Winning Strategies for Leadership and Growth: JooBee Yeow on Mastering the Start-Up Space

Transcription:

Hello and welcome to today's episode of the Startup Diaries. We're super excited to have JooBee joining us today, an experienced people and HR leader with a PhD in leadership development. She's also the creator of the Scaling Startups blog series and Learn Agility open source.  In this episode, JooBee will be sharing her insights into leadership, scaling businesses, and the importance of meta competencies for sustainable leadership developments.

We'll also be diving into how to build a 360 degree feedback culture, common mistakes leaders make when scaling teams from 200 to 500, and how to foster continuous learning on a budget. So whether you're a leader in a scaling startup or people leader aiming to enhance your team's performance, you won't want to miss out on this conversation, so tune in for valuable tips and actionable advice from JooBee.

Welcome JooBee. Thanks for joining us today.

Thanks for having me Livvie.

Pleasure is all ours. So JooBee, I'd love to start with an introduction and a breakdown of number one, who is JooBee? And number two, talk us through your career background, because you've had a really, really interesting trajectory and your position from a consultant perspective is a very interesting one for our listeners. So over to you. 

Hi, I’m JooBee (again).  I was born and raised in Malaysia and I love food, hate exercise. So in terms of my background, I'm a systems engineer turned chief people officer. So heads up, the geek in me is strong! Across my career journey, I've worked for companies that are 2, to 20, to 200 years old, with revenue from £10million, to £100 million to £1billion.  But the area where I repeatedly hone my expertise and experience is building startups to operate at scale, when they receive their series A or B.  But instead of building that now, I am guiding and advising founders and startup leaders to transition from working in a creative chaos manner to systematized, in order to get repeatable performance. I think I am an educator at heart. So, you will see me sharing my knowledge with the startup community in my blog, in my newsletter, events and podcasts like today.

Yes. And we're a huge fan of your newsletter here at Burns Sheehan, the marketing team. As you've mentioned you have a plethora of experience, 20 years, in fact, in organisational psychology and business leadership strategy as well. So today I'd love for our listeners to have very much a 101 of people leadership and for them to take away tangible advice around that topic. So to kick off, can you share some insights into the big questions around people and what changes as you scale? 

So the key change is business focus when startup embark on their one to 100 million journey, revenue journey. So within this journey, you will see there are three broad stages if you like, start, build, and scale. So in the start, the business is focusing on getting their product market fit. In their build stage, now they're trying to get the product as effectively as possible to the customer.

And in the scale stage where they are expanding their market, trying to reach that hundred million revenue, they will be focusing on either entering into new geo or markets or launching new products. So as you can see, the key change is business focus.  But because of the change, the business also needs to operate differently.

So in the start stage, the business need to operate in a more flexible, adaptable way. In the build stage, it is much more structured and systematized. And in the scale stage, they will need to be able to handle highly complex internal and external variable.

So in summary, in the startup growth, there are broadly three stages and those three stages are profoundly different in terms of the business focus, and as a result, the way the business operate also changes. Okay. Succinct answer. Very clear. Thank you. You've spent time as a researcher as well in discovering the meta competencies and how they're key to sustainable leadership development. So what are those meta competencies? And can you delve into a bit of an explanation of that?

I can't believe you are the only one who has dug into my PhD.  So let's go. So we might have heard that beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.  Effective leadership also lies in the eye of the beholder. So for example, for me, a straightforward, no nonsense leader who gives me difficult feedback is an effective leader for me. But for somebody else, that person might be a nightmare. So in essence, effective leadership depends on situation, social and individual needs.  So it might be a little bit rigid of, or even idealistic of HR or companies to say that we can map a menu of all the competencies needed to be effective and train our leaders based on that menu. Instead, what we should do is develop leaders to develop themselves based on the need of the situation, social and individual needs so that they can be more adaptive in a very dynamic and complex workplace.

So that is what I mean by meta competencies, where leaders are able to identify and develop the relevant competencies that they need within the context that they are in. And a cohesive working experience is all about adapting to one another, but making sure that we're focusing on the strengths and the direction of where everybody needs to be, right?

That makes complete sense. Thank you. So can you explain the importance of what you write an awful lot about, which is 360 feedback loops? Now it might sound quite straightforward, but I'm sure that there are a lot of complexities that come with it. So can we just start with some guiding points or guiding lights around 360 feedback loops and why they're so important?

So the answer is actually quite simple. What 360 is trying to achieve is really valuable. It's as simple as it helps us to broaden our perspective and look at the bigger picture. Whether it is for our performance, our development areas, gaps, etc. The challenge is that how we gather the data - is the data that we gather valid and reliable. So here comes the geek. If we look at data reliability, it’s how consistent is the data that we're getting, therefore making it reliable. For example, if I ask several people to rate your performance, how consistent would that data be? Most likely not very.  The reason being it is a subjective measure which are full of personal biases.

So it's important to make sure that we are complementing that with objective measure.  And then when we look at data validity, it's, are we measuring the right thing?  So if, for example, we were to ask the team and say,  how effective is your CTOs communication? Different people will have different perspective. Some will say yes, he or she is effective because they communicate nicely. Some might say no, because the CTO cannot express their expectations clearly. So that's what I mean by the concept of 360 feedback is really valuable, but if the method in which we get the data is flawed, then we risk getting inconclusive insights or worse.

Okay. Wrong conclusion. Off piste. What do you think is the best method to gather that type of information in a medium sized business? 

So number one, gather as many data points as you can because that removes biases. For example, if you were to gather feedback every 12 months, I don't even remember what I ate three days ago!

So gather the feedback more continuously, number one. Number two, from different sources. Currently we're depending on other people to give feedback. Are we making sure that we're gathering data from other sources such as for example, from project retro, or the more objective data, depending on your role. It could be customer's feedback or speed to delivery, something that is more objective beyond just what other people say. I think it doesn't just apply to small to medium sized business, but also  any businesses that wants to collect 360 feedback.

Yeah, definitely.  Your sweet spot, JooBee, is helping to scale businesses from 200 to 500 size wise. So what are the common mistakes that you see leaders doing or not doing at these step changes with regards to leadership? 

There are two that I see over and over again. The first one is clinging to the past. When leaders keep doing what they've always done. And the second one is failing to adapt to the future, the next stage that let's say the startup is entering into. And it is only natural this, because why would we change something that's working so well to get us to where we are?

Nokia probably thought that at the peak of their game, where they rested on their laurels and they failed to see, or they lacked the vision to see what was heading their way.  And if you're listening to this podcast and you wonder who is Nokia, I rest my case.  You mentioned step change to me before.  For those who are perhaps going through it, what should they be looking for in those step changes that they're not quite understanding will impact their ability to lead?

There are many, many, many, many things. So let's pick one simple thing. I mentioned earlier on that if you are moving from start to build stage, where in order to be successful in the start stage, you need to be flexible and adaptable. And when you're in the build stage, you need to start to create structure so the business can scale and systematize, and this is two very different ways of working. Knowing that the next expectation is coming is really important to either start growing the skill. Start understanding what you might need to do more of. Or, if you're like me, you play to your strength in a particular stage. When you move to the next stage, you go back and repeat the cycle.

So it's a lot of foresight really, but prepare it. Once you see it, you must prepare for it. You can't wait till you're in it.

You can, but everything will slow down!

How can leaders cultivate a culture of continuous learning with one, low or two, no budget.  And that ties into our previous question because culture is something that's really hard to maintain at scale and to make sure that people are feeling the same way while in a business or continue with the same behaviours that they think make their culture when you're growing at scale, right?

You pick the culture that actually will enable people and that transition. So, if you go, I really want to foster a culture of continuous learning in the organisation, that is no, low to no cost. There's one really simple answer and it's not going to be a surprise to anyone. It’s to give feedback every day. It’s literally no cost to the business.  The hard question is why are we not doing that?  Why are our managers, why are our peers, and why are our direct reports not giving feedback every day? There are several reasons. People are afraid to hurt other people's feelings. They are afraid to get into conflict. They are afraid of retaliation. Or it could be they're very busy with their own work, or they might not even know what good looks like to give you the feedback. So they chose not to. So there are many, many reasons. But like I said, if you want to foster a culture of continuous learning, the answer is quite simple, which is to give feedback every day. But the challenge we need to solve is not train people how to give more feedback, it's actually to identify what are the blockers that's stopping people from giving feedback every day.

Which can include fear of hurting other people's feelings, maybe not having the confidence, they haven't been given the voice before, maybe looking like they're going against the grain of the business's culture, but actually negative feedback is just as important as positive feedback, right?

Do we even give positive feedback is the question. Because what people do is they give praise. Yeah, good job, but that is not feedback. Why do you think that is? 

I think that people believe that they're reinforcing a good thing by saying, well done, but nothing will get better if there's no change. Nothing changes if nothing changes, right? How can you change with just positive reinforcement?

Even with positive feedback, you want them to change and for example, do more of what they do. But if you just say good job, what is it that I did that is good job? Yes. What is the impact that I have that will drive me to do more of that? So many times we focus on being better in how to give developmental feedback, but we forget as well, we could be better in giving positive feedback that is impactful. 

It's a seriously important slice of the pie, isn't it? If somebody's working super hard and they never get any reinforcement, then they're not going to quite frankly want to carry on doing it, even though their manager might think they're doing a brilliant job.

I have a real life example for this, which is, I remember an employee was really, really nervous going, I don't know where I stand. I don't know if I'll pass my probation. So I talked to the manager just to understand and the manager go, they're doing a great job. I'm like, well, they don't know that! And I remember vividly the response was, well, no feedback means it’s a good job.  No, there's no communication.  Communication.

That's what it is. It's communication. So as we know many people leaders are often in charge of hiring and scaling their teams.  So let's deviate to some hiring wisdom and discuss experience versus potential in the hiring process. Do you think that experience should be hired over potential or do you think that they're equally as valuable.

So that  question can only be answered in the context that the manager, the hiring manager, or the person is in, considering two things.  One is the work that needs to be done. And second is what is your capability and capacity as a manager.

So let's start with the work that needs to be done. So imagine if my whole team are high potential, we will struggle to deliver on what the business needs right now. If all my teams are experienced individual, they will be bored. It is about striking the right balance of ratio between high potentials and experienced individual considering the composition of your team and the work that you need to deliver. 

Then we ask the question of you as a manager, what is your capacity and capability? So if we look at capacity, if all my team members are high potential, I will not have capacity to develop all of them and do my job effectively. And then we look at capability. Am I able to successfully lead my team, depending on the composition?

So if, for example, I am not good in talent. So if I were to hire a head of talent, I would hire somebody that's experienced to benefit the team.  But I am strong in the area of people ops and OD. Which means when I hire, I can hire high potential or even promote internally for a high potential. And because I can support them and their team when need be.

So the question is not, should I hire high potential or an experienced individual? Instead I think we should always think if I'm hiring a team. What is the right composition of high potential and experienced individual in order to deliver impact for the business, but also provide enough stretch for the team to keep them motivated.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Context is everything, isn't it? Absolutely. You're seeing the video now, it depends on the context. So, what exactly do Learngility and Notion Capital do?

So Learngility is my own business and what Learngility solve is what I solve, which is how do I help founders, startup leaders, HR leaders to transition their startup from working in a creative chaos manner to systematize in order to get repeatable performance, the build stage. Notion capital, I was with them last year for six months. I was covering for Michelle. And the reason why I said yes to join a VC for a period of time, because As I mentioned,  as much as I love to educate, I also love to learn  and working as a HR leader from the operator side. I always wonder, what are VCs thinking? What is important for them? So I took the opportunity as a learning opportunity to work with a VC. And as we do that, I love that we have so much synergy with Notion Capital where they are operator VC, and they are really good at go to market.  And they also really, really get it that people and org is the machine that enable the business.

So they're very curious on how do, how do you also create that, you know, structure. for People and Org in order to professionalize the startup. So lots of work done during that six months as Michelle came back. Now I am staying back with them as their expert advisor for People and Org.

So our final two questions. and sometimes the most difficult to put your finger on. What has been your biggest challenge, JooBee, in your career to date? 

That was a hard one I actually have to think about it. So as a HR leader, people expect me to be nice. As a female HR leader, even more so, people expect me to be nice. And I am a lot of things. I can be compassionate, kind, fair, but never nice. For example, I don't do things to please others. I will say no when it's necessary and I will give difficult feedback or take the time to have hard conversation. Because I think in reality effective HR leadership involve making tough decision, having really honest conversation and not just be agreeable.

So with the high expectation for me and my role to be nice, the challenge for me always is I have to reset and manage a lot of expectations. And that takes time before I can be effective. 

A lot of leaders say we need to be kind, not nice. So I imagine that you agree with that type of mantra.

Absolutely. Because sometimes I find that when we are being nice, are we just avoiding  our own fear and not leaning to it and be fair and compassionate to others to help them, whether it is to grow or to see something from different perspective etc.

And if a people leader is struggling with getting the most out of their team, perhaps by being too nice, what one piece of advice would you give for that person to start with?

How do they start being kinder, not nicer?  Okay. Number one, do not assume that the solution I will, or anyone will give you is perfect. To get the most out of your team is relevant to you and your contacts. It's actually the solution because a lot of times people give us the solution. But  if we are struggling to get the most out of our team, the first thing to do is to find out what is causing it. So put on your Sherlock Holmes hat and really, really dig deep into the root cause and be prepared that you might not like the answer.

So for example, if you find out that maybe your team member has something going on at home, that is straightforward. You might find out that your team member has a lot on their plate, and the root cause is because you as a leader cannot prioritise work. Or you might find out that your team member might lack skills, but the root cause is, you're not matching the right level of work to their level of skill set. Or even, you might have hired the wrong person for the role. So I always live by the mantra that, the better you can identify the problem and root cause, the better you will solve it. 

Very sound advice. Well JooBee, on that note, I cannot thank you enough. So much tangible advice. And thank you so much for joining us on the podcast.

Thank you so much for having me.