इस एपिसोड के बारे में
Ask a CEO to name their hardest problem and they will rarely call it a people problem. Beth Karlsson will take that bet every time. From her seat at Lightspeed she watches dozens of the fastest-scaling companies in the world figure out talent in real time, and the ones getting it right have stopped hiring for pedigree and started hiring for how fast someone can learn.
Beth Karlsson is Partner and Chief HR Officer at Lightspeed Venture Partners, the global multi-stage venture firm that was an early backer of Anduril, Anthropic, Glean, Snap and Wiz. She started at Apple on the retail floor in the earliest days of its stores, moved into Apple's people organization, and was head of people at Pinterest through its IPO.
They get into:
1. What a CHRO actually does inside a venture capital firm
2. Why she interviews for turning points instead of experience
3. The Apple research that found compassion set its best leaders apart, and how it got built into interviews and reviews
4. How "pace and purpose" carried Pinterest through its IPO and the year that followed
5. Why the runway a company gets to scale has compressed, and the talent that survives it
6. The one capability she screens every HR candidate for that almost nobody has
Below the Surface is a show about how the best companies build their teams, hosted by Joelle Emerson, co-founder and CEO of Paradigm.
Chapters:
00:00 Meet Beth Karlsson
01:13 A CHRO inside a venture capital firm
03:06 Hiring for potential, not pedigree
05:11 The trait Apple's best leaders shared
09:27 If you want perks, look elsewhere
10:54 The perks arms race at Pinterest
12:43 Pace and purpose through the IPO
14:57 What the best portfolio companies get right
17:15 You can't make everybody happy
21:49 There is no AI magic wand
26:09 When your team fears being replaced
30:37 Everything is about people
33:46 People are the only moat
36:35 Telling a more optimistic AI story
40:45 Lightning round
43:31 Closing thoughts
Where to find Beth Karlsson:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bethkarlsson/
Where to find Joelle Emerson:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joelle-emerson-4a24225/
X: https://x.com/joelle_emerson
Learn more about Lightspeed: https://lsvp.com
Learn more about Surface: https://surface.ai
Where to find Below the Surface:
All episodes: https://surface.ai/podcast
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/below-the-surface/id1896941268
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/033AK9SGqJCL9HLx7dE7bn
इस एपिसोड में
नोद्स दिखाएं 🔗
अनुलिपि 🔗
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:08.340
This is "Below the Surface," where we talk to leaders at category-defining companies to learn how they're reshaping their organizations right now.
00:00:08.340 --> 00:00:11.520
I'm Joelle Emerson, co-founder and CEO at Paradigm.
00:00:11.520 --> 00:00:21.900
We're building Surface.ai to help people teams create the conditions for performance, productivity, and innovation at a time when organizations are changing so fast.
00:00:21.900 --> 00:00:27.620
My guest today is Beth Karlsson, Partner and Chief HR Officer at Lightspeed Venture Partners.
00:00:27.620 --> 00:00:41.340
Lightspeed is a global, multistage venture capital firm that has been the first investor and an early backer in some of the world's most innovative companies like Anduril, Anthropic, Glean, Snap, Wiz, and more.
00:00:41.340 --> 00:00:44.460
Most people leaders get to study one company at a time.
00:00:44.460 --> 00:00:53.600
Beth gets to study a whole portfolio of them, watching some of the fastest-scaling, most AI-forward companies in the world figure out talent in real time.
00:00:53.600 --> 00:00:57.600
Before Lightspeed, she spent years at Apple and was then at Pinterest.
00:00:57.600 --> 00:01:01.140
Where she ultimately took on the role as head of people through its IPO.
00:01:01.140 --> 00:01:11.280
So Beth has really seen this from nearly every seat: the operator scaling through hypergrowth, and now at a venture capital firm, spotting patterns across the whole field.
00:01:11.280 --> 00:01:12.480
Here's Beth.
00:01:12.480 --> 00:01:14.480
Beth, welcome. Thanks for being here.
00:01:14.480 --> 00:01:16.280
Thank you so much. I'm so happy to be here.
00:01:16.280 --> 00:01:22.340
Yeah. So you have a really interesting role. You're a CHRO, but inside of a venture capital firm.
00:01:22.340 --> 00:01:22.840
Yeah.
00:01:22.840 --> 00:01:27.580
Kind of unusual. So what does that role look like? How do you spend your time? I just want to start learning more about what you do.
00:01:27.580 --> 00:01:35.000
Yeah, no, it's a good question. It is a little bit unusual. I feel very lucky to have it. I actually really love my job.
00:01:35.000 --> 00:01:42.640
What I get to do is, so it's some kind of traditional CHRO-type duties. So I am responsible for the HR strategy for our firm.
00:01:42.640 --> 00:01:54.400
We have an HR team, so we look after all the traditional HR sort of things that you need to get done: performance and hiring and recruiting and benefits and all those good things.
00:01:54.400 --> 00:01:56.060
For like a 200-person firm.
00:01:56.060 --> 00:01:57.560
Yes, we are a 200-person firm.
00:01:57.560 --> 00:02:07.120
Global, and so we have to set up all those capabilities just as you would in any organization, so I have the privilege of leading that team, which is a great deal of fun.
00:02:07.120 --> 00:02:22.460
And then I also spend a lot of my time, as most CHROs do, supporting our senior leadership with thinking about our talent strategy, how it relates to where our firm is headed, what are the things that we need to achieve, and then how do we do that through our people structure.
00:02:22.460 --> 00:02:27.540
And then I also have this other part of my job that I think is really unique.
00:02:27.540 --> 00:02:41.520
When I'm working with my portfolio companies, I have an opportunity to do some mentorship and some support for our founders and heads of HR across those teams, and that part is really fun and quite different from, I think, the sort of standard CHRO job.
00:02:41.520 --> 00:02:47.020
This is part of one of the reasons I was so excited to talk to you, because I think that is so, I think both things you're doing are different.
00:02:47.020 --> 00:02:57.520
I think, first of all, running an HR function in a venture capital firm, like, excited to hear about that, and then seeing things across so many different types of companies is a really unique vantage point, particularly right now.
00:02:57.520 --> 00:03:05.980
And so much is changing so quickly in the HR function itself, in how the HR function is enabling the rest of the business to change.
00:03:05.980 --> 00:03:12.060
So I'll start with kind of you looking inward at how you're thinking about people and talent at the firm.
00:03:12.060 --> 00:03:19.500
How is AI reshaping the way that your team works and that you hire or do performance management?
00:03:19.500 --> 00:03:21.760
Have your jobs evolved, and what is that looking like?
00:03:21.760 --> 00:03:27.500
Yeah, yeah, I mean, the answer is yes, right, and I think that actually it's changing and shifting for us the same
00:03:27.500 --> 00:03:30.660
way that it is for a lot of our companies as well.
00:03:30.660 --> 00:03:36.620
You know, the biggest piece is really thinking about how we hire ahead and when we think about our organizational structure.
00:03:36.620 --> 00:03:42.980
What are the kinds of roles that we think we need, but more importantly, almost what's the type of talent that we need?
00:03:42.980 --> 00:03:50.060
And I think increasingly, this has been true for a while, but I think it's so much more sort of relevant now, is that we really need
00:03:50.060 --> 00:03:57.480
people that understand how to learn, how to be flexible, how to be curious, people that can see around corners.
00:03:57.480 --> 00:04:05.680
It's less about hiring for kind of pedigree and years of experience and more about what's the potential and what is this person's
00:04:05.680 --> 00:04:13.540
ability to help us navigate all of the new corners and all of the things that are sort of still, you know, unseen that are ahead for us.
00:04:13.540 --> 00:04:18.720
How do you evaluate that? Because I feel like it's much easier to know where someone went to college or where they worked.
00:04:18.720 --> 00:04:25.480
It's much harder to know how does someone learn and how adaptable are they? So how do you assess for that?
00:04:25.480 --> 00:04:27.460
Yeah, it's a great question.
00:04:27.460 --> 00:04:39.100
Sometimes I ask people to really tell me about turning points so I'm less sort of interested in maybe the core experience or the work that you did in a certain moment of time, but I want to know why you made certain decisions.
00:04:39.100 --> 00:04:45.400
So if it was I decided to change roles, change companies, change cities, there was something that I made a change in.
00:04:45.400 --> 00:04:51.060
Maybe if you're earlier in career, it's something about like I changed majors or I decided to do something different.
00:04:51.060 --> 00:04:57.440
I really want to understand how people thought through that and if I see that people can kind of move into something that feels
00:04:57.440 --> 00:05:11.000
murky or feels like adversity and do that in a way that is sort of graceful for where they have bumps but also articulate about what they learned and why they made the decisions to move forward, that's something that I love to find.
00:05:11.000 --> 00:05:15.080
You started your career, not started, but you spent many years at Apple.
00:05:15.080 --> 00:05:15.620
I did.
00:05:15.620 --> 00:05:18.380
And you started on the retail floor.
00:05:18.380 --> 00:05:18.880
I did.
00:05:18.880 --> 00:05:21.420
And then moved into the people space.
00:05:21.420 --> 00:05:27.420
I would love to hear more about that journey and lessons that you've taken from like that trajectory that has
00:05:27.420 --> 00:05:30.800
kind of stayed with you even now as the world has changed so much.
00:05:30.800 --> 00:05:33.560
Yeah, well, first I'd say I loved starting in retail.
00:05:33.560 --> 00:05:40.760
I mean, I think I worked retail jobs in high school and there's something about being face to face with your customer that's so powerful.
00:05:40.760 --> 00:05:44.320
You know, you get immediate feedback, the good, the bad and the ugly of that.
00:05:44.320 --> 00:05:57.400
And so I think starting in retail was a great place to start when you really want to understand how your product or how your service is being sort of consumed or viewed by the people that you want to consume or view it, right?
00:05:57.400 --> 00:05:58.520
It's a better place to do that.
00:05:58.520 --> 00:06:05.240
So starting in retail really sort of brings focus to how decisions that are made will play out in real time.
00:06:05.240 --> 00:06:11.880
And then I was just very lucky that I was able to start in Apple retail at the very beginning of the early years of Apple retail.
00:06:11.880 --> 00:06:18.580
So, you know, we were handing out water bottles, trying to convince people to come into the stores and then just really rapid scale.
00:06:18.580 --> 00:06:24.100
And the biggest lesson I learned from Apple retail was really about how you think about culture.
00:06:24.100 --> 00:06:27.380
And this was true for Apple corporate as well, which I eventually moved to.
00:06:27.380 --> 00:06:30.880
How you become unapologetic about your culture.
00:06:30.880 --> 00:06:40.440
So whatever that might be, right, you know, if it is something that you feel very passionately about as a founder or something that's directly tied to your product or your mission.
00:06:40.440 --> 00:06:50.240
If you can be clear about what that thing is, that clarity of your culture, the clarity of the purpose serves you so well as you start to operationalize your business.
00:06:50.240 --> 00:06:57.360
I can say more about that, but that was a big lesson that I took from all of those years at Apple, both retail and on the corporate side.
00:06:57.360 --> 00:06:59.580
How did Apple express that clarity?
00:06:59.580 --> 00:07:04.240
How did you, it's one thing to say, like, our culture is X and it's written in these values and it's pasted on the wall.
00:07:04.240 --> 00:07:04.740
Totally.
00:07:04.740 --> 00:07:10.840
And that may be somewhat useful, but it's another thing to live it every day, to reinforce it, to hold people accountable to it.
00:07:10.840 --> 00:07:11.340
Right.
00:07:11.340 --> 00:07:16.180
So how did, I think Apple's like very well known for having a very distinctive culture and certainly at the time you were there.
00:07:16.180 --> 00:07:16.680
Yeah.
00:07:16.680 --> 00:07:24.520
How did you, and then you moved into the people team, how did you perpetuate that and sort of make sure that that culture was well understood?
00:07:24.520 --> 00:07:27.340
Yeah, one of the projects that.
00:07:27.340 --> 00:07:31.600
I led and had the opportunity to work on was profile work, right.
00:07:31.600 --> 00:07:41.060
Which is not in and of itself groundbreaking, but I think the difference is, is that we spent a lot of time doing a lot of research to really understand in a nuanced way.
00:07:41.060 --> 00:07:50.740
What are the behaviors that are distinctly different from employees who, you know, succeed and succeed in the way that we would sort of look for within our culture at Apple.
00:07:50.740 --> 00:07:57.320
And this is true again, both retail and corporate, although the nuance, the differences, there's differences in what those capabilities are, but it was the
00:07:57.320 --> 00:08:00.200
fact that we took the time to research and understand that.
00:08:00.200 --> 00:08:09.000
Because once you really study and know what those differences are, you then can take almost like a magic ingredient and you can take that and operationalize that.
00:08:09.000 --> 00:08:18.060
So for example, in retail, one of the things, the traits that we learned that our retail leaders held that was different than other leaders was compassion.
00:08:18.060 --> 00:08:24.820
And we found that that came out in the way that our leaders invited people into our stores and invited people into our product.
00:08:24.820 --> 00:08:27.300
And so we were able then to take that trait.
00:08:27.300 --> 00:08:37.140
We were able to develop compassion and understand what our behaviors that demonstrate compassion in an interview, for example, or how could we develop compassion in our people?
00:08:37.140 --> 00:08:41.780
How can we include it in our performance reviews so we can assess how people are doing on those things?
00:08:41.780 --> 00:08:46.680
So essentially, you take what you learn and then you integrate it into your system.
00:08:46.680 --> 00:08:50.640
And once you do that, it begins to show up in more natural ways.
00:08:50.640 --> 00:08:52.860
It's not something that you're putting on a wall.
00:08:52.860 --> 00:08:57.280
It's actually something that's just baked into how you operationalize your business.
00:08:57.280 --> 00:09:00.820
And what you're doing now in your role, have you even brought that forward into other roles?
00:09:00.820 --> 00:09:01.660
Yeah, absolutely.
00:09:01.660 --> 00:09:08.800
I mean, I think it was such a sort of unlock to really understanding how you drive culture in those kinds of ways.
00:09:08.800 --> 00:09:15.880
And so both then when I moved on to Pinterest, I think we spent a lot of time also thinking about, you know, how do we operate a system?
00:09:15.880 --> 00:09:17.620
And this has to do with scale, right?
00:09:17.620 --> 00:09:20.040
Like, how do you operationalize these things?
00:09:20.040 --> 00:09:26.060
And then today at Lightspeed, both within my own firm and then, you know, sort of in consulting some of our businesses.
00:09:26.060 --> 00:09:27.260
So absolutely. Yeah.
00:09:27.260 --> 00:09:38.400
I feel like there was a phrase, we had dinner not that long ago, and I feel like there was a phrase that you said that was like a cultural norm at Apple, something about like frozen yogurt.
00:09:38.400 --> 00:09:40.440
Oh my gosh, yeah.
00:09:40.440 --> 00:09:44.360
So, and this wasn't me, this was our recruiting team, right, at the time.
00:09:44.360 --> 00:09:55.240
So, you know, when in the Apple corporate side, you know, at that time, you know, we had, you know, competitors doing wonderful things for their own culture and no judgment there, right?
00:09:55.240 --> 00:09:57.240
But I think that at Apple, we were really,
00:09:57.240 --> 00:10:05.040
really focused on this message of, if you wanted to come work for us at that time, it's because you were coming here to do your life's best work.
00:10:05.040 --> 00:10:13.920
And we weren't focused on things like, you know, what is our food situation, our cafeteria situation, what are the freebies and, you know, sort of all those kinds of things.
00:10:13.920 --> 00:10:27.220
And so, we had some recruiting teams that used to sort of say a little tongue in cheek, but would say, if you're looking for free frozen yogurt, you can, you know, kind of go down the street or look somewhere else, but here, you know, you come here to do your life's best work.
00:10:27.220 --> 00:10:40.240
What that is, again, is about clarity and what you are and what you aren't and being unapologetic about that because then people have the opportunity to either opt in or opt out and that's a wonderful thing, right?
00:10:40.240 --> 00:10:54.360
There's no sort of value judgment there, it's just what do I, as an employee at this time in my career, what am I looking for and does that fit what this company's culture is and what they're looking for and when that is a match, it's a beautiful thing.
00:10:54.360 --> 00:10:57.200
So, what was your take? I mean, when you left Apple, you went to Pinterest.
00:10:57.200 --> 00:11:19.060
And this was at a time when every fast-growing tech startup seemed to be competing on the perks, you know, like the amount of food and snack and every kind of beverage and every kind of coffee and kombucha machines and I remember I was working with all these companies at the time and I loved it so I got to come to your offices and enjoy.
00:11:19.060 --> 00:11:27.180
What was your take on that at a time when you had just come from a company that was explicitly not about that? Were you skeptical at the time about if this would create, you know, a sense of
00:11:27.180 --> 00:11:33.040
entitlement or a sort of confused, you know, motives for working in a place or I'm curious how you felt about that.
00:11:33.040 --> 00:11:57.160
Yeah, no, I actually, I think that what, really what I felt was curiosity because what I wanted to understand was what was our brand, what was our business mission and how do those things align and if they do and when they do, then they're purposeful, right, and I think that there were elements of that that were very purposeful to who Pinterest is as a brand and what we were looking to bring in from talent.
00:11:57.160 --> 00:12:02.420
It was every, every fast-growing, like, you were not, you had great perks, but you, everyone was doing that.
00:12:02.420 --> 00:12:27.140
Everyone was doing that, yeah, for sure, and so that's part of it, right, is that you're sort of, you know, wanting to make sure that you're, you're offering something that's, you know, sort of even, but I think, you know, honestly, and this is true for a lot of companies that I think are in the sort of scale stage that Pinterest was in when I was there, you're, you're really, you're moving so fast and there's so much growth that you are also still trying to figure out who are we and how do we
00:12:27.140 --> 00:12:43.220
want to show up and, and sort of, so Apple was a different institution and I, I understood those differences, right, so when you're in a business that is still growing and scaling and learning and, and at that sort of stage of its maturity, there's still a lot of things that you're sort of looking to understand about how you want to show up in the world.
00:12:43.220 --> 00:12:57.120
I'd love to kind of hear what takeaways you have from the massive growth phase that you led through at Pinterest. You were there for several years, including in a head of people role at the time of the IP
00:12:57.120 --> 00:13:12.140
So things were changing very, very quickly. Company was growing. It was like one of the hot, you know, Silicon Valley darling companies. What did you learn about, you know, how you shape culture and how you lead people from that experience?
00:13:12.140 --> 00:13:27.100
This concept of pace and purpose, the two Ps. And pace is something that can be very fast, right? You can move at a very fast pace. But the thing about pace that's so wonderful is that it's about purpose because you're moving at an intentional speed.
00:13:27.100 --> 00:13:50.080
And when you are faced with massive scale, it can feel really overwhelming. If we know we're headed towards an IPO and we all are running around, like, trying to figure out how we're going to do this or we're a newly public company and all these external things are happening, you know, we IPO'd in 2019, so our first year as a public company was 2020, which brought lots of challenges externally into our environment.
00:13:50.080 --> 00:13:57.080
And so in those moments, you can feel very overwhelmed. And I think the best lesson I learned and hopefully what I was able to share
00:13:57.080 --> 00:14:06.460
with teams was when you have pace, you're able to just put one foot in front of the other and focus on what it is that you need to do and do that with purpose.
00:14:06.460 --> 00:14:16.900
And the best part of that is that I can promise you that a few years down the line, you're able to look back and see how far you've come. And there's honestly no greater feeling than that.
00:14:16.900 --> 00:14:27.060
And sometimes just even sort of having that mantra of we're doing this purposefully helps you get through those moments that otherwise can just feel incredibly overwhelming.
00:14:27.060 --> 00:14:57.040
Yeah, I think the purpose part that's such an interesting kind of way to combine those two concepts, because I do think people often get overwhelmed by pace, especially, I mean, maybe 10x as much maybe at this moment in time, as, you know, things felt fast then and things feel, you know, hyper fast now, but I think, you know, maybe if you're able to communicate and bring people along to the purpose and the intentionality with which you're moving quickly, I could see that being very, very helpful.
00:14:57.040 --> 00:15:14.280
Your portfolio of amazing companies who are all, you know, I'm sure doing things a little bit differently. What are you seeing sort of among the companies that you think are navigating this moment most effectively within their people function? What are some of the trends or themes, the things that you think the companies that are doing it best are getting right?
00:15:14.280 --> 00:15:27.020
Looking for potential in their talent, right? So, we have conversations with a lot of teams that are sort of saying, we're looking for, you know, Jacks and Jills of all trades, right? You know, so you're looking, they're looking for talent.
00:15:27.020 --> 00:15:57.000
That they can flex in a lot of different directions. And I think that's very smart. It's less about sort of saying, here's the exact job description and the three things that this person will do for the next sort of period of time. And instead, they're really looking for that flexibility. So they're looking for potential. I think the other thing that the kind of trend that's happening that I think is very difficult to get right, I think we've already sort of touched on as well, which is, you know, there's always been a challenge in scale, where as you
00:15:57.000 --> 00:16:26.620
scale, leaders are and people are sometimes the scale moves too quickly for what someone's either capability or interest might be. And what we're finding is that time is compressed, right? So where it might have been a year or two, maybe even three, where you're seeing sort of significant scale in a company, you know, we have very early companies who are receiving high valuations and moving very quickly to add to teams. And they're trying to figure out how to do that in flatter structures with less
00:16:26.980 --> 00:16:46.740
descriptive or prescriptive job descriptions. And so that's, it's a difficult thing to figure out how you scale in a compressed timeline in that kind of ambiguous environment. But I think the companies that are able to really identify the talent that can handle that are the ones that are making it through that stage, if that makes sense.
00:16:46.740 --> 00:16:56.960
So if they're finding some way to break through that hardest stage where everything is ambiguous, and they're moving quickly, and the org structure is sort of messy, and if they break through that, you're finding them then start to
00:16:56.960 --> 00:16:57.520
figure it out.
00:16:57.520 --> 00:17:14.520
Yeah, and it comes down to the talent, right? So finding people who both kind of have the skill or expertise that you need, and have the ability to flex and are comfortable with that sort of that movement and the ambiguity piece, if you can find those two things, hire them.
00:17:14.520 --> 00:17:26.360
I feel like we've been on this since, since you and I first met when you were at Pinterest, there's been this sort of pendulum swing from being a very employee friendly job market.
00:17:26.360 --> 00:17:26.940
Okay.
00:17:26.940 --> 00:17:33.720
To employers doing everything that they could to create a place that people might want to come work. That includes some of the perks and benefits we were talking about.
00:17:33.720 --> 00:17:34.220
Yeah.
00:17:34.220 --> 00:17:56.920
But it's also just like a vibe of like, we are going to really try to like win you over. And it feels like the pendulum has shifted sort of forcefully back the other direction towards, you know, people were, I remember when like, a lot of companies were talking about four day work weeks a few years ago, and now we're, you know, people are talking about like 996, like all the time, you know, we're working all the time, and there are no perks and benefits.
00:17:56.920 --> 00:18:15.720
Do you think that from the kind of entirety of your career in people, if there's a happy medium you've seen where it seems to be like working well, or if there's a place you would like to see even just the tech industry go in terms of how we balance this power between employer and employee to get it right.
00:18:15.720 --> 00:18:26.900
We don't probably need all the perks in the world, but we also probably, you know, do need to figure out how to value people and how to create cultures that don't churn people out after 12 months.
00:18:26.900 --> 00:18:28.900
That's not good for the employer either.
00:18:28.900 --> 00:18:36.900
So I'm just curious like where you'd like to see space go and if there are any best practices you've seen throughout your career that could help guide us forward.
00:18:36.900 --> 00:18:38.900
A couple of thoughts come up for me on that.
00:18:38.900 --> 00:18:47.900
The first is that there's like a children's show my kids used to watch when they were little and like the animals at certain times would, they would do the same, they'd say panic and run.
00:18:47.900 --> 00:18:52.900
And I've used that phrase before where I always say to managers and to teams like whatever you do, like don't panic and run.
00:18:52.900 --> 00:18:56.880
Like I think one of the worst things businesses can do is try to swing a pendulum down.
00:18:56.880 --> 00:19:00.880
They can't go too far and what they're trying to do is make everybody happy.
00:19:00.880 --> 00:19:03.880
And the thing is you can't make everybody happy, right?
00:19:03.880 --> 00:19:07.880
Like even what makes you happy or makes me happy are going to look a little bit different.
00:19:07.880 --> 00:19:19.880
And instead there's sort of this element of just being clear about what is it that our business needs to do and then what are the mechanisms that I need to create in order to drive that outcome for the business.
00:19:19.880 --> 00:19:26.860
And so I have sort of first of all not panicked and so never want to swing a pendulum one way or the other.
00:19:26.860 --> 00:19:32.860
I'm trying to find a fair and balanced way to move us forward that is clearly aligned with the mission of our business.
00:19:32.860 --> 00:19:37.860
And listen, the decisions that we make will not always make everybody happy and I know that.
00:19:37.860 --> 00:19:41.860
And it's really hard, especially when you're moving through transformation or change.
00:19:41.860 --> 00:19:43.860
It's really, really difficult.
00:19:43.860 --> 00:19:50.860
But even if you don't know the answer, just saying to people, "I don't know what the outcome of this will be, but this is the decision that we're making.
00:19:50.860 --> 00:19:56.840
This is the direction that we're going," I think is sort of the right way to navigate that.
00:19:56.840 --> 00:19:58.840
So not panicking is number one, right?
00:19:58.840 --> 00:20:01.840
And sort of just staying even and focused on what you need to achieve.
00:20:01.840 --> 00:20:10.840
Do you think like part of what companies need to do to sort of avoid shifting back and forth and ultimately struggling to find their way?
00:20:10.840 --> 00:20:15.840
One thing that I've sometimes seen leaders struggle with is sort of like tuning out noise.
00:20:15.840 --> 00:20:16.840
That's really hard.
00:20:16.840 --> 00:20:19.840
Like that might be external noise like every other company is doing.
00:20:19.840 --> 00:20:26.820
It might be external noise around like the sort of, you know, zeitgeist of the moment culturally.
00:20:26.820 --> 00:20:30.820
It might be even sometimes being able to put a filter through your employee feedback.
00:20:30.820 --> 00:20:38.820
Like being able to say this is what people are saying right now and I know that the direction we need to go is a little bit different than what a lot of people seem to be asking me.
00:20:38.820 --> 00:20:42.820
Have you seen any leaders be able to do that really well and how have they done it?
00:20:42.820 --> 00:20:43.820
Yeah, for sure.
00:20:43.820 --> 00:20:49.820
I think that it goes back just a little bit of the pace but the patience piece is really important there.
00:20:49.820 --> 00:20:51.820
The best leaders that I know are patient.
00:20:51.820 --> 00:20:53.820
And by the patient doesn't mean slow.
00:20:53.820 --> 00:20:56.800
It just means that you're comfortable.
00:20:56.800 --> 00:20:58.800
You're comfortable with space.
00:20:58.800 --> 00:21:08.800
And so you're comfortable when a situation comes up, you can sort of be calm about how you think about the filters you will use to make a decision against that situation.
00:21:08.800 --> 00:21:23.800
And so there is something you know what it looks like when you see a leader who's able to, in the heat of a moment, stay very calm and very comfortable, say I don't know and be okay with that, give a clear answer even if it's not what the room wants to hear.
00:21:23.800 --> 00:21:26.780
But there is sort of this element of patience.
00:21:26.780 --> 00:21:34.780
Sometimes with newer leaders, newer founders, there's this feeling like you need to answer or kind of a rush to an outcome.
00:21:34.780 --> 00:21:45.780
And I often coach people to just sort of take a breath and be comfortable in that moment feeling like you can just pause and you can be patient with what you want to say or how you want to say it.
00:21:45.780 --> 00:21:47.780
I think that goes a long way.
00:21:47.780 --> 00:21:48.780
Yeah.
00:21:48.780 --> 00:21:56.760
How are you seeing when you look at your portfolio and what you all are doing internally at the firm, I want to start to think about how AI is reshaping
00:21:56.760 --> 00:21:58.760
some of the ways that the people team works.
00:21:58.760 --> 00:22:00.760
And I'd love to start with hiring.
00:22:00.760 --> 00:22:12.760
Are you seeing any trends in how other HR teams or your own are using AI in hiring that are, you know, positive things other companies might want to, you know, copy you on or that, you know, people should be more wary of?
00:22:12.760 --> 00:22:15.760
Maybe there's a lot of hype, but it's not actually driving a lot of good outcomes.
00:22:15.760 --> 00:22:20.760
Recruiting is probably the biggest area in the people function where I see companies starting to use AI.
00:22:20.760 --> 00:22:22.760
So I'd just love to hear your take.
00:22:22.760 --> 00:22:23.760
Any cool things you're seeing?
00:22:23.760 --> 00:22:24.760
Any risks?
00:22:24.760 --> 00:22:26.740
Yeah, for sure.
00:22:26.740 --> 00:22:28.740
There's a lot of information out there on these right now.
00:22:28.740 --> 00:22:32.740
You know, I think I agree that there's a lot of great opportunity.
00:22:32.740 --> 00:22:40.740
There's a lot of good tools, you know, some of our own companies that are producing a lot of great tools and systems that support the HR space.
00:22:40.740 --> 00:22:49.740
I think my, so when I think about, step back and think about my own role in my own org, one of the biggest things is really just about placement.
00:22:49.740 --> 00:22:56.720
And so what I mean by that is that I don't believe we're at a place right now where there's just one answer, one AI tool, one AI tool.
00:22:56.720 --> 00:22:58.720
One AI magic wand solution.
00:22:58.720 --> 00:23:03.720
Instead, it's really about understanding as kind of it always has been, what's the suite of options to you?
00:23:03.720 --> 00:23:10.720
And then how do you begin to layer those in, in a way that's not obtrusive, but is sort of natural sort of burning points for your business.
00:23:10.720 --> 00:23:21.720
So whether, so yes, I think it's, there's a lot of like recruiting things that are about efficiency, but I actually would look at it differently and instead take kind of take a step back and think about your employee journey.
00:23:21.720 --> 00:23:26.700
And when you look at that employee journey, where are the biggest pain points or breaking points?
00:23:26.700 --> 00:23:29.700
That are happening in your business at this moment of time?
00:23:29.700 --> 00:23:32.700
And then how do you think about sort of solutioning towards those?
00:23:32.700 --> 00:23:42.700
So maybe it's something I know in my own firm, you know, for example, we introduced, you know, Granola with the Lightspeed company and with Claude at the Anthropix Lightspeed company.
00:23:42.700 --> 00:23:52.700
And we use those tools to help facilitate performance review conversations was an example that we've used because that was something that was a burning kind of like a pain point for us.
00:23:52.700 --> 00:23:56.680
And so it's less about saying, I see these three tools on the market.
00:23:56.680 --> 00:23:57.680
I'm just going to implement them.
00:23:57.680 --> 00:23:59.680
I think it makes me go faster.
00:23:59.680 --> 00:24:08.680
Instead, it's like, take a step back and just decide with intention, where do you most need to play something to bridge a gap or to help your business succeed?
00:24:08.680 --> 00:24:20.680
And for companies that don't have a lot of experience sort of integrating new technologies in their business, how do you think, what would you advise to a people team that has some of these challenges?
00:24:20.680 --> 00:24:23.680
They need to do a better job with performance management or collecting more data.
00:24:23.680 --> 00:24:26.660
Is that what you were using Granola for, to like get more data?
00:24:26.660 --> 00:24:28.660
Well, I think it's really important to allow people to have conversations about talent.
00:24:28.660 --> 00:24:29.660
Okay.
00:24:29.660 --> 00:24:43.660
It's like being more natural about how we talk about our people and then from there how we extract feedback and then use that from an assessment perspective versus I think sometimes in sort of traditional performance reviews, it gets a little sort of caught up in process.
00:24:43.660 --> 00:24:45.660
And it's actually not about the process.
00:24:45.660 --> 00:24:49.660
And so we can remove some of that and instead really focus on the conversation.
00:24:49.660 --> 00:24:56.640
You're able to kind of pull out nuggets and insights that are actually really powerful that sometimes get lost when you're too focused.
00:24:56.640 --> 00:25:06.640
So how did you get from realizing that maybe you were too focused on process to the solution of we're going to use Granola and then pull the data into Claud or whatever?
00:25:06.640 --> 00:25:13.640
Like how should people teams be thinking about going from I've identified the thing I think we could be doing better to I actually know what technology and tools can help us do that?
00:25:13.640 --> 00:25:14.640
What to do.
00:25:14.640 --> 00:25:15.640
Yeah, yeah.
00:25:15.640 --> 00:25:16.640
It's a great question.
00:25:16.640 --> 00:25:17.640
I mean, be a learner yourself, right?
00:25:17.640 --> 00:25:26.620
So I think that all of us, everyone on my team, you know, we attend conferences, we read, we scour the web, we have our own portfolio, you know, we're asking our investors what they're seeing.
00:25:26.620 --> 00:25:27.620
Yeah.
00:25:27.620 --> 00:25:28.620
I mean, you know Granola and you know Anthropic.
00:25:28.620 --> 00:25:29.620
I know.
00:25:29.620 --> 00:25:30.620
We know.
00:25:30.620 --> 00:25:31.620
Finding out about those companies was not hard for you.
00:25:31.620 --> 00:25:32.620
Exactly.
00:25:32.620 --> 00:25:33.620
We're a little, we're lucky in that sense.
00:25:33.620 --> 00:25:34.620
But I think it's true.
00:25:34.620 --> 00:25:36.640
But we have to deal with some of that same self-education as well.
00:25:36.640 --> 00:25:40.780
I mean, I think a lot of HR teams do this, you know, as a team, we do our own version
00:25:40.780 --> 00:25:44.800
of hackathons and our own version of sort of bringing our team together and trying new
00:25:44.800 --> 00:25:45.800
things.
00:25:45.800 --> 00:25:49.940
And we try to build things and we go to our data team and tell, and say like, okay, how
00:25:49.940 --> 00:25:50.940
bad is this?
00:25:50.940 --> 00:25:51.940
Right?
00:25:51.940 --> 00:25:54.880
So, you know, I mean, I think you just have to be comfortable playing and be comfortable
00:25:54.880 --> 00:25:55.880
being wrong.
00:25:55.880 --> 00:26:01.540
I mean, we all have to just enter this world as learners, whether that's about AI or honestly
00:26:01.540 --> 00:26:02.540
anything.
00:26:02.540 --> 00:26:07.880
And if you have that mindset, I think it's, it feels less scary and it's more just about
00:26:07.880 --> 00:26:08.880
exploration.
00:26:08.880 --> 00:26:13.360
If I'm a Chief People Officer, how do I cultivate that mindset on my team?
00:26:13.360 --> 00:26:17.880
Maybe I feel like I have a learning mindset, but you know, I worry that if I start to go
00:26:17.880 --> 00:26:22.440
tell our learning team to experiment with tools, they're going to be afraid that they
00:26:22.440 --> 00:26:23.440
are not going to have a job anymore.
00:26:23.440 --> 00:26:24.440
And that's not my intent.
00:26:24.440 --> 00:26:25.440
Yeah.
00:26:25.440 --> 00:26:29.040
I feel like there's some fear when people are being asked to experiment that we're looking
00:26:29.040 --> 00:26:30.760
for solutions to replace them.
00:26:30.760 --> 00:26:31.760
Replace them.
00:26:31.760 --> 00:26:33.640
And so how do you get people excited about that?
00:26:33.640 --> 00:26:37.360
Yeah, I think you bring them along in the evolution of their own roles.
00:26:37.360 --> 00:26:38.920
I've done that with my own team, right?
00:26:38.920 --> 00:26:43.500
Like our roles just in my, in our own, in my own organization have changed a lot.
00:26:43.500 --> 00:26:46.840
Even in the last, I've been at Lightspeed four years, they've changed significantly
00:26:46.840 --> 00:26:50.300
over that time, but they are co-creators of that, right?
00:26:50.300 --> 00:26:55.000
This is not about, and I'm, and I say that very plainly, we talk a lot about how our
00:26:55.000 --> 00:26:56.080
roles are changing.
00:26:56.080 --> 00:27:00.560
And as we bring in or invite new team members in, what is that role and what do we think
00:27:00.560 --> 00:27:02.780
that looks like right now?
00:27:02.780 --> 00:27:07.620
Understanding it will continue to evolve both as sort of external materials and systems
00:27:07.620 --> 00:27:12.220
and tools evolve and, but also as our own capabilities evolve, those things are going
00:27:12.220 --> 00:27:13.220
to change.
00:27:13.220 --> 00:27:18.100
And so I think if you sort of invite people to create with you, it's less about saying,
00:27:18.100 --> 00:27:21.520
hey, I'm asking you to do a task because I'm going to replace.
00:27:21.520 --> 00:27:24.560
And it's more about let's, let's invent this together.
00:27:24.560 --> 00:27:28.140
Can you give an example of how a role has changed over the last four years?
00:27:28.140 --> 00:27:31.800
Like something that used to sit with one person that maybe it doesn't now?
00:27:31.800 --> 00:27:32.800
Yeah.
00:27:32.800 --> 00:27:38.080
So we created a role, you know, that didn't exist in our function before.
00:27:38.080 --> 00:27:42.620
And this is kind of a talent ecosystem role, which was really interesting.
00:27:42.620 --> 00:27:46.940
So I think that there's elements of different kinds of jobs that used to be sort of more
00:27:46.940 --> 00:27:50.880
distinct positions that sort of rolls into now one person.
00:27:50.880 --> 00:27:54.120
And so this is both kind of internal talent, which might be
00:27:54.120 --> 00:28:00.120
sort of more traditional recruiting types of tasks, and then there's, you know, sort
00:28:00.120 --> 00:28:04.060
of market mapping and research, which is a different type of like recruiting operations
00:28:04.060 --> 00:28:07.360
kind of recruiting strategy type of role.
00:28:07.360 --> 00:28:09.040
And then there's a performance side, right?
00:28:09.040 --> 00:28:14.000
Which is like, what is then our performance strategy, performance reviews, that side of
00:28:14.000 --> 00:28:15.000
it.
00:28:15.000 --> 00:28:19.300
And those, I think, can sit in very distinct positions, even in very different functions,
00:28:19.300 --> 00:28:20.300
right?
00:28:20.300 --> 00:28:23.680
And so what we did instead was blend those into roles
00:28:23.680 --> 00:28:27.580
that are focused on all of those things at once, because what we're finding again is
00:28:27.580 --> 00:28:32.180
a little bit of a compression and maybe some of the manual tasks that need to happen, but
00:28:32.180 --> 00:28:35.360
very, very important to make sure that those are connected.
00:28:35.360 --> 00:28:40.440
So what you're looking for in a candidate, we're thinking right away about how we're
00:28:40.440 --> 00:28:44.140
assessing and developing and supporting that person once they're onboarded.
00:28:44.140 --> 00:28:47.380
So this kind of more talent ecosystem type of role.
00:28:47.380 --> 00:28:53.240
Does that suggest to you that there might be a trend in larger companies towards more
00:28:53.240 --> 00:28:56.900
generalists that aren't as focused on, I just think about recruiting, but I'm thinking
00:28:56.900 --> 00:29:01.060
about the entire talent life cycle, like do you think, is this just because of your firm
00:29:01.060 --> 00:29:04.240
size that this makes sense, or do you actually think this could be a bigger trend?
00:29:04.240 --> 00:29:05.240
Yes to both.
00:29:05.240 --> 00:29:09.320
I mean, I think that we've been able to move there quickly because of our firm size, but
00:29:09.320 --> 00:29:12.560
I see it in larger organizations too.
00:29:12.560 --> 00:29:17.060
I think that it's actually, so it is, it's a bit generalist, but I would actually say
00:29:17.060 --> 00:29:22.800
on the HR side, I see it more as kind of business first and consultancy second.
00:29:22.800 --> 00:29:28.460
And then sort of functional technical skill is like underlying both of those things.
00:29:28.460 --> 00:29:32.340
And so maybe you're still sort of coming up as a recruiter or as someone in learning and
00:29:32.340 --> 00:29:37.260
development or, you know, somebody in benefits or HR ops, and that's kind of your core functional
00:29:37.260 --> 00:29:38.680
technical talent.
00:29:38.680 --> 00:29:44.240
But what matters more than anything I think today is your ability to A, understand your
00:29:44.240 --> 00:29:51.520
business, and then B, consult and influence the rest of the organization alongside whatever
00:29:51.520 --> 00:29:52.360
your functional
00:29:52.360 --> 00:29:54.240
kind of base might be.
00:29:54.240 --> 00:29:59.020
So I think we were able to have maybe more distinct operational roles in the past.
00:29:59.020 --> 00:30:04.400
And today, I think we're looking for people who have sort of more comfort in that sort
00:30:04.400 --> 00:30:06.400
of consulting influence side.
00:30:06.400 --> 00:30:09.380
Yeah, I'm hearing that also in even larger organizations.
00:30:09.380 --> 00:30:13.020
Not necessarily that it's, you know, an immediate change of roles or titles, but that there's
00:30:13.020 --> 00:30:18.640
like a hiring for that mindset and maybe for a little bit of breadth of experience, which
00:30:18.640 --> 00:30:19.520
makes complete sense to me.
00:30:19.520 --> 00:30:21.920
And I feel like it's better for people, like it's better for employees at the end of the
00:30:21.920 --> 00:30:26.520
day, if people understand, if you're hiring me or onboarding me, you sort of understand
00:30:26.520 --> 00:30:30.440
the whole, you know, possibilities of where I might want to go and kind of design for
00:30:30.440 --> 00:30:31.440
that.
00:30:31.440 --> 00:30:32.440
That's right.
00:30:32.440 --> 00:30:33.440
The whole system.
00:30:33.440 --> 00:30:34.440
Yeah.
00:30:34.440 --> 00:30:35.440
Yeah.
00:30:35.440 --> 00:30:36.440
I agree.
00:30:36.440 --> 00:30:37.440
I'm curious, you advise a lot of leaders.
00:30:37.440 --> 00:30:40.920
If I'm a CEO in your portfolio and I come to you or we're at an event and I tell you,
00:30:40.920 --> 00:30:45.300
I just don't think, like, culture is not a word that matters to me, I don't, yeah, we've
00:30:45.300 --> 00:30:50.980
got to like CHRO, but that function is, you know, very tactical for me, I don't really
00:30:50.980 --> 00:30:51.480
think about this as a core structure.
00:30:51.480 --> 00:30:52.480
Yeah.
00:30:52.480 --> 00:30:53.480
As a core strategic part of my business.
00:30:53.480 --> 00:30:54.480
Yeah.
00:30:54.480 --> 00:30:55.480
What might you tell me?
00:30:55.480 --> 00:30:56.480
Yeah.
00:30:56.480 --> 00:30:57.480
I would ask you questions about your business.
00:30:57.480 --> 00:31:00.480
So I'd want to understand what does matter to you and why.
00:31:00.480 --> 00:31:04.420
I have a belief that everything is about people at the end of the day.
00:31:04.420 --> 00:31:07.980
I think, you know, sometimes you'll hear someone say, oh, you know, HR doesn't need to be in
00:31:07.980 --> 00:31:11.560
this meeting, it's not about people or it's not about HR.
00:31:11.560 --> 00:31:14.240
And a lot of times I'll ask that question, like, tell me what it is, tell me what it
00:31:14.240 --> 00:31:15.240
is about.
00:31:15.240 --> 00:31:16.820
Like, tell me what you're focused on.
00:31:16.820 --> 00:31:21.040
And when you're trying to create a business strategy or you're trying to get a product
00:31:21.040 --> 00:31:24.820
to market or whatever sort of that outcome is that you're trying to do, I'm willing to
00:31:24.820 --> 00:31:27.460
bet that there is a people element there.
00:31:27.460 --> 00:31:30.760
And not saying that you always need HR in every single meeting, I don't mean it that
00:31:30.760 --> 00:31:31.760
way.
00:31:31.760 --> 00:31:35.460
I just mean that I think that what I, I would not sort of debate that with the founder.
00:31:35.460 --> 00:31:37.400
I wouldn't start from a place of debate there.
00:31:37.400 --> 00:31:42.040
I would just want to understand and be curious about what that founder is looking to achieve
00:31:42.040 --> 00:31:46.800
in their business and then use kind of my own influence skills to understand, okay,
00:31:46.800 --> 00:31:50.600
how can the people team support you or help you in some
00:31:50.600 --> 00:31:52.500
of those efforts that you're trying to achieve?
00:31:52.500 --> 00:31:56.720
Because I think sometimes there's just not kind of the lived experience or understanding
00:31:56.720 --> 00:31:58.160
of what that might look like.
00:31:58.160 --> 00:31:59.160
Yeah.
00:31:59.160 --> 00:32:04.460
What is an ideal, what does a strong CEO/CHRO relationship look like?
00:32:04.460 --> 00:32:09.180
Like if a CEO is getting this really right, what should they be coming to their CHRO for?
00:32:09.180 --> 00:32:14.420
What should their CHRO, if I'm a CHRO, what should I be bringing to my executive team
00:32:14.420 --> 00:32:16.840
and the way of insights and intelligence?
00:32:16.840 --> 00:32:20.160
I, I've sometimes worked with CHROs who feel themselves like they're
00:32:20.160 --> 00:32:25.220
sort of always reactive and responding to questions and asks for data or insights.
00:32:25.220 --> 00:32:27.680
What should I be bringing and how can I be in service of the business?
00:32:27.680 --> 00:32:28.680
Yeah.
00:32:28.680 --> 00:32:29.680
I think about that a couple of ways.
00:32:29.680 --> 00:32:31.620
Like the first is truth.
00:32:31.620 --> 00:32:37.120
So I think a really important part of my job is being a truth teller and not being afraid
00:32:37.120 --> 00:32:41.480
to say something that your CEO or, you know, may not love to hear.
00:32:41.480 --> 00:32:45.380
Um, and that, that requires trust and it requires a relationship build.
00:32:45.380 --> 00:32:49.200
And so I do think, you know, of course you have to be thoughtful about how you enter
00:32:49.200 --> 00:32:49.720
into that.
00:32:49.720 --> 00:32:56.060
But I think that they, in turn, my CEO expects that of me and wants that of me as well.
00:32:56.060 --> 00:33:00.460
And that's both for things that might be happening in the organization, um, and for their own
00:33:00.460 --> 00:33:01.460
behavior, right?
00:33:01.460 --> 00:33:02.460
Yeah.
00:33:02.460 --> 00:33:04.720
So for the way that they're showing up and how that might sort of be perceived
00:33:04.720 --> 00:33:06.720
or ways that I can help coach them.
00:33:06.720 --> 00:33:10.320
So I think there's like a truth telling sort of element there.
00:33:10.320 --> 00:33:16.220
I think the other thing and, and, um, part of this is about what is it that I can sort
00:33:16.220 --> 00:33:18.280
of remove and just own.
00:33:18.280 --> 00:33:19.280
Mm-hmm.
00:33:19.280 --> 00:33:22.820
And that's really important and that's that there's so many things that happen
00:33:22.820 --> 00:33:29.760
in the people in the HR world and if I can help my CEO focus on the things that are most
00:33:29.760 --> 00:33:34.000
critical for that person to be focused on, that's a win in my book.
00:33:34.000 --> 00:33:37.340
If they're getting pulled into people in HR topics that they don't need to be spending
00:33:37.340 --> 00:33:39.780
their time on, um, that's an issue.
00:33:39.780 --> 00:33:44.320
And so I, it's also a little bit of figuring out how I remove some things from their plate.
00:33:44.320 --> 00:33:45.820
Yeah.
00:33:45.820 --> 00:33:48.840
When you said a few minutes ago that you're willing to bet that every.
00:33:48.840 --> 00:33:52.960
Like every issue is at the end of the day, a people issue or has a people component to
00:33:52.960 --> 00:33:53.960
it.
00:33:53.960 --> 00:33:54.960
Right.
00:33:54.960 --> 00:33:55.960
Right.
00:33:55.960 --> 00:33:56.960
Um, I strongly agree with that.
00:33:56.960 --> 00:34:02.300
And I think, you know, I think there's this story that kind of, you could, that could
00:34:02.300 --> 00:34:08.240
be told right now that people matter less and less, that talent is becoming less important
00:34:08.240 --> 00:34:10.700
as AI takes over the workforce.
00:34:10.700 --> 00:34:13.600
To me, it seems almost obvious that it's the exact opposite.
00:34:13.600 --> 00:34:14.600
I agree.
00:34:14.600 --> 00:34:18.400
As AI takes over the workforce, the only moat is going to be your people.
00:34:18.400 --> 00:34:19.400
Yeah.
00:34:19.400 --> 00:34:20.960
Have you got the best people that you can find?
00:34:20.960 --> 00:34:21.960
Yeah.
00:34:21.960 --> 00:34:23.960
And are you creating the conditions where they can do their best work?
00:34:23.960 --> 00:34:24.960
Yeah.
00:34:24.960 --> 00:34:25.960
Because everyone can build stuff with AI.
00:34:25.960 --> 00:34:28.280
The barrier to entry is incredibly low on that now.
00:34:28.280 --> 00:34:29.280
Right.
00:34:29.280 --> 00:34:30.280
Right.
00:34:30.280 --> 00:34:31.280
The harder thing is people.
00:34:31.280 --> 00:34:32.280
Yeah.
00:34:32.280 --> 00:34:33.280
And to have the right people.
00:34:33.280 --> 00:34:37.100
And are you orchestrating, you know, them correctly to, to do more than they thought
00:34:37.100 --> 00:34:38.100
possible?
00:34:38.100 --> 00:34:39.100
Yeah.
00:34:39.100 --> 00:34:40.440
And I'm curious, it sounds like you agree with that.
00:34:40.440 --> 00:34:46.960
How do you get organizations to, um, both internalize that, if you believe that to be
00:34:46.960 --> 00:34:47.960
true, which I do.
00:34:47.960 --> 00:34:51.800
Um, and then how do you get them to sort of act on that?
00:34:51.800 --> 00:34:55.140
It's one thing to believe that, but then like, okay, I believe that, what should I go do
00:34:55.140 --> 00:34:56.140
differently?
00:34:56.140 --> 00:34:58.140
Should I be having a larger people team?
00:34:58.140 --> 00:35:00.060
Should I be investing differentially in talent?
00:35:00.060 --> 00:35:04.020
Like if I believe that thesis, what do I, what are different decisions that I as a CEO
00:35:04.020 --> 00:35:05.580
or Chief People Officer now need to make?
00:35:05.580 --> 00:35:06.580
Yeah.
00:35:06.580 --> 00:35:11.060
Well, first I'd say back to an earlier question around what are the best teams doing?
00:35:11.060 --> 00:35:12.060
They're doing that.
00:35:12.060 --> 00:35:15.520
I mean, they're talking about people all the time, whether or not they realize that's exactly
00:35:15.520 --> 00:35:16.520
what they're doing.
00:35:16.520 --> 00:35:17.520
Um, you know,
00:35:17.520 --> 00:35:21.400
it's what we do when we think about companies that we invest in and how we support them.
00:35:21.400 --> 00:35:26.140
We talk about their people, we talk about the founder, we talk about their teams all
00:35:26.140 --> 00:35:27.140
the time.
00:35:27.140 --> 00:35:31.060
And so it is a, um, constant conversation.
00:35:31.060 --> 00:35:34.580
And I think that when you, when you're doing that, when you're feeling, when you're talking
00:35:34.580 --> 00:35:38.900
about talent all the time, um, that's the right mode to be in.
00:35:38.900 --> 00:35:42.700
And so at first I'd say like the, the winning teams are doing this already.
00:35:42.700 --> 00:35:46.620
So you would be just like, how much of your time is thinking about your people and
00:35:46.620 --> 00:35:47.080
talent occupying?
00:35:47.080 --> 00:35:48.420
Or how much of your brain space?
00:35:48.420 --> 00:35:53.320
If it's like, low, that's bad, it should be something you're thinking about as a leader
00:35:53.320 --> 00:35:54.320
constantly.
00:35:54.320 --> 00:35:55.320
Yeah.
00:35:55.320 --> 00:35:58.620
And that, and, and so the important difference there too is that it's less about how often
00:35:58.620 --> 00:35:59.620
are you thinking about HR?
00:35:59.620 --> 00:36:00.620
Yeah.
00:36:00.620 --> 00:36:03.640
So I, I'm not asking you how often are you thinking about your benefits packages
00:36:03.640 --> 00:36:07.360
and how often are you thinking about these things that I think sometimes people think
00:36:07.360 --> 00:36:12.700
is HR or is people, instead it's just, what are you trying to do in your business?
00:36:12.700 --> 00:36:16.640
And I'm willing to bet that what you're trying to do involves humans.
00:36:16.640 --> 00:36:19.720
And so who are the humans that are doing that for you?
00:36:19.720 --> 00:36:21.240
Are they set up to be success?
00:36:21.240 --> 00:36:25.020
Are there barriers you can remove that make it more efficient for them to get their jobs
00:36:25.020 --> 00:36:26.020
done?
00:36:26.020 --> 00:36:30.780
Those are the kinds of questions and conversations that HR should be having with the business
00:36:30.780 --> 00:36:33.640
because that's the part that's really going to move the needle.
00:36:33.640 --> 00:36:34.740
Yeah.
00:36:34.740 --> 00:36:40.140
As you think about that, that, that, you know, you and I share this view that people are
00:36:40.140 --> 00:36:42.400
the future and that people are going to matter more.
00:36:42.400 --> 00:36:46.200
Is there anything that you're seeing happen or that you're going to, any trends that you're
00:36:46.200 --> 00:36:49.820
noticing that like keep you up at night that you're worried might be sort of taking us
00:36:49.820 --> 00:36:55.220
off course from a vision where, of the future where people matter a lot or are you, you
00:36:55.220 --> 00:36:58.980
know, pretty confident that like we're headed in a good direction and things are all going
00:36:58.980 --> 00:36:59.980
great?
00:36:59.980 --> 00:37:00.980
Yeah.
00:37:00.980 --> 00:37:03.180
I mean, I don't, there's not, I, there's challenges, right?
00:37:03.180 --> 00:37:08.120
I think that there always will be, so I don't have overly like rose colored glasses in that
00:37:08.120 --> 00:37:09.120
sense.
00:37:09.120 --> 00:37:15.760
I think, you know, I do though, I am an optimist, I always have been, I think that there are
00:37:15.760 --> 00:37:20.040
so much benefit to what's ahead and when we get to see in our portfolio companies the
00:37:20.040 --> 00:37:25.380
amazing work that's happening to advance healthcare and, you know, all of these things that are
00:37:25.380 --> 00:37:30.400
going to change the lives that we live, that change the lives of our children, like what
00:37:30.400 --> 00:37:35.760
an incredible time to be alive and be a part of this and to help shape it and help create
00:37:35.760 --> 00:37:36.760
it.
00:37:36.760 --> 00:37:40.560
I just think that I feel very positive about those things.
00:37:40.560 --> 00:37:45.320
I think that there's almost a little bit of, and this is just my view, but when it becomes
00:37:45.320 --> 00:37:50.000
too much of a fear-based thing, I think that people become closed.
00:37:50.000 --> 00:37:54.220
And I do worry about that, that it's going to start in some pockets feel like, oh, we're
00:37:54.220 --> 00:37:59.440
just going to turn inward to technology and everyone's going to be robots and that's it.
00:37:59.440 --> 00:38:03.480
And I don't know, I worry about that a little bit because I think, gosh, like what beauty
00:38:03.480 --> 00:38:07.000
exists in the chaos of being human, right?
00:38:07.000 --> 00:38:12.120
And so why wouldn't we continue to find ways to sort of feed that?
00:38:12.120 --> 00:38:13.480
It's going to look different.
00:38:13.480 --> 00:38:14.880
It's always looked different.
00:38:14.880 --> 00:38:15.880
Yeah.
00:38:15.880 --> 00:38:16.880
Over time.
00:38:16.880 --> 00:38:17.880
Yeah.
00:38:17.880 --> 00:38:18.880
Look different when we got the internet.
00:38:18.880 --> 00:38:19.880
Look different when we got computers.
00:38:19.880 --> 00:38:20.880
That's right.
00:38:20.880 --> 00:38:21.880
That's right.
00:38:21.880 --> 00:38:22.940
As I said, even, you know, I've been in this role for four years and it looks different
00:38:22.940 --> 00:38:25.160
even than it did in my first day.
00:38:25.160 --> 00:38:29.940
But I see that that kind of messiness is a really beautiful thing.
00:38:29.940 --> 00:38:35.820
And so that is something I worry about is just feeling too closed off and people sort
00:38:35.820 --> 00:38:42.020
of trying to, you know, sort of combat what might feel unknown with too much rigidity
00:38:42.020 --> 00:38:43.020
and structure.
00:38:43.020 --> 00:38:44.440
So that's one thing that maybe I would worry about.
00:38:44.440 --> 00:38:51.320
Do you think leaders have an opportunity to tell a more optimistic story about the
00:38:51.320 --> 00:38:52.320
future?
00:38:52.320 --> 00:38:58.680
I think it is hard when a lot of the external narrative is about layoffs or about how AI
00:38:58.680 --> 00:39:01.340
is the reason why, you know, we're getting rid of this team.
00:39:01.340 --> 00:39:07.940
And to me, it seems like efficiency will be one obvious consequence of AI, but it doesn't
00:39:07.940 --> 00:39:09.100
seem like it should be the goal.
00:39:09.100 --> 00:39:13.340
It seems like that's the least ambitious thing you could do with this technology is save
00:39:13.340 --> 00:39:14.000
on your P&L.
00:39:14.000 --> 00:39:15.440
Like, save 40% on your P&L.
00:39:15.440 --> 00:39:16.440
Right, right.
00:39:16.440 --> 00:39:20.520
It seems like the far more exciting thing is how can we do 10 times what we ever
00:39:20.520 --> 00:39:23.640
thought possible with the same headcount or more headcount because we have new roles and
00:39:23.640 --> 00:39:24.900
new ways of thinking about things.
00:39:24.900 --> 00:39:31.380
And I just wonder what you think the responsibility is of the CEOs, founders, chief people officers
00:39:31.380 --> 00:39:35.400
to be telling that story, and is that something that you coach them on or encourage them to
00:39:35.400 --> 00:39:40.120
do is sort of tell a more ambitious and positive story about where this technology is taking
00:39:40.120 --> 00:39:41.680
us and what it means for the workforce?
00:39:41.680 --> 00:39:43.560
Yeah, I certainly believe that.
00:39:43.560 --> 00:39:47.960
And look, I don't want to discount the fact that there's, as I said before, there's challenges,
00:39:47.960 --> 00:39:48.960
right?
00:39:48.960 --> 00:39:49.960
And you're right.
00:39:49.960 --> 00:39:53.920
Like right now we are in this really unknown period and that is really hard.
00:39:53.920 --> 00:40:00.200
And there are teams that are downsizing and changing and there's unknown about, it's unknown
00:40:00.200 --> 00:40:03.560
where that's going to go and I understand that part of it.
00:40:03.560 --> 00:40:07.520
And so I don't want to discount or sort of step over that too lightly.
00:40:07.520 --> 00:40:13.120
At the same time, I just, I believe that that investment in human talent.
00:40:13.120 --> 00:40:18.160
And what we bring, what we need from people and creativity and problem solving is not
00:40:18.160 --> 00:40:19.420
going away.
00:40:19.420 --> 00:40:25.000
And so those roles and those teams, I think will continue to evolve and just look different.
00:40:25.000 --> 00:40:29.660
And so part of it is just about messaging that to your teams and again, inviting them
00:40:29.660 --> 00:40:32.240
in to be that co-creator with you.
00:40:32.240 --> 00:40:37.260
None of us have all the answers right now and that's okay, but we need to figure it
00:40:37.260 --> 00:40:41.680
out together and be okay kind of moving through this phase together if we're going to get
00:40:41.680 --> 00:40:42.680
to another side.
00:40:42.680 --> 00:40:44.140
And that's what we're going to feel really proud of.
00:40:44.140 --> 00:40:45.140
Okay.
00:40:45.140 --> 00:40:46.140
Let's move to a lightning round.
00:40:46.140 --> 00:40:47.140
Okay.
00:40:47.140 --> 00:40:48.640
I'm going to ask you a few questions and we'd just love to hear the first thing
00:40:48.640 --> 00:40:49.920
that comes to mind for you.
00:40:49.920 --> 00:40:50.920
Okay.
00:40:50.920 --> 00:40:53.360
What's a common people practice that most companies should probably retire?
00:40:53.360 --> 00:40:57.440
You know, actually I would do something that I would add, which I know is the opposite
00:40:57.440 --> 00:40:58.440
of what you're asking me.
00:40:58.440 --> 00:40:59.440
Okay, do it.
00:40:59.440 --> 00:41:03.560
But I think, and this is about kind of hand in hand with the AI and technology
00:41:03.560 --> 00:41:07.120
story, I think people should add more conversation.
00:41:07.120 --> 00:41:11.100
So at the point of decision making, relying less on just whatever a tool or something
00:41:11.100 --> 00:41:12.240
tells us.
00:41:12.240 --> 00:41:17.100
More just take a moment, even a moment, to have an eye-to-eye conversation with someone
00:41:17.100 --> 00:41:20.560
about what they really felt about that candidate, what they really feel about this person's
00:41:20.560 --> 00:41:22.080
potential.
00:41:22.080 --> 00:41:27.020
Even just that minute of conversation, adding that to what you do, I think is pretty impactful.
00:41:27.020 --> 00:41:30.940
I love that, especially as we're all using these tools so much, or this idea
00:41:30.940 --> 00:41:33.480
of infusing something, a little bit of humanity into decision making.
00:41:33.480 --> 00:41:34.480
That's right.
00:41:34.480 --> 00:41:38.500
Is there a future of work, like cliche or predictions, something people say is
00:41:38.500 --> 00:41:40.240
going to happen that you think is not right?
00:41:40.240 --> 00:41:41.240
Yeah.
00:41:41.240 --> 00:41:42.240
Yeah.
00:41:42.240 --> 00:41:46.380
I think the work thing about like in office and sort of not in office and all of the debates
00:41:46.380 --> 00:41:51.880
there, I feel very strongly that it is connection is about sort of gathering with intention.
00:41:51.880 --> 00:41:56.600
And so the conversation when people pull are really sort of strong on one side of everyone
00:41:56.600 --> 00:42:01.000
needs to be in the office every day or everyone should be remote, I don't feel either of those
00:42:01.000 --> 00:42:02.000
ways.
00:42:02.000 --> 00:42:03.000
And so that's something that I'm like, "No, guys."
00:42:03.000 --> 00:42:07.940
I think it just really needs to be about when people can gather again and have an intentional
00:42:07.940 --> 00:42:10.580
moment that's purposeful, do it.
00:42:10.580 --> 00:42:12.020
And otherwise, like letting
00:42:12.020 --> 00:42:15.640
people sort of make those decisions that works for them, I think is the way to go.
00:42:15.640 --> 00:42:16.640
Interesting.
00:42:16.640 --> 00:42:17.640
I love that.
00:42:17.640 --> 00:42:20.000
What would you say is the most underrated capability in HR right now?
00:42:20.000 --> 00:42:23.340
What would you advise, a capability that you'd advise chief people officers everywhere to
00:42:23.340 --> 00:42:24.340
be looking for?
00:42:24.340 --> 00:42:29.800
Yeah, I look for dealing with paradox in any HR candidate that I find.
00:42:29.800 --> 00:42:33.720
And it's actually hard to find, but you can find it even at really sort of early in career
00:42:33.720 --> 00:42:34.720
levels.
00:42:34.720 --> 00:42:38.860
And what that really means are people that can hold competing truths at once.
00:42:38.860 --> 00:42:41.800
So I can hold what maybe my employee is looking
00:42:41.800 --> 00:42:45.820
for, what my stockholders are looking for, what my CEO is looking for.
00:42:45.820 --> 00:42:50.260
I can hold all of those things together and they may all feel very competing with each
00:42:50.260 --> 00:42:54.640
other, but I can still make a decision and feel very clear about what do I want to do
00:42:54.640 --> 00:42:58.680
with that information, even though things may feel sort of competing for with each other.
00:42:58.680 --> 00:43:03.740
I think that's a skill everyone could do well to have more of, living in a bit of
00:43:03.740 --> 00:43:04.740
nuance and paradox.
00:43:04.740 --> 00:43:05.740
That's true.
00:43:05.740 --> 00:43:06.740
That's right.
00:43:06.740 --> 00:43:07.740
Okay.
00:43:07.740 --> 00:43:08.740
Finish this sentence.
00:43:08.740 --> 00:43:11.580
If we deploy AI effectively across an organization, everyone's jobs become?
00:43:11.580 --> 00:43:13.600
More enjoyable.
00:43:13.600 --> 00:43:15.180
Okay.
00:43:15.180 --> 00:43:16.180
Last one.
00:43:16.180 --> 00:43:19.580
The companies that are most successful over the next five years will be those that?
00:43:19.580 --> 00:43:21.800
Nail their talent.
00:43:21.800 --> 00:43:22.800
Know who their people are.
00:43:22.800 --> 00:43:23.800
Yeah.
00:43:23.800 --> 00:43:24.800
I love it.
00:43:24.800 --> 00:43:26.400
Beth, such a great note to end on.
00:43:26.400 --> 00:43:27.800
Thank you so much for your time today.
00:43:27.800 --> 00:43:28.800
Thank you so much.
00:43:28.800 --> 00:43:29.800
This was great.
00:43:29.800 --> 00:43:30.800
I appreciate it.
00:43:30.800 --> 00:43:35.960
That was Beth Karlsson, Partner and Chief HR Officer at Lightspeed Venture Partners.
00:43:35.960 --> 00:43:39.760
I loved hearing about how the landscape is changing from her vantage point.
00:43:39.760 --> 00:43:41.360
Beth's not sharing the perspective of
00:43:41.360 --> 00:43:42.620
one company's playbook.
00:43:42.620 --> 00:43:46.420
She is watching dozens of the best teams in the world build at once.
00:43:46.420 --> 00:43:49.840
And the pattern she keeps pointing to is that the winners aren't just bolting AI tools
00:43:49.840 --> 00:43:53.420
onto how they already work, they are rethinking talent itself.
00:43:53.420 --> 00:43:57.620
They're hiring less for what someone already knows and more for how fast they can learn
00:43:57.620 --> 00:43:58.860
and adapt.
00:43:58.860 --> 00:44:04.540
And they are treating uniquely human skills like curiosity, judgment, critical thinking
00:44:04.540 --> 00:44:06.660
as the actual differentiators.
00:44:06.660 --> 00:44:11.140
It's a good reminder that even in the AI age, or maybe especially in the AI age, your people
00:44:11.140 --> 00:44:12.760
are the thing that sets you apart.
00:44:12.760 --> 00:44:17.260
And the job of the HR team is to create the conditions for those people to do their best
00:44:17.260 --> 00:44:18.260
work.
00:44:18.260 --> 00:44:22.400
That's exactly why we created Surface, to help you build an AI-native people team that
00:44:22.400 --> 00:44:25.340
shapes the future of work for your organization.
00:44:25.340 --> 00:44:27.020
This is Below the Surface.
00:44:27.020 --> 00:44:31.680
If you liked this episode, share it with someone and subscribe wherever you get podcasts.
00:44:31.680 --> 00:44:40.920
Thanks and see you on the next episode.