ABOUT BRETT: LinkedIn  | Liquid and Grit


| Creators at Work Podcast




ABOUT ROCKETSHIP HQ: Website | LinkedIn  | Twitter | YouTube

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

🤝 What  inspired Brett to initially minimize meetings

⚖️ How meetings bring about bias in the workplace

📈 How to operationalize processes to scale your company

🔺 The change begins at the top

💰 Doing away with meetings makes the company more profitable

🗂 Documenting all processes smoothens out logistics

⚒ Tools to support the no-meeting workspace

🪞 Emotional cues still work only face to face

 🛍 Workplace banter doesn’t contribute to profitability

 🧩 The elements of making the zero meeting workplace concept a success

🤼‍♂️  Weekly review meetings are unnecesary for the most part

KEY QUOTES

Hiring a global team is made easier

 I wanted us to be able to hire people all over the world and the no-meetings helps with that, and allows people to work wherever they want to as well. So if you hire someone, for example, in Portland, which we did for our lead writer, and he now lives in Spain and that’s totally fine.

Workplace bias that is introduced by meetings

I felt like meetings were a place that was full of bias where you’d have somebody, for example, who was a very strong verbal negotiator, or very authoritative or loud, or for whatever other reason was good at ‘meetings’. Those people ended up driving a lot of decisions. But I never felt like that was a correlation to having great ideas. They can have great ideas. But a lot of times the quiet person in the back of the room has great ideas, too. I felt like if I eliminated meetings, I would produce better decisions.

Replacing a meeting with a process

A meeting is something that shouldn’t ideally be done multiple times if it’s about something that we’re going to do often. Typically, the process of having that meeting, or the thing that comes up during that meeting should be something that eventually we should try to replace with a process or an outline or a comment on a doc.

Change begins at the top

Well, it has to start from the top. I think that’s actually pretty easy to control. Most meetings are kicked off by managers or execs, because meetings are easy ways to get information. So managers are likely to do it. But if you’re the owner of a company like I am, and you’re also the manager, then having all your employees and workers stop what they’re doing and explain to you something that’s probably trivial for them to explain to you is pretty costly. So I just made it a point that the no-meeting culture was coming from the top. I wasn’t scheduling any meetings with people. 

Zero meetings lower switching costs

As a manager, if I don’t know what’s going on with a project, instead of calling a meeting and interrupting my entire team, which is extremely costly, I can jump into the Dropbox Paper, and I can ask questions, “Hey, How is this going? When do you think is going to be done? Can I check it out?” and all the documents are in there as well. So I can open up and look at it. And the nice thing about that is there’s such low switching costs. When my team is done with their project, they can respond to me.

Meetings are easy and a way to kill time

The reason they like to meet is because it’s easy, and it kills a lot of time. And I sort of equate it to well, humans, like eating doughnuts too, right? And if you let humans eat doughnuts, we’ll just eat doughnuts until bad things are gonna happen. As a leader of a company, you have to be a little bit on the lookout for those things and say, “Well, yeah, we’d like to get into meetings to be social and talk about our dog and cat and what happened this weekend.” I like that just as everyone else. I’m kind of a chatty Cathy myself. So it’s not like I’m sitting here going, I hate meetings. In fact, I like meeting people. It’s fun to learn about the people in 17 different states in America and in four different countries. That’s really interesting to me. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t make as much money for my company and doesn’t make us keep our jobs as secure as if we don’t talk about those things.

When to absolutely have a meeting

I do think that feedback, or anytime we’re getting emotional, or conversations on career progression are probably a good place where you may want to have a meeting.

Emotional cues are best picked through meetings

Anytime I feel like I’m getting emotional, or someone else is getting emotional, which happens fairly infrequently, because we have less meetings actually which is another huge benefit. There’s just a lot less of that human bickering and drama, because you just don’t see people. But anytime I feel as a leader, I’m frustrated about something, it’s either good to have a meeting, or it’s good to record yourself so that that person understands how important it is to you.

Companies cannot replace families and friends

It’s very dangerous for companies to say, “Hey, we’re going to make it so that you’re going to have your social outlet here.”  And I also think it’s bad for the employees in many ways, because a lot of them are replacing their real friendships and their real families with what they’ve perceived to be families and friends. And the company is misleading them by saying that they are treating them as family. We are not treating people as family, because at the end of the day, the company itself has to act objectively about what’s best for the company. And to do that we will let people go, if necessary, right? And that’s not a family.

What’s a costly meeting?

Let’s talk about a costly meeting – you’re going to have the entire company on Friday morning at 10 o’clock, sit there and listen to the CEO talk about the company’s strategy, and the other leads for an hour. And when I looked around the room, 75% of people were just sitting on Slack trying to get their work done. So the entire company has stopped production to listen to something they’re not interested in, and now multitask to actually just get their work done. And they’re gonna get frustrated, because they’re not done with their work, and they’re going to stay there late on Friday.

FULL TRANSCRIPT BELOW

Shamanth  

I’m very excited to welcome back Brett Nowak to the Mobile User Acquisition Show. Brett, welcome to the show. 

Brett

Thanks for having me again. 

Shamanth

We’re excited to have you for so many reasons, including the fact that your first episode was very inspiring to me, and so many folks who heard it because of the very radical approach you have had to hiring. That’s something I’ve put to good use, because we are fully distributed. We’re now at 12 people. And I still draw on a lot from what you said. 

Something you said almost in passing, the last time we spoke, struck me as very unique and intuitive, and not something that a lot of people do, which is what we’re going to talk about today – you barely have any meetings. So the working title of this conversation is “the zero meeting workplace”. I don’t need to elaborate on why that’s impressive or intriguing but let’s get into everything about the zero meeting workplace.

What inspired you to want to minimize meetings when you started your company?

Brett  

Well, at first, it was a little bit of a necessity, because I had a full time job for almost two years when I started Liquid and Grit. So I couldn’t have meetings, I was busy working. But then once I was doing it full time, I realized that not having meetings would reduce switching costs, which was a big component of it, because I wanted people to be able to dedicate time to deep-thought-work. 

I wanted to build a system that really scaled, which is the second reason. Not having meetings allows me to scale very easily.

And then the fourth is probably to reduce bias in the workplace but more so to make better decisions.

I felt like meetings were a place that was full of bias where you’d have somebody, for example, who was a very strong verbal negotiator, or very authoritative or loud, or for whatever other reason was good at ‘meetings’. Those people ended up driving a lot of decisions. But I never felt like that was a correlation to having great ideas. They can have great ideas. But a lot of times the quiet person in the back of the room has great ideas, too. I felt like if I eliminated meetings, I would produce better decisions.

Shamanth  

What struck me as interesting is how you spoke about the bias. And I agree, I think in a lot of conventional workplaces that I have been in, people who are good at meetings end up having a lot of clout. A lot of conventional workplaces favor that. This also reminds me of what you said about hiring in our last conversation, which is that a lot of conventional hiring methods filter for people who are good at interviews, not necessarily those who are the best employees. I think it is very analogous that you end up favoring people who are good at meetings, not necessarily those with the best ideas. 

You also said you wanted to build a system that scales. I’m curious about that aspect and I definitely want to drill down a little bit deeper. Because a lot of folks think, if you’re a small team, it’s just a lot easier to do without meetings. If it’s just you and 2-3 people on your team, you could just say “hey, just email me, or slack me”. But as the team grows, as a company grows, more people need to talk not just to you but also to each other. So in theory, it should be harder to sustain a no-meeting culture as a company grows. 

Now you’re 46 people, if I’m not wrong. Your company grew from you having this as a side hustle and one employee to 46 people. I would love to hear more about how you saw the no-meeting culture. And specifically, was there a trigger point when you felt like okay, I can sustain this not just when I have a full time job and I’m forced to have no meetings, but I can even sustain this with a 46 person team, not just a small intimate team.

Brett 

Well, one of the things I saw while working at some smaller companies is that they would make that assumption of, we’ll do it later. And then when they got to that size, it was extremely difficult and sometimes almost to their detriment when they had to change their culture, because changing culture is extremely difficult even when you’re a 100% owner like I am. So I really was very intense about having a culture and a system that worked for scale and I thought about, how is it gonna work for 100 people? How’s it gonna work for 1000 people? Because I didn’t want to have to change it later on to the point where I would tell people – that email is too long, or that comment is too long. And it was only a few paragraphs. 

And this also somewhat interacts with what I thought about, in terms of the process. And I don’t know if this exactly answers the question but I had a pretty profound reaction to the movie ‘The Founder,’ which is the story of the founding of McDonald’s. What they did is they basically operationalized a system that most people didn’t think was operationalizable. So before McDonald’s, making a burger was an unorganized system of 2-3 people doing the whole process. And what the original founders did was they operationalized a lot of it, leveraging humans for the most important part of the process. So it wasn’t like they operationalized the entire process. And I realized that other companies have done this very well, like Starbucks and Toyota. I thought, if I could think like that with our process, which doesn’t seem like it could be standardized, I could reduce costs, maintain quality, shorten delivery times, improve the system and scale it, it would be incredibly valuable to me. I started to do that piece by piece. 

When I tell people this, they say “Well, we couldn’t do that.”  I think that’s because they think of their entire system and then they say, “Well, we can’t operationalize the whole thing.” And that’s not the solution. The solution is operationalizing parts of the process where humans aren’t really adding a lot of value. Humans are incredibly valuable and skilled in parts of the process, but you want them to be focusing all of their time on that really valuable part of the process. What we do is try to make those other parts of the process be as little as possible or outsourced by technology or other things that don’t really require human capacity and skills. 

A meeting is something that shouldn’t ideally be done multiple times if it’s about something that we’re going to do often. Typically, the process of having that meeting, or the thing that comes up during that meeting should be something that eventually we should try to replace with a process or an outline or a comment on a doc.

The other thing that it all connects to is that the switching cost is a big part of it. 

Shamanth  

You talked about how a company that starts out with a lot of meetings, finds it hard to change, right? When you were starting out, what were some of the things you did to ensure meetings were minimal?

Brett  

Well, it has to start from the top. I think that’s actually pretty easy to control. Most meetings are kicked off by managers or execs, because meetings are easy ways to get information. So managers are likely to do it. But if you’re the owner of a company like I am, and you’re also the manager, then having all your employees and workers stop what they’re doing and explain to you something that’s probably trivial for them to explain to you is pretty costly. So I just made it a point that the no-meeting culture was coming from the top. I wasn’t scheduling any meetings with people. 

The second is I was pretty diligent about calling these things out, almost to an awkward extent, where they probably were thinking, “Listen, I only send you two emails a week and you’re telling me it’s too long.” But I was pretty much like, well, this is going to scale, I hope. And if I get 20 of these emails a week, that’s going to be very expensive. That’s going to be three, four or five hours of my time. I don’t really believe that we have 40 hours in a work week, I think you get about maybe 20 of quality hours, and they’re very, very valuable. And if you waste them on things like that, then that’s not good. 

The other thing is we found alternatives. So Loom is a good example, we’ll record ourselves going over something if we need to talk it through. The other is that we have a lot of things written down. So we have our operating procedures for a lot of different areas of our company written down. And we started building those over time. So we just got after each little thing, we’d just chip away. People hear this and think they couldn’t possibly do this – they say “We’d have to sit down for weeks.” That’s not what we did. We had to make money to live. But as we went, we just chipped away on it, so that we had everything written down. And we had our operating procedures written down. We have a whole communication outline and all the tools, how you’re supposed to communicate. 

Shamanth  

I think when a lot of people hear about operationalizing stuff, they can feel that it’s just too much. I think something that’s also worked for us is just to chip away at small bits. If you do something twice, just codify it and put it in an SOP. I think that’s definitely a useful point.

Brett  

One other thing I want to add is that when people hear me they say, “Well, you wanted a lifestyle business, Brett.” I don’t really know how to interpret that. I’ve worked very hard and I’m very disciplined. I think everyone works to have some type of lifestyle. The more you can do this, the more money you end up making. Because it allows you to have time for more things and newer things. So you’re basically taking a task that’s of low value, operationalizing it, so that you as the CEO, founder or leader or manager, don’t do that task anymore. And that frees you up to do other tasks and your time is extremely valuable, your lead’s time is extremely valuable. So by saving yourself an hour a week, all year, you’ve just added 50 hours of work time per year. That’s a lot of time, that’s an extra two weeks of work. So if you continue to do that, over time, it can be incredibly valuable. You make more money when you do it.

Shamanth  

If you take the hourly rate of an exec or leader’s time and do the math, that would be staggering: this amount of time goes away in unnecessary meetings. Something you also said earlier Brett, that in most companies, meetings are called by people that are higher up, because they want information. Something you do is to codify a lot of these operations. Can you give us examples about how some of this communication happens? In a conventional company, they might use a meeting? How might that communication happen on your team? Are there any examples that come to mind?

Brett  

What we typically do is we’ll project management anything in a Dropbox Paper. Another thing about meetings I don’t like is that I always want to have the product or the thing that’s making the company money to be the primary object and communication to be secondary and supportive of getting that object done. I know people say “You’re not in a gaming company”. But I think the same thing would hold true to a gaming company. It’s the spec that’s creating the game, that’s going to be seen by the users who are going to end up spending money on the game, making you money, right. And what Slack, email and meetings do is, they put communication as the primary thing, which is us talking and the thing that’s making money is secondary. 

So we always have something that’s primary that’s gonna make the company money. And we use Dropbox Paper a lot because  it’s very flexible, it allows us to have a lot of control over it. Most of the technology we use is very flexible. And we build a lot of our own stuff internally. We built our own CRM through some tools as well, you can add comments very easily. So we’ll outline the project. So let’s say I’m doing a custom work project or we’re doing a report, we’ll outline who’s on the project, what’s the goal of the project, when is the project due, what are the tasks, who are owning the tasks? And then if we have any questions about it, we comment on those tasks. And if it’s an elaborate project we may do a loom recording talking about what we want, or what we’re seeing or what the client said or what this report is going to be about. And then people can comment on that and resolve it once it’s done. 

So they don’t stop their work to respond to me, they respond to me when they’re done with their work, and are ready to respond. And that’s very important in the process, because it saves a lot of switching costs time and money. I think that’s pretty much most of the things we do. We use Google Documents for our outline of the report. We use Keynote if we’re going to do something in a presentation, mostly because of the communication of these tools and the real time adjustments, and also some of the backend saving of tech. But that’s generally how we do it.

Shamanth  

If you were to ask folks that are skeptical about some of these approaches to minimal meetings, they might say meetings are valuable because they allow discussion. Do you think that human interaction can get lost with completely asynchronous communication like you just described?

Brett  

A little bit, yes. But we have communication back and forth. And I think it’s actually more valuable than a meeting. Because if I speak my opinion about something, I’ve thought about that in writing, and I can edit it and re-edit it, and I can form my thoughts clearly, then the person who was responding can address that when she is ready to respond. And then I can do it. So we’re getting very thoughtful responses and interactions. And we are still collaborating on something. It’s just asynchronous, as opposed to in the moment. In the moment, you’re just getting the one second prepared comment from somebody and the one second comment from someone else. You’re getting all the bias that goes into it, too – it’s a man, it’s a woman, some authoritative person, it’s a boss, it’s not a boss. And when you remove that, I think you get better reactions. 

I think a lot of these decisions aren’t necessarily of 100% value. But I think when you weigh the costs and benefits of it, it’s very clear that having a massive reduction in meetings is incredibly valuable. The whole spark of the moment of innovation is unlikely and very infrequent, and not something that can just happen while you’re in the same meeting. So I think maybe that’s one plus. The other plus, and this is one of the reasons is, humans like to meet. And

The reason they like to meet is because it’s easy, and it kills a lot of time. And I sort of equate it to well, humans, like eating doughnuts too, right? And if you let humans eat doughnuts, we’ll just eat doughnuts until bad things are gonna happen. As a leader of a company, you have to be a little bit on the lookout for those things and say, “Well, yeah, we’d like to get into meetings to be social and talk about our dog and cat and what happened this weekend.” I like that just as everyone else. I’m kind of a chatty Cathy myself. So it’s not like I’m sitting here going, I hate meetings. In fact, I like meeting people. It’s fun to learn about the people in 17 different states in America and in four different countries. That’s really interesting to me. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t make as much money for my company and doesn’t make us keep our jobs as secure as if we don’t talk about those things.

And ultimately, when I weigh those two, it is certainly clear to me that we are likely to all keep our jobs and be able to go home to our cats, and our dogs and our friends more likely, if I don’t spend time in a meeting, talking about those things. So that’s kind of the tough decision that I make as a leader.

Shamanth  

 Yeah, it’s clear, but it’s not always easy, because it’s not instinctive for a lot of folks, especially if you’re extroverted. I’m also curious how you think about or approach one-on-ones of career development, which, for many companies, happens synchronously.

Brett  

We don’t probably solve this problem well, because we’re not big on career progression as much. Although people do progress their careers, it happens really organically at our company.

And that’s what’s great about our guidelines is that they’re guidelines, not rules. 

Do I think we should have one-on-ones? Absolutely, but not frequently. You don’t really need to have these every week like companies do, so managers can just meet with you and talk about God knows what. But I think every quarter maybe, if you have some leads, who want to progress, you can have that conversation. Otherwise, we generally allow it to happen at the lower tiers, the leads will level up to analysts to seniors, and then I’ll level up seniors to leads and leads to directors. So it doesn’t happen as frequently. But I would say that this isn’t something we’ve developed as much. It is probably one of the places a meeting is more valuable.

Shamanth  

So you do have a few meetings. What are some of these meetings that are critical to you? And what’s the structure of these meetings?

Brett  

The best instances of meetings for us is something when a more complicated discussion happens about something that’s very strategic, if we’re going to plan on changing the format of a report, or we’re going to release a new report, or we’re going to decide to do something pretty large – that doesn’t happen very often and sometimes that can be replaced with loom. 

Anytime I feel like I’m getting emotional, or someone else is getting emotional, which happens fairly infrequently, because we have less meetings actually which is another huge benefit. There’s just a lot less of that human bickering and drama, because you just don’t see people. But anytime I feel as a leader, I’m frustrated about something, it’s either good to have a meeting, or it’s good to record yourself so that that person understands how important it is to you.

There is an importance to understanding their emotions if they’re stressed out or something like that. So I think as a leader, that’s when you really want to try to keep your pulse on stuff and be able to identify, “this person is bothered or stressed out. I should talk to them,”. Because you can pick up on emotional cues, much better over a meeting.

Shamanth  

 I think in written or asynchronous communication, it’s hard to pick up any emotional cues. The tone is completely unclear. Somebody might be very frustrated, and it just wouldn’t come across in a Slack chat.

Brett  

We just avoid a lot of those, because we’re not in the same office, and we do not meet as much and I can only attest to our company. I’m also a very no drama person. My tolerance for drama is very low. But that said, we have had very few problems. And I think a lot of it because communication is very clear. There’s some miscommunication, but it’s all documented. So often issues come from I said something or believe I said something you believe I said something else. If we have it written down or it’s recorded it’s very hard for that to happen unless the person isn’t doing their job. And if the person isn’t doing the job, then we’ll let them go. And so you generally have much clearer alignment between leads and analysts.

Shamanth   

Yeah and you had said before that having minimal meetings is not an isolated decision, it’s part of a larger system. For somebody that’s wanting to institutionalize something like this, what are some of the other elements in the system that they might want to be mindful of? What do you have in your system for this to be successful?

Brett  

Well, we hire people from around the world. We hire through tests, and we standardize our process. We’ve built the tools to be able to go to remote work, we’ve been remote since day one. You probably just need a strong leader, because it’s something that kind of has to come from the top down, it’s not something that humans naturally do on their own. There’s really just not a lot of incentive for an employee or contractor to improve the process of the company, because ultimately, they’re just getting paid based on how well they do the thing that they’re doing. That’s not 100% true, there are people out there who will be so motivated, they’ll improve their own process, but generally people don’t like change or humans don’t like change. 

So you have to have a little bit of a heavy handed leadership to implement change, because that’s what you’re really doing. You’re saying, “okay, that meeting we had, where you guys loved talking about your cats and your dogs, and going over what you’re going to do today, like a scrum that interrupts everybody’s workflow and makes you guys all work at the exact same time, we’re going to cancel that.” What’s going to happen is a bunch of people will say “well, but I liked that meeting”. “We’re going to scrap it, because it’s going allow you to work at 10-5 and you to work 2-10, or whenever you want to work, for us to hire someone from Spain, and Tel Aviv and wherever else, that’s gonna be incredibly valuable to the company, and we’re sorry, that’s the choice that the company has made.” 

And so you kind of have to have that voice, whether it be the leader, or someone you’ve hired to do that job to make this all happen. And I would say, though, don’t start with a thing that you’re going to get that response, start with a whole bunch of things, ideally, because I personally believe that companies themselves have been looked at now as the social outlet for humans as well. And that’s not something that businesses are supposed to supply. And I think for the most part, it countered the success of a lot of companies.

It’s very dangerous for companies to say, “Hey, we’re going to make it so that you’re going to have your social outlet here.” And I also think it’s bad for the employees in many ways, because a lot of them are replacing their real friendships and their real families with what they’ve perceived to be families and friends. And the company is misleading them by saying that they are treating them as family. We are not treating people as family, because at the end of the day, the company itself has to act objectively about what’s best for the company. And to do that we will let people go, if necessary, right? And that’s not a family.

Shamanth  

How do you think about sharing or reviewing metrics and progress on key tasks and projects, which again is something that a lot of conventional companies employ meetings for. How do you go about this?

Brett  

I was bored out of my mind when I listened to most of these companies. Some companies have them every week.

Let’s talk about a costly meeting – you’re going to have the entire company on Friday morning at 10 o’clock, sit there and listen to the CEO talk about the company’s strategy, and the other leads for an hour. And when I looked around the room, 75% of people were just sitting on Slack trying to get their work done. So the entire company has stopped production to listen to something they’re not interested in, and now multitask to actually just get their work done. And they’re gonna get frustrated, because they’re not done with their work, and they’re going to stay there late on Friday.

So that meeting was an easy fix for me.

You really start understanding too when you’re the founder, what is really the motivation behind it? A little bit, I think, is just the CEOs wanting to hear their own voice. And  I try to keep my ego at the door. What we do is, we have a document that outlines the projects we’re going to review. So if anyone wants to see it at any given time, they can go into that document. And there’s some people that really care about that. There are people who care about the vision of the company, and there are some people who couldn’t care less. And that’s totally fine, too. They just want to do their job and go home, and they don’t want to know where the company’s headed. And so for them, they don’t check it. And then every quarter I record myself talking through the projects that we’re planning on doing for that quarter. Again, anyone can listen to it if they want, they don’t have to. And then they can review what’s going to happen in the quarter and what we’ve kind of accomplished in the last quarter. So I generally feel those types of things are really an opt-in thing that you should not make your whole company do. And you should certainly not stop the production of your entire company to inform them of what you as a CEO have done for last week, because they’re not stopping your work, so why would you stop theirs? And most of the time, their work is a lot more valuable than your work.

Shamanth  

Yeah, very true. And as I think about the entire culture around meetings, a lot of it is unquestioned assumptions. And when you do start to question those assumptions, like you just did, you realize how unfounded a lot of these assumptions are. 

Brett, much like the last time I spoke to you, this has been incredibly instructive. There’s changes that I’m going to make literally in the next 20-30 minutes. Part of the reason I wanted to speak to you is for things I can learn and employ for ourselves. But this perhaps is a good place for us to wrap. But before we do that, can you tell folks how they can find out more about you and everything you do?

Brett  

Well, for Liquid and Grit, you can obviously go to liquidandgrit.com and download some of the free resources online. There are full reports there for each of the markets we currently cover. And if you have questions about business stuff, you can reach me on LinkedIn or you can just email me at brett.nowak@liquidandgrit.com, I’m happy to chat about it. Although I am very disciplined about my own time, I’ll probably just send them your way in terms of listening to this podcast.

Shamanth  

You also have a podcast of your own, you want to tell folks about that?

Brett  

Yeah, we also have a podcast very specific to people in mobile gaming, who are working on a product called Creators At Work. And we talk about the product and process of creating mobile games, which you can check out as well.

Shamanth  

Excellent. We will link to all of those things in the show notes. And thank you so much for being on the show, Brett.

Brett  

Thanks for having me.

A REQUEST BEFORE YOU GO

I have a very important favor to ask, which as those of you who know me know I don’t do often. If you get any pleasure or inspiration from this episode, could you PLEASE leave a review on your favorite podcasting platform – be it iTunes, Overcast, Spotify, Google Podcasts or wherever you get your podcast fix. This podcast is very much a labor of love – and each episode takes many many hours to put together. When you write a review, it will not only be a great deal of encouragement to us, but it will also support getting the word out about the Mobile User Acquisition Show.

Constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement are welcome, whether on podcasting platforms – or by email to shamanth at rocketshiphq.com. We read all reviews & I want to make this podcast better.

Thank you – and I look forward to seeing you with the next episode!