and more productive. Conversely, a lack of community is a leading factor in job burnout. (Page 23)
negative effects on team outcomes. 11 But teams of people who subordinate individual performance to that of the group will generally outperform teams that don’t. The trick, then, is to corral any such “team of rivals” into a community and get them aligned in marching toward a common goal. (Page 24)
To balance the tension and mold a team into a community, you need a coach, someone who works not only with individuals but also with the team as a whole to smooth out the constant tension, continuously nurture the community, and make sure it is aligned around a common vision and set of goals. Sometimes this coach may just work with the team leader, the executive in charge. But to be most effective— and this was Bill’s model— the coach works with the entire team. At Google, Bill didn’t just meet with Eric. He worked with Jonathan and several other people, and he attended Eric’s staff meetings on a regular basis. This can be a hard thing for an executive (Page 25)
So, conversely, publicly accepting a coach can actually be a sign of confidence. 13 And a 2010 article notes that “group coaching” is effective but generally underused as a way to improve team or group performance (which the authors call “goal- focused change”). (Page 25)
any company that wants to succeed in a time where technology has suffused every industry and most aspects of consumer life, where speed and innovation are paramount, must have team coaching as part of its culture. (Page 26)
It’s not possible or practical to hire a coach for every team in the company, nor is it the right answer, because the best coach for any team is the manager who leads that team. Being a good coach is essential to being a good manager and leader. Coaching is no longer a specialty; you cannot be a good manager without being a good coach. You need to, according to a 1994 study, go beyond the “traditional notion of managing that focuses on controlling, supervising, evaluating and rewarding/ punishing” to create a climate of communication, respect, feedback, and trust. All through coaching. (Page 27)
Many of the other skills of management can be delegated, but not coaching. (Page 27)
And an essential component of high- performing teams is a leader who is both a savvy manager and a caring coach. (Page 27)
If you are a manager, executive, or any other kind of leader of teams, in any kind of business or organization, you can be more effective and help your team perform better (and be happier) by becoming the coach of that team. (Page 28)
Jonathan once sent Bill a study he had found showing that swearing in the workplace enhances morale. Bill’s uncharacteristically understated response: “A good one for me!”* (Page 29)
These engineers liked being managed, as long as their manager was someone from whom they could learn something, and someone who helped make decisions. (Page 34)
A 1991 study finds that when a company is in the implementation stage of an innovation (such as when Google was developing its search engine and AdWords), they need managers to help coordinate resources and resolve conflicts. However, a 2005 study finds that creativity flourishes in environments, such as Broadway shows, that are more network- oriented than hierarchical. So there’s always tension between creativity and operational efficiency. (Page 35)
As a manager and CEO, Bill was very good at making sure his teams delivered. He brought people together and created a strong team culture, but never lost sight of the fact that results mattered, and that they were a direct result of good management. (Page 35)
Silicon Valley people can get off track, chasing other goals beyond running a good operation. Bill was very good at making sure that it’s a results- oriented game. We’re going to come together to have a team culture, but it’s to achieve results. (Page 35)
“How do you bring people around and help them flourish in your environment? It’s not by being a dictator. It’s not by telling them what the hell to do. It’s making sure that they feel valued by being in the room with you. Listen. Pay attention. This is what great managers do.” (Page 36)
the more talented the subordinate, the less likely she is to simply follow orders.” (Page 36)
A manager’s authority, she concludes, “emerges only as the manager establishes credibility with subordinates, peers, and superiors.” (Page 36)
“If you’re a great manager, your people will make you a leader. They acclaim that, not you.” (Page 36)
what we discussed first and foremost was management: operations and tactics. Bill rarely weighed in on strategic issues, and if he did, it was usually to make sure that there was a strong operating plan to accompany the strategy. (Page 38)
People are the foundation of any company’s success. The primary job of each manager is to help people be more effective in their job and to grow and develop. We have great people who want to do well, are capable of doing great things, and come to work fired up to do them. Great people flourish in an environment that liberates and amplifies that energy. Managers create this environment through support, respect, and trust. (Page 40)
Support means giving people the tools, information, training, and coaching they need to succeed. It means continuous effort to develop people’s skills. Great managers help people excel and grow. (Page 40)
Respect means understanding people’s unique career goals and being sensitive to their life choices. It means helping people achieve these career goals in a way that’s consistent with the needs of the company. (Page 40)
Trust means freeing people to do their jobs and to make decisions. It means knowing people want to do well and believing that they will. (Page 40)
But executives often overlook a company’s management culture when they are looking for ways to improve performance. This is a mistake: a 1999 article notes that firms that improve their management practices by one standard deviation above the mean can raise their market value by $ 18,000 per employee. (Page 40)
“Great coaches lie awake at night thinking about how to make you better. They relish creating an environment where you get more out of yourself. Coaches are like great artists getting the stroke exactly right on a painting. They are painting relationships. Most people don’t spend a lot of time thinking about how they are going to make someone else better. But that’s what coaches do. (Page 42)
THE TOP PRIORITY OF ANY MANAGER IS THE WELL- BEING AND SUCCESS OF HER PEOPLE. (Page 42)
For more than a decade, Eric held his weekly staff meetings on Mondays at 1 p.m. In many ways, these meetings were pretty much like any other staff meeting you might have been to. There was an agenda, check- ins with everyone around the table, people surreptitiously checking email and texts … all the usual stuff. Eric did one thing different from the norm, though: when everyone had come into the room and gotten settled, he’d start by asking what people did for the weekend, or, if they had just come back from a trip, he’d ask for an informal trip report. (Page 43)
there’s a direct correlation between fun work environments and higher performance, with conversation about family and fun (what academics might call “socioemotional communication”) being an easy way to achieve the former. (Page 44)
Marissa Mayer developed a variation of the trip report practice when she was CEO of Yahoo. Rather than trip reports, her staff meetings started with thank- yous. “My staff called it the family prayer. You have to thank another team for something that happened last week. You can’t thank yourself, and you can’t repeat what someone else said. This ends up being a nice way to recap the entire week.” (Page 44)
He frequently coached us to make sure that others in the company understood what we understood. Even when you have clearly communicated something, it may take a few times to sink in. Repetition doesn’t spoil the prayer. (Page 45)
Bill had us pay close attention to running meetings well; “get the 1: 1 right” and “get the staff meeting right” are tops on the list of his most important management principles. He felt that these meetings are the most important tools available to executives in running the company, and that each one should be approached thoughtfully. (Page 45)
Most important issues cut across functions, but, more important, bringing them to the table in team meetings lets people understand what is going on in the other teams, and discussing them as a group helps develop understanding and build cross- functional strength. (Page 45)
Research confirms that team meetings are a terrific opportunity to engage people, with one 2013 study concluding that the relevance of the meeting, giving everyone a voice, and managing the clock well are key factors to achieving that engagement. (Page 46)
START WITH TRIP REPORTS TO BUILD RAPPORT AND BETTER RELATIONSHIPS AMONG TEAM MEMBERS, START TEAM MEETINGS WITH TRIP REPORTS, OR OTHER TYPES OF MORE PERSONAL, NON- BUSINESS TOPICS. (Page 46)
After talking about family and other nonwork stuff, Bill would ask Jonathan what his top five items were. Jonathan came to realize that this approach was Bill’s way of seeing how Jonathan was prioritizing his time and effort. (Page 47)
Bill advocated that each person should put his or her list on the board— a simultaneous reveal. That way everyone could see where there was overlap and make sure to cover those topics. He felt that the process of merging the two agendas could serve as a lesson in prioritization. (Page 48)
Bill took great care in preparing for one- on- one meetings. Remember, he believed the most important thing a manager does is to help people be more effective and to grow and develop, and the 1: 1 is the best opportunity to accomplish that. (Page 48)
He always started with the “small talk,” but in Bill’s case, the talk wasn’t really that small. Oftentimes, small talk in a work environment is cursory: a quick “how are the kids?” or chatter about the morning commute before moving on to the business stuff. Conversations with Bill were more meaningful and layered; you sometimes got the feeling that the conversation about life was more the point of the meeting than the business topics. In fact, while his interest in people’s lives was quite sincere, it had a powerful benefit: a 2010 study concludes that having these sort of “substantive” conversations, as opposed to truly small talk, makes people happier. (Page 48)
From the (not so) small talk, Bill moved to performance: What are you working on? How is it going? How could he help? Then, we would always get to peer relationships, which Bill thought were more important than relationships with your manager and other higher- ups. (Page 48)
work. What do they want? he wondered. Bill’s response was that Jonathan should not worry about top- down feedback; rather, he should pay attention to input from his peers. What do your teammates think of you? That’s what’s important! (Page 49)
From peer relationships, Bill would move on to teams. He always wanted to know, were we setting a clear direction for them, and constantly reinforcing it? Did we understand what they were doing? If they were off on something, we would discuss how we could course correct them and get them back on track. “Think that everyone who works for you is like your kids,” Bill once said. “Help them course correct, make them better.” (Page 49)
Then he’d want to talk about innovation. Were we making space for it on our teams? How were we balancing the inherent tension between innovation and execution? Either alone wasn’t good; striking that balance was critical. (Page 49)
Besides having a detailed communications approach, Bill had strong opinions about being good at communicating. He was mostly old- school about it, preferring face- to- face conversations, or a phone call if that wasn’t possible. (Page 49)
5 WORDS ON A WHITEBOARD HAVE A STRUCTURE FOR 1: 1s, AND TAKE THE TIME TO PREPARE FOR THEM, AS THEY ARE THE BEST WAY TO HELP PEOPLE BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND TO GROW. (Page 51)
BILL’S FRAMEWORK FOR 1: 1s AND REVIEWS PERFORMANCE ON JOB REQUIREMENTS Could be sales figures Could be product delivery or product milestones Could be customer feedback or product quality Could be budget numbers RELATIONSHIP WITH PEER GROUPS (This is critical for company integration and cohesiveness) Product and Engineering Marketing and Product Sales and Engineering MANAGEMENT/ LEADERSHIP Are you guiding/ coaching your people? Are you weeding out the bad ones? Are you working hard at hiring? Are you able to get your people to do heroic things? INNOVATION (BEST PRACTICES) Are you constantly moving ahead … thinking about how to continually get better? Are you constantly evaluating new technologies, new products, new practices? Do you measure yourself against the best in the industry/ world? (Page 52)
Eric liked to use a management technique he called the “rule of two.” He would get the two people most closely involved in the decision to gather more information and work together on the best solution, and usually they would come back a week or two later having decided together on the best course of action. The team almost always agreed with their recommendation, because it was usually quite obvious that it was the best idea. The rule of two not only generates the best solution in most cases, it also promotes collegiality. It empowers the two people who are working on the issue to figure out ways to solve the problem, a fundamental principle of successful mediation. 13 And it forms a habit of working together to resolve conflict that pays off with better camaraderie and decision making for years afterward.* (Page 53)
Bill believed that one of a manager’s main jobs is to facilitate decisions, and he had a particular framework for doing so. He didn’t encourage democracy. (Before he arrived at Intuit, they took votes in meetings. Bill stopped that practice.) (Page 54)
A place where the top manager makes all decisions leads to just the opposite, because people will spend their time trying to convince the manager that their idea is the best. In that scenario, it’s not about the best idea carrying the day, it’s about who does the best job of lobbying the top dog. In other words, politics. (Page 54)
He believed in striving for the best idea, not consensus (“ I hate consensus!” he would growl), intuitively understanding what numerous academic studies have shown: that the goal of consensus leads to “groupthink” and inferior decisions. 15 The way to get the best idea, he believed, was to get all of the opinions and ideas out in the open, on the table for the group to discuss. Air the problem honestly, and make sure people have the opportunity to provide their authentic opinions, especially if they are dissenting. If the problem or decision at hand is more functional in nature (for example, primarily a marketing or finance decision), then the discussion should be led by the person with that functional expertise. When it is a broader decision cutting across multiple functional areas, then the team leader owns the discussion. Regardless, it should involve everyone’s point of view. (Page 54)
To get those ideas on the table, Bill would often sit down with individuals before the meeting to find out what they were thinking. This enabled Bill to understand the different perspectives, but more important, it gave members of his team the chance to come into the room prepared to talk about their point of view. Discussing it with Bill helped gather their thoughts and ideas before the broader discussion. Maybe they would all be aligned by the time they got there, maybe not, but they had already thought through, and talked through, their own perspective and were ready to present it. (Page 55)
“When a leader can get people past being passive- aggressive, then heated but honest arguments can happen.” If your team is working well and thinking company- first rather than me- first, then after the fireworks subside the best idea will likely emerge. How the leader frames this discussion matters: a 2016 study shows that when it is called a debate rather than a disagreement, participants are more likely to share information. (Page 55)
Then one day Bill gave her a new rule: when she was discussing a decision with her team, she always had to be the last person to speak. You may know the answer and you may be right, he said, but when you just blurt it out, you have robbed the team of the chance to come together. Getting to the right answer is important, but having the whole team get there is just as important. (Page 55)
When the best idea doesn’t emerge, it’s time for the manager to force the decision or make it herself. “A manager’s job is to break ties and make their people better,” Bill said. “We’re going to do it this way. Cut the shit. Done.” Bill (Page 56)
Failure to make a decision can be as damaging as a wrong decision. There’s indecision in business all the time, because there’s no perfect answer. Do something, even if it’s wrong, Bill counseled. Having a well- run process to get to a decision is just as important as the decision itself, because it gives the team confidence and keeps everyone moving. (Page 56)
“making decisions with integrity,” which means following a good process and always prioritizing what is the right thing for the business rather than any individual. Make the best decision you can, then move on. (Page 57)
THE THRONE BEHIND THE ROUND TABLE THE MANAGER’S JOB IS TO RUN A DECISION- MAKING PROCESS THAT ENSURES ALL PERSPECTIVES GET HEARD AND CONSIDERED, AND, IF NECESSARY, TO BREAK TIES AND MAKE THE DECISION. (Page 58)
So how do you make that hard decision? When you are a manager trying to move your team toward making a decision, the room will be rife with opinions. Bill always counseled us to try to cut through those opinions and get to the heart of the matter. In any situation there are certain immutable truths upon which everyone can agree. These are the “first principles,” (Page 58)
You can argue opinions, but you generally can’t argue principles, since everyone has already agreed upon them. As Bill would point out, it’s the leader’s job, when faced with a tough decision, to describe and remind everyone of those first principles. (Page 58)
LEAD BASED ON FIRST PRINCIPLES DEFINE THE “FIRST PRINCIPLES” FOR THE SITUATION, THE IMMUTABLE TRUTHS THAT ARE THE FOUNDATION FOR THE COMPANY OR PRODUCT, AND HELP GUIDE THE DECISION FROM THOSE PRINCIPLES. (Page 61)
Bill always reminded us that managing these people is one of the bigger challenges of the job. He called them “aberrant geniuses,” and said, “You get these quirky guys or women who are going to be great differentiators for you. It is your job to manage that person in a way that doesn’t disrupt the company. They have to be able to work with other people. If they can’t, you need to let them go. They need to work in an environment where they collaborate with other people.” (Page 62)
perform, and minimize time spent fighting them. Instead, invest that energy in trying as hard as possible to coach them past their aberrant behavior. As long as you can do this successfully, the rewards can be tremendous: more genius, less aberrant. “He has everything that he needs,” Bill once wrote Jonathan about one of his problematic team members. “Now that you fully supported him, you should try to get him to behave as a leader. He has all of his space. No more arguments.” (Page 62)
aberrant geniuses can be enormously valuable and productive. They can build great products and high- performing teams. They have quick insights. They are simply better in many, many ways. And they can have both the ego and the fragility to match their outsized talent and performance. They often put a lot of energy into personal gains at the expense of peer relationships. A me- first attitude sometimes creeps through (or barges in), which can cause resentment in others and affect their performance. (Page 62)
much management time? It’s hard to know when an aberrant genius’s behavior has become too toxic for the team to bear, but if you are spending hours upon hours controlling the damage, that’s a good sign it’s gone too far. A lot of that time is usually spent arguing with the person, which is rarely constructive. (Page 63)
Eccentric behavior can be okay as long as it is in the service (or intended to be in the service) of the good of the company. What can’t be tolerated is when the aberrant genius continually puts him- or herself above the team. This often crops up in areas that are adjacent to the core work of the group. The genius will continue to shine in the job, be it sales, product, legal, and so on. But when it comes to factors such as compensation, press, and promotion, this is where the aberrant pops up. (Page 64)
Does the aberrant genius seek too much attention and self- promotion? Bill wasn’t a fan of media attention and mistrusted the motivation of people who sought too much of it. Publicity is fine if it’s in the service of the company, and indeed, that is part of the CEO’s job. But if you are the CEO and someone on your team is consistently seeking coverage, that’s a warning sign. (Page 64)
ABERRANT GENIUSES— HIGH- PERFORMING BUT DIFFICULT TEAM MEMBERS— SHOULD BE TOLERATED AND EVEN PROTECTED, AS LONG AS THEIR BEHAVIOR ISN’T UNETHICAL OR ABUSIVE AND THEIR VALUE OUTWEIGHS (Page 65)
Compensation isn’t just about the economic value of the money; it’s about the emotional value. It’s a signaling device for recognition, respect, and status, and it ties people strongly to the goals of the company. Bill knew that everyone is human and needs to be appreciated, including people who are already financially secure. This is why the superstar athlete who is worth tens or hundreds of millions pushes for that next huge contract. It’s not for the money; it’s for the love. (Page 66)
MONEY’S NOT ABOUT MONEY COMPENSATING PEOPLE WELL DEMONSTRATES LOVE AND RESPECT AND TIES THEM STRONGLY TO THE GOALS OF THE COMPANY. (Page 66)
“The purpose of a company is to take the vision you have of the product and bring it to life,” he said once at a conference. “Then you put all the other components around it— finance, sales, marketing— to get the product out the door and make sure it’s successful.” (Page 67)
Bill was a business guy, but he believed that nothing was more important than an empowered engineer. His constant point: product teams are the heart of the company. They are the ones who create new features and new products. (Page 68)
if you have the right product for the right market at the right time, go as fast as you can. There are minor things that will go wrong and you have to fix them quickly, but speed is essential. (Page 68)
This means that finance, sales, or marketing shouldn’t tell the product teams what to do. Instead, these groups can supply intelligence on what customer problems need solving, and what opportunities they see.* 20 They describe the market part of “product market fit.” Then they stand by, let the product teams work, and clear the way of things that might slow them down. As Bill often commented, “Why is marketing losing its clout? Because it forgot its first name: product.” (Page 68)
Bill told the poor product manager, if you ever tell an engineer at Intuit which features you want, I’m going to throw you out on the street. You tell them what problem the consumer has. You give them context on who the consumer is. Then let them figure out the features. They will provide you with a far better solution than you’ll ever get by telling them what to build. (Page 69)
Bill was the marketing guy who literally walked down the street to work with engineers on a problem. It does mean that the engineers (and other people creating products) have clout, and that they need to be given some freedom. (Page 69)
INNOVATION IS WHERE THE CRAZY PEOPLE HAVE STATURE THE PURPOSE OF A COMPANY IS TO BRING A PRODUCT VISION TO LIFE. ALL THE OTHER COMPONENTS ARE IN SERVICE TO PRODUCT. (Page 70)
In business, layoffs and firings are inevitable, perhaps more so in the world of startups and technology. Bill’s point of view on this was that letting people go is a failure of management, not one of any of the people who are being let go. So it is important for management to let people leave with their heads held high. Treat them well, with respect. Be generous with severance packages. Send out a note internally celebrating their accomplishments. (Page 71)
As Ben Horowitz notes in his book, The Hard Thing About Hard Things, treating the departing people well is important for the morale and well- being of the remaining team. (Page 71)
“Many of the people whom you lay off will have closer relationships with the people who stay than you do, so treat them with the appropriate level of respect. Still, the company must move forward, so be careful not to apologize too much.” (Page 71)
laid- off employees care about who’s doing the layoffs, and how good an explanation they get. Doing layoffs properly has a positive impact on both the people being laid off and the people who stay on with the company. 21 (Page 71)
“When you fire someone, you feel terrible for about a day, then you say to yourself that you should have done it sooner. No one ever succeeds at their third chance.” If you’ve ever had the crappy task of firing someone, and you think back on that experience, you will realize that this is absolutely correct. But again, you must let people leave with their heads held high. (Page 72)
HEADS HELD HIGH IF YOU HAVE TO LET PEOPLE GO, BE GENEROUS, TREAT THEM WELL, AND CELEBRATE THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS. (Page 72)
Bill’s perspective on boards starts with this observation: the CEO manages the board and board meetings, not the other way around.* 23 Board meetings fail when the CEO doesn’t own and follow her agenda. That agenda should always start with operational updates: the board needs to know how the company is doing. That includes financial and sales reports, product status, and metrics around operational rigor (hiring, communications, marketing, support). If the board has committees, for example to oversee audit and finance or compensation, have those committees meet ahead of time (in person or via phone or video conference) and present updates at the board meeting. The first order of business always needs to be a frank, open, succinct discussion about how the company is performing. (Page 74)
Much of this material can be sent to board members ahead of time, with the idea that they will review it and be up- to- date on most stuff when they come to the meeting. If you throw a full set of financial reports up on a screen in a board meeting, they will want to talk about it forever, and you end up getting bogged down in operational details that probably don’t need the board’s attention. Send out financial and other operational details ahead of time and expect board members to review them and come with questions. (Page 75)
board members who don’t do their homework shouldn’t stick around. (Page 75)
afterward. Fire him. In our board meetings at Google, Bill always pushed Eric to ensure that the operations review included a thorough set of highlights and lowlights. Here’s what we did well and what we’re proud of; here’s what we didn’t do so well. The highlights were always easy to compile; teams love dressing up their best successes and presenting them to the board. But the lowlights, not so much. It can take some prodding to make teams be completely frank about where they are falling short, and indeed, Eric often rejected an initial draft of the board lowlights for not being honest enough. He was dogged in ensuring that the lowlights were authentic, and as a result, the board would see the bad news along with the good. (Page 75)
“virtuous cycle of respect, trust, and candor” is one thing that makes “great boards great.” 24 And this level of honesty sets a tone of transparency and honesty that reverberates throughout the company. A company that is honest with its board can be honest with itself, too; people learn that not only is it okay to frankly share bad news, it’s expected. Determining lowlights is an important task, something to be handled by people running the business, not left to support functions such as finance or communications. At Google, we had product managers handle the task. (Page 76)
But … we would not include the highlights and lowlights in the packet of information that we sent to board members ahead of the meeting. If you do that, they will spend too much time obsessing about the lowlights and will want to start the meeting there. (Page 76)
Who should be on the board? Smart people with good business expertise who care deeply about the company and are genuinely interested in helping and supporting the CEO. (Page 76)
BILL ON BOARDS IT’S THE CEO’S JOB TO MANAGE BOARDS, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. (Page 77)
He was a superb business executive. And he did it through practicing the points covered in this chapter: operational excellence, putting people first, being decisive, communicating well, knowing how to get the most out of even the most challenging people, focusing on product excellence, and treating people well when they are let go. (Page 77)
It wasn’t so much about hitting those short- term numbers, but about creating a culture where anything less than operational excellence wouldn’t be tolerated. He felt it was management’s job to deliver results, not just for shareholders but for the team and customers. The board wanted to focus on the long run by investing; Bill knew that he was also investing in the long- term success of the company by instilling strong operational discipline. (Page 79)
Perhaps the most important currency in a relationship— friendship, romantic, familial, or professional— is trust. (Page 80)
For Bill, trust was always first and foremost; it was sort of his superpower. He was great at establishing it, and once established, he was great at honoring it. (Page 80)
One academic paper defines trust as “the willingness to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations about another’s behavior.” (Page 81)
Perhaps the idea that trust is a cornerstone of business success belongs in the “well duh, Captain Obvious” bucket. But it is missing from many of today’s business books, (Page 82)
For example, a highly cited 2000 study from Cornell University discusses the correlation between task conflict (disagreements about decisions) and relationship conflict (emotional friction) in teams. Task conflict is healthy and is important to get to the best decisions, but it is highly correlated with relationship conflict, which leads to poorer decisions and morale. What to do? Build trust first, the study concludes. Teams that trust each other will still have disagreements, but when they do, they will be accompanied by less emotional rancor. (Page 82)
“walked among a set of driven technologists, but he saw the world in a completely different way … He saw it as a network of people, learning each other’s strengths and weaknesses, and learning to trust each other as a primary mechanism of achieving goals.” (Page 83)
“When players find themselves in a situation where management has a great deal of integrity and they can depend on my word or anybody else’s word in the organization, they feel secure. And if the players feel secure, they don’t want to leave here. And if they don’t want to leave here, they’re going to do everything they can on the court to stay here.” (Page 84)
Establishing trust is a key component to building what is now called “psychological safety” in teams. Team psychological safety, according to a 1999 Cornell study, is a “shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking … a team climate … in which people are comfortable being themselves.” (Page 84)
Not surprisingly, when Google conducted a study to determine the factors behind high- performing teams, psychological safety came out at the top of the list.* (Page 84)
The common notions that the best teams are made up of people with complementary skill sets or similar personalities were disproven; the best teams are the ones with the most psychological safety. And that starts with trust. (Page 84)
Leadership is not about you, it’s about service to something bigger: the company, the team. Bill believed that good leaders grow over time, that leadership accrues to them from their teams. He thought people who were curious and wanted to learn new things were best suited for this. There was no room in this formula for smart alecks and their hubris. (Page 86)
People who want to get the best out of a coaching relationship need to be coachable. Bill’s approach to coaching was rooted in his mind- set that almost all people have value, not based on their title or role but on who they are. His job was to make them better. But only if they were coachable. (Page 87)
The traits of coachability Bill sought were honesty and humility, the willingness to persevere and work hard, and a constant openness to learning. (Page 87)
Honesty and humility because a successful coaching relationship requires a high degree of vulnerability, much more than is typical in a business relationship. Coaches need to learn how self- aware a coachee is; they need to not only understand the coachee’s strengths and weaknesses, but also understand how well the coachee understands his or her own strengths and weaknesses. Where are they honest with themselves, and where are their blind spots? And then it is the coach’s job to raise that self- awareness further and to help them see the flaws they don’t see for themselves. People don’t like to talk about these flaws, which is why honesty and humility are so important. If people can’t be honest with themselves and their coach, and if they aren’t humble enough to recognize how they aren’t perfect, they won’t get far in that relationship. (Page 87)
Humility, because Bill believed that leadership is about service to something that is bigger than you: your company, your team. Today the concept of “servant leadership” is in vogue and has been directly linked to stronger company performance.* 5 Bill believed and practiced it well before it became popular. The coachable people are the ones who can see that they are part of something bigger than themselves. You can have a considerable ego and still be part of an even bigger cause. (Page 87)
“People who generate a lot of BS aren’t coachable. They start to believe what they are saying. They shade the truth to conform to their BS, which makes the BS even more dangerous.” (Page 88)
ONLY COACH THE COACHABLE THE TRAITS THAT MAKE A PERSON COACHABLE INCLUDE HONESTY AND HUMILITY, THE WILLINGNESS TO PERSEVERE AND WORK HARD, AND A CONSTANT OPENNESS TO LEARNING. (Page 89)
Al Gore says he learned from Bill how “important it is to pay careful attention to the person you are dealing with … give them your full, undivided attention, really listening carefully. Only then do you go into the issue. There’s an order to it.” (Page 89)
“We’d all be a lot wiser if we listened more,” Wooden said, “not just hearing the words, but listening and not thinking about what we’re going to say.” (Page 89)
Bill’s listening was usually accompanied by a lot of questions, a Socratic approach. A 2016 Harvard Business Review article notes that this approach of asking questions is essential to being a great listener: “People perceive the best listeners to be those who periodically ask questions that promote discovery and insight.” (Page 90)
“Bill would never tell me what to do,” says Ben Horowitz. “Instead he’d ask more and more questions, to get to what the real issue was.” (Page 90)
“CEOs always feel like they need to know the answer,” Ben says. “So when they ask me for advice, I’m always getting a prepared question. I never answer those.” Instead, like Bill, he asks more questions, trying to understand the multiple facets of a situation. This helps him get past the prepared question (and answer) and discover the heart of an issue. (Page 90)
things like listening and chatting with employees are important aspects of successful leadership, because “people feel more respected, visible and less anonymous, and included in teamwork.” (Page 91)
And a 2016 paper finds that this form of “respectful inquiry,” where the leader asks open questions and listens attentively to the response, is effective because it heightens the “follower’s” feelings of competence (feeling challenged and experiencing mastery), relatedness (feeling of belonging), and autonomy (feeling in control and having options). Those three factors are sort of the holy trinity of the self- determination theory of human motivation, originally developed by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. (Page 91)
PRACTICE FREE- FORM LISTENING LISTEN TO PEOPLE WITH YOUR FULL AND UNDIVIDED ATTENTION— DON’T THINK AHEAD TO WHAT YOU’RE GOING TO SAY NEXT— AND ASK QUESTIONS TO GET TO THE REAL ISSUE. (Page 92)
Bill was always 100 percent honest (he told the truth) and candid (he wasn’t afraid to offer a harsh opinion). (Page 93)
“He really taught me about honesty and authenticity in giving feedback. You can keep someone’s respect and loyalty while delivering tough news about their performance.” Bill’s candor worked because we always knew it was coming from a place of caring. Former Googler Kim Scott, author of the excellent book Radical Candor, says that being a great boss means “saying what you really think in a way that still lets people know you care.” (Page 93)
An important component of providing candid feedback is not to wait. “A coach coaches in the moment,” Scott Cook says. “It’s more real and more authentic, but so many leaders shy away from that.” Many managers wait until performance reviews to provide feedback, which is often too little, too late. Bill’s feedback was in the moment (or very close to it), task specific, and always followed by a grin and a hug, all of which helped remove the sting. (Page 93)
learned from Bill to never embarrass someone publicly. “When I’m really annoyed or frustrated with what someone is doing,” she says, “I step back and force myself to think about what they are doing well and what their value is. You can always find something. If we’re in public, I’ll praise them on that. I’ll give constructive feedback as soon as I can, but only when the person is feeling safe. (Page 94)
NO GAP BETWEEN STATEMENTS AND FACT BE RELENTLESSLY HONEST AND CANDID, COUPLE NEGATIVE FEEDBACK WITH CARING, GIVE FEEDBACK AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AND IF THE FEEDBACK IS NEGATIVE, DELIVER IT PRIVATELY. (Page 97)
He believed that managers should not walk in with an idea and “stick it in their ear.” Don’t tell people what to do, tell them stories about why they are doing it. (Page 97)
For Bill, honesty and integrity weren’t just about keeping your word and telling the truth; they were also about being forthright. This is critical for effective coaching; a good coach doesn’t hide the stuff that’s hard to talk about— in fact, a good coach will draw this out. He or she gets at the hard stuff. (Page 98)
Scholars would describe Bill’s approach— listening, providing honest feedback, demanding candor— as “relational transparency,” which is a core characteristic of “authentic leadership.” 13 Wharton professor Adam Grant has another term for it: “disagreeable givers.” (Page 98)
“we often feel torn between supporting and challenging others. Social scientists reach the same conclusion for leadership as they do for parenting: it’s a false dichotomy. You want to be supportive and demanding, holding high standards and expectations but giving the encouragement necessary to reach them. Basically, it’s tough love. Disagreeable givers are gruff and tough on the surface, but underneath they have others’ best interests at heart. They give the critical feedback no one wants to hear but everyone needs to hear.” (Page 98)
DON’T STICK IT IN THEIR EAR DON’T TELL PEOPLE WHAT TO DO; OFFER STORIES AND HELP GUIDE THEM TO THE BEST DECISIONS FOR THEM. (Page 99)
Bill’s perspective was that it’s a manager’s job to push the team to be more courageous. Courage is hard. People are naturally afraid of taking risks for fear of failure. It’s the manager’s job to push them past their reticence. (Page 100)
He had such credibility that if he said that you could do something, you believed him, not because he was a cheerleader but because he was a coach and experienced executive. He built his message on your capabilities and progress. This is a key aspect of delivering encouragement as a coach: it needs to be credible.* (Page 102)
Bill set high standards for his coachees; he believed they could be great, greater than what they believed. This created an aspiration for each of us, and disappointment when we thought that we were not living up to that aspiration. Bill set the bar higher for us than we set it for ourselves, and when you approach people with that mind- set, they respond. (Page 102)
THE EVANGELIST FOR COURAGE BELIEVE IN PEOPLE MORE THAN THEY BELIEVE IN THEMSELVES, AND PUSH THEM TO BE MORE COURAGEOUS. (Page 103)
FULL IDENTITY FRONT AND CENTER PEOPLE ARE MOST EFFECTIVE WHEN THEY CAN BE COMPLETELY THEMSELVES AND BRING THEIR FULL IDENTITY TO WORK. (Page 105)
When Google went public, in August 2004, it created two classes of stock. Class A shares were the ones sold to the public, each share coming with traditional voting rights: one share equals one vote. But class B shares were different: each share came with ten votes. Class B shares were not sold publicly and were held by Google insiders, such as cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and CEO Eric. This “dual class” structure ensured that Google’s founders and executive team retained control of the company. This structure was unusual at the time (Page 107)
company. They admired Warren Buffett and had become knowledgeable about the dual class stock structure that his company Berkshire Hathaway employed. They had always considered Google as much an institution as a business. They fervently believed in thinking long term, making big bets and big investments in those bets, without having to consider the quarterly ups and downs of public markets. (Page 108)
Bill Campbell was a coach of teams. He built them, shaped them, put the right players in the right positions (and removed the wrong players from the wrong positions), cheered them on, and kicked them in their collective butt when they were underperforming. He knew, as he often said, that “you can’t get anything done without a team.” (Page 109)
“You can only really succeed and accomplish things through the collective, the common purpose,” (Page 109)
Bill’s guiding principle was that the team is paramount, and the most important thing he looked for and expected in people was a “team- first” attitude. Teams are not successful unless every member is loyal and will, when necessary, subjugate their personal agenda to that of the team. That the team wins has to be the most important thing. (Page 110)
Perhaps Charles Darwin said it best in his book The Descent of Man: “A tribe including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes; and this would be natural selection.” (Page 110)
This was an example of high- stakes team building, with a multibillion- dollar IPO at stake and investors, founders, and executives debating difficult issues. But it is in precisely these situations that a team coach is needed the most, someone who can see past individual egos and understand the value that all of the members, combined, create. Team building is vital at every company, and the principles Bill espoused apply at every level of an organization. But it gets a lot harder to hold a team together at senior levels in companies, where egos and ambitions are considerable. (Page 111)
Senior executives may have access to individual executive coaching, but team coaches at that level are more rare. (Page 112)
So as a coach of teams, what would Bill do? His first instinct was always to work the team, not the problem. In other words, he focused on the team’s dynamics, not on trying to solve the team’s particular challenges. That was their job. His job was team building, assessing people’s talents, and finding the doers. He ran toward the biggest problems, the stinkers that fester and cause tension. He focused on winning but winning right, and he doubled down on his core values when things turned south. And he brought resolution by filling the gaps between people, listening, observing, and then seeking people out in behind- the- scenes conversations that brought teams together. (Page 112)
As managers, we tend to focus on the problem at hand. What is the situation? What are the issues? What are the options? And so on. These are valid questions, but the coach’s instinct is to lead with a more fundamental one. Who was working on the problem? Was the right team in place? Did they have what they needed to succeed? “When I became CEO of Google,” Sundar Pichai says, “Bill advised me that at that level, more than ever before, you need to bet on people. Choose your team. Think much harder about that.” (Page 113)
WORK THE TEAM, THEN THE PROBLEM WHEN FACED WITH A PROBLEM OR OPPORTUNITY, THE FIRST STEP IS TO ENSURE THE RIGHT TEAM IS IN PLACE AND WORKING ON IT. (Page 115)
“Everybody that is managing a function on behalf of the CEO ought to be better at that function than the CEO. Some of the time, they are going to be wearing their HR hat or their IT hat, but most of the time you want them to be wearing their company hat. These are all smart people that have great capabilities, and what you want to get is the best idea that comes from that group.” (Page 116)
Bill looked for four characteristics in people. The person has to be smart, not necessarily academically but more from the standpoint of being able to get up to speed quickly in different areas and then make connections. Bill called this the ability to make “far analogies.” The person has to work hard, and has to have high integrity. Finally, the person should have that hard- to- define characteristic: grit. The ability to get knocked down and have the passion and perseverance to get up and go at it again. (Page 116)
When he interviewed job candidates to assess these points, he wouldn’t just ask about what a person did, he would ask how they did it. If the person said they “led a project that led to revenue growth,” asking how they achieved that growth will tell you a lot about how they were involved in the project. Were they hands- on? Were they doers? Did they build the team? He would listen for the pronouns: does the person say “I” (could signify a me- first mentality) or “we” (a potential indicator of a team player)?* (Page 116)
A big turnoff for Bill was if they were no longer learning. Do they have more answers than questions? That’s a bad sign! (Page 117)
He looked for commitment, to the cause and not just to their own success. Team first! You need to find, as Sundar Pichai says, “people who understand that their success depends on working well together, that there’s give- and- take— people who put the company first.” Whenever Sundar and Bill found people like that, Sundar says, “we would cherish them.” (Page 117)
And also when someone is excited because something else is working well in the company. It isn’t related to them, but they are excited. I watch for that. Like when you see a player on the bench cheering for someone else on the team, like Steph Curry jumping up and down when Kevin Durant hits a big shot. You can’t fake that.”* (Page 117)
He felt hurt by the reorg and considered these other jobs a demotion. Bill was so disappointed; Jonathan was putting his bruised ego ahead of what was best for the Google team (and, in fact, himself). He was making a “mistake born of ego and emotion,” and Bill thought Jonathan maybe should consider removing his head from his ass. (Page 118)
Bill didn’t give up on him, but he also never let him forget how he had let the team down. This was a vivid and personal lesson: when change happens, the priority has to be what is best for the team. (Page 118)
Bill valued courage: the willingness to take risks and the willingness to stand up for what’s right for the team, which may entail taking a personal risk. (Page 118)
Earlier in his Google career, before he became CEO, Sundar Pichai would often speak up when he felt something wasn’t the right choice, both to us and later to Larry Page when he was CEO. That takes some guts, but as Sundar says, “Bill always appreciated it when I spoke my mind about difficult issues because he knew I cared about the company and the products, and that’s where I was coming from.” (Page 118)
Bill was attracted to people who were “difficult”— more outspoken in their opinions, occasionally abrasive, not afraid to buck trends or the crowd. “Like diamonds that are somehow misshapen,” (Page 119)
Whereas others might find this type of person difficult, Bill found these people interesting and worth developing, sometimes helping them smooth away rough edges. The most effective coaches tolerate and even encourage some level of eccentricity and “prickliness” among their team members. Outstanding performers, from athletes to founders to business executives, are often “difficult.” You want them on your team. (Page 119)
This is perhaps the most important characteristic Bill looked for in his players: people who show up, work hard, and have an impact every day. Doers. (Page 120)
“Bill made the point that you don’t want to staff a team with just quarterbacks; you need to pay a lot of attention to the team composition and have a diverse set of different talents smartly woven together.” All people have their limitations; what’s important is to understand them individually, to identify what makes them different, and then to see how you can help them mesh with the rest of the team. Bill appreciated high cognitive abilities, but he also understood the value of soft skills, like empathy, that aren’t always valued in businesses, especially tech ones. At Google, he helped us learn to appreciate that this combination— smarts and hearts— creates better managers. (Page 120)
He did not overemphasize experience. He looked at skills and mind- set, and he could project what you could become. This is a coach’s talent, the ability to see a player’s potential, not just current performance. (Page 120)
Carol Dweck points out in her 2006 book, Mindset, someone’s true potential is unknowable, since “it’s impossible to foresee what can be accomplished with years of passion, toil, and training.” 3 But even without that accuracy, you can bet on potential enough to avoid writing off people solely because they lack experience. (Page 121)
If you are creating a high- performing team and building for the future, you need to hire for potential as well as experience. (Page 121)
Bill’s counsel to Jonathan was simple: add some players to the team. Jonathan should invite the engineering leads to his staff meeting. Not to just one meeting, but permanently. Then force the discussion of plans with them, air the arguments, and get everyone to buy in on whatever decisions were made. (Page 121)
it was to get the team to gel. Bringing in the people who were a focal point of dissension was the only way to do that. Sure, there were still plenty of arguments, but because more of the players were in the room, they got resolved more quickly, which helped create stronger relationships across groups. (Page 122)
at Kodak he developed a talent for finding the “doers” in any department and getting those people talking. This isn’t always easy in a large company, but Bill would look for those same characteristics he looked for in candidates: smarts, hard work, integrity, grit. And then he would figure out ways to formally or informally bring those people together to talk and make stuff happen, around a particular project or problem. (Page 122)
PICK THE RIGHT PLAYERS THE TOP CHARACTERISTICS TO LOOK FOR ARE SMARTS AND HEARTS: THE ABILITY TO LEARN FAST, A WILLINGNESS TO WORK HARD, INTEGRITY, GRIT, EMPATHY, AND A TEAM- FIRST ATTITUDE. (Page 123)
Bill highly valued peer relationships. An important, often overlooked, aspect of team building is developing relationships within the team. This can happen organically, but it is important enough that it should not be left to chance. So Bill looked for any opportunity to pair people up. Take a couple of people who don’t usually work together, assign them a task, project, or decision, and let them work on it on their own. This develops trust between the two people, usually regardless of the nature of the work.* (Page 123)
After sitting in on a couple of his staff meetings, Bill told Jonathan that he needed to work more on coaching people and pairing them up on things. Don’t just be a dictator assigning tasks, pair people up! So from that point forward, for projects such as preparing material for public events like earnings calls, producing team off- sites, working on compensation and promotion ladders, and developing internal tools, Jonathan stopped dictating and started pairing people up. The results: better decisions, stronger team. (Page 123)
The deliverable matters, but what matters just as much is the opportunity for the pair of teammates to work together on something and get to know and trust each other. That is invaluable to the team’s success. (Page 124)
PAIR PEOPLE PEER RELATIONSHIPS ARE CRITICAL AND OFTEN OVERLOOKED, SO SEEK OPPORTUNITIES TO PAIR PEOPLE UP ON PROJECTS OR DECISIONS. (Page 124)
Bill felt so strongly about the importance of peer relationships that he helped design a peer feedback survey we used for years at Google. Respondents gave feedback about colleagues, and the results provided a good picture of how well a person was performing in the eyes of their peers, the most important evaluators, in Bill’s opinion. (Page 125)
The survey was initially designed to elicit opinions on four aspects of a person’s performance: job performance, relationship with peer groups, management and leadership, and innovation. Later Bill insisted that it be expanded to include a question about people’s behavior in meetings. He was dismayed by how many people chose to be on their phones or laptops in meetings! We added a question about collaboration as well, and a set of questions on product vision that went just to product leaders. (Page 125)
on the most effective teams everyone contributes rather than one or two people dominating discussions, people on those teams are better at reading complex emotional states, and … the teams have more women. This can be partly explained by the fact that women tend to be better at reading emotional states than men. 6 So Bill always pushed us to consider women for any senior positions; he believed “you can always find a woman for a job, it may just take a little longer.” (Page 128)
GET TO THE TABLE WINNING DEPENDS ON HAVING THE BEST TEAM, AND THE BEST TEAMS HAVE MORE WOMEN. (Page 131)
problems. Quants or techies with this worldview tend to see the inherently messy, emotional tension that’s always present in teams of humans as inconvenient and irrational— an irritant that will surely be resolved in the course of a data- driven decision process. Of course, humans don’t always work that way. (Page 132)
Bill’s approach, Shona says, was always to tackle the hardest problem first. “You have to address that first.” (Page 132)
A litmus test for when issues have simmered for too long, a way to spot the elephant, is if the team can’t even have honest conversations about them. This is where the coach comes in, as a “tension spotter.” (Page 133)
Of course, another word for tension is politics. When you hear people saying that things are getting “political,” that often means that problems have arisen because the data or process hasn’t led to the best decision. At that point, personalities take over. (Page 133)
“For us, political stuff is very toxic,” he wrote Jonathan. “We have managed to become a big company with a wonderful absence of politics.” The reason we accomplished that, he failed to mention, was his own diligence in tackling the toughest, ugliest problems head- on. He would, as former Google head of communications Rachel Whetstone says, “beat the politics out of the situation” by bringing up the problem clearly, then forcing everyone to focus on it. (Page 133)
SOLVE THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IDENTIFY THE BIGGEST PROBLEM, THE “ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM,” BRING IT FRONT AND CENTER, AND TACKLE IT FIRST. (Page 134)
“When it gets to the negative, get it out, get to the issues, but don’t let the damn meeting dwell on that. Don’t let bitch sessions last for very long.” Psychologists would call this approach “problem- focused coping,” in contrast to “emotion- focused coping.” The latter may be more appropriate when facing a problem that can’t be solved, but in a business context focusing on and venting emotions needs to happen quickly, so more energy is directed to solutions. (Page 135)
One way Bill was able to accomplish this trick was by staying relentlessly positive. Negative situations can be infectious, people get cynical, optimism (Page 136)
“In those early years we had some tough times,” Eddy says, “but Bill was by far the most positive board member we had.” It would be easy to dismiss this attitude as mere cheerleading, except that he was also relentless in identifying and addressing problems, which cheerleaders don’t do. Studies show that positive leadership makes it easier to solve problems, so Bill would praise teams and people, give them a hug, and clap them on the shoulder to boost their confidence and comfort. Then, when he asked the tough questions, everyone understood that he was on their side, and that he was pushing on things because he wanted them to be better, to be successful. (Page 136)
When we leave the office behind and go coach our kids’ soccer or baseball teams, we are always taught the value of “positive coaching,” of leading with praise and then following with constructive feedback. But when we get back to work, we forget all that and rip into people. (Page 137)
DON’T LET THE BITCH SESSIONS LAST AIR ALL THE NEGATIVE ISSUES, BUT DON’T DWELL ON THEM. MOVE ON AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. (Page 137)
You can’t talk about coaching— or leading a company— without talking about winning. That’s what the good coaches do. That’s what great leaders do. (Page 138)
a former Hewlett- Packard executive who worked extensively with Bill, says that the biggest lesson he learned from him was about “the humanity of winning,” by which he means winning as a team (not as individuals) and winning ethically. (Page 139)
WINNING RIGHT STRIVE TO WIN, BUT ALWAYS WIN RIGHT, WITH COMMITMENT, TEAMWORK, AND INTEGRITY. (Page 141)
Leaders lead, he told him. You can’t afford to doubt. You need to commit. You can make mistakes, but you can’t have one foot in and one foot out, because if you aren’t fully committed then the people around you won’t be, either. If you’re in, be in. (Page 142)
LEADERS LEAD WHEN THINGS ARE GOING BAD, TEAMS ARE LOOKING FOR EVEN MORE LOYALTY, COMMITMENT, AND DECISIVENESS FROM THEIR LEADERS. (Page 144)
As Bill described it, his job as our coach was to “see little flaws in the organization that with a little massage we can make better. I listen, observe, and fill the communication and understanding gaps between people.” The coach can spot those fissures before they become deep and permanent, and act to fix them by filling in the information gaps and correcting any miscommunication. (Page 145)
Bill sought her out after the meeting. Listen, he told her, we decided not to make that change to that particular thing this time. I’m sorry and I know it’s tough, but you’re going to have to suck it up. Deal with the problem, okay? Not much of a pep talk, right? His advice was “deal with it”! But sometimes that’s all it takes. An acknowledgment that things didn’t go your way, some empathy that it sucks, a reminder to buck up and soldier on for the team. These were the sort of messages that Bill delivered all the time. Short, timely, and highly effective.* (Page 148)
This was all done without an agenda. Bill often didn’t voice an opinion about which way a decision would go— he just pushed for the decision to be made. When he sensed those moments, he’d work behind the scenes, drawing out people’s points of view, closing communication gaps, and fixing miscommunications, so that when the time came to discuss things in the meeting and make the decision, everyone was prepared. Then Bill would sit back, observe, and start the cycle over again. (Page 149)
FILL THE GAPS BETWEEN PEOPLE LISTEN, OBSERVE, AND FILL THE COMMUNICATION AND UNDERSTANDING GAPS BETWEEN PEOPLE. (Page 150)
“It’s so easy to get wrapped up in the work of what we’re producing, and not how we’re doing it. But leading teams becomes a lot more joyful when you know and care about people. It’s freeing.” (Page 150)
Bradley put Bill’s approach, the permission to be empathetic, to work. He prioritized his time to focus not on tactical and technical issues, but on team ones. He got to know and care about team members as people, pumped them up, pushed and implored them, then helped build momentum as they started to achieve important milestones. He focused on the team and not the problem, and the team responded. Senior leads started stepping up as Bradley gave them more freedom. (Page 151)
PERMISSION TO BE EMPATHETIC LEADING TEAMS BECOMES A LOT MORE JOYFUL, AND THE TEAMS MORE EFFECTIVE, WHEN YOU KNOW AND CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE. (Page 152)
And the essence of Bill was the essence of just about any sports coach: team first. All players, from stars to scrubs, must be ready to place the needs of the team above the needs of the individual. (Page 152)
Get the team right and you’ll get the issue right. (Page 153)
The reason Bill was able to get away with his hugs- and- curses approach was that all of his behavior was rooted in his heart: it came from love. “Get away” isn’t the right way to describe it; people looked forward to Bill’s hugs and profanities, because they meant he loved you. (Page 156)
Academic studies point out that there is a “compensation effect” between warmth and competence: people tend to assume that people who are warm are incompetent and those who are cold, competent. (Page 156)
Which means that you should lead with warmth, but know that you might have to work just a bit harder to build your reputation for competency. (Page 157)
Love is a word you don’t hear a lot in business settings. Oh sure, maybe people will express love toward an idea, a product, a brand, or a plan. Or to that dessert they are serving in the cafeteria today. But not to a person. We’ve all been conditioned and trained to separate our personal emotions from the business environment. We all want to hire people with passion, but only in the business sense, of course, lest the lawyers and HR people get concerned. (Page 157)
But not Bill. He didn’t separate the human and working selves; he just treated everyone as a person: professional, personal, family, emotions … all the components wrapped up in one. And if you were one of his people, he cared about you fiercely and genuinely. (Page 157)
“When Bill walked into the office at Benchmark, it was like a party arriving,” Bill Gurley says. “He’d walk around greeting people by name, hugging them.” After the hugs and greetings, he would talk about families, trips, friends. Bill was a coach of teams and a lover of people. What we learned from him is that you can’t be one without the other. (Page 157)
“The concept of male love is something people aren’t used to talking about. When he is yelling at you, it’s because he loves you and cares and wants you to succeed.” (Page 158)
So this is what we learned from Bill: that it’s okay to love. That people in your team are people, that the whole team becomes stronger when you break down the walls between the professional and human personas and embrace the whole person with love. (Page 158)
“To care about people you have to care about people.” This seems like it should be some hoary quote; we heard it a few times in our conversations with people about Bill. (Page 160)
Bill cared about people. He treated everyone with respect, he learned their names, he gave them a warm greeting. He cared about their families, and his actions in this regard spoke more loudly than his words. (Page 160)
Sundar Pichai recalls that Bill would start every one of their weekly Monday meetings by asking about Sundar’s family and weekend and talking about his own. “I was always busy going into these meetings, with lots of things to do, but my time with Bill always gave me a sense of perspective. That whatever I was doing was important, but he showed me that what really matters at the end of the day is how you live your life and the people in your life. It was always a lovely reset.” Bill’s small talk about families wasn’t small at all. It provided his coachees a respite in a busy day and a chance to ease their work- family conflict at least momentarily. (Page 160)
Bill cared about a person by caring about that person’s family, not just by asking about their well- being but by actually caring about them. (Page 162)
“Bill showed me that when you have a friend who is injured or ill or needs you in some way, you drop everything and just go. That’s what you do, that’s how you really show up. That’s what Bill would do. Just go.” (Page 163)
“You have to take the time to smell the roses, and the roses are your people,” he says. “Recognize that people want to talk to you about other things than just the job.” (Page 164)
THE LOVELY RESET TO CARE ABOUT PEOPLE YOU HAVE TO CARE ABOUT PEOPLE: ASK ABOUT THEIR LIVES OUTSIDE OF WORK, UNDERSTAND THEIR FAMILIES, AND WHEN THINGS GET ROUGH, SHOW UP. (Page 165)
With one gesture, a short outburst of enthusiastic clapping, he would both tell the team that he loved their work, giving them all a big pat on the back, and keep things moving. Bill’s raucous cheerleading didn’t just signal his approval, it generated momentum among the entire group in the room. What a brilliant technique! (Page 166)
When someone announces something good in a meeting, someone else will erupt with five loud claps. (Page 167)
THE PERCUSSIVE CLAP CHEER DEMONSTRABLY FOR PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSES. (Page 168)
To Bill, it was all part of a grand approach. Once you have your team or your community, what matters most are the bonds between the people on the team, which are forged by caring for each other and the common good. With all the trips Bill took with people, the trips were not the goal of the communities, the communities were the goal of the trips. It was all about making enduring connections between people, generating what sociologists call “social capital.” (Page 172)
You would be talking to him about something and he would say, you should talk to so- and- so, I’ll put you in touch. Minutes later the email would be on its way. He didn’t do this randomly or for the sake of it; he made a quick calculation that the connection would be beneficial for both people. Which is a pretty good definition of community. (Page 173)
ALWAYS BUILD COMMUNITIES BUILD COMMUNITIES INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF WORK. A PLACE IS MUCH STRONGER WHEN PEOPLE ARE CONNECTED. (Page 173)
“being an effective giver isn’t about dropping everything every time for every person. It’s about making sure that the benefits of helping others outweigh the costs to you.” People who do this well are “self- protective givers.” They are “generous, but they know their limits. Instead of saying yes to every request for help, they look for high- impact, low- cost ways of giving so that they can sustain their generosity— and enjoy it along the way.” (Page 176)
We learned from Bill that it’s okay to help people. Do favors. Apply judgment in making sure that they are the right thing to do, and ensure that everyone will be better off as a result. Then do the favor. (Page 176)
HELP PEOPLE BE GENEROUS WITH YOUR TIME, CONNECTIONS, AND OTHER RESOURCES. (Page 177)
Too often we think about running a company as an operating job, and as we have already examined, Bill considered operational excellence to be very important. But when we reduce company leadership to its operational essence, we negate another very important component: vision. Many times operating people come in, and though they may run the company better, they lose the heart and soul of the company, the vision that is going to take it forward. This is where founders excel. Bill loved founders, not just for the chutzpah they possess to try entrepreneurship in the first place, but for the vision they have for the company, and the love they have for it. He understood their limitations, but he usually felt that their value outweighed the shortcomings. (Page 178)
His principle every time: love the founders, and ensure they stay engaged in a meaningful way regardless of their operating role. (Page 180)
Today you are the CEO and they are the founders, Bill said, but someday you will be the ex- CEO and they’ll still be the founders. It’s not you versus them; it’s you and them. You are here to help them. (Page 180)
the essential argument in favor of founders remains: Vision is an important role. Heart and soul matter. Often that is embodied in the founder, but many other people may also embody what the company stands for, its mission and spirit. They don’t show up on a balance sheet, income statement, or org chart, but they are very valuable. (Page 180)
LOVE THE FOUNDERS HOLD A SPECIAL REVERENCE FOR— AND PROTECT— THE PEOPLE WITH THE MOST VISION AND PASSION FOR THE COMPANY. (Page 181)
THE ELEVATOR CHAT LOVING COLLEAGUES IN THE WORKPLACE MAY BE CHALLENGING, SO PRACTICE IT UNTIL IT BECOMES MORE NATURAL. (Page 182)
it is often the highest- performing people who feel the most alone. They usually have more interdependent relationships but feel more independent and separate from others.* 1 Their powerful egos and confidence help drive their success but may be paired with insecurities and uncertainty. They often have people who want to be their friends for personal gain rather than for friendship. They’re human. They still need affirmation and to know they are appreciated. (Page 187)
To be successful, companies need to have teams that work together as communities, where individuals integrate their interests and put aside differences to be individually and collectively obsessed with what’s good and right for the company. Since this doesn’t naturally happen among groups of people, especially high- performing, ambitious people, you need someone playing the role of a coach, a team coach, to make it happen. Any company that wants to succeed in a time where technology has suffused every industry and most aspects of consumer life, where speed and innovation are paramount, must have team coaching as part of its culture. This is especially true at its top levels; executive teams must have a coach if they want to perform at their best. (Page 188)
Because the best person to be the team’s coach is the team’s manager. Being a good coach is essential to being a good manager and leader. Coaching is no longer a specialty; you cannot be a good manager without being a good coach. The path to success in a fast- moving, highly competitive, technology- driven business world is to form high- performing teams and give them the resources and freedom to do great things. And an essential component of high- performing teams is a leader who is both a savvy manager and a caring coach. (Page 188)
He believed that managers who put their people first and run a strong operation are held as leaders by their employees; these managers don’t assume leadership, they earn it. (Page 188)
He listened completely, was relentlessly candid, and believed in his people more than they believed in themselves. (Page 189)
He thought that the team was paramount, insisted on team- first behavior, and when faced with any issue his first step was to look at the team, not the problem. (Page 189)
He sought out the biggest problems, the elephants in the room, and brought them front and center, ensuring they got looked at first. (Page 189)
He worked behind the scenes, in hallway meetings, phone calls, and 1: 1s, to fill communication gaps. (Page 189)
He loved people. He brought that love to communities he created or joined. He made it okay to bring it into the workplace. (Page 189)
Bill grasped that there are things we all care about as people— love, family, money, attention, power, meaning, purpose— that are factors in any business situation. That to create effective teams, you need to understand and pay attention to these human values. (Page 190)
Bill would get to know people as people, and by doing so he could motivate them to perform as businesspeople. He understood that positive human values generate positive business outcomes. This is a connection that too many business leaders ignore. (Page 191)
BE CREATIVE. Your post- fifty years should be your most creative time. You have wisdom of experience and freedom to apply it where you want. Avoid metaphors such as you are on the “back nine.” This denigrates the impact you can have. (Page 192)
DON’T BE A DILETTANTE. Don’t just do a portfolio of things. Whatever you get involved with, have accountability and consequence. Drive it. (Page 192)
FIND PEOPLE WHO HAVE VITALITY. Surround yourself with them; engage with them. Often they will be younger. (Page 192)
APPLY YOUR GIFTS. Figure out what you are uniquely good at, what sets you apart. And understand the things inside you that give you a sense of purpose. Then apply them. (Page 192)
DON’T WASTE TIME WORRYING ABOUT THE FUTURE. Allow serendipity to play a role. Most of the turning points in life cannot be predicted or controlled. (Page 192)
I look at all the people who’ve worked for me or who I’ve helped in some way, he would say, and I count up how many are great leaders now. That’s how I measure success. (Page 193)
