50m 13 min read 10,619

Why Being Good at Everything Gets You Nowhere

Chris Do shows how specialization turns creative skill into recognizable expertise and stronger client conversations.

Chris Do

Founder, The Futur™ · October 25, 2026

Watch on YouTube →

Become a Member →

The portfolio that proved too little

A portfolio can show everything a designer can do and still give a client no compelling reason to hire them. Breadth looks like insurance. In Chris Do's early career, it became a liability.

His teachers had encouraged variety: logos, websites, entertainment packaging. The instruction made sense inside a classroom, where demonstrating range meant demonstrating capability. Outside it, that same collection had to compete against companies built around a particular kind of work.

Do remembers losing bids worth $50,000 to $250,000 to specialized firms. He saw the money disappearing and struggled to reconcile rejection with his confidence in the work. Being good should have been enough.

It was not.

His diagnosis is more demanding than a recommendation to tidy up a portfolio. He had not demonstrated deep knowledge through the work, the processes behind it, or the questions he asked prospective clients. The weakness was not simply presentation. It was the absence of a convincing argument for expertise.

That distinction changes the purpose of positioning. A list of capabilities tells a buyer what can be purchased. Evidence of depth helps explain why this particular practitioner belongs in the conversation.

Specialization makes expertise easier to recognize. In Do's account, the specialist did not need to prove universal competence. The specialist needed to establish relevance to the job under consideration, then demonstrate enough depth to make that relevance credible.

The generalist's promise was expansive. The specialist's promise was legible.

Three kinds of evidence emerge from Do's explanation of those early losses:

A body of work that demonstrates repeated experience in a particular area.
Processes that show an understanding of how that work gets done.
Questions that reveal knowledge beyond the surface of the brief.

These are not interchangeable. Strong finished work cannot explain a weak process, and a polished process cannot rescue questions that miss the client's problem. Together, they make a more substantial case than a portfolio organized around the number of services available.

The argument also challenges the appeal of the multi-hyphenate identity. Having several interests is not the same as possessing several mature specializations. Naming a collection of disciplines does not establish depth in any of them.

Do's objection is to the claim arriving before the evidence. A young practitioner can describe an ambitious future accurately while describing present expertise inaccurately. The commercial problem begins when a buyer is asked to treat aspiration as proof.

There is a related distinction in the premise of You Don't Need a Personal Brand. You Need an Offer. A description of the practitioner and a reason to buy are different things. An impressive professional identity does not automatically supply the second.

For Do, the answer to losing against specialists was not to become less capable. It was to stop asking breadth to perform the work of depth.

The portfolio needed a center of gravity.

Range becomes useful after depth

Specialization sounds restrictive when it is mistaken for a permanent limit. Choose one discipline, abandon every other interest, and spend a career protecting that boundary. That is not the model Do proposes.

His argument concerns sequence rather than confinement. Breadth remains available, but it develops around a substantial foundation instead of substituting for one. The first area of expertise becomes the support for the next.

He uses three shapes to explain that progression:

T-shaped skills: Broad familiarity supported by deep expertise in one area.
Pi-shaped skills: Two substantial areas of expertise beneath a wider range of knowledge.
Comb-shaped skills: Multiple deep specializations developed over time.

The shapes matter because they preserve ambition. Someone drawn to design, business, writing, and another discipline does not have to renounce that range. The difficult decision concerns what deserves concentrated effort first.

Do illustrates the progression through stages of a working life, describing a second deep specialization after substantial experience and several specialties later. Those ages function as illustrations of accumulated practice, not admission requirements. The operative condition is depth, not a birthday.

His tree metaphor makes the same point. More leaves require a trunk strong enough to support them. Multiple trunks are possible, but adding visible growth without adequate support leaves the structure unstable.

The financial logic is equally important. An established specialty can generate income while another develops. That makes sequential specialization more than a learning preference: it offers a way to fund expansion without pretending the new discipline is already mature.

Do puts the advantage plainly: “Because the first one will reward you while you work on the second one.”

This is a different promise from becoming everything at once. It allows a practitioner to keep a broad horizon while making a narrow commitment in the present. The discipline is not permanent exclusion. It is refusing to confuse simultaneous activity with simultaneous mastery.

Do then extends the argument beyond skill into recognition. His working model separates expertise, authority, and influence. An expert has developed the ability; an authority has become known for it within the field; an influencer, in his usage, becomes recognizable beyond that field.

“The authority is the best-known expert,” he says.

He explicitly presents this hierarchy as a recent idea still under development. Its usefulness lies less in ranking people than in separating two tasks that creatives often collapse: becoming capable and making that capability visible.

Do identifies content, media, and reputation as the bridge. Doing excellent work supplies the foundation. Communicating that knowledge helps distinguish the practitioner from others with comparable abilities.

Visibility without the foundation is precisely what makes him skeptical of some influencers. He does not reject influence itself. He rejects skipping the work that would give influence substance.

The desired progression is therefore not from obscurity to attention at any cost. It is from depth to recognition, then from recognition to a wider audience. Specialization supplies something worth becoming known for.

The client was never buying the logo

Depth becomes commercially useful when it changes the conversation. The clearest demonstration comes when a software entrepreneur named Tudor challenges the value of a logo. He understands branding, he says, but does not see why the mark itself should matter.

Do does not begin defending logos.

Instead, he accepts the possibility that a logo is not the relevant answer and asks what the business needs. The conversation moves through differentiation, identity, messaging, and the difficulty of communicating what the company does.

The distinction is consequential. Defending a deliverable would have kept both parties arguing over the worth of an object. Exploring the problem gives them a chance to establish whether any design or communication work belongs in the solution.

Tudor wants prospective customers to understand the company's capabilities and reasons to choose it. He also wants more clients to approach the business instead of relying entirely on outreach. The discussion now has a commercial purpose that the original logo debate lacked.

Do separates an identity system, including typography, colors, patterns, and a logo, from copywriting, messaging, and positioning. That distinction prevents branding from becoming a catchall word that allows everyone to agree without agreeing on the work.

The broader subject connects naturally with Developing a Winning Brand Strategy: the relevant starting point is the business problem, not an assumption that every prospect needs the same artifact.

This exchange exposes a tension in specialization. A practitioner can become highly skilled at making something and still become too attached to selling it. Expertise loses usefulness when every problem is interpreted as permission to produce the familiar deliverable.

Do's opening concession avoids that trap. If the client does not need a logo, the conversation can proceed without one. The work earns its place only after the problem becomes clearer.

A different discussion reveals that the desired result does not always need a financial expression. Asked how a designer can quantify the value of a logo, Do investigates why someone would want to replace an existing mark.

One hypothetical answer is disarmingly personal: the client's wife dislikes it. Do turns that concern into a headline: “Have a logo your wife will love.”

The point is not that family approval should become a universal positioning strategy. It is that the customer's actual motivation is more useful than the designer's preferred explanation of value. Pride, confidence, and relief from embarrassment are different outcomes from revenue growth, but they remain outcomes.

Another participant has made a logo with ChatGPT and feels it does not represent her or her business. The substantive problem is representation. A response centered only on the production tool would miss the dissatisfaction she has actually described.

These examples put a boundary around the promise. A logo can be offered as something a client feels proud to use. It cannot responsibly be presented as a guaranteed cause of unrelated personal or business results.

The specialist's advantage is not a bigger claim. It is a more accurate one.

Value needs arithmetic and boundaries

Once Tudor identifies the business outcome, Do begins attaching numbers to it. Three additional clients a month would be meaningful. For the exercise, they settle on $40,000 in lifetime customer value for each client.

Three clients at $40,000 produce $120,000 in projected lifetime value. Repeated across twelve monthly groups, the arithmetic reaches $1.44 million. After stumbling over the calculation aloud, the discussion arrives at that figure.

These are scenario inputs, not verified financial results.

That distinction is essential to understanding the exchange. No completed branding project has produced those customers. Tudor and Do are exploring the potential scale of the problem using assumptions supplied during a live conversation.

The resulting number does something useful without becoming a guarantee. It gives the proposed engagement a commercial frame larger than the cost of drawing a mark or writing a page. The conversation can now address whether the opportunity is worth pursuing and what the client can afford to risk.

Value-based pricing enters through that relationship between the problem and the proposed fee. Do asks what percentage Tudor would consider fair to spend on solving it. Tudor initially suggests 30 to 40 percent.

Do then tests a $200,000 engagement. Tudor is interested but lacks the initial cash. That objection changes the negotiation because it concerns payment capacity, not a rejection of the potential value.

The distinction prevents a familiar collapse: treating every hesitation as evidence that the price is too high. Here, interest and liquidity are separate variables. Reducing the price without understanding the constraint would answer the wrong question.

The exchange moves toward revenue sharing. Do proposes an upfront payment combined with a percentage of the lifetime value of new customers. Tudor pushes for a smaller initial commitment and offers a larger percentage in return.

The conversation progresses through several positions:

A $200,000 engagement tests interest in the proposed solution.
A $40,000 upfront payment plus 10 percent introduces shared upside.
A $10,000 upfront payment plus 15 percent addresses Tudor's cash constraint.

The final arrangement is a proposed basis for further work, not evidence of a signed contract. The exchange does not establish measurement rules, attribution standards, or how customer value would be verified. Those unresolved details limit what the demonstration can prove.

What it does show is reciprocal movement. Tudor does not simply ask for the same engagement at a lower price. He offers more participation in future value in exchange for less money upfront.

Do recognizes that exchange. The negotiation becomes a discussion of structure rather than a contest over who can hold a number longest.

This shift also places the practitioner in a different role, a distinction suggested by Moving from Makers to Entrepreneurs. Producing the work and designing a workable commercial relationship are connected responsibilities, but they are not identical skills.

The important transformation is not from a cheap logo to an expensive logo. It is from an argument about an isolated deliverable to a conditional agreement about a business problem. The numbers become meaningful only after the problem has been named.

A stronger promise starts with better language

Once a practitioner understands the outcome, that understanding still has to survive contact with a headline. Expertise does not communicate itself. A service description can be technically accurate and still fail to give the reader a reason to care.

Do approaches copywriting as a structured craft rather than an unexplained gift. The existence of a formula does not eliminate creativity. It supplies a structure within which the writer makes choices.

His starting point is AIDA: attention, interest, desire, action. A headline earns attention, the next material develops interest, the offer builds desire, and the communication leads toward action. The stages distinguish getting noticed from sustaining enough interest to move someone forward.

Attention alone is not the sale.

For the headline itself, Do introduces a second structure, ROT: result, objection, time. It asks the writer to identify what changes, what concern blocks belief, and how long the change takes. The order can vary.

The practical sequence follows those elements:

Result: Name the outcome the customer wants, rather than the service used to produce it.
Objection: Address the concern that makes the outcome difficult to believe or accept.
Time: State the relevant timeframe without making an unsupported promise.

A participant offers a headline about delegating a business in 90 days without losing control. The ingredients are present, but Do challenges the result. Delegation describes a mechanism, not necessarily the improvement the entrepreneur wants.

The more compelling outcome is working three days a week.

That revision changes the reader's mental picture. Delegation requires interpretation: tasks, responsibilities, staff management. A three-day working week describes a recognizable change in daily life.

The objection remains losing control of the business, while the timeframe remains 90 days. Nothing about the formula supplies evidence that the offer can deliver. Its function is to make the intended promise clear enough to evaluate.

The distinction matters when the discussion turns to medicine. A doctor objects that treatment cannot guarantee a fixed result for every patient. Do responds by asking what proportion of patients achieves the outcome being discussed.

She gives 80 percent and a two-week timeframe for the example. Do reframes the claim around that proportion rather than implying a universal result. In the session, those figures are supplied by the participant; they are not independently established medical evidence.

The copywriting lesson is the qualification. A result observed in a portion of cases should not become a promise to every buyer. Precision includes the limit, not just the attractive outcome.

The logo discussion offers another route. When numerical causation cannot be established, the promise can address a specific emotional result rather than manufacturing a revenue claim. The relevant contrast is not numerical versus vague. It is grounded versus unsupported.

A framework can sharpen either a truthful offer or an exaggerated one. Expertise should determine which promises survive the writing process. That is where the specialist's knowledge becomes more than a marketing advantage: it becomes a restraint on what the marketing says.

The strongest position leaves room to listen

Strong positioning does not remove the need to listen. It makes listening more useful because the practitioner no longer has to force every conversation toward a sale. Do describes confidence as being comfortable whether the prospective client proceeds or not.

That confidence rests on a particular belief: another provider can be hired, but that does not make the providers interchangeable. His argument is not that every client must choose him. It is that his own value does not disappear when a client chooses someone else.

The danger is confusing that independence with indifference. The strongest conversations in his examples depend on attention to the other person's situation, not a performance of superiority. Tudor's cash constraint matters precisely because Do stays in the discussion long enough to understand it.

Listening also means detecting what an encouraging statement leaves unresolved. Do recounts a friend who interpreted a chief executive's conditional enthusiasm as a sign that a job was secured. The friend heard approval and missed the qualification.

Do's interpretation is that other people's concerns still influenced the decision. The useful response would have been to establish who else was involved and what reservations remained. The story supports inquiry, not certainty about another person's unspoken motives.

A positive signal is not the same as a completed decision.

Do recommends softening the inquiry with “Out of curiosity, how do you make decisions here?” The phrase creates an opening without turning the conversation into an interrogation. It asks for information rather than demanding that the other person justify their authority.

This is adjacent to the concern named in The Skill You Need To Win Clients That No One Talks About (but should): how a practitioner meets the person across the table matters alongside what the practitioner intends to sell.

For someone who repeatedly struggles to reproduce these conversations, Do recommends reviewing a recorded call and comparing the transcript with the approach being studied. The point is to inspect what was actually said, rather than relying on a memory shaped by intention. That recommendation assumes recording and handling the conversation appropriately.

His closing project story brings the argument back to specialization. A website assignment had accumulated more than 70 rounds of changes. Do says websites were outside the company's specialization, and the project was losing money.

He arrived at the client meeting with documentation and acknowledged the team's failure to manage the work properly. Then he laid out three possibilities: finish at a loss without continuing under the same terms, receive more money and revise future budgets, or end the relationship and hand over the files.

The client agreed to pay more, though not the full amount requested, and adjust the budgets for subsequent projects. Do attributes the constructive exchange partly to tone: direct, warm, and free of a claim that either side was superior.

The practical standard is demanding. Establish depth. Ask questions that expose the actual problem. State the promise within the evidence. When the terms stop working, name the choices without hostility.

A specialist does not need to claim every job. A specialist needs to know which problem the work can solve, and when to stop pretending.

TRANSCRIPT

I want to talk about specialization for a second, because there's this argument like some young person came up to me, not that young but youngish, young compared to me, and said, "Oh, I'm a multi-hyphenate. I'm a polymath. I can do everything." I'm like, "Really?" I don't know I don't know about that. So, here we go. You see this here? When when I was in school um many many years ago, our teachers would say, "You want to show a breadth of work, a variety of things that you do, so that if somebody asks, 'Can you do a logo? Can you build a website? Can you use entertainment packaging?' that I can do it." That was the wisdom back then. Show a breadth of work. So, I was very proud to tell people, "Look at my portfolio. There's a lot that I can do." And I struggled mightily because every time we were to bid against a specialized company, we would lose. And back then I was really sad and angry that we would lose these really big jobs. Now, imagine yourself, you're 22 years old, you just graduated college, you have some debt, you think you're great, you think you're amazing, and you go out into the marketplace, and you're bidding on jobs between 50 to 250,000, and you're losing all of them. So, all I'm thinking about is, there goes that money, there goes that money, there goes that money. Super depressing. Why am I losing? It's not fair. The world is not fair. I'm really good. Because I don't demonstrate both in body of work and processes, nor the questions that I'm asking, that demonstrate I have deep knowledge and expertise in one thing. So, instead of going wide, I'm going to encourage you to go deep. It's called the T-skill. Many of you have know T-skill, yes? Yes, fantastic, great job. I know you're doing it. Cuz it takes a long time actually to develop deep expertise, okay? Now, a friend of mine, a new friend on the internet and I, we were having this discussion. We It started as a debate, and then he agreed at the end of the debate I was right. Happens from time to the But I want to share this with you cuz language is very important to me. He said there's three levels and we agreed to this. This was dope, okay? First is you need to become an expert. And if you believe Malcolm Gladwell, he he estimates about 10,000 hours of intentional practice doing something. You play the flute, you put 10,000 hours, you're going to be pretty good. Maybe not a genius. And when you are good enough and have achieved that level of experience, you become an authority. What is the difference between an authority and an expert? Language matters. Why do they listen to you? Because they can learn from you? Okay, what else? Yes. They have their own opinions? Well, experts have their own opinions. Let's keep going. Okay, there's one thing I'm looking for. What's the difference? Okay, hold on. All right. I love this. Hold on. Hold on. I can only listen to one person at a time. Easy. Easy. An expert has put in all the time and work to figure this thing out. An authority is above them because they can do this or they There's one characteristic about authorities that's different than experts. What? No, everything is disputable. Wait. Wait. >> [laughter] >> Am I cross-eyed? I'm looking at this person and this person. Look over here. I know you want to tell me something. Chillax. Chillax. Where were we? You Who was saying it? Go ahead. No, I'm confident. You know what? Idiots are really confident. >> [laughter] >> They're the most confident people. They really are. So, it can't be that. Go ahead. Nope, it's not the right language. What? They're gays? >> [laughter] >> Huh? They're proof? Uh not really, either. >> [laughter] >> This is like a gun. I'm pointing to that person. I promise I get to you. Go ahead. >> I wanted to say proof. >> Proof. Yeah, let me put your hand down. Go ahead. Who Who's saying Who's you? The way they Okay, we're done. We're good. I'll do I'll do you. Go ahead. Credibility {slash} what? >> [laughter] >> Romania, work with me. I can only have one conversation with one person at a time. Credibility {slash} Trust? Beautiful. When I say too many T sounds, I spit on the whole audience, so I will not try to do that. Okay? All right. Okay. There are lots of experts. The authority is the best-known expert. That's all it is. Okay? These experts point to this authority as the leader. And we'll just say top 10. Okay? In whatever market, they know you. So, I'm an expert plumber, but the plumber we all talk about is Joe Plumber. Yeah? Okay, give me a category here. Web design. Who's the best-known web designer in Romania? Throw out a name. Blah blah blah. Yes, that would be the authority. You see what I'm saying? Everyone else might be an expert, but they're really amateurs. We don't talk about amateurs. Everybody understand this? Okay, there's one level above that. What do you think that person is? Icon? What? >> [laughter] >> I think this side of the room understands me better. Drigo did you dirty. He said these guys are cool. You're much cooler. They entertain. Every time they laugh, it's cuz you're doing something wrong. You understand that? They're like, "Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah." They're not paying attention, right? Okay. What did we say? Okay, what somebody here? Thought leader. That's a very That's a pretty good term. A thought leader is also known as an No, that's a pretty good guess. Okay, they're getting warmer. Influencer. There we go. Okay, and I'll explain what this is now. Influencer. Okay, are we okay here? Okay, many of you are here. We won't even give you a name. You're the nameless. You're untouchable. You put in the work. You become really good. 10,000 hours. You've won some awards. You've judged shows. You're an expert. You know what you're doing. You've done this for years, okay? Then we move on to the authority level, where these people know you. You're above your peers. Yes, they look up to you. And when you move to this level, people outside of your vertical know you. That's how you know you're an influencer, okay? We take the example again. I'm a plumber. Cuz that's who he's What was your name? Peter. I was going to say Alex, okay. So, you're a plumber, and you become a really good plumber. You become a master plumber. But now all the plumbers are talking about you as not a plumber, you're the plumber. Yeah? And now when Sally MacPherson knows you are the plumber, you're an influencer. Make sense? Okay? So, when it goes outside of your vertical, here, you're that well known. Make sense? You want to argue? Let's go. No, we're good? Okay, this is a recent discussion. It's only like 3 weeks old. So, I'm still working with this, okay? You can convince me otherwise. So, when we go wide, what is our chance to become an expert? Goose egg. Mhm zero. If we keep doing this, T skill, we might become an expert. But we need to start creating content and media and a reputation that separates us, that differentiates us from everyone else. We become the authority. If we do this really well, you grow grow way outside of that. Now, in America, this word has a lot of negativity to it. Why would they be so negative about this? Are Do you guys hate influencers here? Yeah. Yeah. A lot of people do. You don't? You love them? Which ones? Which ones? All right, I'm back to this side. >> [laughter] >> Oh, some influencers? Okay, anyways. All right. The reason why a lot of people hate influencers is because they skip the step. That's why. They're They're charismatic. They understand media and they're blabbermouths and they don't know nothing about anything. Right? You understand that? Yeah. That's why we hate them. And so, we say we hate influencers. That's really judging violent language and it's clearly describing something with a heavy heavy amount of negative energy. So, would you ever want to be an influencer? No. Because if you hate them, you would never want to be them. That's the problem. So, we can now delineate there are different kinds of influencers. The ones who built it on nothing, we ignore them. We don't need to hate them. We ignore them. But the ones who built up expertise and authority in their space and have transcended their vertical, I respect the hell out of them cuz they've done what very few people can actually do. They're not only good at their craft, they've transcended their industry. That is powerful. I'm happy to be called an influencer. At first, it was a little uncomfortable, but I'm like, "Okay, I'll go with that." Okay? So, this comes through specialization. There's this the that's is called the pie. So, this is the T, this is the pie. So, I feel like in your 40s, when you've done something long enough, you actually pick up a new skill. And you can go deep on two two trunks of the tree. Right? And the trunk has to be so strong because the more leaves there are in the tree, and the trunk's not strong, it falls over. So, we need to make sure we have a lot of depth, and actually you can have a multi-trunk tree now. So, you can be an expert at health care. You could also be a health an expert at dance. Those are two things. So, we we now know that you don't have to get stuck here, but it usually takes time to develop two levels of mastery. We understand that? So, every time an 18-year-old, unless they're a child prodigy, I don't believe you when you tell me you're multi-hyphenate. It's just a trendy word people like to use to describe ADHD. Just saying. Okay. So, the third version of this is something called the comb, which is amazing. I think this is when you're in your 50s and possibly in your 60s, where you have deep levels of expertise across multiple verticals. So, even if I tell you right now you should specialize, I want your heart to rest assured that you can have multiple specializations. But I encourage you not to do them all at the same time. You build one after the other. Because the first one will reward you while you work on the second one. Make sense, everybody? Okay. Now, we're going to get into writing here cuz I have [clears throat] a slide for that somewhere. Okay. There's a copywriting format called AIDA, A I D A. If you've not heard of it before, this is going to be very beneficial to you. Now, if you don't know how to write music, it sounds and looks like it's magic. But people who study Thank you, Anna. People who study music understand there's formulas, there's structure, and rules that you should have followed. So, if we're going to write copy, we should learn from copywriters. And they have a formula. It's called AIDA, and it stands for attention interest desire action. Do your best to follow this formula and see what happens. AIDA okay? Which is what's going to grab their attention? That's the headline. If you don't have a strong hook, no one reads the rest of the post. And now what you have to do is you have to build interest, so you expand on the hook. So the hook grabs them, but they need something to bite into, okay? I'm going to make a metaphor for you here, okay? I I fish. It's really weird, people don't think I fish, but I love fishing, okay? I really do. I'm a redneck like that. Good country boy, right? You throw the line out, the fish bite the hook and the bait. Wrong bait, wrong hook, no action. You pull too hard, the line breaks. You let out too much slack, they get off the hook, they wrap it around something, and you've lost the fish. So it's the art of pulling in and keeping tension with the fish until you get them to the boat. And now they're really tired. Now you just lift them out of the water and you've boated the fish. That's how we do it. So the attention is the hook. So we need to figure out how to write hooks okay? And there's a formula on how to write headlines, that's your hook. So forget this. That wasn't that helpful. Hook. Okay? The hook. There's a formula, it's called the ROT thing. I I don't have a slide for it. ROT. R stands for result. This is the result I promise. O stands for objection. This is probably what you think won't work, and T is the time. How much time does it take? And you can use the ROT formula to write your headline, your headline. Okay? So for example, I want to teach somebody how to learn Spanish. So the result is learn how to speak Spanish, or learn how to speak Romanian. Okay? The objection is I've never spoken a foreign language before. So, we can write a headline, learn how to speak Romanian even if you've never spoken a second language. Uh an objection is it's too difficult. The easiest way to learn how to speak Romanian in in 2 weeks. Those are hooks. They're very functional. You can reverse the order in 2 weeks even if you've never spoken a foreign language before, you can speak Romanian. Does that make sense? This is how you write a headline. So, these formulas are here for you to use. There are structures in how to build things, not the creative part. The creative part is you putting in the variables for these things. So, if you have a strong headline, that is the A, that's your attention. Okay, let's try with somebody here. Somebody who's pretty clear, please. Not too long-winded. Give me a hook. Okay, up front. Can we get her the mic, please? You've got one ready like that? You've got one ready to go? >> A hook? >> A hook? >> Yeah. >> You just got hooks everywhere? >> No, but I >> I barely finished the sentence, you're like, I'm ready. You're amazing. >> I'm working with flow and at the same time with you, so >> All right, well, like that? >> No. >> That's okay. We got to use our human brain. >> Okay, let's do >> Okay. What's your hook? >> How to become to delegate your business in 19 days without losing the control of your company. >> This is pretty good. Pretty good. I'm going to test the human brain now. >> No, okay. >> Okay? Let's see. So, you >> I'll be the judge of that. Okay, 90 days, we got that. What's the result you promise? >> That you are going to work less and the team is going to do the job, not you as an entrepreneur. >> Was that your headline? >> No, it just >> You used the word delegate. >> Okay. >> That's The result is not delegation. The result is what? >> You will have more time in your business. >> Can we make it more specific? How much time? >> You will work 3 days a week. >> That's a pretty good result. Much better headline already. I'm interested now. How many days you guys work here a week? >> Five. >> Oh, normal. Okay. So, Okay. Okay, and what's the objection? >> Uh, I don't want to lose control of my business. >> Perfect. Okay, we're almost there. You've been great, by the way. You do have an amazing, fabulous human brain. Lose control. This is how it's done, everybody. Lose control. And the result is work 3 days. Yes? Okay. Freestyle your head the headline without Claude. Remember, you can do it in any order you wish. Freestyle, go ahead. >> How to work just 3 days a week without losing control over your business in just 90 days. >> Pretty good headline, right? Round of applause everybody. Okay. >> [applause] >> You can try a different order. Try a different order. Try either this first or that first. >> In 90 days, you're going to learn how to Ah. >> Oh-oh. >> In 90 days, you're going to learn how to not lose control of your business even if you're going to work 3 hours 3 days a week. >> Perfect. Okay, you see how this game is played, everybody? Now we can get a little bit more creative. Who's got a different version of that same headline? You want to freestyle one, anybody? Doctor? No. No, not not ready for that now, huh? Good in operating room, but not here. Okay. Anybody else want to freestyle it? Okay, go ahead. Yeah, VIP. Yeah, you know me. Go ahead. >> Like >> Freestyle it. >> Uh >> I thought you were ready, man. >> I was. >> Let's go. >> Before I got the mic. I um Just 90 days to get control of uh your 3-day week uh of work or something like that. >> Say with a little more confidence. Trailer voice. >> [laughter] >> Uh so just 90 days for you to get control of your 3-day work week? >> Yeah, something. You could do something like that. >> I Yeah. >> Yeah, that will work. So you can say 90 days or less run your business in half the time or whatever that amount is while retaining control without losing control. Yeah? See, it can work. Have you written headlines before? Are you a copywriter? You seem so angry. Are you okay? >> [laughter] >> You should be happy. No, no, hold on. Hold on. All right. The doctor God, once you give her the mic, you can't take it back. Go ahead. >> Hi again. >> Hello. >> So, yes. The My problem is that in >> What's your question? >> Uh in medicine, the result is never exactly that you cannot promise a fixed result. >> Yeah. >> So, my question is how do you promise a fixed result if you cannot >> Give Give me an example of a result that you can deliver. >> Um healing a tissue. I'm You have a problem with your tendon in your elbow and uh usually it works in 2 weeks. Okay. Fixing it. >> Yeah. How many percentage of the people? >> 80%. >> Okay, you can say 80% of my patients, their elbows back to normal in 2 weeks. >> Oh, you're good. >> I'm good. >> [laughter] >> I know what you're thinking. Watch this. >> [laughter] >> I'm going to stump the monkey. I'm going to show him my doctor degree and he got that BFA from an art school. We do? What kind of brain do you have? What's that? Okay. Thank you. You have a beautiful brain. I have a beautiful brain. Okay. All right. All right, [clears throat] I don't know where we are now. What are we doing? >> Chris Here. >> Yes. >> I have a question specifically for you on this because I am also recovering designer. >> Okay. >> So, in terms of articulating results, how do I promise results in terms of design and strategy? How do I quantify those things? >> You want to do this again? Here we go. What is the result you can promise? What is the result you hope to deliver? >> That's the thing. If I change your logo, I'm not sure how to quantify what results that will have. >> This is a great. I already have the answer to this problem cuz everyone's like, "You can't quantify this." I'll show you. Okay. >> the voice but that's the thing. >> Okay. Yeah. >> [laughter] >> I would prefer you did the voice but that's how I hear it in my head. Okay. You have a problem with quantifying the results cuz it's more feeling based, right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah? Everybody Anybody else have this problem? Yeah, a lot of you have this problem. Okay, do you think it's possible? Do you think it's possible? >> I mean, I >> [clears throat] >> you said you know it so it's probably possible. >> You're listening. >> Yeah. >> I like that. So, you can say, "I want to say no but I believe you you could do it." >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, let's say logo and identity design. >> Yeah. >> Is that okay? Why would anybody ever want to buy a logo design? Why would they want that? >> Could be preference. Could be about, you know, I I just don't like the way it looks and my neighbors uh just had a new logo and theirs looks better than mine. >> Okay. Why not do nothing? Why not just live with it? Are we in the Matrix? Wow, that was a pretty Okay, can we do that again? I'm dig digitized out of here. Those are Where's the phone booth? What's the next exit point? All right, go on. >> Yeah, it it could also be that it doesn't do the trick. So, for example, you scale up your business and the >> No, no, no. I want you to be the client right now. >> Okay. >> Right? Why would you want to change your logo? Why don't you just leave it alone? >> Well, my competitor did twice the revenue I had this year and I think their logo looks better. >> Okay, so you think changing your logo will improve your business? >> Yeah, I would hope so. >> Do you have any evidence? >> Uh no. >> Mostly feeling-based? >> Yeah. >> What's wrong with your logo today? >> Uh my wife doesn't like it. >> Perfect. I like you already. I don't know why people are applauding for that. That's a terrible answer. Okay. Here's your headline. You ready? >> Yeah. >> Have a logo your wife will love. >> [laughter] [applause] >> What man would not buy that? He will. >> [laughter] >> Yeah? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Why does it have to be so complicated? Would you Is that not a good headline? Have a logo your wife will love. Don't sleep in the spare bedroom. Have a logo that won't start a fight. Yeah? Okay? Have a logo you can have you can wear proudly. Have a logo so good your neighbors will talk about it. We can go on for days. Doctor, what do you think? You got one? >> [laughter] >> I'm just teasing you. I'm going to do this all the time. Huh? You got one? >> Yes. >> Fire away. >> Have a logo your life your wife will love you. >> Oh damn, that's a big promise. >> [laughter] >> If you can do that, you got to charge a lot of money. So, that's what we would call an over promise. If you said have a logo and you will be cancer-free, that's a big promise. Okay? As far as I know, there's no formula to make my wife love me. So, let's keep moving on. What's that? Yeah. Okay, so everybody thinks we have to quantify it in kind of numerical language. We don't. It can be feeling based. Yeah? Have a logo you don't have to hide. Have a logo that you can proudly place on the table. >> But, how do you market that? >> You just write that headline. You said that so confidently and now you're like, "Mhm." >> But, usually people want numbers. >> Do they want numbers? Yeah? Are you sure? >> Yeah. >> We just proved it. Do you need a logo? Okay, I don't want to talk to you. Do you need a logo? No? Okay, who needs a logo? Who thinks they need a new logo? Will it impact your business? >> I think so, yes. >> Why? Why do you believe that? >> Well, mine is done with ChatGPT, so it's awful. >> What what Say one more time. >> [laughter] >> My logo my current logo is um self-made with ChatGPT. I don't think it represents my myself or my business. I have searched for someone good. I'm not finding it yet. So, I'm still searching for that person that can support my my logo design. >> You just heard >> If there is anyone >> Hold on. Hold [laughter] on. I got this, guys. I got this. I got you, okay? Send me in. I got this. We're going in, all right? 100 hearts have been broken by that statement. >> Well, here I am, guys. I need you. So, >> Okay. I Anytime someone says I use ChatGPT to erase a human like that, I was like, "Ooh, for a logo?" >> No, absolutely no. It's just I need to put something out there. >> Fantastic. So, write the headline for her. I've lost my markers. Okay. Somebody write the headline for her specifically. Why don't we get it back to our logo guy? Where's our logo guy? Raise your hand. Give him the mic, please. Put him to work while I find my marker. Where's the other one? Do you see it? >> Okay. >> It's disappeared. Go ahead. >> Uh yeah, so result uh would be um Can I hear the problem again? >> She's using ChatGPT. You want her to say it more times? >> Yeah, no. So, she's using the ChatGPT, but what is the problem with the logo that ChatGPT created besides the obvious? >> want to hear the headline, bro. >> It's your turn. >> Okay. >> You got this one opportunity. >> Um In 1 week >> [laughter] >> Go ahead. Keep going. Let him Let him Let him Let him have some space. It's not starting strong. But, let him have some space. >> I'm not ChatGPT. It takes me 1 week. Uh In 1 week get a logo that ChatGPT cannot ever produce. >> Yeah? >> [applause] >> Or a logo designers won't hate you for. There's lots of ways to do this. You guys understand the game? Yeah. Shame on you. I I'm just kidding. >> [laughter] >> I told you I had another one. >> another one. >> What's that? Uh let me Where's my phone? I need to take a picture of her. >> No, no, no. >> Yeah. >> [laughter] >> You good? You're not good. >> No, you're shaming me for something that you don't know the context for. >> You going to tell me the context? >> you another one if you want. >> You just give it to us. >> Okay. So, in 1 week get a logo Chris Do won't shame you about. >> [laughter] >> That's pretty good, Ashley. Man, you're getting good at this. Are you a copywriter? >> No, sir. >> The answer is I'm aspiring copywriter. Of course. Yeah? You good? You know how to play this game? >> I'm trying to. >> Was that valuable to you? >> Yeah. >> How much would you have paid for that kind of knowledge? >> Uh are you going to charge me? >> Don't get scared. I'm just asking a question. >> Yeah. >> How much is that worth to you to learn how to write copy? >> I'd probably say maybe $500. >> You're so cheap. >> Yeah. >> I shame everybody. So, you would have paid $500. >> Yeah. >> How much was your ticket? >> How much what? >> How much was the ticket to be here? >> Uh 100? >> Oh, 100? >> Yeah. >> Damn! So, you got 5x ROI. Is that what you're saying? Robert, you're doing a good job on this. Round of applause, guys. Wow. >> [applause] >> Do you know how much money I charge? Out of curiosity? >> Probably like three zeros. >> No, no, no, no, no. It just depends. For an hour, it's 5,000 bucks. >> Okay. >> If you want to work with me, it's 50 grand. Okay? So, you just have tremendous ROI because I believe the price to this thing is so undervalued. Robert, we need to talk later. I don't think this is a good ticket price. When I found out the ticket price for 5 days? Ridiculous. Only for 1 day? >> Yeah, I was early bird as well. >> Just for today? >> Yeah, it was the early bird price. >> So, you didn't go to my talk? >> Uh yeah, I did. >> Oh, so you got 2 days? >> Yeah. I I get all days, but I bought it last year when the last event happened. >> But I'm cheaper. >> They're arguing with me. We're We're talking, guys. Excuse me. It's 5 days for $100. That's what he got. Somebody else paid a little bit more. What did you guys pay? VIP, how much you pay? 600? Why'd you wait? You waited, right? The most expensive price is the last price. The best price is the first price. So, when Robert tells you to book your ticket for next year, don't wait. Incredible ROI. Yeah? Is that fair, guys? Okay. There's a lesson here, though. Okay? There's a meta moment here. Whenever I give a client a price, they're like, "Chris, why so much?" I promise you, that's the best price you'll ever hear from me. Cuz every day my time's more valuable, I'm more experienced, and I like clients less every day. Really. For real. I'll just say it. It's not expensive. It's the cheapest price you'll ever get from me. Can you guys walk in the room with that kind of energy? Daniel Priestley refers to this with or without you energy. I'm good with you. I'm good without you. And the reason why I exhibit this energy is because I really believe that. Because I believe I'm unique, I'm special, and you can get someone else to do it, but you just can't get me. And if you want that je ne sais quoi, you're going to have to pay me. If not, I'm happy without you, right? The problem is when you're really needy and you want the job so bad, you get the opposite result. Needy people are repulsive. They're You want to push them away. Buy now. Buy now. For this price, I'll go below or I'm like, I don't want any of what you're selling. It's a disservice to you. Okay, we want what we cannot have, so be a little less available, everybody. Little meta lesson there. Okay, I don't know where we are in the deck now. No, no, we got to share the love. We got to share the love. No, no, hold on. Hold on. I I I I'm sure it is, but we just Okay, the gentleman with his hand up. We'll get you in the corner here. Go ahead. Let's get him the mic. Hold on, you don't have your hand up and you don't have a mic. Give me a second. >> Sorry. Can you guys hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, I have a question for tech companies mostly. Um why does a logo matter because I understand why branding matters for a company? Uh what? >> Sorry. What are you? Are you a tech company? >> I'm a tech company and provide software on demand. >> it. Role play right now. You ready? Cameras on him. This will be a viral video. It almost always is. Okay. So, you don't need a logo? >> Not really. I mean, I'm thinking that Facebook could have looked different the logo and the logo wouldn't have mattered because the brand >> Well, I just want to talk about you though, not about other companies. >> Not really. I don't understand the value of it. >> Okay, so you don't need a logo. What do you need? >> Branding, I guess. Maybe. >> Branding might make a difference? >> Yeah, people knowing what we do and why we do it and why we are the best at it. >> Perfect. I'm in agreement with you. Logo will not change your business. You need branding. >> Okay. >> What kind of problem are you trying to solve? >> Um it's the customer's problem. We can automate like mostly anything. We're like human life like similar to laws, they can be transcribed into code. So, you can >> to branding, what kind of problem are you trying to solve? You have a branding problem? >> Like identity more or less. Like we I don't know how to differentiate. >> Sorry? >> Oh, differentiation? >> Yep. >> Perfect. Cuz you don't want to look like everybody else. Right? >> Uh I mean, I guess I don't. >> No, tell me what you mean. >> Um >> Do you want to stand out? >> Uh no, I want to stand up between like amongst other businesses that do the same thing. >> Okay, friend, are we speaking English? >> Yeah. >> I just said do you want to stand out? You're like, "No, I want to stand up." >> [laughter] >> I want to look different. Do you Do you Do you know what I'm saying when Do you want to stand out? Just stand out from >> Me from everybody, yeah. >> Yes. Sure, sure, sure. Yes. >> Okay, so now we're speaking the same language, okay. You want to be different. >> Yeah. >> And you need an identity to reflect that yes? >> Yes. >> What else do you need? >> Customer success stories, I guess. >> But as it relates to branding, I'm sorry. >> I don't know. Um more than more than than identity, no, like people knowing that what we do. >> Okay, perfect. So, you described you need an identity system >> Yeah. >> that helps you stand apart from the rest of the people. >> Exactly. >> Perfect. An identity system would include a logo, typographic recipes colors patterns. Is that what you're thinking, or are you thinking something else? >> Perhaps I think more like a story. >> Oh, okay, yes. Like copywriting, messaging positioning. >> Perhaps that, yeah. >> What else could it be? >> Um like the transmission of what kind of problems we're solving. Like pricing, yeah. >> We call that copywriting. >> Yeah. >> So, you know the language, but we can write it in ways that people can understand and get excited about. >> Exactly. >> If we solve that problem, what would it do for your business? >> Uh perhaps more clients come in than we reaching out to them. >> Okay, in a given month, how many more clients do you think changing this might impact your business? What do you think? >> Even three. >> Three would be amazing. >> Yeah, three would be amazing. >> clients? >> Yeah, for three three percent it's amazing. >> Yeah, what's the lifetime customer value for one client? >> Depends, maybe from one month for the product >> Lifetime customer value? >> Uh 6 months to a year. >> And the value? Um >> Money? Just make up a number. Doesn't matter. >> I don't know, like 30, 40, 50,000 dollars. >> Let's pick the one in the middle. Is that okay? >> 40, yeah. >> 40, let's say. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, if this goes well, you have three new clients and it'll generate roughly lifetime customer value 40k per customer. Yes? >> Yes. >> So, that by my math is 120k. Yeah? >> Yeah. >> And if we do that for 12 months at a time, that's more math than I can do, but 240,000, something like that. >> Yes. >> Or even more No, it's 2.4 million, I think. >> million, yeah. >> You're good with math. You're a tech person. I trust you. >> I don't have like math. I'm I'm coding, so people that code don't do math. >> 144, thank you. 1.44 million, okay. That's a big endeavor. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Are you serious about solving the problem? >> Of course. >> Okay. What percentage would you like to spend feels fair to you to get this job done? >> 30 to 40, like >> 30 to 40 million? What are you talking about? >> No, 30 to 40%. >> Oh. That's amazing. >> Yeah. >> I love the way you Are you a business person? >> Yeah. >> be. Okay. So, help me do the math. So, 10% would be 144k, right? So, we just got to do that three times. Yeah? >> Yeah. >> It's Well, we'll say it's a lot. >> No. >> It It It It's 300, 450-ish. >> Bringing money in solves the problem? >> My god. You are my dream client. >> Yeah, I agree. >> You are literally my dream client. I love the way your brain works. I love to work with entrepreneurs just like you who understand this principle. For real, I'm being real real with you right now. I think this is a lot of money. This sounds risky to me. If you saw a solution that's solve your identity design problem for say 200k, would that excite you? >> Sure. Yes sure. >> Yeah. Sure, yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, what's the problem now? >> I don't have that initial money. >> Oh. Okay. That's a fair statement. If a payment plan could be developed where you're comfortable with that, would that work for you? >> Sure. >> What terms would you like? >> Per increase, we share a percent of what we get. >> Oh, okay. Okay. So, you want to share revenue share? >> Yeah. As we go. Like >> Okay, that's even better. I like that even more. So, I'm going to get a percentage of new customers based on the work? >> Yep. >> Excellent. What percentage would you like to pay? >> I don't know. 10 to 15 based on that. >> Okay. I'll just say 10%. So, I'm going to make a proposal to you. See if this sounds good. What if we started off with say 40K, which is significantly less, and for every new customer we bring in we get 10% lifetime customer value. Would that work for you? Cuz I have expenses up ahead, up front. >> The 40K is like a little bit rough. We're working on tight margins as >> I understand. I respect that. What number works for you? >> I don't know. Maybe 10K. >> That's rough for me now. We can be open >> We can bump up the percentage. Like I don't mind that. >> How much? >> Uh 15. Make it out of the 10K. >> Okay. You know what? I I I I like your game. You understand you got to give something get something. So, 15% 10K up front. Okay. If I gave you a proposal to do this, would you be inclined to say yes? >> Yes. >> Without hesitation? >> Yeah. >> Amazing. I'll send you a proposal at the end of today. Would that work for you? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Great. >> [applause] >> You know what that's called? Taking candy from a baby. It's so easy. Okay, let's talk about let's have a conversation about this, okay? What's your name? >> Tudor. >> Wait, what's it >> Tudor. T U D O R. >> [laughter] >> Tudor? >> Tudor, yeah. >> Tudor. Okay, I got it. Yeah. You guys have tricky names here. My god. And you say it so fast like I can't even understand what I mean. >> the English dynasty like Tudor? >> Yeah. >> That's you. >> Are you part of the dynasty? >> Not really, no. >> [laughter] >> I wish you said yes. I'm going to add another zero to this. >> Then you wouldn't Then you would have had to pay me like the other way around. >> No, never works like that. >> [laughter] >> I don't pay for the privilege of working for you. Okay. So, let's have a conversation cuz we have 13 minutes. I'd like to answer any question about this because, you know what? Literally he said, "I don't need logos." and then he bought a logo. He really did. Go ahead. Okay, let's get him the mic first. Wait for the mic right here. Raise your hand so everybody can see you. Yeah. Make some movement. Go ahead. >> How How do I open up the client to the possibility to have this conversation? >> We just did. >> Yeah, but could I I'm I'm I'm I'm sad I have to do this, but we have a certain culture in Romania that people are more closed and avoiding to give you numbers. >> language. >> Yeah, it's very judging language. So, I I don't want to do this, but I have to because I have the difficulty of trying to break through >> I got you. I got you. You're saying Romanian culture is very difficult to do. Agreed? Yes? No, see? Not people do not agree with you. >> Okay. >> Uh Tudor, are you Romanian? Is there a problem? Do we have a problem right here? Is this kind of real? Are you pretending to be somebody you're not? I just did it. He's Romanian. Check his passport. Might be from some other place. >> I have watched your videos hundreds of times and I have not never managed to break through this conversation with the client. So, >> Did you do as you were instructed? >> Something is missing and I don't know what it is. >> you were instructed? Did you follow what I told you to do? >> I thought so. >> No, I already know so. Record your next call. >> Okay, I will. >> Study it. >> Yeah. >> Ask it, "Uh I learned it from this video. Watch this video. Compare it to the transcript from what I did. Tell me where I went wrong." Have you ever done that? >> No. >> That's the good news. See, previously this would not be available to you without you spending a lot of money. >> Yeah. >> Now, if you ask the right question, this is available for pennies. Sad for me, good for you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah? Just try that. I promise you, everybody's like, "I nailed it. I did everything you said and they still said no." I can listen to one part of their conversation and tell you where it went wrong. It wouldn't even take me that long. You know the funny thing is, side story, there's a buddy of mine, his name is Rich, and he was going to get this big, important job with a very important celebrity influencer type of person. And he didn't get the job. And he told me what was happening in the interview. I told him, "You didn't get the job because of this, this, and that." And keep in mind, he just told me what he remembered. I don't have a transcript. He's like, "Uh I don't know if that's true." I said, "Okay, go ask ChatGPT." So, then he got the transcript, cuz it was a Zoom call, dumped it into it, and it said the exact same thing I said. He goes, "Chris, how do you do this?" You knew because you already told me. Because if you lied to me, I wouldn't be able to find it. So, even in his telling, he was blind to what was happening. Okay? I'll give you an example. The person who's making the decision, the CEO, had an interview with him and said this, "If it were up to me, I'd hire you." He goes, "Woo! The CEO said, 'If it was up to me, I'd hire you.'" What's the problem, everybody? Okay, hold on. Who has their hand up? You? Let's get her the mic. Right here. He's really close to you. Here comes the mic. If it were up to me, I'd hire you. What's the problem? >> It's not up to him. If >> He's the CEO. >> Yeah, but still >> The buck stops at this Everybody just lower your hand. Just don't pressure her right now. She's got this. If it were you in that position and somebody said, "If it were up to me, I'd hire you." What would you say back? I'll wait for you. Shh. >> So, why is it not up to you? >> Sounds so accusatory. >> [laughter] >> Sorry. >> I'm asking the questions. >> Sorry. I was just thinking >> Yeah. Don't come with that energy. That's why it doesn't work in Romania. Don't bring that kind of energy. What is the Okay, this is a thing that's called subtext. You know what subtext means? Sub means below, below what is said, reading between the lines. When somebody says "If it were up to me, I'd hire you." What are they really saying? Let's first translate what they said. Okay, let's move the mic. Here we go. Over here. >> They are not the decision makers. >> No. No. I already said no to that. Are you listening? It's not that. They are the CEO. They were They want to tell you the truth, but they won't tell you the truth. >> They are not convinced. >> No. They don't want to hire you. That's not true either. Yes. You? How old are you, man? Yeah. Brilliant. 27-year-old. He says there are other factors. My friend heard, "If it were up to me, from the CEO, I'd hire you." He goes, "Woo!" He's doing a happy dance in his mind. The CEO would hire me. I'm like, "Rich, what do you think he meant? 'If it were up to me.' It means there are other people who I have to consider their opinions. And they're telling me, "You're not the guy." Okay. Young man, 27 years old, let's see how smart you are with your human brain. What should you ask back? >> Just a second. >> Take your time. Take all the time, 7 minutes and 51 seconds of time. Or until my matcha runs out. >> So, my first one would be I mean, that's what I would reply. >> Um >> if it were up to me, I would work for you. That's what I would say to the CEO. >> You were applying for the job, I know. Not a good answer. Good try. You want to try one more time? >> You can only be genius once. >> [laughter] >> I'll pass the mic. >> I love your spirit. Let's hand the mic to someone else. Drego, that's your new best friend. Okay. Hand the mic to whoever you want. That's sexist. Go on. >> Walk Walk me through your decision-making process. >> You're not the boss of me. Are you telling me what to do? Walk me through your decision-making process? >> Can I meet the rest of the team? >> Can I meet the rest of the team? >> Yes. >> What for? >> To convince them. >> What? >> To convince them. >> How do you know there's a them? That's pretty assumptive, don't you think? Give the mic to the person behind you. >> What can I do so that it becomes up to you? >> [laughter] >> No. Look at these people. You guys are great. You are You're really great. I love this audience. Have me back next year. I love you guys. You are >> Who do I have to convince? Then who do I have to convince? >> Okay. So, this is great. You're on the right path now. The bloodhounds are out. You're going down the right path, okay? So, if somebody says, "If it were up to me, I'd hire you." Well, who else is involved in the decision-making process? Bob, Mary, Jack, Peter. And what is their concern? I'd love to know what they are. So, now [snorts] we become really curious. And Peter asked, "Walk me He commanded me, actually. Walk me through your decision-making process." The way that you can soften this and you should probably write this down and memorize this. Whenever you don't know what to say, just say, "Out of curiosity, how do you make decisions here?" Just add that phrasing. It softens everything. I mean, you can say, "You're stupid." Or you can say, "Out of curiosity, >> [laughter] >> why are you so stupid?" It just is a little softer. It's not great, but it's softer. You guys feel the energy difference there? And I'll give you one more trick. Your tone matters a lot, everybody. And some of you have a much warmer tone, and some of you have a really direct, almost like a Russian yet kind of tone. Yeah? We got to work on that a little bit. So, if you make this one practice, if you just smile while you're talking, everything sounds better. Now, there is a term and it's written in Chris Voss's book, Never Split the Difference. It's called the speaking smile. It's not his term. It's a term that's available. It's called the speaking smile. There was a client who we needed to ask for more money. We were at 74 rounds of revisions. I had a young producer didn't know what she was doing. It was out of control. We were hemorrhaging money on a website design. Okay, we're not used to designing websites cuz it wasn't our specialization, and we're we've had We're at the end. I'm like, "What are we doing? How did we get here? We're bleeding money on this project." And she goes, "I don't know, Chris." I said, "Here's what we're going to do. We're going to have a client meeting. I want you to print out every change order." And she literally put this binder together of every change order they've asked for. And we're driving over to see the client. The client's a multi-billion-dollar real estate development company, 13.something billion. Okay? That's how much money they have. So, a lot of leverage on that side. And when we're in the car, I said to her, I said, "Hey, her name is Nicole. Nicole, when we get there, do not say a single word. Only when I specifically ask you or they say, 'Nicole, what's your thoughts on this?' should you speak. Let me do all the talking." She goes, "Okay." So, we get there and we sit down and I said to the client, who's the senior vice president of marketing, actually she's No, she's not senior vice president. She's the CMO. She's very important, second most important person in that company as far as we're concerned. And I said to her, "So, we have gone off the rails on this project. I'm not saying it's your fault, but I'm not saying it's all our fault, either. And I don't know what to do. Because originally we scoped this project at this price, and there have been so many changes, like 70-plus changes. And that is our fault cuz we didn't manage the project really well. So, we have a couple options. Number one, we finish this work and we just bleed, but we can't do any more projects at this price. Number two is you can pay us more and we'll do this and we'll make it work and we can do all the other projects. Maybe there's a third option where you say, "Screw you, you're stupid, you're incompetent." And you fire us on the spot. We will then hand over the files, whatever you want, and we'll we'll call it quits. I appreciate you. I know you're a fair-minded business person. What do you think she said? What? There was three options. Make us bleed, pay more, or say screw you later. Pay more. Okay, thank you. She did say, "Chris, I will get you more money. I'm not going to give you what you asked for, but we'll pay you more for this project and all the other projects we'll change the budget." We're not getting divorced, are we? I said, "No, we're not. We're going to make this work." See, so when you bring a certain energy to the room, and there's just a fun I I just call it fun energy, people are totally cool. You see, so we can have conversations with people and we can push and we can pull. They're not better than us, we're not better than them. Speak with a smile and things are much easier.

Download transcript

Enjoyed this? There’s more where it came from.

Get insights on creativity, business, and design from The Futur.

You can unsubscribe anytime. By submitting, you agree to receive communications and to our Privacy Policy.

“Because the first one will reward you while you work on the second one.”

— Chris Do

Key Takeaways

Subscribe

Details

Length: 50m
Views: 10,619
Topic: POSITIONING

Share