← Business, Bourbon & Cigars
Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
You know what I can't stop thinking about? If the information, you know, that leaders are getting is better and the tools are sharper and the teams are more qualified than they've ever been, why are so many high performing operators watching their own plants die within 72 hours of the meeting where everyone agreed to them? I'm not talking about, you know, bad companies here. I'm talking about companies doing well but struggle to improve, let's say client experience, onboarding, cloud, client retention, maybe it's attracting new business, all of that and more. These companies are doing eight, nine figures teams that are objectively talented leaders who have earned the right to be where they are. And yet the same things keep happening. We've all been there. Meeting ends, everyone walks out a line. Lee says they are. And by the middle of the following week, the plan is already bleeding out on the floor. Nobody can point to the moment that it stopped breathing. That should disturb you. Because if your plan and your strategy is technically sound and your people you know, are capable and they all agree with it, heck, even help plan it, then the failure is not in the strategy or the talent. The failure is in a window of time that nobody's paying attention to. And today I'm going to show you exactly how to close it. What's actually happening inside that 72 hour window after a planning meeting? I'm going to use a situation I watched unfold with an operator in our community doing mid 8 figures. Could not figure out why his numbers, you know, kept lagging behind what his team was committed to. I'm going to break down the three specific things that were killing his execution. And then I'm going to show you the exact structural changes he made that drop his execution gap literally from 15% to under 5 in a single quarter. When I see a leader take the same team, same strategy, and generate a different result, it grabs my attention. By the end of this, I'm going to show you what he did and you're going to have something concrete that you can install in your operation this week. Welcome to business. Bourbon and cigars. I'm your host, Scott Joseph. I've spent more than 30 years in the trenches building and scaling companies, acquiring dealerships. I've navigated full operational restructures and sat across from leaders at every level trying to figure out why their execution doesn't match their ambition. Along the way, you know, after making enough of my own mistakes that I could fill a book, I built me Plus Ultra Mastermind community for operators who've had enough of Pretending they have it all figured out and they're ready to actually fix what's broken. I can speak to this specific topic because I lived inside that exact problem for two straight years at J and L Marketing. Our sales plateaued. Every plan that we made felt 100% right in the room, but it would die on the vine within a week. I'd blame our effort. I'd go around blaming commitment, obviously execution. It took me embarrassingly long to realize the real failure was in the gap between agreement and action. I was the one that was leaving that gap unowned. When we finally fixed it, the company started moving again in a way we hadn't felt in years. Here's how today goes. I'm going to take you inside a breakthrough session where an operator laid his execution gap on the table and the the room tore it apart. Then I'm going to walk you through the three specific things that were killing his plans after everyone already agreed on. And for each one, I'm gonna give you the specific fix that solved it. The actual structural change. Not a concept, not a principle. The thing he installed that you can take back to your team. Monday morning, let's get into it. So, you know, this happened a few months ago in one of our breakthrough sessions. Member comes in, they run a mid 8 figure company, multiple divisions, A leadership team I'd say would impress just about anyone. It was the kind of operator where you, you look at his setup and you think, this guy has his act together. So he sits down, he says something that surprised the entire room. He tells us his team is about 85% of plan every single quarter. Not 70, not 60, 85. Now, for most companies, that number would be a huge win. But he's looking at it and realizing that the 15% gap compounding quarter after quarter, is costing him somewhere between two and three million dollars a year in revenue that he had planned for, you know, he had budgeted, he committed resources to, but he's not capturing the revenue. So the group, you know, they start doing what we do in these sessions, right? We always ask questions before anyone offers a piece of advice. We slow things down. We do not let anyone jump to solutions until we are sure, you know, that we're solving the right problem. And one of the members, a woman who had scaled and successfully exited her company, asked him a question that lands like a brick. She literally says, walk me through what happens in the first three days after your quarterly planning session ends. She didn't want to know the plan, you know, or the assignments really. She Wanted to know what actually happens when people go back to their desks and he gets kind of quiet. Not because he doesn't know the answer, because the answer embarrasses him. You know, what happens is exactly what happens in almost every company I've ever seen at this stage. People start walking back to their inboxes and let's face it, those accumulated during the meeting, right? Fires from the previous week that were never put out all the way, they're still burning. Then you got a client escalation that landed, you know, while they were in the room. The things that feel urgent, immediately they start crowding out the things they just committed to. Monday turns into Wednesday, Wednesday turns into Friday, you know, and by the following Monday, the commitments from that planning session, they've already lost half their energy, most of their context, and definitely all the urgency. Not one person in that room decided to abandon the plan or to forget about it. They were all committed. The 72 hours after the meeting just ate it alive because nobody owned that transition. The meeting ended with alignment. The week ended with nothing. The group spent the rest of the session tearing this apart. And what came out were three specific things killing his execution after agreement and three specific structural changes that fixed them. I want to walk you through each one because I guarantee at least two of these are operating in your company right now. The first, killer. Gosh, we all feel this, right? The inbox drowns the plan. Every single time his team walks out of the planning session. You know, where they had just spent an hour, maybe two, deciding where the company needs to go over the next 90 days. Everyone agrees. They literally are all committed to it. They help build it. And then they open their laptop and they see 47 unread emails, three Slack fires, a client threatening to leave, and a direct report asking for a decision on something that needed to happen yesterday. Sounds like a pretty normal day or normal week, does it not? Every one of those things has a shorter deadline than the commitments they just made. Everyone feels more immediate. And so the plan gets mentally, you know, filed under I'll start that Monday. Except Monday has its own fires. The plan doesn't get rejected. It gets postponed into irrelevance by things that scream louder. I watch this happen at J. L for two years. We'd leave a meeting feeling great about the direction, and within a week I would realize that nobody had taken a single step on the things we agreed were critical. Not because my team was weak, because nobody protected that first 72 hour window. So here's the specific fix that Solved it. Now, I'm talking about the company that was in our breakthrough session, right? He designated his COO as the owner of the first 72 hours after every planning session. Not a project manager. You know, who checks in at the two week mark. His coo, the person with enough authority to walk up to a division head on Tuesday morning and say, what is the first action you took on your Q2 commitment and when did you take it? By the end of business on day two, after every planning session, the COO confirms that the first concrete action on every major commitment has started. Not the full deliverable, just the first step. That could be, you know, a meeting scheduled, maybe a draft open, a resource allocated for a call made. Something tangible that proves the commitment moved from agreement to motion while the thinking was still fresh. That one change, assigning a name, senior leader to own the ignition, you know, I guess window, so to speak, and verify first actions within 48 hours. That's what shifted his execution gap more than anything else, because it created a structural guarantee that plans would not sit untouched and just let the inbox eat the week. The urgent will always be louder than the important, unless you build a system that forces the important to start first. The second killer, the reasoning behind the decision, dies faster than the decision itself. In the room, everyone understood the logic and all, you know, everybody participated in the debate. They saw why this particular priority mattered more than the other three options on the table. That shared context is what made the commitment feel real. But reasoning usually doesn't, you know, survive the commute home. By day two, the person who owns a deliverable remembers what they were supposed to do, but has already lost half the context for why it was prioritized. By day four, you know, they're making decisions about how to execute based on their memory of the meeting, not the actual logic that drove the commitment. And if they need to hand, you know, that work off to someone, maybe, you know, someone on their team or whatever who wasn't in the room, you know, think about that. The signal just degrades with every relay. I had a conversation about this with an operator who runs a 20 person team. Told me he realized by the second week after a planning session, his directors were executing based on their interpretation of the plan, not the plan itself. Same deliverables on paper, completely different intent behind the work. The gap between what was agreed to and what was actually being built widened every day without anyone noticing, because everyone was technically busy doing what they were told. Here's the specific fix. Same day as the planning session before Anyone goes home, the COO sends a one page document to every single person who owns a commitment. This is not a document of the meeting minutes. It's not task list. You know, it's not some type of recap of what was discussed. It's a decision brief. Each commitment gets three lines with the decision. What the decision is, why it was chosen over the alternatives, and what outcome it's designed to produce. Three lines, that's it. The key is the why, you know, why was it chosen over the alternatives line? Because that is the part that decays. First, when someone's team asked them three days later why they are prioritizing this initiative over the other one, they don't have to reconstruct the reasoning from memory. They pull up the decision brief and read the exact logic that drove it. He took it a step further. Any commitment that requires more than one person to execute gets a 15 minute handoff call within the first 48 hours. Think about that. The owner of the commitment walks the people who were not in the room through the decision brief. They're not sitting there boring them with a presentation or a formal meeting. It's a 15 minute call where the why starts gets transferred. You know, gets transferred while it's still intact. That eliminated the telephone problem almost entirely. The people doing the work understood the intent, not just the task. If this episode is hitting home, you're probably already asking where this kind of thinking actually happens. That is exactly what Me plus Ultra sessions are built for. They're small, virtual, structured working sessions for experienced business leaders and leaders. Each month includes breakthrough sessions, process sessions, and expert forums. And each one has a very specific purpose in a session. You know, one leader brings a real challenge or decision they're facing. The room starts by slowing the thinking down, asking clarifying questions, challenging assumptions, and making sure everyone is actually solving the right problem. From there, members are sharing insights, their experiences, and they're giving advice. But it's grounded, relevant, and it's built on what's actually already been pressure tested. If you've been in rooms where advice comes fast, the clarity never sticks. This is a different standard. You can request access right now at me+ultra.com sessions. Once again, go to me +ultra.com sessions. You know the third killer, collective ownership. That's fake ownership. This is the one that gets operators at scale in the meeting. When the whole leadership team agrees, it creates a feeling of shared responsibility that feels like strength at the time or maybe team unity. But it's actually the most dangerous moment in the entire planning process. Because when everyone owns the outcome, nobody owns Monday morning. Nobody owns the first phone call or cracking open the document and starting the work while the thinking is still sharp. The assumption is that momentum from the meeting is going to carry this forward. But momentum isn't a system. Momentum's a feeling. And it has a half life of about 48 hours. After that, you're relying, you know, on the individual discipline of people who are already stretched across 12 other priorities. Here's the specific fix, and it's almost embarrassingly simple. Every commitment that comes out of a planning session gets broken into one named owner and one specific first action with a completion date within 72 hours. Not the final deliverable date, the first step. And here's the part that matters. They do this in the room before anyone leaves. The last 30 minutes of every planning session are now dedicated to what he calls, you know, the start list. Each commitment owner states in front of the whole group what their first concrete action will be and when it's going to be done. So you're not sitting there delegating that and telling them this has to be done tomorrow morning at 8. They're telling you they're not talking about what's going to be completed next quarter or next month. This is all about within 72 hours. This then goes on a shared document that the COO uses for, for 48 hour check ins. That's the structure. A named person, a specific first action, a date within three days stated publicly, verified by the COO within 48 hours. He told me after one quarter of running this system that the public commitment piece was more powerful than he expected. When a division head stands up in front of the rest of the leadership team and says, I'll have the vendor shortlist drafted by the end of Wednesday, there is a weight to that statement that doesn't exist when it's quietly typed into a project management tool. The social contract of saying all this out loud in front of peers. It helps create its own accountability. And when the COO follows up 48 hours later, it's not micromanagement, it's confirmation that the system is working. His team actually started requesting the check ins because it gave them a reason to protect those first actions from the noise of the week. Think about that shift. Agreement is not ownership. Agreement is the last comfortable moment before the work gets real. So let me put the full picture together, because this is not three separate fixes. This is one system with three moving parts. You've got the 30 minute start list at the end of every planning Session where each owner publicly commits to a specific first action within 72 hours. Then you've got the same day decision brief. You know, this captures the why behind each commitment in three lines and it gets distributed before anyone goes home. And the COO led 48 hour verification that confirms first actions have started and flags anything that hasn't moved. That's the bridge. That's what goes between the meeting ending and the work actually beginning. And when this operator installed it, his execution gap dropped from 15% to under 5 in one quarter. $2.5 million in recovered revenue from a system that costs nothing but 30 minutes of meeting time and a few hours of follow through. I think about the things leaders actually say when no one else is listening. I've sat with operators in our community who will tell you, especially behind closed doors, things that they would never say in front of their teams. I'm talking about real problems from great operators doing a ton of revenue. And when you trace the thread on the chaos that they have to deal with, more often than not, it comes back to this. They're not failing to plan, they're failing to protect the 72 hours after the plan. That's specific. When we talk about communication problems, the fix isn't harder work. It's a bridge that nobody built yet. Drift doesn't announce itself. It shows up disguised as being busy. So here's what I want you to do this week. Not eventually, now, this week. Go back to your calendar and find your next planning meeting. Before that meeting happens, build the bridge. Designate someone senior enough to own the first 72 hours. Block the last 30 minutes of the session for the start list. Prepare the decision brief template, three lines per commitment. What, why over the alternatives and what outcome it produces. Schedule that 48 hour check in before the meeting even starts so it's already on the calendar and nobody can claim they forgot. Then run it once you know, just one time and watch what happens to your execution. Watch what happens to the level of communication, how specific it can become. I'm telling you, the difference is going to be obvious within the first two weeks. Not because you changed your strategy. You didn't have to change the plan. Because you finally closed the gap where your strategy was going to die anyways. Now, if this is hitting and you want to see how this kind of problem solving actually works in a room full of operators, let me tell you where it happens. Me plus Ultra sessions. They're small, virtual, structured working sessions for business owners, for leaders that strive to transform their results. Each month includes breakthrough sessions, process improvement sessions, you know, expert forums, and each one is a very specific purpose. The operator that I just talked about didn't solve his problem with a consultant or a course. He solved it because a member, you know, asked him one question about what happens in the first 72 hours after a planning session, and that single question changed how he runs his entire company. That's what these sessions are built for. You can request access@me/ultra.com sessions. Your plans are not the problem. Your people aren't the problem. The 72 hours after the meeting where nobody owns the transition from agreement to action, that's your problem. And now you know exactly how to fix it. I'm Scott Joseph. This is business. Bourbon and cigars. I'll see you in the next episode. Cheers.