E006 / Permission to Take Space As Leaders / Rob Ocel
In this episode of Peer Ripples, Noa and Ofir are joined by Rob Ocel, VP of Innovation at This Dot Labs and host of the Engineering Leadership Podcast.
The conversation delves into the concept of leaders taking space and the challenges associated with it. It explores the balance between leadership and team ownership, as well as the role of a leader in creating space for themselves and their team. Key takeaways include the importance of permission and duty, the freedom that comes from clear rules of the game, and the concept of owning the middle as a leader
Takeaways
Permission and responsibility go hand in hand as a leader
Leaders create space by building systems rather than controlling every decision.
Trust grows when expectations are clear.
Owning the middle is a critical leadership skill.
Clear rules of the game create freedom, not restriction.
Chapters
00:00 Permission to Take Space
10:00 Leadership, Freedom, and Boundaries
18:00 Owning the Middle
30:00 Rules of the Game
35:30 Reflection and Takeaways
More About Us:
Episode Transcript
Noa (00:00)
Yeah. So we have Rob in the room. Rob, do you say that Rob O cell How do you say your last name? Also, so welcome. We know each other for a long time and Ofir to know you as well. Rob is the tour guide for this podcast because he brings years of experience.
Rob (00:06)
Yeah. sell. Yeah.
Noa (00:20)
with podcasting and also with leadership and tech.
Ofir (00:23)
I think what he gave us now is the courage to start.
Rob (00:26)
The courage
Noa (00:27)
to start
cool. Okay, that's a good one Ofir So Rob, how about before we dive into what we thought to chat with you today and seems like any topic with you will be interesting. ⁓ So how about you take a moment to introduce yourself?
Rob (00:43)
Yeah, of course. I'm so happy to be here on this side of it, because last time we talked about this, it was before y'all had started. So it's so fun to be a part of it. But my name is Rob Osel. I'm the VP of Innovation at a company called This.Labs. This.Labs is a software consultancy and AI transformation shop. I've been doing engineering, first as a software engineer and then as a manager, for about the last 20 years, and doing management for the last 10.
I think Noa sort of alluded to this, but I'm also the host of a couple of our podcasts, including our Modern Web podcast, which is our tech-focused one, and maybe of more relevance to what we'll be talking about today, our Engineering Leadership podcast, where I've been able to speak to over 200 CTOs, directors, and VPs on all of the things that they see about being best practices for running companies and leading teams. So it's been a lot of fun for me to get to have those conversations. Helped a lot in my own career.
Noa (01:35)
So we are very, very excited to have you here with us. And yeah, we, we want to help leaders or partner with leaders to see what they can get out of this conversation. And the conversation we thought to have today is more about, talk a lot about space. So how we actually give ourselves permission as leaders to take space, because a lot of people like me.
start talking about things like you should ask permission from your people. And you ask your people what ⁓ is their style and adapt to situations. And there is a lot of molding the leader to be agile with situations and their people. So we actually wanted to push the button and poke a bit from conversations that I had with different leaders. And even my daughter gave me a pep talk about, mom, stop.
⁓ tiptoeing with your people and start giving yourself permission to be who you are unstructured chaotic Noa. ⁓ So that's that's where I thought to take the conversation. How can we actually take more space as leaders?
Rob (02:52)
Yeah, I mean, I'll start, I guess, as I like to do from an abstract top level thing and say what I think is one of the challenges that people have with this that I've seen a lot of certainly of leaders of my generation. And that is a lot of us millennials and such that have come up into the management space sort of came up and had this idea that they all everyone remembered the toxic manager they had. And so, you know, maybe if you're a parent out there, it's the same thing, right? Maybe you had a bad experience in your childhood and you're like, I'm not going to grow up to be that parent. And a lot of people
A lot of millennial managers, that's how they came up. I'm not gonna be that toxic manager. I'm gonna be the good manager. And so a lot of us has adopted as our first frame agreeableness as kind of the first thing we are as leaders. And I think one of the things that I've seen is that agreeableness can actually become a toxic trait when taken to the extreme, right? Like as an analog, I keep thinking of the idea of...
⁓ I have a bad habit of being very agreeable and so I ask my wife or my son a lot, hey, what do you want to have for dinner? And I think that I'm doing a kindness. I will adapt to whatever they want to have for dinner. But to them, it's an imposition. They're always being asked to think of what should be for dinner. And it's one of those situations where you think that you're being kind, but you're actually putting a lot of stress on people.
yourself and other people included and so now I've had to teach myself to be a lot better at saying hey I was thinking this for dinner does that sound good or would you like to do something else and I think that this is maybe one of those things that can like fool people right again it's just this idea that you think that you're being agreeable you think that you're being a good manager but you're creating patterns that are kind of working against both you and your team maybe against your own will
Noa (04:37)
I think the question I would say my mom says don't hate. You cannot love but don't hate. But the question I hate the most is mom, what's for dinner? That's my...
Ofir (04:49)
So you're talking about the opposite, The kind of the leader need to make this decision. So Rob, like, how do you balance this? As a leader, you want to set the tone, right? You want to want it or not, you have the final say in many topics. ⁓ But you want your team to also take part in ownership, be accountable to some of this.
So how do you build this balance?
Rob (05:19)
Yeah, I think the thing that you're looking to do then is instead of leaving it up to people, right? So let's come to something really concrete here, right? So it might be, you what do you know, I work in software. So for the next software release, you know, you can go to the team and you can say, hey, what do you guys think would be the next best tickets to work on the next best features to add to the software? And again, that might feel like you're empowering your team. And, you know, maybe for some teams that works, but that's
maybe not going to serve the organization completely, and it's not going to serve the team super well, unless they're completely read in and all the things that you know. So instead of asking the team, what do you want to do next? What should we do? Hey, what issue tracking system should we use? How do you guys want to run meetings and this type of thing? What I've tried to start to do is instead of telling people what I want them to do, to start to set up the sort of system and the framework that we're going to use to make that decision.
So like, if it's gonna be about tickets, I'm going to say, I might start a meeting and say, hey everyone, you know, as you know, our yearly priorities are this and this and this, our quarterly objectives are this and this, ⁓ the last release did well in this way and didn't do well in this way, knowing what we've learned now, which of these things do you think best aligns with that, right? So I've set the stage for what I think is gonna make us successful, but I didn't prescribe anything, and nor did I put it on them to decide what those
those criteria of evaluation were going to be, I offered them and I just asked them to come and conform to them. And I think for me, that's had more success than necessarily giving up all of my power and expecting people to come up with good answers, you know, without any guidance at all, versus also just saying, hey, this is what you're going to do. These are the five features. You don't get to choose. Just do what I say. And, you know, missing out on their feedback and their intuitions.
Ofir (07:13)
So going back to the core of our topic, how is this approach creating space for you?
Rob (07:23)
Yeah. Well, because, okay, so you have to think what doesn't give space, right? Like stress. So one of the biggest forms of stress that I've seen, both for myself and for other managers, have you guys ever seen or heard people say that they just feel like they're stuck between two sides? Like heard from managers say that they feel suffocated for some reason, like things were really good for a little while, but now recently,
They just feel suffocated. Their manager is constantly on them about things their team isn't doing and their team is on them about things that are changing in the org and they feel stuck in the middle. And so I've talked a lot with people about what it means to own the middle. And that is a way of like creating the space, right? Is that one of the reasons that you don't feel like you have space is because you're constantly trying to like manipulate outcomes without actually telling people what you're doing. So like.
you know, if you're not guiding the team towards making a good outcome, you're stressed out because they're giving you decisions that won't work for your boss, right? And if you're worried that your boss is pushing you in a way, but you don't want to give the bad news to your team, you're trying to find a way to sort of massage that and buy some time with your manager while you get them where you need them to go the right way. And so I think where this creates space is that when you can kind of say, guys, this is what I expect, you tell your manager, this is what...
you're going to get from my team, I understand you and this is what you're gonna get and you tell the team, this is what I need to do. You're creating a space where people around you know what's expected and you don't feel like you're constantly having to run around and connect all the disparate pieces and plug all the little holes in the the dyke and things like that.
Noa (08:57)
I really appreciate you bringing the voice of what we sometimes, I don't like that term, but the middle management. ⁓ It's such a frustrating space to be in. That's the space in between, between the the executives and the teams or the individual contributors or the managers reporting to the middle management. And that's a very frustrating space to be in.
And you are advocating for how can we create space, take space in that middle space in between those two sides. And I think it's very important. you you mentioned the toxic experience that start happening when we over, let's call it over empower Is that a good term or would
Rob (09:48)
Sure, yeah, we can choose to use that term.
Noa (09:51)
Yeah, maybe over-empower that what we see with kids is that they just not sure what to do with that. And it reminds me Ofir The conversation that we had here with Paul about ⁓ allowing your team to do mistakes. And he said that one of the ways to allow people to fail or do mistakes is with guardrails, with boundaries. And again, I hear that empower without boundaries.
giving choices without boundaries or systems or structures or the why is what creates the frustration for the leader and also for the team. So that's what I hear right now. And thank you for advocating for that space.
Ofir (10:39)
I
think now what kind of between what both of you said, the guideline and the clarity Rob that you described on one hand of what is the perimeter that we have to work with, right? What framework we need to use and the trust that you build with the team to tell them, I'm giving you the guidelines, you go and do what I believe and trust you to be doing, but you can trust me.
that if you're making a mistake, if you're not doing it right, I got your back. This is kind of the mix of those two sides.
Rob (11:18)
Yeah, yeah, I've met leaders that see leadership from an ego standpoint. I mean, there might be a whole lot of toxic traits that are leading to this, but let's just stop at ego for now. And ⁓ I was talking to Charity Majors, she's the CTO at Honeycomb on my podcast, we were talking about this a little bit more. And she had had the story of a CEO that proudly proclaimed, like giving a speech at a conference and proudly proclaimed, nothing makes it to...
to my product without it going through me first. And like, if you think about that as a CEO level, like what that will do to an organization of sufficient size to just slow down innovation. And I've met other leaders that like, they care so much about quality, but the net effect is that they put such an imposing force on how work is done, that all their workers are afraid to make any decisions, because they're always looking over their shoulder. And, you know, again, it comes from a,
maybe not of ego but of like wanting to do good work and of professionalism but when you're Dictating what is done as an exactly how it's being done as opposed to sort of the broader strategic strokes of it then yeah Nobody has any space to innovate and even if they wanted to Your style is not exactly their style. So it never comes intuitively to them So I think always a lot more like the analogy I've always liked the most is that of an executive chef in a kitchen, right that
That chef is at the pass making sure that all the dishes come out at the level of quality that they expect. They make sure that the menu is set, that the ingredients are picked, that they hired the right people and put the right tools in their hands. But they are not running around saying, now you have to stir this. Now you have to take that off the fire. Now put the next one on the fire. No, don't put the pan there. Do it this way, right? Like his chefs and his line cooks are allowed to find ways to innovate within that system, to do the best work they can and to support each other within that system.
But yet, you know, all of that comes together. And again, that chef, while he's certainly stressed out in big kitchens, is less stressed out than if he was having to monitor every single person cooking every single dish, right? You sort of can trust that once you've set that system, you can stand back at the pass and just observe things heading out and have a good sense that things are proceeding as you expect them to. And to me, like, maybe that's what we're getting at with creating space is you want to create a system where you feel comfortable operating within it and your team is trained well enough to operate within it.
so that you don't have to see every single thing that's happening in order to know that good work is getting done.
Ofir (13:49)
Yeah, and when you have a system that is consistent and predictable, you know what the results that you're going to see. And when you have trust with your team, you know that they're going to follow the system. And then you can really move aside and take a step back, right? Whether it's a focus on other tasks or, you know, take a break, right? And not be involved in each and every task that happens and every activity that happens.
This is where in my opinion, where this space is really making a difference, where you know that you don't have to be everywhere all the time. Because this is going to where you started the road. This is what creates stress. For the leader, feeling that if I'm not there, part of it might be ego for some cases, but
The feeling that if I'm not going to be in the room, if I'm not going to be part of this meeting, if I'm not involved in the details of this project, it's not going to work, it's going to fail, it's not going to deliver the right results, whatever, then it's very stressful.
Rob (15:01)
Yeah, yeah, exactly. And this idea that a lot of times, and I was talking to Noa about this a little bit, which is this idea of managers sometimes feeling like, again, that agreeableness, I don't want to dictate how this team works. I'll let the team do what works best for them, and then I'll adapt to it. I'll figure out how to make it work. And again, that can make it difficult because there's far more of them than there are of you. So if anything, in order to have confidence in what your system is,
You know, have to be willing to say, listen, I know how I work. I know what I need to do to understand that what we're doing is that quality. I don't need to know every single thing that you're doing, but I might need, you know, for me, it's a really strong sense of the why. You know, I was saying to Noa that like, I really need my team to give me their theory of the case. Why was this what you did? What did you do? What else did you consider? Just give me that high level. Then we'll go as deep in as you want, but I need that high level pinning first and foremost.
And it's okay to say to the team, you have to give me that. on this team, this is how we communicate to each other. And that that's not a greedy, selfish, or even say, like, you're not a good manager if you need your team to conform to you. A good manager can work in different systems. And it's like, to some extent true, but nothing is gonna match a manager who is operating in a system that makes them effectively and who has recruited a team and trained a team.
who also works well in that system and to use that system, right? That's like a really great alignment, I think. And I think too often, again, the pressures on managers is to not do that, to serve your team first ⁓ and then to take up space. But like we should be using the lesson that we hear all the time, every time we fly, right? You have to put your own mask on first. And I think too often we're not allowing ourselves to do that.
⁓ And you know, we're reaping poor consequences because of it
Ofir (17:00)
I'm curious on something I picked on something that you said. ⁓ So that we need to build a system and then hire the people that are fitting into the system. ⁓ So two questions on this one is
isn't it creating some kind of a dullness, right? Cause if everyone are doing the same thing, isn't it killing innovation and the ability to bring new ideas to the group. And on the other side of this is what happens when you inherit a team that is already in place, it can be well performing. can be not well performing, but you already inherit a group of individuals that are a team.
and you didn't pick them, you need maybe to install a new system in place. How do you approach that? So does this necessarily mean that you need to replace them in order to bring people that fit with your system or do need to adjust your system to the people that you have on the team?
Rob (18:07)
Yeah, it's good question. So we can start with the first one, which is the idea of like, what does this do with diversity? And is this kind of a monoculture? And I think the key thing to preventing it from becoming a monoculture is the notion that you're not trying to recruit or train a set of clones of yourself, just simply a set of people who are motivated by the same things as you. And so I was speaking with Joe Essay, who's the...
VP of engineering at pop menu, who used to be on like a high school championship hockey team. And it worked in like Michelin restaurants. And what he talked a lot about is like building championship level teams. And he said like, really like high, high level championship caliber teams, the types of teams that if you had them, a lot of people, at least in engineering in the last 10 years would have said, those are 10 X toxic engineers. That's a toxic culture of people that are so focused on being perfect and being the best.
But what he stressed to me, it really made a lot of sense was, no, you just have to know what you're building. Like, listen, if you want to start a baseball team, you can start the New York Yankees or you can start the Savannah Bananas. Those two teams have very different whys on what they're doing. They recruit very different people. They're driven by very different ethos, but they're both wildly successful baseball teams. so similarly, like your org is not like other people's orgs. You need to figure out what your why is and you
just because Google hired some engineer for $500,000 doesn't mean that Google engineer is gonna do well in your system, nor would they want to, nor would you expect them to. So I think it's more about aligning on the whys than necessarily the hows or the whats. And then you allow that creativity to show up in how people choose to implement that ⁓ and align to that why along those lines. ⁓ As for the second piece, ⁓
actually remind me one more time the second. that's right.
Ofir (19:56)
You're getting a team, right? Whether you come to
Rob (19:59)
I guess the first question is, is how did you land here? Like certainly if you're the CEO coming into a new org, that's certainly advice I can't give. I don't have this experience. I've only observed it from the outside like so many others. assuming you're not the CEO, so you landed somewhere in the middle of the org, ⁓ you landed there for a reason. And I hope, again, if we're doing our due diligence when we're being selected, it's because we aligned to some form of why at that org level.
that resonated with us. So I would hope that when you landed on the team, you're at least initially aligned to some extent with that team, just by nature being aligned to the organization. And let's assume that that's the case. Now you're still stylistically different. And this is where like, I always look to sports for my examples. You know, I'm a big college basketball fan and you you can have coaches that have changed their style from decade to decade when they've coached. But then there's others, the Jim Bayheims of the world and the Patinos of the world.
who are known for having extremely specific systems. And so if they go to a new team, I mean, you're going to, you have to do what you can with the people you have. Like, listen, you're a zone team like Jim Beheim is, you can't immediately come in on day one and say, this is what we're doing if the team you've joined is not trained that way. You have to be a little bit humble. But over time, you're going to impose your system. And what's going to naturally occur then is that some of those people will no longer...
align to that team. That's not where they want to be. So they'll maybe go to a different team and you'll have to replace them. and other people are going to like the new style more than the old style, or at least be capable of liking the new style. And they're going to adapt and move on. ⁓ but I think as a, as a leader, like we said, I ultimately, do have to, at least what I'm hoping to give myself the confidence to do is to say, I would want this team to eventually conform to this vision, but aligned to the same things that we were all aligned in.
And, you know, unfortunately that's going to mean that some people aren't going to enjoy working here anymore like they did with the previous leader. and that's fine. We'll hopefully find them another position in the org. And if not, you know, hopefully they find something else somewhere else. ⁓ but certainly I don't think you come in and just expect, okay, all these people are on the chopping block until they earn their way back in. I do think there's like a process there of you feeling out the team and them feeling you out, building that trust with each other. And then some people are going to probably stay in some people are not. I think that's okay. That's not a sign of failure.
Noa (22:16)
Yeah. And I would just add from at least team theory that every time there is a new member in the team or a new leader, the team is forming. So it's not the same system. Something shifted is think about it even in the family when there is a new baby in the family, it's shifting. The parenting is shifting. The, the, the old system is shifting. So the team is for is moving back into form because they need to build trust.
And the moment the leader is changing the whole dynamic, yeah, you know that. Ofir I'm actually curious as an executive, where do you maybe find leaders get into trouble with not taking space?
Rob (22:50)
me.
Ofir (23:07)
think it's coming from, I can get many, many angles on this, but I think that the one thing more than anything else ⁓ is the personal burnout, because you have to be everywhere all the time. It's just exhausting. The burnout also triggers less effectiveness. So your results are not good, which it's kind of a vicious cycle that feeds itself. Your results are getting less ⁓ successful. So you're putting even more time and getting more involved.
So this is one part. The other thing is think it's creating lack of trust with the team. I think people are accepting, if you have a new leader in place, understand and accept some of, some will call it micro management, some will call it too much involvement. People understand when it happens for a period of time, right? You need to learn the organization, you want to understand what's going on, how the system is operating. But for the longterm,
people don't like it and they don't appreciate it. You kill innovation, you kill motivation, and then it's ending up also with you having even more stress and it's just feeding this business even more.
Rob (24:23)
Yeah, have you seen this show up on teams? The one of the things that we've sometimes had some struggles with is where leaders feel completely stressed, burned out like they have no time ever any day. And the people are complaining that there's nothing to do. And it's just because they're just you just have not done enough to set up those delegation channels. And you're so far behind that then there's no time to spend setting up that delegation. And it's just this self perpetuating problem of the managers being crushed.
and nothing getting through to the team to actually work on. And so your team is completely like so happy and stress free and not doing whatever they want to do. And the managers just, just cannot possibly get things done fast enough to keep up.
Ofir (25:07)
Sure. And again, it's part of it is the trust and the other part that can happen from this, right? People can be stress free and free time and enjoy it for a while. Most people after a while say, okay, what am I doing here? I'm not contributing anything. I'm not learning anything. And eventually you also can lose good people that have the motivation, have the skillset, have the desire. But if you're not enabling them and not giving them the opportunity, eventually they will go somewhere else.
Rob (25:37)
Another way that managers stress themselves out, here's, here is it. What do you all think about this? This was a piece of feedback that I got, not for me, but just in general that I loved. And it was towards manage again, the same types of managers that are trying really hard, but, maybe are not working out. And it was, they said that the first responsibility of a manager is not to their people, but to the organization. And what they meant, they meant it to be provocative, but what they meant was, is that, you know, a lot of managers will like grab their people and go like,
It's chaotic out there. I'm gonna protect you from what's going on. It's us against the world even inside the org. It's us against them and ⁓ What tends to happen is that like that team has a lot of trust and those people report? Liking their manager, but they almost always quit and the reason is is because the org doesn't value them because they aren't a part of the org and so what they were saying is that one of the ways you can really set people up for success
is to help the team understand that first and foremost, the team is in service of the organization and the success of the organization and those metrics. And that it's one of those ideas that by making the team well aligned to that and contributing to that, they're then perceived broadly as being that they have more opportunities because of that. They get promoted because of that. And it's it's this knock on effect of positive things. When you realize that your first job isn't to make those people happy in the moment, it's to make them successful in the aggregate.
I've sat with that for a while because it is so counterintuitive.
Ofir (27:08)
I completely agree with this. I think it's like when you teach your kids to ride a bike, you need to find the balance, right? You want to protect the team, but you also want to expose them to the world, to the real world out there. You need to find a way to balance it and different team members will have different kind of tolerance level and maturity level to be prepared for this, but to expose them to the outside world.
let them present to your leader and fail if needed, right? So they get the experience and they understand what it means. also, it helps them to understand your role better. It helps them to understand what they need to do in order to one day get your role, right? To be promoted and to develop. So it gives them a lot of this index, the exposure to where the stress point that you're experiencing.
And then it helps them to with empathy and with tangible help to support you better.
Noa (28:14)
I want to add to that. ⁓ What you mentioned, Rob, is that when I take too much care of my team, ⁓ it becomes a silo because I take all the resources to me. start it's become a competition with my peers.
My leader peers that are also a team of mine, I take from them rather than thinking about what will bring the most to the organization as a whole. And by that, actually create the obstacle to my team and the other teams. So, ⁓ that's something that when I'm overprotecting of my team, becomes a silo and that's not helpful to the company and.
And, you know, leaders start manipulating how they get resources for themselves rather than giving it to their peers when they need to get the resources. or ideas also when we are siloed, there is no innovation. So that's something that is concerning and talking about also ⁓ over caring for my team in spaces that maybe I shouldn't.
I should remove obstacles for them, but there are some spaces that when I'm over engaged, that's what some people say, this is not a family. So it, again, it ⁓ takes from your energy. It takes from the team energy because then one of the team members is not functioning ⁓ in a healthy way with the team and with you, the leader. And so it's what is my role?
And what is my team role? I think is a very important question.
Rob (30:03)
Yeah, yeah. And when you are focused internally first, you really do. You, you pervert or subvert the why the why stopped being what the organization has as their why. And it started being our why is, is your minute to minute experience of comfort, not of fulfillment, but of comfort is ultimately what that manager is doing. And I think when you make a team well aligned to the why of the org,
⁓ you know, again, Joe, S he was talking in kitchens. talk about me son plus this idea that everything in its place. And so he said, listen, if you're going to have a championship level, you know, a Michelin star level kitchen. It is the responsibility of that kitchen to make sure you have the best tools that they're all clean, that they're all in the right places, that everything is labeled. You have the best ingredients. ⁓ and that's an incredible level of support. When your team is performing at a high level, you can go to your management with confidence and say, if you want even more out of this team.
I need this level of training, this level of support, this level of equipment, know, this level of promotions and recognition and things of that nature, because why wouldn't an org want to invest in a team where they're getting a many multiples ROI on each of that investments? And so this is where, again, when you see it as it's not about not prioritizing your team, it's not prioritizing comfort and ease over fulfillment and achievement. And so
you when you start to read, realign it that way, suddenly it doesn't sound like such a toxic statement anymore. And I think ultimately that's what people want, right? That's what our children want. They don't want a life free of hardship. ⁓ they, they want a life full of accomplishment and, things to be proud of and things that they've overcome. And I think setting your team up in that way, again, you know, yes, how does this have to do with dealing with space? It's because when you're doing that, suddenly you're not having to run around and make up that gap.
between what the team is, what you're trying to protect the team from and what the organization is expecting. You stop being the one having to make up all the differences all the time and you can, everyone kind of knows and suddenly you can just breathe because both sides are kind of aligned with what they're expecting and what they're getting out of you.
Ofir (32:15)
When you said the word gap, I was thinking that the gap is the space.
Noa (32:25)
I think you kind of like did a nice wrap, Rob, of this conversation. And I think it's a new conversation of giving permission for leaders to take space as leaders. And we don't talk about toxic space. We just want to put it there. But where can I take space with my team? you know, going back to the conversation about kids,
⁓ Parents are parents that I know that I'm not always the best mother for my at least from my kids perspectives, but I'm giving them the tools and the resources that one day when they go to college, they know to do their laundry, they know how to cook and take care of themselves and be what's the word I'm looking for. Yeah.
And I think there is one way of just asking the child all the time, what do you want? How do you want to do that? And that's actually very frustrating. And it's over freedom that makes them very frustrated and very lost. ⁓ So we are advocating ⁓ to take more space and really ask yourself, what does it mean? So we're going to move into the round that we have of takeaways, reflecting.
on this conversation. So a little bit of a moment to breathe into this very interesting conversation with Rob and who wants to go first with what's the key takeaway from today's conversation?
Ofir (33:55)
I can start, I'll take something that Rob kind of opened with like owning the middle. ⁓ I think it's true at every level of leadership. ⁓
you always squeeze between someone that is, you you're reporting to and squeeze you to get more of your team and get results and help and support the organization in a greater way every day. And a team that wants to be successful, but also wants to be treated fairly and put in a position that they can win. This is something that ⁓
Again, it's a delicate balance that I think when you manage to develop the system that supports it, it really frees you up to take a step back and take this space that we're looking for. And it makes you a better leader. It makes you ⁓ better support the organization and your team because you have the time to look in a more... ⁓
observatory way, of from the side for a second, right? Take this breather for a second and look, zoom out and see what are the best ways that you can support your team. So that kind of on the middle, my takeaway.
Noa (35:26)
And as an executive, you need to pay attention to that with the people reporting to you Ofir So we're putting you on the spot.
Ofir (35:35)
Got it.
Rob (35:36)
I'll say for me that the word that sticks out a lot is permission. And I think that to go with permission, though, is also maybe the duty that goes with it. And that is to be clear. I think too often I was afraid. I mean, I was I was comfortable telling my reports what it is that works best when they work with me. But I was afraid to to demand it. I was afraid to make it a mandatory thing and to make it the way that we work. And.
So the permission piece for me sort of unlocked that, that said, hey, you know, so it's not so confusing for them or anybody that's new. I need to clearly state the requirement or what the way that the team works. And I have to feel okay, knowing that that is an acceptable thing to do. Cause I can make my team the most successful when I am the most empowered to understand what they're doing and to help guide what they're doing, which is sort of a way of working. for me, like permission and then the duties that flow from permission ⁓ is the big takeaway.
Noa (36:34)
Yeah. And ⁓ I will build on that with the phrase that sticks with me. I did, I don't think I used it in the conversation, but it was with me through the conversation is that there are rules to the game and that the team understands the rules of the game. can be co-designed by the way, with the leader, that's fine. But there are rules to the game that we know how to play together.
to win. And I think again, it's the same with sports. It's the same in the kitchen. It's the same with parenting when we know the rules of the game. And I think a lot of times leaders try to be a leader they know, and it just doesn't work for them because those rules don't work for them. So it's designing what are the rules of the game that work for me. And I do believe it brings beyond that permission, it brings freedom.
And that's where I find a little bit of a paradox. It brings not only freedom to the leader, but also to the team. So that's what came into mind from also listening to your reflections and key takeaways. ⁓ Rob, such a pleasure.
Rob (37:51)
Thank you so much for having me. This was great.
Ofir (37:53)
Thank you for joining.
Noa (37:54)
Yeah, this is aspiration right to Ofir we see him.
Ofir (37:57)
You can see a professional in action.
Rob (38:00)
As someone who is normally the host, I love being on this side so much less pressure. So.
Noa (38:05)
We'll bring you back because I have another question I want to talk about now is how we influence the "Ofirs" the executives to get the space on the other side. ⁓ So we'll bring you back if you would like to. We'll conversations. ⁓ Thank you. Keep the smile. We are going into Friday, Eve. So have a beautiful weekend and cheers as always.
Rob (38:18)
Yeah, that'd be great.
Ofir (38:31)
Thanks. ⁓ Thank you.
