← Becker Business
Becker Business
Leadership Lessons with Holly Buckley and David Pivnick of McGuireWoods LLP 8-20-25
00:15:06
In this episode, Holly Buckley and David Pivnick of McGuireWoods share their best advice for emerging leaders, discuss what great leadership looks like, and reflect on the pitfalls to avoid.
Loading summary
Transcript22 lines
- [00:00]
A
This is Scott Becker with the Becker Private Equity and the Becker Business Podcast. I am thrilled today to be joined by two of the brightest colleagues I've had the chance to work with throughout my career. We're joined today by Holly Buckley, who heads up the healthcare department at McGuire Woods. It's one of the largest healthcare practices in the country and she focuses across the spectrum of healthcare and private equity and also represents some major health systems as well. Just a brilliant person. We're also joined by David Pivnick who is also very, very gifted. David heads up a lot of the litigation, particularly in healthcare, that overlaps with private equity and health systems. Just does a tremendous job as well. We were going to talk today about something a little bit different. We're going to ask each them for their best thoughts on leadership, the best examples and thoughts on leadership they have. You know, what advice they give to evolving leaders. And then we're going to ask them each what's something a leader should never do? Holly, let me ask you to kick off, maybe take a second introducing yourself and lead into your best advice for emerging leaders.
- [01:01]
B
Thanks, Scott. I mean, I think you introduced me very well. I run the healthcare group here at McGuire Woods. My personal practice is very much healthcare regulatory, working with hospitals and health systems as well as private equity funds and private equity backed portfolio companies. And I've been in this role as healthcare department chair for about four years now. I think the best advice I could give to emerging leaders is never underestimate the ability of your team members. I think the best results I get from people when I assume that they have no ceiling and that they can achieve absolutely anything and they will often amaze you with what they can achieve. Whereas if you artificially determine what you think someone's capable of, they will either hit that ceiling that you've set for them or maybe not even get that high. Whereas if you kind of assume they will, they will or they likely will do so.
- [01:58]
A
Fascinating. I just absolutely love that that don't set a ceiling either for yourself or for your people. Let them set that ceiling and figure that ceiling out. If you set a ceiling artificially low, you might sort of leave them. That's where they're going to be as opposed to where they could have grown to and thrive to. I just think that's one of the great pieces of advice. I love that and how anything you've ever seen a leader do that, that they shouldn't do. Any advice you have like, oh my God, I saw waiters do that. I don't like that.
- [02:26]
B
I mean, there are so many things and I think none of them are really going to be a surprise. But I mean, I think belittling people, making people feel badly about things, micromanaging, there's so many kind of bad leadership traits. And I think for all of us in leadership roles, there's going to be times where we act in a way that isn't our optimal leader self. But I think working really hard to identify what, what those things may be and where our natural instincts may not be the best and just trying to hold back from it. But I mean there's, there's so many things that, that leaders do that are not ideal. And I think just trying to be really self aware is the best thing you can do to try and avoid that.
- [03:06]
A
How I love that in David. The best advice you would give to emerging leaders and to also introduce yourself.
- [03:13]
C
Yeah, absolutely. Scott, appreciate you having me on and the chance to chat with you and Holly both. You know, I think your introduction is fair. I'm partner and litigator in the commercial litigation group at McGuire Woods. Spend virtually all of my time on private equity and healthcare related litigation disputes, investigations and things of that nature, with a heavy emphasis on defending government investigations and false claims act cases, again, both for private equity and healthcare clients. In terms of good advice for emerging leaders, and I think it's advice that works for more senior leaders or is applicable to more senior leaders as well, is to make sure that you have a plan and know what you're trying to do. And I think that both has to be an individual plan and a plan for the team, group, department, whatever it might be that you're responsible for leading. Because ultimately having a plan, thinking through strategically what you're trying to accomplish, revisiting and checking in on that plan periodically to see how you're doing relative to goals and targets and if those are being satisfied or if adjustments need to be made, I think is critical to then moving forward with executing on the plan. So I think it's important for leaders to sort of set the tone to understand what they in the group are trying to accomplish and then drive performance towards actually accomplishing those goals.
- [04:36]
A
No, and I love that concept. You know, so many times coaches go without a plan and they don't know where they're going. There's an old Alison Wonderland quote on that. If you don't have a plan as to where you're going, you're going to end up there, but you don't know where that's going to be. So it is what it is. And talk about advice for. I'm going to ask you two questions, really. The first question is advice for things a leader shouldn't do. And then second, totally unrelated, I'm going to ask you to ask Holly a question on leadership and then I'm going to return the tables and ask Howie to ask you a question about leadership. So, David, first, something a leader shouldn't do and then a second, a question that you'd want to ask Howie about leadership.
- [05:17]
C
Yeah, in terms of something a leader should do, I think placing yourself above the team. And that could be both sort of an organizational hierarchy structure, making it clear, you know, that you're reminding people, if you have to remind people repeatedly you're the leader, you're probably not a very good leader, not doing a very good job. And I think people not feeling that it is truly a team and a cohesive use. I mean, people will ultimately recognize where value is generated and who leaders are based on titles and roles. But I think the best leaders are able to do so through their approach and their style and building a camaraderie and trust with their team versus reminding their team members frequently, you know, who they work for or that they're in charge. And so I think acting as though you're on a different level from the team and trying to build that distinction through conduct and words is often very detrimental, both to the respect that the leader is going to gain, but also to the performance of the team. So I think that's a significant concern.
- [06:23]
A
And thank you very, very much for that. You see that when people try to set layers between them and others just ultimately never feels good or looks good in the long term, doesn't build team great thrive thrive situations. And talk about what's a question that you'd want to ask how you about leadership?
- [06:40]
C
Yeah, I don't know if I'd go so far as to say. It's a question I've always wanted to ask Kali, but I wanted to ask Holly for at least the last 90 seconds since you teed this up. Holly, how would you recommend a leader handling an underperforming team member, whether it's just a performance issue or one that sort of impacting the team morale based on conduct.
- [07:02]
B
Thank you, David, for the question. I think that anytime you're dealing with an underperformer or someone who's temporarily underperforming, the most important thing is communication with that person. And this kind of goes to the bucket of feedback. It should be really continual, timely, unemotional feedback and Letting people know kind of the impact that they're having. And this actually came up somewhat recently where I had a colleague, and they were interacting with the team in a way that was setting some, to use a young term, some bad vibes. And I relayed this back to the colleague and just kind of said, you know, you need to understand the impact you're having. And that just isn't the way that we operate here. That's not part of our culture. And here's how, you know, we'd prefer that you conduct yourself. And that person, to their credit, kind of came back to me and said, you know, I've thought about this, and I've realized that you are right. And I was kind of bringing with me some things from a different place, and that's. That's not who I am and not how I want to proceed. But if you're really honest with people and you give them really direct feedback, then you don't have to escalate things most of the time to a much more serious and dire point. And if you do have to go there, it's not a surprise for the person. So just not being afraid to have really direct, kind of somewhat immediate communication with people to deal with the situation. The more you bottle things up and procrastinate dealing with it, the more it becomes a bigger thing than it often needs to be in a surprise to the person who's receiving that feedback.
- [08:41]
C
I think that's very helpful.
- [08:43]
A
Thank you. And, Holly, I'll ask you to turn the tables as well. Thank you. What would you like to ask David, either that you've been dying to ask in the last 90 seconds to four to five minutes, or for a longer time. And I know there's a lot to work with there in terms of questions of David, but really about leadership specifically.
- [09:03]
B
You know, David, I'm curious, as a valedictorian, what you specifically look for when you're evaluating talent? What are some of the kind of telltale signs to you that someone's going to be successful here at McGuire woods as a member of your team or a member of the firm? What do you look for and how do you really assess that?
- [09:26]
C
Yeah, I appreciate that. That's a great question. You know, when I'm interviewing or looking at resumes and meeting with candidates, two things. So, first of all, I always sort of take it as a given. I know you and Scott both like to bring up my grades, I think sometimes to give me a hard time to put me on the spot. But I look less at that because I assume the folks were meeting sort of pass the baseline intelligence test, that they're. They're all going to be able to do the job. So I'm sort of looking, you know, when I meet with folks and interview them and also look at the resume at a couple things. One, is there a demonstrated history of hard work? So, particularly with younger candidates, I like to see some work experience or meaningful extracurriculars during undergrad and law school, something that shows that they weren't just going to class and doing well, but actually have a work ethic drive and are able to balance multiple tasks. And then I like to ask questions during the interview about how they've handled competing challenges, both from a time management perspective, but also things they've struggled with in life and how they've adapted. Because I like to get a sense for whether people have, you know, a work ethic that's going to work, frankly, for what we need out of associates who are joining the firm. And then I'm trying to figure out personality fits and whether or not I think this is someone I'll enjoy working with. Because I think, again, I assume most of the people that were coming that are coming in to meet with us meet the baseline intelligence questions. So then trying to suss out as much as I can, hard work, problem solving, and personality fit during the interview process becomes highly important to me. And I'm sure I've said this to both of you before, but I joke about it, but it's true. When I interviewed, coming out of law school, my goal at every interview was to avoid talking substance as long as possible during that given interview. And it wasn't that I didn't want to answer hard questions. It was more that I figured a lot of people were going to make staff judgments based on grades and other things. So I was interested in genuinely trying to figure out personality fits and who could carry on, you know, a conversation off the cuff with someone they hadn't met before. And I. I try now from the other side of the table, have a lot of that same dialogue to get a good feel for the people I'm meeting with and whether they're going to be a good fit and hardworking.
- [11:50]
A
Thank you very much, David. One last question. If you interview somebody who's like an intellectual freak of nature, someone who's just incredibly gifted, the kind of person who starts college at 16 versus the normal track of 18 or 19 or so forth, how do you look at that person? How do you think about that person when you come across people that are just intellect just in a different plane, that have shown that kind of level of achievement in early age. Like one of these kids that goes to college two years early. How do you look at that?
- [12:17]
C
Well, the first thing I would think to myself is, are they British? And I think that would generally be a potential strike against. If they're really Midwest values, I think that helps. But then I'm really just trying to figure out the same things I just talked about. Are they going to be a good fit personality wise? Are they able to answer the questions in an old manner? Are they smug about the intelligence? I had someone I interviewed once who asked me, during the interview, I asked them, I should say, about, you know, a thesis that they had written and it was listed on their resume and the response was basically, it's really complicated, you may not understand it. And I immediately thought to myself, that's great, but I do understand you're not getting a job offer. And so I think trying to balance out the fact that that person is, you know, incredibly intellectually gifted with the fact that they're going to have to come here and work with other people, have a strong personality that fits in, have a personality that fits in, be able to work, be able to lead others, as Holly does so well, becomes very, very important in that process, rather than just saying this person's really smart. The one caveat I would give is sometimes with someone who's incredibly gifted and bright and that's a parent, we might take a shot at hiring them, figuring we can get a couple good years of work out of them at a minimum, even if it doesn't work out long term. But when we're really trying to invest in people and build for long term success, which is the goal when we're hiring, it's got to be more than just pure raw intelligence. If it doesn't get matched by work ethic and the ability to work well within a team. No.
- [13:57]
A
Thank you very, very much. And David, let me ask you this follow up question. The person who said you might not understand this and David, for people who don't know, is a brilliant person. I, I feel bad about him taking a shot at the Brits because he's Canadian himself, but that doesn't matter. But the person who asked you and said to you you might not understand it, was he right or was he wrong? Substantively, I get the etiquette of it's horrible, but was he right?
- [14:26]
C
It's a valid question. And the problem is we'll never know the answer because he couldn't be bothered to explain the thesis to me. And so I'll never know if I would have comprehended what his brilliant mind established on, you know, an undergraduate paper. But, you know, it is what it is. In hindsight, I'm sure that person, I couldn't tell you their name, and I'm sure they're doing just fine wherever they are. But it wasn't a great approach to an interview.
- [14:50]
A
I bet. That's absolutely right. Holly and David, two of the best people I get to work with. Just the very best of the best. Thank you so much for joining us today on the Becker Private Equity and the Becker Business Podcast. Thank you very much.
- [15:01]
C
Thanks for having us, Scott.
- [15:02]
B
Thank you.