“Leadership is a tool like a hammer, you can build beautiful things or bludgeon somebody to death with it.” In this conversation, Illana Burk and I discuss what makes true leadership unique, why "scalability" is broken, and the one thing we should ask leaders (but never do).
In this conversation, we talk to business mentor and consultant, Illana Burk about your life's work and leadership impact.
We get into:
- what makes true leadership unique
- how crisis illuminates if you were "made for this"
- why "scalability" is broken
- how we weaponize coaching
- the one thing we should ask leaders (but never do)
“Leadership is a tool like a hammer, you can build beautiful things or bludgeon somebody to death with it.”
Join us for a fun conversation about big-picture leadership impact and wrestle with your answers to the questions Illana said were “some of the best she'd ever been asked on a podcast.”
We need you out there leading because “good leadership and good skills proliferate at any level.”
—
Illana Burk has been a business mentor and consultant for more than fifteen years. She specializes in guiding clients from doing good work to leading good work using profitable, proven, values-driven business strategies for making culture changes a reality.
As host of The Good Business Podcast, Illana makes smart, experienced business learning available to as many people as possible. Illana has an MBA in Sustainable Enterprise and has worked with hundreds of business leaders across a wide range of industries all over the world proving that when good humans learn leadership, the whole world gets better.
You can learn more about Illana and her work at yourlifesworkshop.com or connect with her on social (she’s @illanaburk in all the places).
I'm Celine Williams and welcome to the "Leading Through Crisis," podcast, a conversation series, exploring resiliency and leadership in challenging times. My guest today is Illana Burk, leadership educator, business mentor, and host of, "The Good Business Podcast," welcome, Illana.
Thank you so much, Celine, it's lovely to be here.
I'm very excited to finally talk to you. Illana has put up with a lot of me canceling with my illnesses, I still sound a little bit rough, so I really appreciate your patience and I'm very excited to talk to you today as well.
No problem at all, ditto, worth the wait.
You're very kind. As we start this off, I always start with the same question that is the name of the podcast is, "Leading Through Crisis." When you hear that phrase, what comes up for you or what does that mean to you?
You know, it's a solid question that I've thought about a good bit in watching other episodes and listening to other episodes rather. I think these days leading through crisis is just leading, right? I don't actually know any leaders that don't feel like they're kind of in a constant state of crisis. And leadership in my world can mean a lot of different things. I work with very small business owners all the way into bigger businesses and the people that lead them and people that are aspiring leaders. Some of my clients are writers and artists and I think leadership can take on a different definition for everybody when you're thinking about crisis. But I think fundamentally it means approaching your work with a perspective of service, of how can you serve your community best when they're facing the same trials or their own trials that are different from yours. And so for me, I think leading through crisis, it brings up some of the best opportunities to rise to the occasion. And I think that the most interesting people and the ones that I tend to gravitate towards and work with kind of tend to be in that category of like, I think it can bring up the best in people or the worst in people and I think the people that are most natural leaders, crisis gives you an opportunity to really guide and oftentimes it gives you an opportunity to do your best work, leading in, "Ordinary times," if there is even such a thing, doesn't always afford, so...
So thank you for sharing that, there's a few things immediately that come up. When you said leading in, "Ordinary times," in the air quotes, I was thinking, 'cause you started with like who's kind of not in crisis and that just leading right now. That I think it's a really valid point. Like I say often that, for me, when I think of crisis, and people can disagree, I totally appreciate that, for me, crisis is really, any change can be a crisis, 'cause it depends on how we deal with it, what our lens on it is, whatever that case is. And the thing that is constant is change. So it kind of has become, definitely in my opinion, is that like, just people leading.
Yeah, if you can't hang onto the wheel when things are changing, then you're probably not leading, you're managing and those are two pretty different things.
Ooh, okay, I love that, I agree with that. I'm curious how you define those differently, 'cause some, it's really interesting how people, some folks use that really interchangeably, leading and managing and for some people it's a very distinct difference.
Well, for me, I think the difference is it comes down to skill and desire. Managers, those who are managing things, they're sort of more in that like category of responsibility. Oftentimes they can be in a position to like make sure things are getting done, but they're not necessarily in a position to serve the people who are doing the things, nor do they necessarily have the training or will or desire to guide, nourish, nurture, lift up or serve the people who are doing the work. And, when I say doing the work, we're speaking about this in kind of like through a corporate lens, but I think a manager requires other people, a leader does not. You can lead entirely independently. You can lead a movement, you can lead an idea, you can lead with beautiful artwork and display a sense of community leadership through the way you move through the world, without anyone really doing anything underneath you. I think managing... Managing feels a lot more like a job title, I think leadership is a way of moving through the world. That would be the simplest terms I could come up with for that.
No, I mean, absolutely and I love it and I appreciate you sharing that. I think that I often make a distinction that we manage things which often unfortunately people put people as things and we manage the things that people are doing, but we're really managing things, whereas we lead people and that can be leading ourselves. To your point, it can be leading a movement, it doesn't have to be other people necessarily, but we are leading people in some way. We're leading ideas. It's very different than managing things. And I think that, I love the idea of what you talked about, that a leader, you can be a leader, an individual on their own, can be a leader. I think that there's so much of the traditional teachings around leadership are, besides being outdated and written for a very specific audience, that is not necessarily the audience we have today, are very much focused on, you have to have a certain number of followers and this is how you get the followers and then this is how you lead them in this really specific way and I think people still get hung up on that, 'cause that's what we're taught.
And it's honestly, I think there's nothing clearer in our culture right now than, I mean, like look at influencer marketing. If there's ever been an example of the fact that like, how many people are following you has nothing to do with your leadership skills, I think that's it.
Great example! I do not classify any influencer really at all as being concerned at all about leadership. They're concerned about leveraging influence and influence and leadership are not the same thing, influence can be a component of leadership, but you can be an influencer without being a leader, you certainly can't be a leader without having or gathering some level of influence. But that level of influence can happen almost secondarily to whatever is most important about what you're doing. To me, leadership is like, it's a systemic method of gathering power and exerting it in hopefully positive ways. But leadership is, I mean, it's a tool, it's like a hammer. In one hand it can be used to build beautiful things and another hand, it can be used to bludgeon somebody to death, like fascism is pretty solid leadership, like, it's effective! It doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing, right?
Right.
But I think leadership, it is a process of gathering and exerting power in some way. We like to think of power as being kind of a dirty word, like, especially I think as women we're sort of trained that like, if you're powerful, it's like a kind of a negative. But if you actually kind of understand that gathering it is the marker of real leadership and then using it to buoy the people around you and lift the people that are coming up behind you, that to me, I think is where real leadership shines and crisis is the very best moments for it.
Well, and it's interesting, 'cause what you just said links me back to one of the things you said when you were defining leading through crisis, which is you brought up the idea of, I was gonna say servitude, that's not the word that you used.
Of service.
"Of service," I know, I was like, that is...
That is a whole different conversation.
Whole different conversation! I know, but being of service... Listen, at least we're real on the podcast. There's nothing else that's true on this podcast, it is, you get to see all the dirty bits of how my brain doesn't work sometimes. Being of service and that leaders, ideally leaders are of service and some of the best work-
Managers definitely are not, managers are not concerned about that, usually. I think that's a rarity.
And I wonder, and based on the people that listen to this, the people that consume this podcast, some are in corporate, some are not, some are business owners, some have a background, like, they're kind of all over the place. Some are new managers or new leaders, some want to be leaders. There's not a very specific, this is the one thing that we hit, which is why this is conversational. So I'm curious, I say all that context to say whether it's based on your experience, based on your education, whatever, wherever you wanna draw from, how does someone know? How do you tell if someone is being of service? And I say that-
Oh, that is a really good question, go ahead.
Great, I say that because I think we talk about being of service and there's books written about servant leadership and it's not everyone, there's different definitions, it means different things to different people and I think it doesn't make it really clear for a lot of people that are out there. And so, I'm not saying, this is Illana's defining this for everyone, but I'm curious from your experience, how can you tell, what does that look like? How does that show up?
That might be one of the best questions I've ever been asked on a podcast.
Thank you very much.
I love this question. Okay, so, I'll answer with an example, right?
Please. When Covid started, when the pandemic started, I'm a business coach, so I had probably two dozen clients at the time, something like that, that were very, tiny independent business owners and about a third of them had brick and mortar businesses, which were absolutely dependent on in-person experiences in order to stay alive. And the people that listen to my podcast, the people that follow me, I have a lot of brick and mortar people in my greater community, so that I feel a responsibility to serve and lead. And then when Covid started it was a parade of shell-shocked fear from my clients, from other business owners, from the people that didn't hire me. It was like I was getting all the questions, because I often operate kind of by accident, as a bridge point between brick and mortar business and online business. They're two worlds that I know a lot about, that I am very experienced in both and I am often helping people bridge that gap. So for me, the first thing I did when Covid started was I made as many sessions as possible available to as many people as possible on a pay what you can scale. That was how I could serve my community. Because people had questions and they needed specific answers that were unique to them, not generalized broad market stuff I could put out on a podcast or stick in a reel or write in a blog post and that was what I could do with what I had. I had time, I had knowledge, I gave it as freely as I absolutely could. And the first thing that I did with all of those people was to spread that same ethos of service. What could they do for their community to continue to serve their community through that crisis without folding and closing their doors? What was the most that they could offer to keep their business sustainable and help their communities respectively with what they did and what they offered and managed to keep themselves afloat in the process. And that, to me is the best definition of being of service. The second thing that I did was I came up with a guide of how to get online fast and I gave it away to anybody who wanted it. I leveraged my very broad network of being in this business for 20 years and I sent it out to everybody that I knew and said, "Send this to your people." And it went far and wide and you didn't have to give an email address for it, it wasn't a freaking opt-in, like, it wasn't designed for me to get anything from it. There was no barrier to entry whatsoever. It was just, people need this information right now or they're not gonna survive this and so that was what I could do with what I have. I think that crisis is the moment where you find out whether or not you are made for this. So to your question of how do I tell? well, when there's not a crisis in front of us to test people's motivations, when I'm talking to somebody about their work in the world, I think the first things that they talk about are the most telling. If they talk about the impact that they make and how they lift people up and the effect that their work has on other people, that's what should come first. If they tell me their numbers first and how fast they've grown and their pedigree, that's the different type of person. It doesn't necessarily make them like a bad person, but it gives me a place to direct them if they wanna actually learn how to lead in a more balanced way. A lot of times it's just a lack of experience, people do what they've been taught, they follow the leader, they follow whoever was in front of them, they follow whoever said, this is what you should do and this is how you lead and it's like monkey see, monkey do, we just continue to mimic, until we end up in late stage capitalism. But a lot of people who participate in this market are absolutely willing and able to change the way they do things they're just not ever invited to. So, I look for people who are like, I can tell the difference based on what the impact level is that they wanna take and their respect for whether or not they can do what needs to be done to have the impact that they wanna have. In my world, in small business, it's like kind of a joke that people come all the time to business coaches like me and they're like, I don't wanna do Instagram or Twitter or Facebook or whatever social media thing. It's like, it's kind of a lightning rod for caring people don't wanna have to sell themselves, but they wanna be able to have an impact. Generally speaking, the ones that I think are the most coachable and tend to become the best leaders are the ones who come to me with a baseline of, I understand I'm gonna have to do things that stretch me, but that's what I'm gonna have to do to meet the needs of my people and my community and to build that community so that I can do the work that I love. Those are the ones that are the born leaders. But you can teach it, like you can help people understand how to make that transition, but I think the born leaders are the ones that walk in with that attitude, so...
So I appreciate all of that answer.
I think I answered your question somewhere there.
You did, absolutely. You absolutely did. And then some, which is a wonderful thing. So this is not the question I was gonna ask originally, but you just said it and it came to mind in what you were just saying. How important is coachability in leadership in your opinion?
Oh, that's another good question. I think the answer's that it's really subjective.
By the way, my favorite answers are when it's like, I don't have a good answer for you, 'cause it depends, those are my favorite answers, tell me more.
It depends because I think that there are people who are sort of born humble, born with like the raw materials it takes, so they sort of rise into a sense of leadership naturally and coachability doesn't necessarily, like, there's sort of like an implied that like everybody could be coached, everybody could do to learn something. But I don't know that that's necessarily true, I think it's really contextual. I'd say a level of being receptive to feedback and growth is a baseline for being able to do good work in the world. I think that that's necessary. But I mean, I'm not super coachable. I mean, I'll be honest! At least not in some areas, like, I think that's what it depends on is also like what are the areas that you're being coached on? there's certainly areas where I'm extremely coachable, because I'm very, very aware of what I don't know, So, it's like a cup I wanna fill, but like if somebody comes to me and they wanna coach me on my leadership style, I am a wall of resistance. Because it's what I do. It's rare that somebody's gonna say something that surprises me. This is my, like, for lack of a better way to put this, that feels less buzzy is like my zone of genius. I'm not gonna be super coachable in the area where I coach other people. I'm gonna probably be a little bit resistant and probably wish that I was a little bit more receptive to other people's input, but we all have our faults, right?
Yeah.
So I think that it's important to recognize that you don't know everything and be coachable in the areas where you're deficient, for sure. But I don't think that you have to be coachable as a blanket way of existing in the world, because I think lots of people are doing a great job and coachability kind of can turn into a stick that they're flogging people with, like, if you're not coachable, then you're not humble or you're not effective or something and it can turn into a weapon, especially in corporate environments. That it's like, well, I'm actually just really freaking good at my job. I don't want coaching, because I don't feel like I need coaching and I'm effective, so maybe there's something systemic here. Like there's just so many layers to that that there's gotta be more context and nuance laid onto that, I think.
Yeah, I appreciate that. I tend to agree and I think sometimes what happens, probably more times than I would like to see, but I think definitely sometimes what happens is people are, I'm gonna use a buzzy term 'cause we'll just got through it, but, people have imposter syndrome about things, so they feel like they need to, often women have this, where I need to know more, I need to be better at, I don't know all the things in order for me to feel confident in doing what I'm doing and that we can confuse that with coachability and it's not the same thing. There's a self-awareness, self-acceptance piece inside of there that's not just coachability. Does that make sense the way I'm saying that?
Yeah, yeah.
So I think there's a lot of that that we then go, "But see how coachable," and I'm using, "See that person's so coachable." Well that person, there's insecurity, there's other stuff, that's not the same thing as coachability, because I think to your point, if you, when you are really confident and you know your stuff, you do tend to be less coachable in those areas and the thing I would add to that is when you see people that think they are really good at something, where there is the false sense of confidence that you're like, um, you are not hitting your targets or that thing isn't actually working, but they refuse to hear that or get the feedback, it's like the opposite of coachable, there's a spectrum here.
Yeah, yeah, I think they call that mansplaining, right?
Oh...
One end of the spectrum is like, let me explain this thing to you that is incredibly apparent and your zone of genius, let me explain that to you very slowly and repeatedly, because I don't know anything more than what I'm saying to you. Coachability, I think it becomes such a weird, like it gets perverted almost, and can be weaponized so easily of like, we need to coach them into some leadership skills. And it's like, well, or you need to treat them with respect and give them the power they need to actually do the things that you've asked them to do. I think coaching, especially in leadership environments, has become this like almost like a scapegoat for higher leadership to like disempower the people underneath them. Like if they're not effective, it's like a thing you can throw at a problem. Well, let's coach them. And then that person's going, "Well, that's not actually the problem here. I see all these other problems here, they're not being addressed. It's not actually my leadership needs that are the problem here." So, I think that that can be marked as resistance a lot and sometimes it's actually competence.
I agree and I do think coachability is weaponized far too often, I 100% agree with that. I also think it is weaponized to create shame for people, which I absolutely hate when I see that and I see that a lot and I'm sure you've seen that with people who have worked with other coaches, because this happens, corporate or not. If you've worked there, like where that becomes part of it is the shame in not being coachable and they're made to feel a certain way, which I think I really absolutely hate that as well. Like who does it serve when that's what people are walking away with?
Oh God, I've joked for years that I've like gotten the coaching refugees, like, bring me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses, who have been given really terrible advice. Like that's been something that I do, that I've done for a long, long time, because I think, in the coaching industry, so many people, especially in business and leadership coaching, they take a format or some sort of prescribed something that they learned, some methodology and then they slap a price tag on it and sell it like crazy for oftentimes an insanely high amount of money and none of it takes any of the context and nuance of the person or the business's actual situation into account. They are just teaching, like they're broadcasting essentially, right?
Yes.
Like they're broadcasting ideas on top of things and, "You have to do this, you must do that, you have to follow these particular steps, or you're never gonna be successful." And then it becomes like, well, you're just uncoachable if they don't wanna do it, when actually that person's experiencing like some legitimate resistance and intuitive reaction to somebody telling them that they should be doing things that don't apply to their unique situation. As far as I'm concerned, like real coaching, especially leadership coaching, has to take into consideration so much more than goals. Goals, like, I mean, I barely even do goal setting with clients, like the outcome is almost secondary to how we get there, because how we get there so much more important. It's like, I look at goals a lot like business plans and business school, it's like everybody jokes that like the only place that a business plan goes after the bank is the circular file, because it's the same thing with a lot of like systemic type coaching. We're gonna have someone come in and they do X, Y, Z acronym coaching and then they just do that. Well, you don't even know if that's what you needed, that's just somebody in a leadership meeting went hey, we should hire somebody to help us do X, Y, Z, without any kind of prescriptive evaluation of like, what's actually going on. I mean in our chat, before we hit record, we were talking about what you do of like, that there's a lot of evaluative components to doing good work. You have to understand the lay of the land before you can do good work, whether you're coaching one-on-one or systemically across an organization. If you wanna change the culture of any ecosystem, whether it's the c-suite or the individual life coach who wants to get her first website up that I'm working with, I work with people at all those levels, because I think that good leadership and good skills proliferate at any level and you have to understand what you're dealing with. You have to take inventory, you have to understand what your resources are. Like there's so much more to it than just prescriptive garbage, because what that leaves is people feel terrible, because they weren't able to get the outcomes they thought they were gonna get, because it was wrong for them to start with, but they don't know that and unless you have somebody who's like, relatively experienced and has perspective at the wheel, then you're gonna leave things worse than you found them, because you were putting a bandaid on a hole in the dam or giving people just the completely wrong solution because you never bothered to figure out and understand the systemic issues at play to understand the problem.
Yeah, look, the reality is that, I think you'll appreciate when I say this, it is so much easier to create a program and say, this is the way everything works and everyone goes through the program and it's gonna be perfect and I'm just gonna sell this program the exact way it is and if you don't make it through, it doesn't give you what I'm promising you it's gonna give you, hat's your problem. That's not me, that's you. It is much easier from a scalability, from a repeatability, from all of that. And it results in all these buzzy things that are meaningless that people will then say about what's not working or about what's wrong with someone. "Oh, well you need to improve your funnels." Great, I mean, theoretically, sure, lots of people probably do need to improve their funnels, but just to say that is completely meaningless to a business owner, the same way to say to someone, Well, your leadership skills need to be improved. You have to work on your executive presence." It's just as meaningless to say, "You have to work on your..." We create these things, blanket statement that are easy to sell. Well, we're gonna work on executive presence, great. We're gonna work on funnels, great. We're gonna like check the box, 'cause that's what someone has said, but actually, there's so much nuance and context inside of any, they're actually meaningless when we think about a lot of this stuff.
Uh, huh, yeah, my first question would be like, well, "Maybe we should talk about what an actual funnel even is?"
Sure, great starting point.
Can we talk about that? That could be a whole other episode of me going off about why funnels are the worst thing ever. It's like just the concept, you're to like set your people, the people you wanna serve, that you say you wanna help, you're gonna sit them on the edge of a funnel and like literally the clip art graphics you find on the internet on Wikipedia even and then you're gonna shove them headfirst into a funnel and then you're gonna squeeze as much money out of them as you possibly can, until they pop out the bottom with nothing. That is not being of service, right?
It is not.
To anything but your bank account! That's not leadership, that's manipulation, it just is! It's a really nice polite way of saying that you're gonna just squeeze them for everything that they're worth. There's no conversation about service in there. So, I mean, I know that's not really the topic here, but it's more so like that's illustrative of how we ask these prescriptive questions, but we don't ask the right questions. Like, "You need to improve your funnel." Well, maybe you don't need a funnel, like, that's the right question. Maybe the funnel is... Maybe that was the freaking problem to begin with. "You need to improve your executive presence." Well why? why is that a problem? And what would that look like if you improved it? Is it you look better in a suit, you can walk better in heels? Like how do you improve your executive presence, right?
What is executive presence? How about that? What is this?
Maybe we need to redefine how we view and understand leadership in the ecosystem of our whole organization, instead of telling people that the way that they're functioning and moving through the world is fundamentally wrong in some way, maybe the ecosystem's wrong. Maybe we challenge ourselves to chew on bigger problems.
Yes, it's context and nuance and better questions. Like, imagine the world we'd live in if all of these things?
Oh, imagine, imagine!
Right, it's be beautiful.
Yeah, people ask me like why I work with like very small business owners, like, because of my experience and definitely, I could do bigger things if I wanted to, I could work with organizations if I wanted to, I have, I think, for me it's the question of scalability is fundamentally sort of broken, right?
Amen.
Like, I know lots of people who have very big businesses and very broad reach and have focused entirely on reach and bigness and external visibility, but their impact is quiet. Their impact is like, okay, so you've helped a whole lot of people do something really small and relatively insignificant. That's the way that we think about scalability, is about financial growth and broad market appeal, broad market impact, that's what scalability means. But I've helped, I went back and counted and I've probably worked with around 400 people by now in my business, mostly one-on-one and the ripple effect that I see over time is far more profound. That's how I view scalability, which to me is how I define leadership underneath it all is like, the impact that I wanna have is that people answer questions in a different way. When they're faced with new challenges, they think about it in a different way as a result of working with me. That they move through the world making decisions from a more inquisitive and more holistic standpoint and that scales, big time, because that's how they teach, it's how they do their work in the world. That's what scalability really means, as far as I'm concerned. So when we think about leadership, leaders don't always have the opportunity to see the impact that they make and that's that's the truth of it, right?
Yeah.
Is can you be okay with that? Can you get okay with not actually visibly seeing the impact of your work? And I think fundamentally corporate environments are not calibrated for that. They're not calibrated to have invisible successes, because they can't quantify it on a balance sheet, they can't talk about it at a quarterly meeting and that's why I do the work that I do, because individuals are much more comfortable with invisible impact and nuance and that feels far more impactful. That's how I scale, is I focus individually and I make sure that each person that I work with is leaving with more skills, like real skills, that changes how they do their work and changes how they do business forever and that feels like a whole different kind of thing.
Yeah, I think that's incredible and I think the fact that you have that clarity, is a lot of people don't have that clarity. I've worked with a number of smaller businesses and startups and they become hyper, a lot of them, I'm not saying everyone, but there's this hyperfocus on this many people on an email list or on a whatever and then growing to have this many people in the organization and then growing to hit this idea of growth, which is not scalable and it's completely arbitrary numbers and metrics that they're pulling from. Why is the size of it, why is having 200 people in your organization better than having five people, if the impact that those five people have or the profitability or whatever your thing is, is higher at that, like what? But we get stuck on these external ideas and I think, what I hear you talk about is that you, by helping people question and shift and figure out what's best for them and their business, you get to have an impact and then they get to have an impact, that's real.
Yeah, which is, I mean, organizations, like, it's amazing how big companies can systemically forget that they have incredible amounts of power to have a positive impact. But if you remind them and show them the ways that they can wield that power, they do and they do it well, they do it sustainably and they do good things in the world. But we have free market capitalism that says you have to pay attention to the needs of your shareholders before anything else and those things end up being mutually exclusive and that trickles down, it just does, you know?
Yeah, absolutely. I mean's, I like to think about these things like the three terms in the same conversation and its scalability, sustainability, and stewardship. If you're considering those three things as being three sides of a triangle, then it changes the way that you do business. Because if you think about scalability in a vacuum, then it does what we just described. It's bigger, bigger, better, more, faster, stronger, bigger, bigger, bigger, more visibility and you win, but do you?
What do you win?
You may or may not have sustainability. What does sustainability look like? And I'm not talking about just environmental sustainability, but all sustainability. Like, are you functioning in a way that you can continue to flourish, indefinitely, which is an amazing thing to aspire to, but what's even better than that is stewardship. Are you actually enriching the ground you stand on? If you are, you might not actually get to see the ways that you're scaling, because it happens under your feet. It's quieter, it's subtler, it's some employee 20 years from now talking about one of the managers at your company that they had when they were in their very first internship and what an impact that person made, because of the culture you created in your company. That's not quantifiable, that's just like good people-ing. It's a lot harder. It's a lot harder to teach and it's a lot harder to learn and it's definitely harder to market!
Yeah, isn't that always the case?
Isn't that always the case?
Yeah, we could keep talking, and I'm gonna be mindful
We could. of your time and I'm gonna ask the question that, is there anything that we didn't get to that you wanted to bring up or something you wanted to emphasize? Or you can also say, I'm actually really good, I feel like I got to everything, I said everything that I wanted to say, before we wrap this up.
I love that. I really enjoy that you ask hard questions, so that's nice. Like, it's really fun to be able to say a lot of the stuff, this is big think-ey stuff that doesn't often come up on leadership podcasts. And so, it's fun to chew on that in the context of both entrepreneurship and bigger business and thinking about the ways that individual human beings can become leaders is really powerful and so I would just say that would be my final thought is like, it's nice to be able to have that conversation, I'm glad you're having it, so thanks!
Well thank you, I appreciate you having the conversation with me. This was lovely, I really enjoyed our time together. I appreciate you sharing and being so open and playing with me in the space, these are always the best episodes. So thank you so much Illana.
My pleasure, thanks for having me, Celine.
Absolutely. Thanks for joining me today on the "Leading Through Crisis," podcast. If you enjoyed this conversation, please take a minute to rate and review us on your podcast app. If you're interested in learning more about any of our guests, you can find us online at www.leadingthroughcrisis.com.