Elon Musk, Risk-Taking, and the Power of High Agency in Business

Summary

Episode Summary: "Elon Musk, Risk-Taking, and the Power of High Agency in Business"

Published on February 28, 2025

In this compelling episode of the Business Lunch podcast, host Roland Frazier delves deep into the concept of high agency individuals in the business landscape, using Elon Musk as a quintessential example. Joined by Ryan Deiss, the conversation navigates the intricacies of fostering high agency within organizations, the challenges it presents, and its implications on hiring and team dynamics.

---

1. Introduction to High Agency

Roland introduces the topic by referencing an article discussing Elon Musk's role in the Department of Governmental Efficiency, highlighting him as a flag bearer of high agency people. This sets the stage for an exploration of what high agency entails and its rising prominence in modern business practices.

Roland Frazier [03:16]: "I read an article kind of talking about Elon Musk and what he's doing... as kind of the flag bearer of a trending topic called high agency people."

---

2. Defining High Agency

The discussion pivots to defining high agency, a term not universally standardized but widely recognized in entrepreneurial circles. Roland likens high agency individuals to mavericks or firebrands—those who take charge, think outside the box, and challenge the status quo.

Roland Frazier [05:35]: "It's kind of the successor to Disruptor is what it really is. Does that make sense?"

Ryan seeks clarification, prompting Roland to elaborate further, emphasizing the proactive and unconventional nature of high agency individuals.

---

3. High Agency in Hiring and Team Dynamics

Ryan raises a pertinent concern about the implications of assembling a team predominantly composed of high agency individuals, likening it to a "pirate ship." Roland counters by highlighting the necessity of balance within an organization, differentiating between leaders and followers.

Ryan Deiss [05:55]: "But at the same time, do you want a slave ship? You know, do you want... a ship full of drones..."

Roland Frazier [06:09]: "It's a balance. ... leaders to lead and you want the followers to be intelligent and hopefully... contributing."

The conversation underscores that while high agency individuals drive innovation, organizations also require roles filled by those who effectively execute defined tasks without constant oversight.

---

4. Measuring and Evaluating High Agency

A significant portion of the dialogue focuses on quantifying high agency and its intersection with judgment. Roland muses about creating a "High Agency Quotient (HAQ)" to assess individuals, while Ryan points out the complexity of evaluating good judgment alongside high agency.

Ryan Deiss [10:52]: "Can we also measure for people who have good versus bad judgment?"

Roland Frazier [15:33]: "What I was thinking about that was Hack H A Q, the high agency quotient..."

They acknowledge the challenge in creating objective measures for these traits, suggesting that track records and scenario-based interview questions might serve as proxies for judgment and agency.

---

5. Fostering High Agency in Teams

The hosts explore strategies to cultivate a high agency culture within organizations. Ryan emphasizes the importance of knowing the 'why', encouraging employees to understand the rationale behind decisions, thereby empowering them to make informed judgments.

Ryan Deiss [22:23]: "One of our core values is always know the why. ... I want you to have the context behind it."

Roland adds that creating an environment where innovation is encouraged and mistakes are tolerated can significantly enhance high agency behaviors.

Roland Frazier [28:50]: "Can we encourage more high agency behavior in the team that you've got as well? Can it be taught as opposed to is it a natural thing?"

---

6. Balancing Agency and Organizational Structure

A recurring theme is the balance between high agency and organizational needs. Both hosts agree that while high agency individuals can propel a company forward, unchecked agency can lead to chaos. They advocate for a balanced approach, where agency is leveraged in roles that benefit most from it, while structured roles maintain stability.

Ryan Deiss [35:04]: "There's a balance. It's gotta be a balance."

Roland Frazier [35:10]: "I think it's an interesting thing... how creative I necessarily want our bookkeepers to be."

---

7. Conclusion and Future Directions

Wrapping up, Roland and Ryan express enthusiasm about further exploring the high agency concept, even contemplating writing a book to provide a comprehensive guide on measuring, hiring, and nurturing high agency individuals within organizations. They invite listeners to engage with their ideas and share feedback, highlighting the relevance and timeliness of the discussion in today's dynamic business environment.

Roland Frazier [34:17]: "We think it's a fun thing that could be very helpful and it's also something that's kind of at the top of everybody's thought process right now."

---

Notable Quotes

• Roland Frazier [05:35]: "It's kind of the successor to Disruptor is what it really is."

• Ryan Deiss [10:52]: "Can we also measure for people who have good versus bad judgment?"

• Ryan Deiss [22:23]: "One of our core values is always know the why. ... I want you to have the context behind it."

• Ryan Deiss [35:04]: "There's a balance. It's gotta be a balance."

---

Key Takeaways

• High agency individuals are pivotal for driving innovation and challenging established norms within organizations.

• Balancing high agency with organizational structure and role requirements is essential to prevent chaos and maintain efficiency.

• Measuring high agency and associated traits like judgment remains a complex challenge, necessitating creative assessment methods.

• Cultivating a culture that fosters high agency involves empowering employees with context, encouraging experimentation, and tolerating failures as learning opportunities.

• The conversation underscores the need for strategic hiring practices, ensuring that high agency individuals are placed in roles where their strengths can be maximized without disrupting overall organizational harmony.

---

This episode offers invaluable insights for entrepreneurs, business leaders, and HR professionals aiming to harness the potential of high agency individuals while maintaining a cohesive and effective organizational structure. By examining the traits, benefits, and challenges associated with high agency, Roland and Ryan provide a nuanced perspective on building dynamic and resilient teams poised for success.

Transcript

[Ryan Deiss]

The idea of moving on concrete is something I've done my. I just feel like they should allow grown adults to assume the risk. It's like, you know what? They're wet. The concrete's wet. You're a freaking adult. You know what happens on wet concrete? We assume no liability or responsibility. If you slip on the. But they're not. They're like, no, no, no. They're shut down. We're shutting them down.

[Roland Frazier]

Hey, everybody. Welcome to the Business Lunch podcast with your hosts, me, Roland Frazier and Ryan Deiss. Ryan, how are you doing today?

[Ryan Deiss]

Exceptionally awesomely. Amazing. And how about you?

[Roland Frazier]

I'm doing fantastic. I'm wishing the rain would clear up a little bit so my courts would dry off and I can get into my. My pickleball wonderfulness. But that way I'm always.

[Ryan Deiss]

Because my son played tennis. And I get it. It's slick. But it seems like in every other sport, it's a little bit wet. You know, they're like, go figure it out. Go. Go play tennis. It's like the slightest bit damp, and they're like, nobody do anything.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah. The challenge with tennis is that it's a fuzzy water absorptive ball that they could probably redesign to be playable. But also, I think it's very slick. They would have to resurface the courts so that you wouldn't. Because you're running and stopping and sliding. And even on, like, a dry tennis court, if there's any kind of, like, sand or anything on it, you're. You're going to slip. And water, I think, would be pretty tough. And then in pickleball, even though it's a wiffle ball, when the ball is wet, it definitely affects the bounce. And again, you've got slippage, you know, issues I get.

[Ryan Deiss]

I mean, I just. I've walked on wet concrete. This is not a new concept.

[Roland Frazier]

You run and done really quick stops and starts and move.

[Ryan Deiss]

I have, like, again, the idea of moving on concrete is something I've done my. I just feel like they should allow grown adults to assume the risk. It's like, you know what? They're wet. The concrete's wet. You're a freaking adult. You know what happens on wet concrete? We assume no liability or responsibility if you slip on the. But they're not. They're like, no, no, no. They're shut down. We're shutting them down.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah, we're shutting them down. I was actually surprised because when I called this morning, I was. I wasn't thinking that they were closed. I was thinking that they were Too wet to play. And when I ask. And she's like, you know, yeah, no, they're. The courts are closed currently. And I'm like, close what?

[Ryan Deiss]

I mean, I get it on like a golf course if they're overly wet because you can damage, like actually caused it. But we're talking about concrete and moisture.

[Roland Frazier]

I think it's 100% liability focused. I really do.

[Ryan Deiss]

I don't know. I think you got adults. I think. Let me sign something saying that I understand how wetness and concrete functions. Let me go. Let me go. Give it hell. But anyway, that's just me. That's just me. What? This is not the subject of our conversation.

[Roland Frazier]

I'm guessing the subject of our conversation is going to be. But you know what? It is very authentic to business lunch because you don't just sit down and start talking business without catching up and asking how each other's doing and having some conversation about little things. So I think it's. So if you guys don't like that, if you don't like that part of our lunch, just skip, you know, hit the fast forward button a couple times and you'll get to the. The other stuff.

[Ryan Deiss]

We could be like other podcasts and have like five minutes of ads.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah, right. What I would love to chat about today is I read an article kind of talking about Elon Musk and what he's doing at the Department of Governmental Efficiency, which I just find hilarious that it's doge. And they were talking about him as, in particular, as kind of the flag bearer of a trending topic called high agency people. And that high agency, I think it was first mentioned by somebody on one of Tim Ferriss podcasts, and it just really caught on. And so it's showing up in job forums and lists of things or qualities that hirers want, recruiters want from the people that they're hiring for jobs and people that are getting promoted into positions and questions for interviews. And so I thought that it would be fun for us to talk about what is this high agency trend? What do high agency people look, you know, like, and how do we use that to help us in business? Is it a good thing? Is it a bad thing? And that's kind of. Have you, have you seen anything about Hiatus?

[Ryan Deiss]

Yeah. No. Define, define. I mean, I think I know what it means, but I don't know. I know what I mean. So define the term for me.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah, it's. It's a. It's a really good question because it's not terribly well defined, but it is generally somebody that takes charge, that does unconventional, outside the box things, that's kind of a maverick firebrand, you know, going their own path, everybody else, you know, be damned. And, and just really moving outside of traditionally expected or even mandated behavior. And, and so like kind of Steve Jobs entrepreneur. It's, I think it's the successor to Disruptor is what it really is. Does that make sense?

[Ryan Deiss]

And the idea is you want these people to work for you because like I can see the benefit of being this person from an entrepreneurial perspective. It seems like having an entire team of them sounds a lot like a pirate ship to me. So, you know, is there what's kind of your thoughts?

[Roland Frazier]

But at the same time, do you want a, you know, do you want a slave ship? You know, do you want, you know, a ship full of drones that are just functioning in their jobs, looking at their job description and saying, yep, that's on the list, I'm supposed to do that? No, that's not on the list. Not looking for innovative opportunities, not thinking outside the box, not trying to think about how do I make this better, why are we doing this? Is this the right way to do things? So it's a, like, it's, it's interesting to me because it's a balance. Because it's nice to have somebody that questions everything and it's nice to have somebody that just does what they're fricking told. Right. And, and be careful what you wish for because yes, if you had a, if you had a company of Elon Musk's, it would be chaos, you know, and they'd all be leaving in a week anyway to start their own, you know, their own things. So I guess that's the question is, is what really is it? I think is we kind of know what is the level of it that we want is probably the, the more difficult question, right? How do we measure it and say, you know, I want to, I want to high five high agency person, you know. No, I'm just looking for a, you know, a mid two agency, you know, what, what is the scale that defines what we actually want for different jobs? Because I don't think you want high agency people in non leadership roles because you need leaders to lead and you need the followers to follow and you want the followers to be intelligent and hopefully, you know, evolving and contributing, but you really don't want them taking giant risks. The thing that they referred to with Elon and I thought this was actually cool is it's like everybody laughed at him when he Bought Twitter and they're like, you're an idiot. You overpaid for that. It's all the advertisers gonna go away. I just saw article saying that all the advertisers are coming back now, by the way. But, but now it's like, well, that put him in every headline and elevated his presence in the media more than, you know, maybe more than a $40 billion spend could have made, maybe not, but certainly from a relevant standpoint, and then ultimately gets him to be besties with the arguably the most powerful human on the planet as the President in this unprecedented, unprecedented Lee. Powerful position that 17 states just filed suit against Doge today because they said it was an unconstitutional delegation of presidential powers. Like, that's pretty significant. And I honestly think he's going to turn that thing around and make money. And it doesn't, it doesn't suck to own what's arguably the most influential news platform also on the planet. Like, I mean, he also didn't spend.

[Ryan Deiss]

40 billion of his own money. People forget.

[Roland Frazier]

Yes, he wrote a check for $40 billion cash, Ryan. That's how that works. Yeah, that's an excellent point. I did also read that today there was a lot of separate publications and separate things, but the banks that funded 13 billion of the acquisition in debt. The article said that the debt was nuclear, radioactive. Nobody would touch it. They couldn't pedal it off to anybody. And Now I think JP Morgan bought in and now has upped from like 3.3 billion to 4.7 or something. And now the debt is very, very, very marketable and very, very wanted. And everybody wants it not just because they believe in the company, but also they believe we should do things that help Elon Musk because we want to be closer to the guy that's close to the guy. So he thinks outside the box. Let's reinvent the way that rockets go into space and reuse them. Let's make electric cars that drive themselves. I mean, that guy is about as out there as you can think and somehow has managed to succeed with all of it, as far as I can tell. So, so it's a pretty, I think it's a pretty good set of things to have, but you are taking a lot of risk when you are going way outside the box like that. So.

[Ryan Deiss]

Especially when the comparison is Elon Musk, because most. Because you're probably not hiring the next Elon Musk and you're probably not the next Elon Musk. So I think you brought up an interesting point before where I Think the question that you asked is what, what degree? Like on a, On a scale of 1 to 10, what is the appropriate amount? Right.

[Roland Frazier]

I think that's the magic.

[Ryan Deiss]

I think that's the minimum, like, viable, you know, kind of quantity of agency that gets you. And I think that that's. I think there's an aspect of it, what it may also be is we need to add another. We basically need to add another layer to this. So if agency is existing on an. On the x axis, we may need to add. That is judgment. Right. And so can we also measure for people who have good versus bad judgment? Because give me somebody with really high agency, a 10 out of 10, but who's also a 10 out of 10 in terms of judgment. And I'm in it all day long. Right. Whereas if somebody has bad judgment, then I want them to be about a zero in terms of agency. Because there are people who have worked for us who do have very bad judgment.

[Roland Frazier]

Right.

[Ryan Deiss]

But they're really effective.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And these are the people who you point and you, like, go that way and they just run. They like, put their head down and they run. And there could be a wall there, and they'll hit the wall and they'll back up and they'll just keep running at the wall over and over again until eventually that they break through the wall.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And there is an extent to which that is effective.

[Roland Frazier]

Yes.

[Ryan Deiss]

And these people can be blunt instruments, but they can be effective in certain roles. Now, the second that you take them slightly out of that, if there's any change whatsoever, it's not as effective. And I don't mean to diminish or degrade the value of these people because they're grinders. And some of them, frankly, some of these folks exist in sales roles where they're making more than a lot of folks who are quote, unquote, smarter with better judgment.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

Because they just do the fricking thing.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And they don't try to come up with their own path and create their own scripts and get overly creative. They just do the crap that freaking works. That makes the money. Right. So I really do think it comes down to judgment. And so I think if you decide that you want to build a high agency team, you should also. And you want to interview for that and hire for that. You also figure out how you're going to interview and hire for. For good judgment.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And I don't know how to do that. Man. That seems hard.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah, I, I really hard.

[Ryan Deiss]

Because there, there have been people who I Have been shocked because it's not just intellect because you can interview and, and we have people at executive level. We have them take competency tests. Like literal IQ tests. Yeah, that, that they will do that and they'll, they'll do great on it. But a high IQ does not necessarily equal good judgment. Good judgment is something that I don't know how to interview for, I don't know how to, how to hire for. And so that's, that's the piece.

[Roland Frazier]

That's a good question. I haven't seen a, A judgment measuring tool test or device, but I'm sure there's probably one that's out there. I haven't really looked for it. What I was kind of playing around with that I sent to you earlier was that, you know, you could use an acronym power and say you want somebody that is productive. Excuse me, is proactive, somebody that takes ownership, somebody that has will, which is, you know, grit or tenacity, somebody who is comfortable with experimentation and somebody that's resilient, that, you know, that will bang into the wall again and again and again. And that doesn't include judgment, but it does. It's kind of the opposite of the person you don't want, which would be a, you know, a past person, which would be passive, apathetic, stagnant, and submissive. I like that. Like, I guess you're kind of always assuming a level of judgment and then you're giving more and more autonomy and authority to people who demonstrate good judgment in the position you hire them in. Because like, if, let's say that we're interviewing a portfolio company CEO, we're assuming that they come with good judgment, and we are relying on their track record of past performance and referrals and recommendations and then our ability to assess what we believe their judgment is in the interview process. So I think that's a. I'm going to defer that and say, let's assume that you're just going to have to figure that out and hope that the track record carries that.

[Ryan Deiss]

Yeah, you know, I'll buy that. Like, just, just to kind of put a pin. I think that, I think what you said there is important. You can interview for, for good judgment because it's going to show up in their past performance.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

Somebody who has succeeded, has almost certainly succeeded because they have demonstrated good judgment. Some level, some level of good judgment. Yeah. They must have done it Even, even if they were merely on a good team, like they did a good job, like luck will only take you so far. You had to have. Have shown some good judgment at some point in time. And so. And you can also interview for it through scenario based questions. And so throwing a lot of scenario based questions out during an interview. Okay, so this happens. What would you do?

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And. And that is a key aspect of interviewing, especially when you're talking executive level hires. Then that's. That's critical. But. And I do think you said something earlier and we kind of glossed over it. But I think it's critical at the executive level. Leadership level, certainly. CEO. Yeah. I think you want somebody who's a seven plus on the agency.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

Level. Because what I don't want is somebody who's an executive leading a team and certainly leading a company who's low agency.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

Somebody who's going to come in. It's like, just tell me what to do, boss. Like, no, chief, you're the fricking boss.

[Roland Frazier]

Right.

[Ryan Deiss]

You tell you what to do and then tell everybody else what to do too. And you make it bigger and you make it better. You got to have high agency. And I think that that's such an important distinction. I love that we're talking about this because I'm. As we're thinking out loud, I'm getting more excited about this concept because I think the mistake that we've made in the past is we have merely promoted effective people.

[Roland Frazier]

Yes.

[Ryan Deiss]

Into roles. Into. Into high, you know, high level roles.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

But. And they've gotten there because they've been effective because very often they've been low agency. Just whatever you tell me, Drill Sergeant.

[Roland Frazier]

Yes. Right.

[Ryan Deiss]

And because they've done what we told them to do, they've been effective. But because they don't know how to do anything than what they've been told to do. They don't. They're not able to succeed or expand at the next level.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And that's when we get frustrated with them.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah.

[Ryan Deiss]

And so that's where you need to have people of high agency. Sorry, I'm rambling, but it's cause I'm slowly finally freaking figured out what I think you figured out forever ago.

[Roland Frazier]

I love that. And I don't think it's rambling. I think it's great. And I think it's super helpful to anybody that's watching or listening. What I was going to say is how many jobs did you have before you became an entrepreneur and were your own boss? I know we're looking back here a bit, but I think it'll be helpful.

[Ryan Deiss]

I mean, I worked on the family. I was a laborer on the family tree farm. I worked in retail in college and I worked so maybe 3ish kind of. But I mean, I basically started my first company at 19. So, yeah, not many.

[Roland Frazier]

Same here. Right. Okay, so in those jobs, how well did you succeed or how happy were they with your performance because you did what you were told versus how many challenges did you have because you worked around the system to find better ways to do things?

[Ryan Deiss]

Yeah, I mean, I crushed all of them. Yeah. I mean, that's. And they all want to be.

[Roland Frazier]

Did you run into frustrated bosses at all.

[Ryan Deiss]

The. So in. Well, you know, so setting aside, like, the family side, you know, piece of it on the. On the retail side, I would ask a lot of questions and I would come up with ways to make things a little bit better. And my manager was like, hey, cut it out. Like, just do it the way it's supposed to be done.

[Roland Frazier]

I remember your Abercrombie stories. Absolutely. You're like, what if I go and talk to the customer and help them? And they're like, no, you need to piss the customer off. And you're like, what if we don't throw away these giant, you know, boards of handsome models that everybody wants to buy and we just sell them? You know, no, we're going to throw them away. Okay, can I have them? Yeah, you're going to sell them. And then they're like, hey, you can't sell. You know, it's like you to me. And. Because I had the same thing, like, from my very first job, you know, supposedly sweeping the tennis courts and then taking my own money and going out and renting a leaf blower and doing it in five minutes and then having the rest of the day to do what I wanted to do and having them pissed at me for doing that because I didn't do it Right. To being a runner for a legal office who waited and created my own routes that were much more efficient than their. You need to take this thing here and this over to the other side of town, then go back to here and then back here. And I'd be like, what time does it have to be there by this. Okay, great. This is the route I need. And then I'm done in an hour and a half with something that would take the average bear six. Not. You know, it's not. I'm not trying to say that to Flex or Bright. I'm saying I am not a good employee to do what I am told. Just historically. I'm going to fight management because I'm going to Try to innovate and do it better. And in those positions, for whatever reason, I still, I still think I'm right. You know, I still think you're right. It's like, well, let's.

[Ryan Deiss]

I don't think I'm right. I was objectively right, Roland.

[Roland Frazier]

Okay, me too. I mean, but it's, but, but seriously, it's like, so, you know, then it's like, well, maybe I don't understand the bigger goals because I run into friction with my son right now because. Who may even be on this because I'm like, we need to do this, this, and this. And he's like, that's dumb. We should do this. And I'm like, you don't understand the bigger picture. The reason we need to do this is because these other things are affected by it. Right? Or I've already done what you're talking about doing, and I know it doesn't work because I lived it. Right. I have the benefit of being significantly more experienced or older than you are. Right. So I think that what I'm driving at here is that you should be able to identify within your company the people who are doing that. The people who, like, if you're unhappy with the performance of somebody, not because of the results they're achieving, but because the method in which they're achieving them, that's not unethical or illegal, then that to me is a good indication. You've got a high agency person and you will absolutely lose them if you don't find a way to work with them and embrace the high agency that can really help your company. Does that make sense?

[Ryan Deiss]

Yeah, absolutely. And it's one of the reasons, you know, my frustration with those previous jobs and my frustration with what you just described is one of the reasons that one of our core values that every company that I've ever been a part of in the leadership team, one of the core values is always know the why. I am very big on, you know, I want everybody to know the reason that we do something, the why behind it, so that they can make a judgment on does it make sense to. To break something? Does it make sense to do it a little bit differently? I want them to have the context behind it. And to your point, very often high agency people will try something new. They'll. They'll innovate, and it won't work. And what I say is, I've got no problem with you doing something new as long as you knew the why behind it. If you can tell me why you chose to do something Then I'm okay with it. If you just were flailing around and saying like, well, I don't know. And what I say is that the only unacceptable thing is, well, that's just the way it's always been done. That's the only unacceptable response. I don't want to hear that. Like, if you can say no, I want to do it this way because I believe this would be true. I had a hypothesis about this. Fine. But furthermore, if I'm going to tell somebody, don't do it that way. I believe that I owe them. I don't believe in acceptable response from me, even as a leader, is because I said so, because I hated it when people said that to me. What I can say is, I don't have time to explain it to you right now at this exact second. Please trust me right now. I promise I'll explain it later. Because one of our core values is know the why. So I need you to trust me in this moment. We'll set up a time. I'll tell you later because I got to know the why. But for the love of God, trust me right now because I've been down this road, right. And I still sign your check. But that's. That's exactly. That's exactly why I don't literally. But you get what I'm saying.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah. Yeah. So I think it's interesting. I would like. As we. And we can talk about it here is. Our plan is to do a book about this because we thought it was an interesting subject. I'm glad that you're more excited about it because I was like, this is pretty cool. And you were like, yeah, it's cool. But I think that. I think that having some sort of scale to identify it and, and measure it and nurture it and embrace it and within the organization and also how to identify it in the people that you're interviewing. Because I particularly like Power versus Pass. And. And then what I sent you, I think it was in there is. I was thinking about it was Hack H A Q, the high agency quotient, which is the measurement. Right. So. So that's that I think that's. And then. And an assessment around that. And then how do we embrace it? That. That I think would be really, really cool for. For us. That's my brainstorm with us for two seconds. But as far as for. So within the company, you've got these people who maybe you're butting heads with. If you're butting heads with them because the status quo seems wrong to them. That's an opportunity, not a threat. And if they are questioning, then they just need to be in a position where you don't need somebody that's just going to go bang their head against the wall until they accomplish it. My question is like, is it possible to encourage more high agency behavior in the team that you've got as well? Can it be taught as opposed to is it a natural thing? I know like Steve Harward at Prime Corporate Services is constantly frustrated because why aren't people thinking to do this? Why aren't you guys taking this and running with that? Why aren't you like that? And yesterday I had a conversation with Deanna, who runs one of our portfolio companies about that because I said, well, how many sales have come from this so far? And this thing that we just did? And she said, well, none yet, but you know, there's a bunch coming. I'm like, well, what are we going to do to capture the 3,100 people that registered for this? You know, of Those dripping wet, 400 of them came and saw this stuff. So we've got 2,700 people who raised their hand and said they were interested that are just in the wind at this point. They're going to get email nurtured. But like, what can we do to put them over the edge now? And why aren't you thinking about this as it's your responsibility to think about this now, not in a bad way. And some people like that management style might seem too harsh to people. It's definitely too harsh when I bring it home to my family. But it's, but you know, it is, it's like, you know, look, your job, your responsibility is to ask questions like that. So if you're not, why aren't you and why don't you have the information at the top of your mind on that? This is the number of people that we brought in that aren't currently being activated and what could we do and what are we testing to make it happen? And so now I'm, and I'm not doing that in a scolding way. I'm just doing it in a matter of fact, let's get on that and figure it out. And we came up with an action plan that we'll see what happens with it. But that's what I want in the people that are in those leadership roles. And it's honestly what I want in the people that are in lower level roles as well. I appreciate it when my son has an idea and he had one yesterday and My initial reaction was no, because people don't like that. But we haven't tried it and tested it. And it's wrong for me to shut him down and say that and not say, like, if I don't have current data on that, then I should receive that with an open mind and we should try it. And if I don't do that, it shuts him down from giving me additional ideas, which is not good for the company or him. And if I do embrace it, maybe it'll work. And if it doesn't, then what did it cost? You know, it cost a test. So that's a lot of rambling too. I know that was my turn to ramble, but what are your thoughts on all of that? Mess of thoughts.

[Ryan Deiss]

I'll tell you what I believe and I think it'll be fun to do some actual research on this to see if we can't, can't do some studies, do some research and try to maybe come up with some real data around it. But what I believe right now, based on my own experience of having worked with, I don't know, hundreds of people over the past couple of decades, is I think that we can create an environment and a culture where agency can either thrive or be stifled in people. Right. And I think anybody listening to this, you can create a culture where it can thrive or be stifled. And if you have certain values, like know the why, if you have certain values where you're rewarding and encouraging people to try new things, if you let people make mistakes and you know, the second somebody tries something new, if you don't immediately squash it. Right. If you don't force somebody just to, you know, go by a paint by numbers type system, if you're encouraging it, I believe there's things that you can do to foster it and there's obviously things that you can do to stifle it. That being said, I think that this is always going to happen with, in a spectrum as it relates to the individual person. I think that there are just some people who are going to be high agency and there are some people that are low agency. Because I just think some people are different. And I think it's important to acknowledge that in both types of people those gifts are equally valuable. It just means they might need to occupy different roles.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah, yeah, somebody think about it. I agree with that initially. And then I think about it and I'm like, I want my receptionist to be a high agency person. I want him or her to be thinking about, you know, gosh, we answer the Phones in the stupidest way. Why don't we do this? You know, why haven't we done this? Yeah, like, I kind of feel like I'd really like. I'm probably going to butt heads with them. So I think a constructive communications framework for communicating with high agency versus low agency people. Low agency people, I think, want to be told what to do. You tell them and then they do it. And then they either did a good job or they didn't. And that's accountability. The high agency people, you're gonna, you're going to have to justify more why you are doing what you're doing, and you're gonna have to be receptive to their questioning and welcome it as opportunity, not see it as threat. I think that's the going to be the key there. But I kind of. It wouldn't surprise me if all of them are agency. Ryan.

[Ryan Deiss]

Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me if what we're describing as a high agency, high judgment person is what has also been referred to as a, quote unquote, a player. And so I think, yes, I think the problem is, is that those people don't exist out in the real world in a tremendously high quantity. And so I'm not sure that every company can fully staff this.

[Roland Frazier]

I wasn't, I agree. I wasn't suggesting that. I was just saying, like, if I got my choice, even in a position that feels kind of drone, like, I think I want a high agency person because maybe because I feel like I am and so they're more like me, but. But I just find myself constantly asking, why is it so slow? Why does it take so long? Why can't we do this faster? Why haven't we tried this? Why don't you have that data? Why don't I have that data? You know, like, why can't you get it to. You know, I just feel like it's a constant. I'm gonna say it and it's gonna sound terrible. It's just a constant underperforming. It's not like everybody's not delivering their A game all the time. And that's what I want, and it's not reasonable.

[Ryan Deiss]

I don't know though, man, because let me, Let me give you a different, maybe a different take on that. If everybody's always testing, then what's the control? So I think it might be a mix. You know, at some point there needs to just be, this is what's working today. And so everybody is doing what's working today. And then you've got somebody on that team who is the high agency person and they're trying something new because it's important to remember that very often the new thing that you tried, it doesn't just work. You know, it's not just not an improvement, it works a lot worse. Very often we test things and we try things and they work a lot worse than the other.

[Roland Frazier]

But then everybody's trying a lot of.

[Ryan Deiss]

Things and collectively they work worse. That's underperformance.

[Roland Frazier]

I have three initials to counter you with abt. Always be testing. So you are always having a control. You're just always iterating around a test cohort. Right. So that, that's what I'm looking for, right is I think the control is the control and we're sending out the control. But if we're not testing, you know, 10% of our list or our market or our effort with these, these things that maybe can get us better, then we're not going to be iterating and evolving up. And yes, most of them probably won't work better. Right. That's the whole point of having the control. If nothing else, it validates the control. But, but I think that if, if you're doing it that way and that's the culture, I still think it's better in the case.

[Ryan Deiss]

I mean you use a marketing example there less people with the ability to do tests at a lot greater volume. In the case of a receptionist with inbound phone calls, how many tests can they run? I don't know. If you have salespeople, I kind of want them on script and maybe I've got one that's going to be testing a different script. Right. So I think it does just kind of depend on the role and how many you go. This is what's going to be fun to figure out as we go through and begin to think through. Because I do think that it's going to be a lot of role dependent type stuff. I don't know how creative I necessarily want our bookkeepers to be, you know. Right. Like let's get a little, let's get a little bit fancy with this, you know, let's move, let's move this chart of accounts all over the place. I don't know, I don't know how much agency I want there.

[Roland Frazier]

You know, there was a lot of.

[Ryan Deiss]

Agency at fricking Enron. Like, you know.

[Roland Frazier]

Yeah, I don't know.

[Ryan Deiss]

There's a balance. It's gotta be a balance.

[Roland Frazier]

I think it's, I think it's an interesting thing. So hopefully you guys found this interesting. I would love to hear your thoughts on it. Ryan and I are going to be brainstorming on it a good bit as we go through because we think it's a fun thing that could be very, it could be very helpful and it's also something that's kind of at the top of everybody's thought process right now. So if you found that it was helpful or enjoyable, please share it with a friend. If you didn't, then let us know what you didn't like about it. Let us know we're both available on the socials with forward slash our names most places and I think that's it. Anything else Ryan, before we sign off?

[Ryan Deiss]

No, I would just say if you, if you didn't like it, don't let us know. Just keep to yourself.

[Roland Frazier]

I usually say that, but this time, like I think every 10th time I want to hear a little bit about.

[Ryan Deiss]

Feedback is always appreciated. So are reviews. If you could give us a review and if you could leave us some stars, that's how people find out about this and we would very much appreciate it if we more people found out and heard about this.

[Roland Frazier]

Thanks guys. See you next time. Hey, Roland Frazier here. If you're looking for a way to grow your business exponentially to get more customers and ultimately increase your wealth, there's no faster way to do it than to acquire other businesses that already have the customers, products, services, teams and media that you want. If you want to double your sales, just acquire a company that has the same sales as yours. It sounds simple, but far too many people end up starting new businesses that fail and forget that they could skip all the hard stuff and just acquire one that already exists. There's a reason why private equity firms, family offices, big companies like Apple, Google, and some of the smartest entrepreneurs on the planet do not start new businesses from scratch. They acquire already successful businesses and when they do it, they instantly increase their sales, their profits. If they want market share, they increase that they can get new products and services to offer all instantly. Hey look, 90% of new businesses fail. 90%. Why not acquire an already successful business and increase your chances of success by 900%? What most people don't realize is you can acquire highly profitable businesses with no money out of your own pocket in pretty much any country in the world, regardless of your credit, and without having to go find a bunch of investors or needing any experience. Look, I've been acquiring businesses for over 30 years now and I cover the whole process in my EPIC Investing strategy training and I want to give it to you 100% free, just visit businesslunchpodcast.com EPIC to get your free access to my EPIC investing training right now while it's available.