[00:00] (0.32s)
As a manager, I could get rid of any one
[00:02] (2.48s)
employee I wanted. This was the most
[00:04] (4.64s)
brutally honest interview I've done so
[00:07] (7.12s)
far. I think most pips are a combination
[00:10] (10.16s)
of dishonest and or psychologically
[00:13] (13.92s)
unrealistic.
[00:15] (15.36s)
This is Ethan Evans. He went from being
[00:17] (17.68s)
fired twice to being promoted to a VP at
[00:20] (20.56s)
Amazon with a team of over 800
[00:22] (22.56s)
engineers.
[00:23] (23.52s)
After it happened twice, I damn sure
[00:25] (25.44s)
looked at like, who's the common element
[00:27] (27.36s)
in this? It's me. I asked him about his
[00:30] (30.32s)
experience working with famous Amazon
[00:32] (32.48s)
executives like Jeff Bezos and Andrew
[00:35] (35.60s)
I've probably had about 50 meetings with
[00:37] (37.28s)
him and about 50 with Andy. The biggest
[00:39] (39.44s)
difference is Jeff's
[00:40] (40.96s)
I also asked them about the behind the
[00:42] (42.80s)
scenes of performance management at
[00:44] (44.64s)
Amazon. What is stopping a manager from
[00:46] (46.88s)
painting their report in an unfair
[00:48] (48.56s)
light? People won't like to hear this.
[00:50] (50.96s)
I'm actually willing to tell you the
[00:52] (52.88s)
truth and tell you that almost
[00:54] (54.72s)
everyone's doing what I'm doing. They're
[00:56] (56.40s)
just not telling you. Before
[01:01] (61.68s)
we get into, you know, the juicy parts
[01:04] (64.08s)
of you kind of growing to a VP at
[01:06] (66.24s)
Amazon, I think that's a level that a
[01:08] (68.64s)
lot of people can only, you know, dream
[01:10] (70.40s)
of or imagine of. Really curious to dig
[01:12] (72.72s)
into what is even happening at those
[01:14] (74.72s)
levels. I'm curious to kind of lay out
[01:16] (76.88s)
your full career story. I know there's
[01:18] (78.72s)
some interesting stories about you being
[01:21] (81.36s)
uh fired in the com boom prior to
[01:24] (84.08s)
joining Amazon, and I imagine there's a
[01:25] (85.76s)
lot of interesting learnings there. So
[01:28] (88.08s)
let's get into the beginning of your
[01:30] (90.24s)
story which is your experience before
[01:32] (92.80s)
Yeah, absolutely. So just to your
[01:34] (94.96s)
original point, I never expected to be a
[01:37] (97.04s)
VP at Amazon. That just kind of evolved
[01:39] (99.44s)
like many careers do. I started working
[01:42] (102.64s)
and that's where I ended up and I'm very
[01:44] (104.72s)
happy with it. I wanted to be an
[01:46] (106.16s)
engineer and I grew up right when home
[01:48] (108.48s)
computers were beginning and so I
[01:50] (110.24s)
actually wrote Apple a letter, a
[01:52] (112.48s)
physical letter pre- email and said,
[01:54] (114.56s)
"Hey, I want to come work at your
[01:55] (115.84s)
company. how do I do that? And they
[01:57] (117.76s)
explained to me that at that time they
[01:59] (119.36s)
only hired engineers from five
[02:01] (121.28s)
universities. Uh Stanford, Caltech,
[02:03] (123.52s)
Berkeley, all in California. I was in
[02:05] (125.44s)
Ohio, so that seemed far. Uh Carnegie
[02:07] (127.84s)
Melon and MIT. I didn't get admitted to
[02:10] (130.24s)
MIT. I did go to Carnegie Melon. And so
[02:12] (132.80s)
I was like on this plan of I will go
[02:14] (134.64s)
work at Apple. What actually happened is
[02:17] (137.04s)
uh I did a master's degree at Purdue and
[02:19] (139.20s)
then I started going through startups
[02:22] (142.32s)
basically all with a thread of
[02:24] (144.08s)
high-speed networking. So the first
[02:26] (146.16s)
company was a physical layer networking.
[02:28] (148.88s)
Had an incredible run there. Got
[02:30] (150.40s)
promoted a couple times, not unlike your
[02:32] (152.56s)
early story. Then I joined an internet
[02:36] (156.08s)
search firm that was acquired by LIOS,
[02:38] (158.16s)
one of the original search engines. From
[02:40] (160.40s)
there I went to a network management
[02:41] (161.92s)
company that worked at the management
[02:44] (164.00s)
layer of large networks for Telos. From
[02:46] (166.64s)
there I went to internet advertising and
[02:48] (168.80s)
audio streaming. The internet couldn't
[02:50] (170.96s)
handle video at that point. I had a
[02:52] (172.80s)
short detour at a company that made
[02:55] (175.20s)
lighting, entertainment lighting, like
[02:57] (177.28s)
dance club stuff. Uh, which an
[02:59] (179.20s)
interesting detour. And then Amazon
[03:01] (181.44s)
hired me and asked me to build Prime
[03:04] (184.00s)
Video based on the the work I had done
[03:08] (188.24s)
streaming uh music. And so there is a a
[03:11] (191.76s)
chain of one after the other, but the
[03:14] (194.40s)
startups were all very different, you
[03:17] (197.12s)
know, very small, very high growth. And
[03:20] (200.00s)
candidly, most of them other than the
[03:21] (201.76s)
first one flamed out right before the
[03:24] (204.00s)
dot. And that's also where I managed to
[03:26] (206.32s)
get myself made redundant twice. So it
[03:28] (208.88s)
wasn't just once, it was really twice.
[03:31] (211.28s)
Both times helped along by the fact that
[03:33] (213.76s)
I was abrasive.
[03:35] (215.20s)
I'm kind of curious cuz a lot of people
[03:37] (217.44s)
early in career, there's the decision
[03:40] (220.08s)
between going to smaller companies
[03:42] (222.00s)
versus more established ones. What was
[03:44] (224.24s)
your thinking behind working at
[03:45] (225.84s)
startups? Well, like a lot of people, I
[03:47] (227.68s)
guess my original thinking was driven by
[03:50] (230.24s)
my friends. I had friends who had joined
[03:52] (232.32s)
this startup that was local to Carnegie
[03:54] (234.96s)
Melon in Pittsburgh. It was founded by
[03:56] (236.72s)
some professors who'd left. Uh they were
[03:59] (239.04s)
talking about how cool it was and they
[04:00] (240.64s)
were getting me things called stock
[04:02] (242.00s)
options, which at that time, because I'm
[04:04] (244.16s)
older, no one I'd never heard of and
[04:06] (246.32s)
they were explaining it. I'm like, "Wow,
[04:08] (248.08s)
that seems amazing." And so, it wasn't
[04:10] (250.72s)
really a conscious choice of small or
[04:13] (253.52s)
big. It was this apparent gold mine and
[04:16] (256.40s)
my roommate who had joined a little
[04:18] (258.24s)
earlier. So my college roommate who then
[04:20] (260.80s)
was my roommate when I started in in his
[04:22] (262.72s)
company also he joined a little earlier
[04:24] (264.72s)
than I did. He joined before that
[04:26] (266.32s)
company IPOed and he made his first
[04:29] (269.36s)
million dollars by the time he was 25 or
[04:31] (271.84s)
26 with inflation. Now that would be
[04:34] (274.56s)
like two or three million. You know it
[04:36] (276.64s)
worked incredibly well. It was the
[04:38] (278.48s)
startup dream. I joined a little later.
[04:40] (280.72s)
I only made enough money to put a down
[04:43] (283.04s)
payment on a house. But still, I think
[04:45] (285.52s)
the real estate agent was pretty
[04:46] (286.96s)
surprised when I was probably 25 and,
[04:51] (291.12s)
you know, putting cash down on a house.
[04:53] (293.84s)
I went that way because that's where my
[04:55] (295.52s)
friends went. It wasn't until later that
[04:58] (298.32s)
I really started understanding what does
[05:00] (300.08s)
a career look like and making
[05:01] (301.52s)
intentional choices.
[05:02] (302.88s)
You mentioned being made redundant twice
[05:05] (305.12s)
or I assume that means exiting the
[05:06] (306.96s)
company,
[05:07] (307.76s)
let go, laid off. Yeah. You mentioned it
[05:10] (310.40s)
was because you were abrasive. Did you
[05:12] (312.40s)
see it coming? And what's the story
[05:14] (314.64s)
behind uh those layoffs?
[05:16] (316.48s)
Oh, I'd love to tell you I saw it
[05:18] (318.08s)
coming. It's not that people didn't try
[05:20] (320.08s)
and warn me. My very first performance
[05:22] (322.08s)
review I ever got, my manager said, I
[05:25] (325.76s)
think sometimes Ethan's solution to
[05:28] (328.16s)
problems would be, "Let's knock their
[05:30] (330.32s)
heads together." You know, so I was I
[05:32] (332.64s)
was pretty combative. He saw it. I
[05:34] (334.88s)
didn't get let go at that company, but
[05:37] (337.20s)
you know, this was a consistent theme. I
[05:39] (339.20s)
used to say uh you probably know the the
[05:41] (341.68s)
phrase, "Oh, that person's a loose
[05:43] (343.36s)
cannon." Well, I modified it as, "Oh,
[05:45] (345.52s)
yeah, people say I'm a loose cannon, but
[05:47] (347.20s)
that's only because I'm pointed at them,
[05:49] (349.20s)
right? I'm I'm busy telling them how
[05:51] (351.36s)
wrong they are." Uh, so obviously that
[05:53] (353.44s)
whole statement, I'm busy telling them
[05:54] (354.88s)
how wrong they are, is very arrogant.
[05:56] (356.80s)
That was me. So, as I went up in
[05:59] (359.28s)
leadership levels, I rose based on
[06:01] (361.92s)
ability and and jumping into projects. I
[06:04] (364.88s)
rose to a vice president in startup
[06:07] (367.44s)
level. But then I had conflict with my
[06:09] (369.92s)
peers. The first peer was a product guy.
[06:13] (373.12s)
He was basically saying, "We are
[06:15] (375.20s)
dreaming that we're going to build all
[06:16] (376.64s)
the things we're going to build in the
[06:18] (378.32s)
time we're going to build them." He was
[06:20] (380.32s)
predicting that our product was
[06:21] (381.92s)
impossible to put together with the time
[06:24] (384.00s)
and resources we had. He was actually
[06:26] (386.32s)
right. I was fantasizing. I I was mad
[06:29] (389.68s)
that he wasn't committed to the mission.
[06:31] (391.68s)
So, I ended up fighting with him because
[06:33] (393.84s)
he was saying something that was true,
[06:35] (395.84s)
but it wasn't lined up with my religion,
[06:38] (398.32s)
which is, "But we're a startup team
[06:40] (400.00s)
together. We're gonna do it." And he was
[06:42] (402.24s)
pushing back on that enthusiasm. So, we
[06:45] (405.20s)
argued that company hit hard times. I
[06:48] (408.32s)
wasn't let go only because of that, but
[06:51] (411.92s)
we were downsizing and I had an
[06:54] (414.64s)
opportunity at another startup. And so
[06:56] (416.80s)
part of what I did is I talked to the
[06:58] (418.32s)
CEO and I said, 'Look, I have the chance
[07:00] (420.80s)
to just bounce to this other startup and
[07:03] (423.44s)
you can save someone else. And he's
[07:06] (426.08s)
like, "That sounds great." Well, in
[07:07] (427.60s)
hindsight, of course, he was probably
[07:08] (428.96s)
also pretty glad to get rid of the
[07:11] (431.36s)
contention in his team. Fast forward to
[07:13] (433.44s)
the next startup, classic situation. I
[07:15] (435.68s)
was leading engineering and the sales
[07:18] (438.64s)
VP, we were short on money because it
[07:21] (441.28s)
was the.com bus. The sales VP was lying
[07:23] (443.68s)
about what the product would do. He was
[07:25] (445.68s)
talking it up and making a sale based on
[07:27] (447.68s)
stuff we hadn't built. And of course, as
[07:29] (449.60s)
the head of engineering, I'm like, we
[07:31] (451.04s)
don't we can't, you know, I was arguing
[07:32] (452.32s)
with him about we can't do that. The
[07:34] (454.08s)
thing I didn't realize was it was either
[07:36] (456.72s)
sign that contract or go out of
[07:38] (458.32s)
business. And so, you know, the the fact
[07:40] (460.72s)
is the truthfulness there matters, but
[07:44] (464.56s)
he needed to promise the sun, the moon,
[07:46] (466.64s)
and the stars, and then we would have to
[07:48] (468.32s)
do our best to deliver it or go under.
[07:50] (470.96s)
Well, again, in that case, I really was
[07:54] (474.16s)
um let go and it was technically a
[07:57] (477.36s)
layoff, but I was the only person laid
[07:59] (479.60s)
off in the layoff. So, they called it a
[08:02] (482.24s)
layoff. They presented it to me as a
[08:03] (483.84s)
layoff, but you know, you're the only
[08:05] (485.36s)
one in the room being laid off. I'd call
[08:07] (487.04s)
that being fired. That was 100% about
[08:09] (489.92s)
removing conflict. So, you asked, did I
[08:12] (492.40s)
see it coming? The important thing I
[08:13] (493.84s)
would say is no, but after it happened
[08:15] (495.92s)
twice, I damn sure looked at like, who's
[08:18] (498.08s)
the common element in this? it's me and
[08:21] (501.12s)
why why is that? And while I was sitting
[08:23] (503.52s)
around in a in a bad period of the
[08:25] (505.36s)
economy trying to find a new job and
[08:27] (507.28s)
struggling to do so, I absolutely asked
[08:29] (509.68s)
what do I need to change? What do I need
[08:31] (511.60s)
to be do differently? And so it was
[08:33] (513.60s)
after that I completely yeah completely
[08:36] (516.48s)
I very significantly changed my
[08:38] (518.56s)
personality. I changed how I interacted
[08:41] (521.12s)
at work to not get into you know
[08:43] (523.92s)
arguments and shouting matches with
[08:45] (525.60s)
people. Now I just handle those very
[08:47] (527.68s)
differently. I ask questions. I listen.
[08:49] (529.52s)
People don't steamroll me, but I don't
[08:52] (532.16s)
escalate confrontation.
[08:53] (533.84s)
You mentioned that, you know, soft
[08:56] (536.08s)
skills obviously became an important
[08:58] (538.88s)
part of you being a leader, but when you
[09:01] (541.12s)
were earlier in your career, you were a
[09:02] (542.72s)
little bit more abrasive. You kind of
[09:04] (544.08s)
went in the direction that you thought
[09:05] (545.84s)
was right. No one would doubt that soft
[09:08] (548.80s)
skills are important, but I'm kind of
[09:10] (550.24s)
curious like early career. Do you think
[09:12] (552.72s)
being abrasive and super aggressive on
[09:15] (555.36s)
your direction was actually better or do
[09:18] (558.32s)
you think it would have been even better
[09:20] (560.32s)
if you had soft skills? I mean, I think
[09:22] (562.48s)
if I had had soft skills with that
[09:24] (564.48s)
energy, it would have been the best. But
[09:27] (567.12s)
even today, I tell people, look, you
[09:30] (570.48s)
have to be somewhat pushy. The best
[09:33] (573.44s)
phrase someone recently taught me or
[09:36] (576.72s)
used, they called it being strategically
[09:40] (580.16s)
annoying. And I like that because
[09:42] (582.40s)
annoying isn't as bad as abrasive or
[09:44] (584.88s)
confrontational, but it gets at that you
[09:48] (588.48s)
can't just be compliant or helpful.
[09:51] (591.20s)
You've got to have an opinion and be
[09:54] (594.24s)
willing to fight for it. It's really a
[09:57] (597.20s)
question of how do you fight? I was
[09:59] (599.36s)
fighting more in the classic way of
[10:01] (601.52s)
getting red in the face or raising my
[10:03] (603.60s)
voice or using critical terms of like
[10:05] (605.84s)
that's a dumb idea. There are better
[10:08] (608.32s)
ways to argue or to debate and I was
[10:12] (612.48s)
doing it the bad way. I think I got away
[10:14] (614.64s)
with that for a long time because I was
[10:16] (616.64s)
right many times uh or driven. But
[10:19] (619.84s)
ultimately the best way is to have the
[10:21] (621.44s)
skills to do that. Well, you mentioned
[10:23] (623.52s)
in some of your writing that when you
[10:26] (626.00s)
lost your job as a VP at the startup
[10:28] (628.64s)
that one of the big sources was sneaky
[10:31] (631.44s)
corporate politics and let's say you
[10:34] (634.48s)
someone was in a leadership role and
[10:36] (636.08s)
they want to kind of get ahead of that.
[10:37] (637.92s)
What's the story behind the politics
[10:39] (639.84s)
there and how do you do it right or how
[10:41] (641.68s)
do you do it well to prevent that kind
[10:43] (643.60s)
of situation?
[10:45] (645.12s)
Well, there's two things going on.
[10:46] (646.80s)
First, when you're loud and abrasive and
[10:48] (648.64s)
confrontational, if you are, if you push
[10:51] (651.20s)
too hard, people who disagree with you
[10:54] (654.00s)
will stop telling you. They'll just stop
[10:56] (656.64s)
talking to you and start talking to
[10:58] (658.16s)
others about you instead. So, you want
[11:00] (660.16s)
to be careful when you are strategically
[11:03] (663.60s)
annoying that you aren't so much in
[11:06] (666.56s)
people's faces that you shut them down
[11:09] (669.44s)
and they go behind your back instead.
[11:11] (671.52s)
So, I kind of cause those situations by
[11:14] (674.00s)
causing people to say, "This guy's
[11:15] (675.36s)
crazy. we'll just go see if we can get
[11:17] (677.04s)
him removed. The second thing is I
[11:19] (679.28s)
didn't build enough alliances with
[11:21] (681.84s)
others. So let's say I disagreed with
[11:24] (684.16s)
person A very strongly. I didn't have
[11:27] (687.36s)
enough alliances or close enough
[11:29] (689.04s)
relationships with B, C, and D so that
[11:31] (691.76s)
when A would go to them, they would tell
[11:34] (694.16s)
me. Instead, when A went to them,
[11:36] (696.08s)
they're like, "Yeah, we see he's a
[11:37] (697.76s)
problem." And you know, it became,
[11:39] (699.52s)
again, I literally dug my own grave in
[11:42] (702.00s)
hindsight. And what I would say you need
[11:45] (705.04s)
to do is yes how you interact with
[11:47] (707.52s)
person A matters having the social
[11:49] (709.36s)
skills there but the other part is
[11:51] (711.68s)
building your set of allies or at least
[11:54] (714.00s)
people who respect you enough to include
[11:56] (716.08s)
you in the conversation and I failed to
[11:58] (718.32s)
do that. I didn't realize as an engineer
[12:00] (720.88s)
and I think many engineers fall into
[12:02] (722.56s)
this. We think that being right is what
[12:04] (724.88s)
matters and we don't realize that
[12:06] (726.96s)
relationships and how other people feel
[12:08] (728.80s)
about it matters just as much. Even to
[12:12] (732.08s)
the point where people will pick a worse
[12:13] (733.84s)
solution that feels more comfortable.
[12:15] (735.68s)
That happens all the time.
[12:17] (737.28s)
It sounds like you got repeated feedback
[12:20] (740.08s)
through situations that happened in your
[12:22] (742.08s)
career early where soft skills might
[12:24] (744.32s)
have been something that could have been
[12:25] (745.92s)
better and later in your career it
[12:27] (747.92s)
sounded like it was one of your
[12:28] (748.96s)
strengths. So I'm curious what made you
[12:31] (751.28s)
flip the switch?
[12:32] (752.56s)
Yeah, it is this incident of being let
[12:34] (754.40s)
go the second time where I was a layoff
[12:36] (756.24s)
of one. It was more direct than the
[12:38] (758.72s)
first time I left a company. It was very
[12:40] (760.88s)
pointed and I also had trouble because
[12:43] (763.44s)
it was right after 911 and and sort of
[12:45] (765.92s)
the first dot bubble. I had trouble
[12:48] (768.40s)
finding another job. And so that really
[12:51] (771.36s)
there was an interviewer. I was at an
[12:53] (773.76s)
interview and I was telling the story of
[12:56] (776.08s)
all my accomplishments and trying to get
[12:57] (777.76s)
the job. And he said, "Everything you
[12:59] (779.44s)
say sounds fine, but I just really
[13:01] (781.12s)
struggle to believe that if you were
[13:02] (782.88s)
that valuable, these companies, even
[13:04] (784.88s)
though they were struggling, wouldn't
[13:06] (786.16s)
have found a way to keep you around."
[13:07] (787.92s)
And I actually realized he was kind of
[13:09] (789.44s)
right. Like if I were that valuable,
[13:11] (791.60s)
they'd have kept me around. And so I
[13:13] (793.68s)
asked that caused me to think, okay,
[13:16] (796.08s)
what's the gap? The gap isn't my
[13:17] (797.92s)
technical skills. It isn't my ability to
[13:19] (799.84s)
drive and get projects done. It's my
[13:21] (801.68s)
ability to work well, play well with
[13:23] (803.44s)
others. And so then I got deeply into
[13:26] (806.48s)
and I recommend this to people, the
[13:28] (808.56s)
psychology of work and what motivates
[13:31] (811.92s)
people. Of course, how to interact, how
[13:34] (814.48s)
to ask questions, how to draw people in.
[13:37] (817.12s)
Um, as an engineer, we love, we're
[13:39] (819.60s)
taught in school to make statements. The
[13:42] (822.08s)
statement is the answer is this, the
[13:43] (823.76s)
method is that, the code should be this,
[13:45] (825.76s)
as opposed to ask questions. Once I sort
[13:48] (828.40s)
of realize, oh, look, this works. I can
[13:51] (831.84s)
lead and motivate people and inspire
[13:53] (833.84s)
them and and this is a fun puzzle. Then
[13:57] (837.28s)
I was hooked. And so now I study it kind
[14:00] (840.16s)
of full-time in a way. I saw, you know,
[14:02] (842.88s)
after you kind of worked at some
[14:04] (844.72s)
startups, you decided to move across the
[14:08] (848.24s)
country and take the job at Amazon,
[14:10] (850.88s)
which is pretty big move. I'm kind of
[14:12] (852.88s)
curious what the story is behind that
[14:15] (855.52s)
move and how did you know it was worth
[14:17] (857.52s)
joining Amazon?
[14:19] (859.04s)
This is a fun story I don't know if I've
[14:20] (860.48s)
ever told. I was working at that search
[14:23] (863.12s)
engine, LOS, and Los had a partnership
[14:26] (866.80s)
with Barnes & Noble. Barnes & Noble knew
[14:30] (870.32s)
nothing about being online at that
[14:31] (871.92s)
point, but they wanted to be. And so
[14:35] (875.04s)
they partnered with this online company
[14:37] (877.76s)
and part of my job was to figure out why
[14:41] (881.36s)
they were losing to Amazon. So I had
[14:43] (883.52s)
some calls with some people at Barnes &
[14:45] (885.04s)
Noble. I talked to them and what they
[14:46] (886.96s)
were doing and what they could do and
[14:48] (888.16s)
what they couldn't do. And so I learned
[14:50] (890.08s)
about Amazon by viewing them as a
[14:51] (891.92s)
competitor to our partner. And that's
[14:54] (894.00s)
what taught me like, oh, this Amazon
[14:55] (895.84s)
company is completely different, way
[14:57] (897.76s)
ahead of what was called bricks and
[15:00] (900.24s)
mortar, right? Like the physical world.
[15:02] (902.96s)
Then when Amazon called me, because they
[15:05] (905.60s)
actually reached out, a recruiter
[15:07] (907.36s)
reached out, I was able to talk about
[15:10] (910.00s)
how I knew Amazon as this competitor to
[15:13] (913.68s)
Barnes & Noble and how I had been
[15:15] (915.28s)
impressed and what I had done with
[15:16] (916.72s)
Barnes & Noble to try and help them
[15:18] (918.24s)
compete and how hopeless that looked.
[15:20] (920.80s)
And I think that probably appealed to
[15:22] (922.40s)
Amazon of like, okay, this guy is seeing
[15:24] (924.96s)
where we're going. As for taking a risk,
[15:28] (928.16s)
you know, I was at yet another startup
[15:30] (930.16s)
that was struggling with product market
[15:32] (932.56s)
fit and funding, and Amazon wasn't. So,
[15:35] (935.60s)
there was both the the being impressed
[15:38] (938.40s)
with them, but also being sick. You
[15:41] (941.12s)
know, Amazon was had IPOed at that
[15:44] (944.24s)
point, was a public company. They were
[15:46] (946.24s)
not profitable, but they still looked
[15:48] (948.72s)
they were 10,000 people, which now
[15:51] (951.12s)
they're way over a million, right? So
[15:52] (952.72s)
10,000 seems quite small. But to me,
[15:55] (955.60s)
working in firms of dozens or hundreds,
[15:58] (958.48s)
it was like, oh my god, this has got to
[16:00] (960.24s)
be stable. Look how big it is.
[16:02] (962.24s)
You know, when you when you got to
[16:03] (963.28s)
Amazon, I saw you were hired in as a,
[16:05] (965.28s)
you know, senior manager and eventually
[16:07] (967.44s)
you got promoted to um, you know,
[16:10] (970.16s)
director first and then later to a VP. I
[16:12] (972.96s)
think like there's not a lot of
[16:14] (974.64s)
information on what those jumps even
[16:16] (976.96s)
look like. So, I'm curious, you know,
[16:19] (979.28s)
for instance, the promotion to director.
[16:21] (981.92s)
What What is even the the expectations
[16:24] (984.48s)
like what does a promo like that even
[16:26] (986.16s)
look like?
[16:26] (986.80s)
It's interesting. Times have changed.
[16:29] (989.12s)
Amazon was smaller. I remember seeing
[16:31] (991.60s)
the paperwork to become a director and
[16:34] (994.00s)
the paperwork said to be a director in
[16:36] (996.32s)
Amazon, this person should be one of the
[16:38] (998.56s)
100 most important leaders in Amazon.
[16:41] (1001.44s)
But of course it was already outdated
[16:42] (1002.96s)
and there were well over a hundred
[16:44] (1004.48s)
directors uh when I when you know when I
[16:47] (1007.04s)
saw this. So things were moving fast
[16:49] (1009.44s)
because it was a hyperrowth company.
[16:51] (1011.44s)
What they were looking for specifically
[16:54] (1014.24s)
was someone who could lead a business or
[16:56] (1016.88s)
an effort on their own that only needed
[17:00] (1020.08s)
highlevel goals. And in my case my
[17:03] (1023.76s)
promotion specifically came from some
[17:06] (1026.96s)
good luck and a good decision. So I
[17:09] (1029.52s)
could then I think this is common
[17:11] (1031.44s)
promotions either happen as what I call
[17:14] (1034.16s)
lifetime achievement awards. Someone's
[17:16] (1036.32s)
there and they do good work and they do
[17:17] (1037.76s)
good work and eventually the process
[17:19] (1039.52s)
grinds away or they have an outsiz
[17:21] (1041.76s)
event. In my case, two things worked in
[17:23] (1043.84s)
my favor. The first is there was a
[17:25] (1045.68s)
project that came up. I made a very
[17:28] (1048.00s)
high-risk call. My management disagreed
[17:31] (1051.36s)
with doing the project, but they had
[17:33] (1053.28s)
told me show that you can be the leader.
[17:35] (1055.52s)
So, I specifically said to my SVP, I
[17:38] (1058.32s)
said, "Unless you order me not to do
[17:40] (1060.88s)
this, double negative. Unless you order
[17:42] (1062.88s)
me not to do this, I'm going to do it."
[17:44] (1064.72s)
And he's like, "Great. Hang yourself."
[17:46] (1066.64s)
Well, I built the project and it worked.
[17:48] (1068.64s)
And it turned out to be a big success.
[17:50] (1070.64s)
So, in my eventual promotion, the key
[17:52] (1072.88s)
line was it was a partnership with Teo,
[17:56] (1076.08s)
the DVR company. The key line was
[17:59] (1079.04s)
without Ethan, we wouldn't have had Teo.
[18:01] (1081.28s)
So I kind of made my chops on being a
[18:05] (1085.68s)
high judgment decision maker who could
[18:07] (1087.60s)
make things happen. The second thing is
[18:10] (1090.56s)
my VP in between level uh was leaving. I
[18:14] (1094.88s)
had gone to him and said look I want to
[18:17] (1097.92s)
be promoted to director and I had
[18:20] (1100.08s)
threatened to leave very politely if I
[18:22] (1102.80s)
wasn't promoted. Well, it was going to
[18:25] (1105.60s)
make him look really bad if he left and
[18:27] (1107.36s)
I left cuz the project would fall apart
[18:29] (1109.36s)
as opposed to being threatened by my
[18:30] (1110.96s)
threat in a way. He had pressure to like
[18:32] (1112.88s)
make sure he secured me. And the
[18:34] (1114.72s)
specific words I use are interesting.
[18:37] (1117.12s)
When I threatened, the learn soft
[18:39] (1119.68s)
skills. I was very careful. And the
[18:41] (1121.76s)
words I use, I said, well, my career is
[18:44] (1124.40s)
very important to me, which no one can
[18:46] (1126.56s)
argue with that. my career is very
[18:48] (1128.48s)
important to me and I need to know if
[18:50] (1130.96s)
it's as important to Amazon because if
[18:54] (1134.08s)
it's not as important to Amazon as it is
[18:56] (1136.24s)
to me I have to think about that and of
[18:59] (1139.12s)
course you can hear the like hey take
[19:02] (1142.48s)
care of me or I'm out but I never said
[19:05] (1145.20s)
anything that someone could be like
[19:07] (1147.36s)
screw you you can't threaten us I just
[19:09] (1149.20s)
said my career is really important to me
[19:10] (1150.64s)
and if it's not as important to you you
[19:12] (1152.96s)
know as the representative of Amazon
[19:14] (1154.56s)
then I need to think about that it's led
[19:16] (1156.48s)
me to the philos philosophy that you can
[19:18] (1158.08s)
find polite and civil ways to raise any
[19:21] (1161.60s)
topic. And so my promotion came because
[19:24] (1164.96s)
I proved I could lead a business and
[19:27] (1167.60s)
move Amazon video forward and because I
[19:30] (1170.96s)
again strategically annoying. I was
[19:33] (1173.52s)
willing to put pressure on it. That boss
[19:35] (1175.84s)
wouldn't have done anything if I hadn't
[19:37] (1177.52s)
been pushing. He wasn't the sort of guy
[19:39] (1179.20s)
who was just like, "Oh, I should
[19:40] (1180.40s)
probably promote Ethan." It was 100%
[19:42] (1182.72s)
because I put the squeeze on. I was
[19:44] (1184.24s)
like, "Well, up or out." That wording is
[19:46] (1186.88s)
is so it's it's subtle, but it's so
[19:50] (1190.00s)
good. You know, I could imagine that
[19:52] (1192.08s)
have gone way worse if you had said, "I
[19:54] (1194.96s)
need this promotion. You need to help
[19:56] (1196.96s)
me." Rather than kind of implying it and
[19:59] (1199.84s)
being polite with the wording. And I
[20:02] (1202.24s)
think I've seen in many people's uh
[20:04] (1204.96s)
careers as well that sometimes their
[20:07] (1207.20s)
growth comes from being politely pushy.
[20:09] (1209.84s)
You know, maybe they not exactly
[20:11] (1211.76s)
threatened to leave, but it's it's clear
[20:13] (1213.60s)
that they're asking for something and
[20:16] (1216.32s)
the manager feels the demand of that.
[20:19] (1219.28s)
Not in a stressful way, but just in a
[20:22] (1222.08s)
when they're thinking of who to promote,
[20:23] (1223.60s)
they kind of that's the first person on
[20:25] (1225.52s)
their short list because they're asking.
[20:27] (1227.60s)
As a leader, you know, people won't like
[20:30] (1230.24s)
to hear this. It's I I believe in
[20:32] (1232.56s)
telling the straight truth. It's one of
[20:34] (1234.24s)
my tagline. As a leader, there have been
[20:36] (1236.48s)
times where I have had two equally
[20:38] (1238.56s)
qualified people on my team uh or you
[20:40] (1240.88s)
know approximately equal and one of them
[20:42] (1242.96s)
is agitating for the promotion and
[20:45] (1245.28s)
threatening to leave and the other is a
[20:47] (1247.60s)
nice person who's willing to wait and so
[20:50] (1250.00s)
they wait. And a lot of people say,
[20:51] (1251.84s)
"Well, you just rewarded the jerk."
[20:53] (1253.60s)
Maybe, but I had a triage. I'm going to
[20:56] (1256.64s)
get one promotion done this quarter or
[20:58] (1258.96s)
this year because it takes work and you
[21:02] (1262.08s)
only need so many leaders at the next
[21:03] (1263.68s)
level. and I have a very realistic
[21:05] (1265.60s)
choice of move up this person and keep
[21:08] (1268.40s)
them even though I'm a little bit being
[21:10] (1270.32s)
held hostage or move up this person and
[21:13] (1273.52s)
lose the other one. I'd like to tell you
[21:15] (1275.60s)
I always did the right thing and you
[21:17] (1277.84s)
know help the team player, but I I can't
[21:20] (1280.48s)
actually tell you that's true and I
[21:22] (1282.32s)
certainly wouldn't tell you other
[21:23] (1283.52s)
leaders do that because we have to think
[21:26] (1286.32s)
about our short-term problems to some
[21:28] (1288.48s)
degree and it's not a perfect world. And
[21:31] (1291.28s)
so, yeah, if you're that person who's
[21:33] (1293.04s)
expecting to be rewarded because you're
[21:35] (1295.76s)
the silent hard worker who's always
[21:38] (1298.16s)
collaborative, you know, maybe you
[21:39] (1299.76s)
dislike me for it and you're like, well,
[21:42] (1302.16s)
you sound like a bad boss. I'm actually
[21:44] (1304.96s)
willing to tell you the truth and tell
[21:47] (1307.20s)
you that almost everyone's doing what
[21:48] (1308.80s)
I'm doing. They're just not telling you.
[21:50] (1310.64s)
So, I don't know, bad, good, it's the
[21:52] (1312.80s)
reality. you mentioned in your promotion
[21:55] (1315.28s)
story, you said explicitly there's a
[21:58] (1318.00s)
wording in your promo packet or
[21:59] (1319.68s)
somewhere that said, you know, X would
[22:01] (1321.92s)
not have happened unless Ethan was
[22:04] (1324.40s)
there. And I think that's a really
[22:07] (1327.60s)
important distinction when it comes to,
[22:10] (1330.96s)
you know, crediting and and stuff like
[22:12] (1332.72s)
that and promos. There's a lot of people
[22:14] (1334.56s)
in big companies, there's multiple
[22:16] (1336.08s)
people involved and, you know, people
[22:18] (1338.08s)
ask, should I hoard it so that I get
[22:19] (1339.92s)
credit or what? But really all that you
[22:22] (1342.16s)
need is that that narrative is obvious.
[22:24] (1344.40s)
If we pull Ethan out of this, that
[22:26] (1346.56s)
wouldn't have happened. And if that
[22:28] (1348.24s)
narrative is true, you get credit. And
[22:31] (1351.12s)
that's often what drives these these
[22:33] (1353.04s)
promos.
[22:33] (1353.76s)
You know, if that project would have
[22:34] (1354.96s)
just been fine, it wouldn't have hurt
[22:36] (1356.88s)
me. I might not have gotten promoted,
[22:38] (1358.56s)
but it wouldn't have hurt me. But if it
[22:40] (1360.80s)
had blown up, I was the one who pushed
[22:44] (1364.08s)
for it over the leadership's not
[22:47] (1367.76s)
disagreement but advice not to do it.
[22:51] (1371.20s)
And so had had I gone against that
[22:53] (1373.68s)
advice and then it been a big disaster,
[22:56] (1376.16s)
you know, that that could have very
[22:57] (1377.92s)
easily cut the other way, which I think
[23:00] (1380.24s)
gets the part of the point. If you want
[23:01] (1381.92s)
to grow rapidly, you're going to have to
[23:03] (1383.28s)
take some risks. But the risks are
[23:05] (1385.20s)
recoverable. Remember, I was also a jerk
[23:07] (1387.76s)
earlier in my career and lost some roles
[23:10] (1390.48s)
and I still became an Amazon VP. Like
[23:13] (1393.28s)
venture capital, taking some risks and
[23:17] (1397.12s)
having some of them work out and some of
[23:18] (1398.88s)
them fail still moves you forward faster
[23:22] (1402.00s)
than always playing it safe. And if I
[23:24] (1404.40s)
have any one regret, it's actually that
[23:26] (1406.80s)
I didn't take more risk. I could have
[23:29] (1409.44s)
gone further. I think like if I had my
[23:31] (1411.60s)
career to do over again, I'd probably
[23:33] (1413.12s)
take a lot more risk. By the time I was
[23:35] (1415.44s)
trying to become a vice president, I had
[23:37] (1417.52s)
been at Amazon a long time, I finally
[23:40] (1420.64s)
truly understood how everything worked.
[23:43] (1423.20s)
And that was a longded process where I
[23:47] (1427.04s)
lined up stakeholders. I got my manager
[23:49] (1429.84s)
on board to support me. You know, I had
[23:52] (1432.24s)
a good relationship with my manager,
[23:54] (1434.16s)
something a lot of people struggle with.
[23:55] (1435.60s)
I was lucky enough that my vice
[23:58] (1438.56s)
president was stable in his role for
[24:02] (1442.24s)
about 2 and 1/2 to 3 years while we
[24:04] (1444.96s)
worked the process. My timing was good
[24:07] (1447.44s)
because he was reorged within 6 months
[24:10] (1450.32s)
and after that. So had I been just 6
[24:13] (1453.52s)
months later, I'd have had a new boss
[24:15] (1455.36s)
and it would have, you know, been a
[24:16] (1456.88s)
setback for sure, you know, rebuilding
[24:19] (1459.20s)
trust and all that. So I can go more
[24:21] (1461.68s)
deeply into it. The big thing I did
[24:24] (1464.00s)
there is I've developed this idea I call
[24:26] (1466.16s)
the magic loop which is working with
[24:28] (1468.48s)
your leader, your manager to figure out
[24:31] (1471.12s)
what they need you to do and then form a
[24:33] (1473.84s)
partnership with them that amounts to
[24:36] (1476.96s)
I'll do everything you need done. You do
[24:39] (1479.68s)
you do one critical thing which is make
[24:41] (1481.76s)
sure I'm rewarded for it. And that's our
[24:43] (1483.92s)
deal is I can either work for you as a
[24:46] (1486.40s)
standard cog in a box or I can really
[24:49] (1489.52s)
push and go above and beyond, but
[24:51] (1491.84s)
there's got to be a payoff and and can
[24:53] (1493.84s)
we line up and agree to that? And my
[24:55] (1495.60s)
manager, I remember he came to me one
[24:58] (1498.16s)
day, my vice president said, "Okay, I'm
[25:00] (1500.80s)
going to try and get your VP promotion
[25:02] (1502.88s)
through this cycle. I'm going to do
[25:05] (1505.60s)
everything I can. I can't promise you
[25:08] (1508.24s)
anything." But he was at a place where
[25:10] (1510.24s)
he's like, "Okay, we're gonna take the
[25:12] (1512.40s)
shot. I'm gonna lay my reputation on
[25:14] (1514.64s)
it." And I had, it took two and a half
[25:17] (1517.04s)
years to get him to where he was ready
[25:19] (1519.76s)
to put his credibility down. Uh, luckily
[25:22] (1522.24s)
that paid off, right? We both got it
[25:24] (1524.00s)
done. He was happy, I was happy.
[25:26] (1526.08s)
That partnership makes a lot of natural
[25:28] (1528.56s)
sense. I mean, you help your manager,
[25:31] (1531.04s)
your manager helps you, and they want
[25:33] (1533.20s)
you to grow. People think managers are
[25:36] (1536.00s)
withholding promotions at any level.
[25:38] (1538.40s)
That's not true. Speaking as a vice
[25:40] (1540.56s)
president, I want all the directors I
[25:42] (1542.96s)
can have because the better my team is,
[25:46] (1546.24s)
the easier my job is. So, I want high
[25:49] (1549.36s)
performers. I want you to be good
[25:51] (1551.36s)
enough. I want you to have the skills,
[25:53] (1553.44s)
but I can't do that for you. So, people
[25:55] (1555.52s)
say, "Why didn't you promote me?" And
[25:56] (1556.96s)
I'm like, "You did not promote yourself.
[25:58] (1558.96s)
You did not get there." If you can get
[26:01] (1561.12s)
there, I want that. It's good for me. I
[26:03] (1563.36s)
know you have a story from, you know,
[26:05] (1565.28s)
right when you started at Amazon where
[26:07] (1567.44s)
there was a high performer on your team
[26:09] (1569.60s)
and you established that partnership
[26:11] (1571.60s)
with them, but you weren't able to get
[26:14] (1574.64s)
their promotion and they ended up
[26:16] (1576.08s)
leaving. Yeah. So, I had a star young
[26:18] (1578.96s)
engineer who uh made this deal with me
[26:22] (1582.00s)
and I made the deal in good faith. He
[26:23] (1583.92s)
said, "Oh, I will help ship our very
[26:25] (1585.60s)
first version of our product. I'll do
[26:27] (1587.12s)
whatever it takes. You get me from what
[26:28] (1588.96s)
we called SDE1, which was the new
[26:30] (1590.72s)
college higher level to SD2." And I'm
[26:32] (1592.48s)
like, great, got it. I'll do that. I had
[26:34] (1594.56s)
always worked at startups where when you
[26:36] (1596.08s)
wanted to promote someone, you just kind
[26:37] (1597.68s)
of went to your boss and maybe HR and
[26:40] (1600.00s)
said, "We should promote this guy." And
[26:41] (1601.60s)
you did it. Amazon had a process and
[26:43] (1603.68s)
they only did promotions twice a year
[26:45] (1605.36s)
and they had a cycle. Our project launch
[26:47] (1607.92s)
was a mess. Not his fault, but we had
[26:50] (1610.48s)
problems. I was busy looking at the
[26:52] (1612.64s)
problems and trying to, you know, fix
[26:54] (1614.48s)
the product. The cycle came and went.
[26:56] (1616.96s)
He's like, "Hey, where's my promotion?"
[26:58] (1618.80s)
I went and asked like, "Oh, how do we do
[27:00] (1620.32s)
this?" and they're like, "Yeah, you can
[27:01] (1621.52s)
do that in the spring, maybe." The the
[27:03] (1623.84s)
factor was my and I've written about
[27:06] (1626.00s)
this very publicly. I own it. It was my
[27:08] (1628.32s)
ignorance. And so, the problem is we
[27:10] (1630.80s)
made a deal in good faith that I didn't
[27:12] (1632.72s)
know how to keep. So, that's my error.
[27:15] (1635.84s)
The advice for someone making the deal
[27:18] (1638.80s)
is figure out is your manager a veteran?
[27:22] (1642.24s)
Do they know what they're doing? You
[27:24] (1644.08s)
know, do they understand the process or
[27:25] (1645.92s)
do you? And this is a common problem
[27:28] (1648.00s)
because people get new managers very
[27:29] (1649.76s)
often. So even if I hadn't been the
[27:32] (1652.24s)
idiot in this situation, uh it could
[27:34] (1654.32s)
have been somebody else who was hired
[27:36] (1656.40s)
in. Can do you understand the process? I
[27:39] (1659.36s)
think part of the issue is that
[27:41] (1661.04s)
engineer, which is not his fault, but he
[27:43] (1663.68s)
also didn't know. And so it was an ugly
[27:46] (1666.80s)
discovery for him like, oh, we missed
[27:49] (1669.04s)
the date and sorry. He didn't know to
[27:51] (1671.52s)
tell me like, hey, Ethan, you got to be
[27:52] (1672.96s)
doing this. you know, there's a date and
[27:54] (1674.72s)
you got now is that his responsibility?
[27:56] (1676.96s)
It's not. It was mine. But the tricky
[27:59] (1679.52s)
part is it's your life. And so if you're
[28:01] (1681.92s)
the engineer in that situation, probably
[28:03] (1683.84s)
people all know the story from scrum and
[28:06] (1686.24s)
chickens and pigs, right? The pig is
[28:08] (1688.24s)
committed. The chicken's only involved
[28:10] (1690.16s)
in the ham and eggs restaurant. The
[28:12] (1692.24s)
manager is the chicken in this. Their
[28:14] (1694.40s)
life isn't on the line. It's you. You're
[28:17] (1697.44s)
the one who's going to get hurt. So know
[28:19] (1699.28s)
the process and make sure the manager is
[28:21] (1701.36s)
like, "Okay, I'm going to do this." this
[28:22] (1702.64s)
and you're like, "Okay, well, by
[28:24] (1704.08s)
September 15th, are you going to have a
[28:25] (1705.68s)
document done?" And if they say, "Why
[28:27] (1707.44s)
does September 15th matter?" That's like
[28:29] (1709.92s)
a warning sign, right? Why does that
[28:32] (1712.16s)
matter? Oh, that's the deadline. Oh,
[28:34] (1714.32s)
there's a deadline. Like that, you know,
[28:36] (1716.32s)
that conversation would have been very
[28:37] (1717.76s)
revealing if he'd have known to have it.
[28:39] (1719.84s)
And I feel terrible about it. It's why
[28:41] (1721.20s)
I've written about it publicly is I
[28:42] (1722.48s)
don't want it to happen to anybody else.
[28:44] (1724.24s)
So, this guy left. He joined another big
[28:46] (1726.40s)
tech company. He's had an amazing career
[28:48] (1728.72s)
there. It cost him a year. And I I feel
[28:52] (1732.00s)
bad about that. But the truth is careers
[28:54] (1734.72s)
are 20, 30 years long or more. Things in
[28:57] (1737.68s)
life are going to cost you a year
[28:59] (1739.36s)
sometimes. That's not fatal. So when you
[29:02] (1742.32s)
hit that, I just wasted a year. You can
[29:05] (1745.20s)
either mope it and be depressed or you
[29:07] (1747.68s)
can move on. He moved on and was
[29:09] (1749.68s)
successful. I've moved on and been
[29:11] (1751.28s)
successful. You can you can make that
[29:13] (1753.36s)
change.
[29:14] (1754.24s)
So after you got promoted to VP, I saw
[29:16] (1756.88s)
that you switched business verticals. or
[29:19] (1759.20s)
you went to the Twitch partnerships or
[29:21] (1761.20s)
managing the Twitch partnership and then
[29:22] (1762.72s)
later into gaming. I'm curious, it
[29:25] (1765.28s)
sounds like the Twitch acquisition was
[29:26] (1766.96s)
right before you became kind of in that
[29:29] (1769.76s)
role. Were you the VP in charge of
[29:32] (1772.72s)
plugging them in or what's the story
[29:34] (1774.24s)
behind that role?
[29:35] (1775.20s)
Amazon's a big company. So, it had a
[29:37] (1777.44s)
process that every time it bought a
[29:39] (1779.04s)
company and we spent 970 million on
[29:41] (1781.68s)
Twitch, so a billion dollars. They take
[29:43] (1783.84s)
a VP and they make them kind of what
[29:47] (1787.04s)
you'd call the integration liaison, the
[29:49] (1789.44s)
the person who's going to facilitate
[29:51] (1791.60s)
making sure you get your billion dollars
[29:53] (1793.36s)
worth. The trick is they leave the CEO
[29:55] (1795.92s)
in charge. So IT Shear, we talked about,
[29:58] (1798.64s)
you know, you're aware of Imit. Imit was
[30:00] (1800.80s)
still in charge of Twitch. I was not his
[30:03] (1803.04s)
boss. Instead, I purposefully sought out
[30:05] (1805.92s)
that role. We talked about working on
[30:07] (1807.84s)
soft skills. I had become vice president
[30:10] (1810.40s)
running Amazon's app store and I had a
[30:12] (1812.16s)
team of 800. And so I was now very good
[30:14] (1814.72s)
at running a global team of hundreds of
[30:17] (1817.04s)
people. But that's where I had
[30:18] (1818.72s)
authority. I decided to challenge myself
[30:21] (1821.44s)
and go take a role where I had a goal,
[30:23] (1823.92s)
help Twitch integrate, but I had no
[30:26] (1826.40s)
authority. I was simply an advisor to
[30:29] (1829.36s)
the CEO. I had no team. And I had to
[30:32] (1832.64s)
achieve this goal without being able to
[30:34] (1834.32s)
give this guy any orders. And here's a
[30:36] (1836.16s)
guy who's just been made wealthy for
[30:38] (1838.16s)
life. He's 15 or 16 years younger than
[30:41] (1841.28s)
me. He's in a business that served
[30:44] (1844.80s)
mostly teenagers and people in their
[30:47] (1847.28s)
20s. You know, he's 33 or so. I'm late
[30:51] (1851.20s)
40s at that point. How am I going to
[30:53] (1853.36s)
influence him in how to run his sort of
[30:56] (1856.48s)
millennial Gen Z business when I'm
[30:58] (1858.72s)
neither? And I I I wanted that challenge
[31:01] (1861.28s)
to work on my soft skills. So I gave up
[31:03] (1863.92s)
the team of 800 to go figure out how to
[31:06] (1866.64s)
do this. It's a fascinating story that
[31:09] (1869.12s)
worked out really well and I really
[31:10] (1870.96s)
enjoyed working with EMTT as well as of
[31:13] (1873.68s)
course learning to live stream on Twitch
[31:15] (1875.68s)
and all kinds of stuff.
[31:17] (1877.12s)
When I see these founders with, you
[31:19] (1879.20s)
know, rocket ship trajectories, I don't
[31:21] (1881.84s)
know the exact size of Twitch at the
[31:23] (1883.60s)
time, but maybe hundreds maybe low
[31:25] (1885.60s)
thousands of employees at such a young
[31:28] (1888.00s)
age. I'm curious when you work with a a
[31:31] (1891.20s)
young founder like that as a seasoned
[31:33] (1893.44s)
manager with tons of experience. What
[31:35] (1895.52s)
are the gaps that you notice in someone
[31:37] (1897.28s)
that has such a unique management
[31:39] (1899.20s)
trajectory or are there none?
[31:41] (1901.12s)
Oh no, there were plenty of gaps. I
[31:42] (1902.96s)
think EMTT would agree with that if he
[31:44] (1904.96s)
were with here with us. We might not
[31:47] (1907.20s)
agree on what the gaps were. So first to
[31:49] (1909.68s)
give you scope, Twitch was several
[31:51] (1911.68s)
hundred employees at that point and grew
[31:55] (1915.04s)
within the next couple years to be a
[31:56] (1916.80s)
thousand. So he was on a very rocket
[31:59] (1919.60s)
trajectory. The biggest problem was
[32:02] (1922.40s)
Twitch was a classic venture funded
[32:04] (1924.56s)
company. It was bleeding cash, you know,
[32:07] (1927.44s)
at a huge rate. And in fact, one of the
[32:10] (1930.64s)
gaps was in the beginning, Emit and
[32:13] (1933.68s)
certainly members of his team didn't
[32:16] (1936.16s)
even think this was a problem. Well,
[32:18] (1938.64s)
they had always been able to get venture
[32:20] (1940.40s)
money. And now the way they originally
[32:22] (1942.32s)
looked at it, I remember people in
[32:24] (1944.96s)
Twitch on the management team looking at
[32:26] (1946.72s)
me and saying, "Well, now that Amazon's
[32:28] (1948.08s)
bought us, you guys have lots of money.
[32:30] (1950.40s)
Why do we need to worry about
[32:32] (1952.00s)
profitability or advertising? Like, why
[32:34] (1954.72s)
can't we just focus on the gaming?" And
[32:37] (1957.44s)
my job was to help move them to
[32:39] (1959.28s)
profitability. So, I'm like, "Whoa,
[32:41] (1961.12s)
Houston, we have a problem. They don't
[32:43] (1963.36s)
even see it as a worthy goal."
[32:45] (1965.52s)
Meanwhile, you know, the management
[32:46] (1966.88s)
chain above me, because I ultimately
[32:48] (1968.72s)
reported into Andy Jasse, who's now CEO
[32:51] (1971.12s)
of Amazon, he wanted profitability quite
[32:54] (1974.16s)
soon. So, you're trapped between a a
[32:56] (1976.48s)
group of people who are like, "Ah, why
[32:58] (1978.16s)
does this even matter anymore? You guys
[32:59] (1979.76s)
have all the money in the world." So,
[33:01] (1981.20s)
that was one gap. Another gap that I
[33:04] (1984.00s)
would say Emit learned the hard way over
[33:05] (1985.84s)
time, it's very easy to be loyal to your
[33:08] (1988.80s)
early employees, but not all of them can
[33:11] (1991.44s)
scale. And so Emit went through a big
[33:15] (1995.12s)
learning cycle of I'm gonna have to hire
[33:17] (1997.84s)
in somebody over this person who was
[33:20] (2000.32s)
with me from the beginning and I'm gonna
[33:22] (2002.56s)
have to explain to this person who's a
[33:24] (2004.56s)
friend of mine, love you. You're going
[33:26] (2006.88s)
to make a lot of money because your
[33:28] (2008.24s)
stock options are now Amazon shares, but
[33:30] (2010.96s)
you're not going to remain whatever
[33:33] (2013.20s)
chief product officer or fill in the
[33:36] (2016.00s)
blank. And uh that was a that was a big
[33:39] (2019.60s)
discovery I think for Emit that he had
[33:43] (2023.28s)
to replace some friends or level them
[33:45] (2025.60s)
and a few of them quit and were angry.
[33:47] (2027.68s)
You you mentioned that you reported to
[33:50] (2030.24s)
Andy Jasse the now CEO of Amazon and I
[33:53] (2033.84s)
imagine you had some proximity to Jeff
[33:55] (2035.92s)
Bezos or had been in meetings with them
[33:58] (2038.40s)
comparing and contrasting the leadership
[34:00] (2040.16s)
styles between the two. Is there
[34:02] (2042.40s)
something that stands out from each or
[34:04] (2044.88s)
maybe a story that you think illustrates
[34:07] (2047.12s)
those things?
[34:07] (2047.84s)
Yeah, so I knew Jeff pretty well. Yeah,
[34:09] (2049.76s)
I'm not going to claim he's like a best
[34:11] (2051.44s)
buddy of mine, but I've probably had
[34:12] (2052.72s)
about 50 meetings with him and about 50
[34:14] (2054.72s)
with Andy in different contexts. So, I
[34:17] (2057.12s)
know them both, you know, spending
[34:19] (2059.20s)
dozens of hours with them and working
[34:21] (2061.52s)
for them. The biggest difference is
[34:23] (2063.52s)
Jeff's the founder. And what that means
[34:25] (2065.84s)
is he can take gamles with the company
[34:28] (2068.88s)
that others won't. So, a story I
[34:31] (2071.44s)
remember is in a budget discussion, our
[34:34] (2074.56s)
chief financial officer was trying to
[34:36] (2076.80s)
slow down Jeff's spending on something
[34:39] (2079.60s)
and he said to Jeff, "Well, you know,
[34:41] (2081.60s)
Jeff, we only have so much money in the
[34:44] (2084.16s)
bank, trying to like just pump the
[34:46] (2086.08s)
brakes a little because Jeff was let's
[34:47] (2087.84s)
do this and let's do this and the price
[34:49] (2089.60s)
tag's going up." And the CFO said, "You
[34:52] (2092.16s)
know, Jeff, we only have so much money
[34:53] (2093.60s)
in the bank." And Jeff looked at him and
[34:56] (2096.00s)
this was the previous CFO to the current
[34:57] (2097.84s)
one. And he said, "Well, Tom, how much
[34:59] (2099.52s)
is that? Because I might want to spend
[35:01] (2101.36s)
it." And he was just telling his CFO
[35:03] (2103.44s)
like, "Thank you. Your job is to count
[35:05] (2105.84s)
the pennies and my job is to allocate
[35:07] (2107.92s)
them and don't don't confuse your role
[35:11] (2111.12s)
and my role." And Andy is a more classic
[35:14] (2114.80s)
I don't recall if he has an NBA. I think
[35:16] (2116.96s)
he does, but he's a more classic
[35:18] (2118.88s)
business leader. He's not going to tell
[35:21] (2121.28s)
his CFO, you know, stick a sock in it.
[35:24] (2124.48s)
That he's going to see that he has to
[35:26] (2126.00s)
partner. And that's because it's not his
[35:28] (2128.96s)
toy, right? He is the paid leader, but
[35:31] (2131.76s)
it's not his company. And that no matter
[35:34] (2134.72s)
how much I respect Andy, that's just
[35:36] (2136.88s)
very hard to get over because when it's
[35:38] (2138.56s)
your toy, Jeff definitely felt that he
[35:41] (2141.84s)
could, you know, sort of take
[35:43] (2143.60s)
metaphorically take the whole company to
[35:45] (2145.44s)
Vegas and bet it on black, right? That
[35:47] (2147.60s)
that like he had that right. I built it.
[35:50] (2150.48s)
I can do what I want with it. Whereas
[35:52] (2152.32s)
for Andy, he helped build it, but he has
[35:55] (2155.28s)
to actually do what the board wants with
[35:56] (2156.96s)
it and what Jeff wants with it. And
[35:58] (2158.40s)
that's just different. Both Jeff and
[36:00] (2160.48s)
Andy put great demands on me and other
[36:03] (2163.12s)
leaders. For me personally, for my
[36:05] (2165.52s)
style, I felt Jeff was emotionally
[36:08] (2168.72s)
behind me and supportive. And I felt
[36:11] (2171.92s)
Andy was kind of always waiting to see
[36:14] (2174.40s)
if I'd screw up. And so if we brought in
[36:16] (2176.96s)
10 executives who work for both of them,
[36:18] (2178.80s)
not all of them have had that
[36:20] (2180.00s)
experience. I found working for Jeff
[36:22] (2182.64s)
much more inspiring and not just because
[36:24] (2184.72s)
he was the founder, but because he
[36:26] (2186.72s)
seemed enthusiastic. Andy seemed more
[36:29] (2189.52s)
ready to ask more probing questions. And
[36:32] (2192.64s)
I at least as a personality need that
[36:34] (2194.88s)
leader who yes, they ask all the
[36:36] (2196.64s)
questions, but then they're like, "Okay,
[36:38] (2198.24s)
I'm on board. Let's do it. We'll do it
[36:40] (2200.64s)
together." And I never got a like we'll
[36:42] (2202.48s)
do it together from Andy. I always feel
[36:45] (2205.12s)
like I got okay, it's your plan. You're
[36:47] (2207.52s)
on the hook now. Let me know when it's
[36:49] (2209.60s)
done. It didn't inspire me the same way.
[36:53] (2213.36s)
You mentioned being scrutinized and I
[36:55] (2215.92s)
saw that you had written about how you
[36:58] (2218.80s)
started the prime gaming vertical with
[37:01] (2221.04s)
some some peers and you mentioned that
[37:03] (2223.44s)
it had failed multiple times. I'm kind
[37:05] (2225.44s)
of curious, you know, what does a VP's
[37:07] (2227.84s)
performance review look like if the
[37:09] (2229.84s)
business vertical they started is
[37:12] (2232.16s)
failing? So this is a flaw of big
[37:14] (2234.16s)
companies because often when I say
[37:16] (2236.08s)
something was failing, we would hit most
[37:18] (2238.24s)
of our goals, ship this, build that, add
[37:21] (2241.12s)
this feature. We might even hit some
[37:22] (2242.88s)
financial goals, but we weren't
[37:24] (2244.96s)
achieving the vision. The vision of
[37:27] (2247.12s)
Prime Gaming, the original vision Jeff
[37:29] (2249.44s)
wanted was to make Amazon a real player
[37:32] (2252.32s)
in the video game business. At one point
[37:35] (2255.44s)
his vision was how can we be as big as
[37:39] (2259.28s)
10 cent which is the largest gaming
[37:41] (2261.20s)
company in the world out of China. So we
[37:43] (2263.76s)
met a bunch of goals but we were never
[37:45] (2265.68s)
on track to become like that. And
[37:48] (2268.80s)
certainly Prime Gaming has never done
[37:50] (2270.64s)
anything like that. Amazon Game Studios
[37:52] (2272.88s)
all the gaming pieces they're very
[37:55] (2275.12s)
niche. So when I say it failed multiple
[37:57] (2277.36s)
times I think it failed against the
[37:59] (2279.12s)
vision. you can get a good review for
[38:01] (2281.52s)
ticking all the boxes and hitting like
[38:04] (2284.16s)
all these interim goals and not really
[38:06] (2286.80s)
be on track for doing anything
[38:08] (2288.96s)
significant. Right before I left the
[38:11] (2291.36s)
Amazon App Store to join Twitch, I told
[38:14] (2294.08s)
a peer I said, you know, this year I'm
[38:15] (2295.92s)
going to hit every goal and it's going
[38:17] (2297.92s)
to be meaningless. And the proof of that
[38:20] (2300.48s)
in some ways is now 10 years later,
[38:23] (2303.04s)
Amazon has shut down its app store. They
[38:25] (2305.52s)
use it internally, I think, but all
[38:27] (2307.44s)
external use has been, you know, for
[38:29] (2309.92s)
phones and whatever. They they've given
[38:31] (2311.36s)
up after 10 more years. Well, I saw that
[38:33] (2313.60s)
coming 10 years ago. But big companies
[38:37] (2317.04s)
can get lost in, well, we're hitting the
[38:39] (2319.12s)
goals and they confuse hitting the goals
[38:41] (2321.68s)
for doing something actually valuable.
[38:44] (2324.32s)
The bottom line is I was rated well as a
[38:46] (2326.48s)
VP every year of my career. And yet,
[38:49] (2329.44s)
when I look at did some of the things I
[38:51] (2331.68s)
do really succeed, I'm very proud that
[38:54] (2334.64s)
we launched Prime Gaming and we put
[38:56] (2336.88s)
Amazon in the game business, but it
[38:58] (2338.72s)
hasn't gone anywhere. And it won't
[39:00] (2340.16s)
surprise me if in 2, three, or 5 years,
[39:03] (2343.36s)
Amazon shutters that. Now, it also won't
[39:05] (2345.92s)
surprise me if they get some leader who
[39:07] (2347.60s)
figures out how to make it big. But
[39:09] (2349.60s)
there's a lot of sort of zombie products
[39:12] (2352.08s)
in a big company that no one quite wants
[39:14] (2354.56s)
to pull the trigger on shutting down
[39:16] (2356.32s)
because that's a big decision and an
[39:18] (2358.08s)
admission of failure, but no one really
[39:20] (2360.24s)
knows how to make big either. So they
[39:22] (2362.08s)
just kind of bump along.
[39:24] (2364.16s)
It sounds like even forward-looking,
[39:25] (2365.84s)
like being in it, you you hadn't
[39:27] (2367.68s)
achieved the goals yet and you looked at
[39:28] (2368.96s)
the goals and you said these are not
[39:31] (2371.36s)
impactful. Did you ever have a thought
[39:33] (2373.20s)
of let's make the goals more ambitious
[39:35] (2375.28s)
or let's change the goals so that
[39:36] (2376.96s)
they're the ones that align with the
[39:38] (2378.96s)
vision?
[39:39] (2379.68s)
Sure. The problem is you know you're
[39:41] (2381.68s)
going to be judged on them. So there's a
[39:44] (2384.16s)
tension between the goals you think
[39:47] (2387.04s)
matter and the goals you have any idea
[39:49] (2389.12s)
how to hit. So, I'll I'll I'll tell you
[39:52] (2392.00s)
for the Amazon App Store, the goal was
[39:54] (2394.96s)
somehow compete with Google on on
[39:57] (2397.76s)
Android phones when Google comes
[39:59] (2399.68s)
pre-installed and Amazon is a sideload
[40:02] (2402.32s)
like that people have to decide they
[40:04] (2404.00s)
want and then opt into. I had no idea
[40:06] (2406.80s)
how to compete basically with an endemic
[40:10] (2410.48s)
store, a pre-installed store on its own
[40:12] (2412.80s)
phone. That was the goal. Of course, I
[40:15] (2415.60s)
argued strongly against being judged
[40:18] (2418.16s)
against that because I didn't know how
[40:19] (2419.76s)
to do it. I would say other leaders who
[40:22] (2422.00s)
came after me who were quite hardworking
[40:23] (2423.92s)
didn't obviously didn't know how either.
[40:26] (2426.24s)
For my review and my pay, I want goals I
[40:28] (2428.96s)
know I can nail. And for the good of the
[40:31] (2431.12s)
company, I actually want goals that I
[40:32] (2432.88s)
have no idea how to do. And so, when I
[40:34] (2434.96s)
said this, I was like, "Yeah, I'm going
[40:36] (2436.16s)
to nail all these goals that I fought to
[40:38] (2438.24s)
be measured on, and I'm going to miss
[40:40] (2440.32s)
all these goals that actually matter
[40:42] (2442.08s)
because I don't know how to do them."
[40:43] (2443.76s)
And it turns out maybe they were
[40:45] (2445.04s)
impossible. The the you know again if
[40:47] (2447.44s)
you think about this aspiration oh
[40:49] (2449.36s)
Amazon wants to be 10 cent in games.
[40:52] (2452.08s)
Well this is like if you work at some
[40:55] (2455.44s)
e-commerce startup saying well you know
[40:57] (2457.44s)
Ryan we want you to take a goal to be a
[41:00] (2460.32s)
second Amazon. How are you know you
[41:02] (2462.56s)
might be like well I get why that would
[41:04] (2464.64s)
be valuable. I do understand that's a
[41:07] (2467.04s)
great vision but I'll pass. with your
[41:10] (2470.48s)
tenure as a manager at Amazon, I kind of
[41:13] (2473.92s)
want to talk about, you know, management
[41:15] (2475.76s)
practices like, you know, stack ranking,
[41:18] (2478.72s)
performance-based layoffs, pips, those
[41:21] (2481.12s)
types of things. So, I'm curious, you
[41:23] (2483.04s)
know, Amazon's pretty famous for stack
[41:25] (2485.04s)
ranking and, you know, really
[41:26] (2486.80s)
aggressively managing people out. Yeah.
[41:29] (2489.20s)
Um, what are your thoughts on on these
[41:31] (2491.04s)
types of systems? About 10 years ago,
[41:33] (2493.36s)
Amazon ran an experiment where after
[41:35] (2495.76s)
getting years of bad press for stack
[41:37] (2497.60s)
ranking, they removed what was called
[41:40] (2500.96s)
the unregretted attrition goal. So,
[41:43] (2503.28s)
Amazon has a goal every year for what
[41:45] (2505.60s)
they call unreged attrition, which means
[41:47] (2507.44s)
people, it's a nice way of saying people
[41:49] (2509.28s)
we want to leave. Um, and we don't care
[41:51] (2511.44s)
if you pressure them into quitting or
[41:53] (2513.44s)
they get fired. It's just there's a
[41:55] (2515.36s)
number and you put people on a list of
[41:57] (2517.52s)
folks you want out and you can either
[42:00] (2520.32s)
improve their performance to where you
[42:02] (2522.16s)
take them off the list, they can quit or
[42:04] (2524.64s)
you can fire them. But you have to hit a
[42:06] (2526.80s)
goal and it's usually like 7% a year.
[42:09] (2529.52s)
Sometimes it's as low as four, sometimes
[42:11] (2531.20s)
it's as much as seven. So Amazon uses
[42:14] (2534.56s)
lots of words to kind of cloak this
[42:16] (2536.56s)
process, but the bottom line is it's
[42:18] (2538.16s)
fire the bottom 5% or so. Here's the
[42:20] (2540.64s)
thing. When we remove the goal, managers
[42:23] (2543.76s)
immediately stop having hard
[42:26] (2546.32s)
conversation and talking to their
[42:28] (2548.64s)
struggling performers because without
[42:31] (2551.44s)
the pressure of having to do it, it was
[42:33] (2553.76s)
just easier to focus on your good people
[42:36] (2556.32s)
and let that problem person hang around
[42:38] (2558.64s)
because it's not in a big company. It's
[42:40] (2560.72s)
not costing your burn rate that you know
[42:44] (2564.24s)
about or care about and you don't have
[42:46] (2566.32s)
to have that unpleasant conversation and
[42:48] (2568.48s)
you also don't have to be the bad guy.
[42:50] (2570.32s)
One of the worst things about being a
[42:52] (2572.00s)
manager is you may have someone who
[42:53] (2573.84s)
isn't very good but is wellliked.
[42:56] (2576.72s)
They're friendly. They are outgoing.
[42:58] (2578.32s)
They bring donuts. They organize the
[43:00] (2580.00s)
parties. Everybody likes them. And so
[43:02] (2582.72s)
now you have to not only have a hard
[43:05] (2585.12s)
conversation with them, but if you do
[43:07] (2587.20s)
move them out or if they talk to other
[43:08] (2588.96s)
people like, "Ethan's trying to fire
[43:10] (2590.72s)
me." Then everybody's like, "Why are you
[43:13] (2593.12s)
trying to fire Ryan? He's awesome. We
[43:15] (2595.44s)
love him." Well, it may be that you know
[43:17] (2597.52s)
you have lots of performance problems,
[43:19] (2599.52s)
but other people aren't feing those. So
[43:22] (2602.40s)
when we remove the goal, people stopped
[43:24] (2604.56s)
having the hard conversation. So the
[43:26] (2606.72s)
next year, Amazon put it back and it's
[43:28] (2608.48s)
kept it every year since. So on the one
[43:30] (2610.88s)
hand, many managers avoid actually
[43:34] (2614.24s)
performance managing if they're not
[43:36] (2616.00s)
forced at gunpoint. An unfortunate
[43:38] (2618.16s)
truth. On the other hand, because
[43:40] (2620.56s)
there's a list and because there's a
[43:42] (2622.48s)
goal, you would be then be in a
[43:44] (2624.56s)
situation where someone who had a chance
[43:46] (2626.88s)
to succeed, maybe you had to put on the
[43:49] (2629.36s)
list to make your quota. And you ask how
[43:52] (2632.72s)
how how well the pips work. I think most
[43:56] (2636.00s)
pips are a combination of dishonest and
[43:59] (2639.36s)
or psychologically
[44:01] (2641.60s)
unrealistic because once I've decided
[44:04] (2644.48s)
that I'm going to put you on this list
[44:06] (2646.24s)
or once I've decided you're enough of a
[44:09] (2649.12s)
problem that I need to write up this
[44:10] (2650.72s)
plan and have this ugly conversation
[44:12] (2652.56s)
with you mentally I've already moved to
[44:16] (2656.56s)
we have to get rid of Ethan, right? We
[44:18] (2658.48s)
have to get rid of Ryan. They're not
[44:19] (2659.84s)
good. recovering. It sort of doesn't
[44:22] (2662.88s)
matter what you do unless it's amazing.
[44:25] (2665.12s)
I've already decided and so my cognitive
[44:27] (2667.60s)
bias is going to be self-fulfilling. Um,
[44:30] (2670.08s)
so what I recommend, you know, this has
[44:31] (2671.68s)
happened. I coach people. I have had
[44:34] (2674.08s)
half a dozen people reach out to me for
[44:36] (2676.16s)
coaching and say, "I was just put on a
[44:38] (2678.24s)
PIP at Amazon. I I really want to
[44:40] (2680.48s)
succeed. Help me." And I've tried and
[44:43] (2683.20s)
they've all gotten fired. And so now
[44:44] (2684.80s)
when people call me, this is funny. They
[44:46] (2686.72s)
call me and they say, "I'm on a PIP."
[44:48] (2688.00s)
And I'm like, "So, what you need to do
[44:49] (2689.68s)
is spend that time on the PIP looking
[44:51] (2691.68s)
for your next job because you're going
[44:53] (2693.12s)
to be fired." And they're like, "No, no,
[44:55] (2695.04s)
I'm going to overcome it." And I'm like,
[44:56] (2696.32s)
"Good luck with that. Tell me what
[44:58] (2698.08s)
happens." And 3 months later, I get a
[44:59] (2699.68s)
note that says, "You were right. I was
[45:01] (2701.04s)
fired." And the reason I state both
[45:02] (2702.72s)
people I coach and people I don't is, of
[45:04] (2704.56s)
course, you could suspect, well, maybe
[45:05] (2705.76s)
I'm a lousy coach and I didn't dig them
[45:07] (2707.52s)
out of the hole. But the people I didn't
[45:09] (2709.20s)
coach got fired, too. It's a self like
[45:11] (2711.92s)
once you're at that stage, it's going to
[45:14] (2714.16s)
happen. Very few people ever dig out of
[45:16] (2716.64s)
them. Now, I believe some managers in
[45:19] (2719.60s)
their minds start a PIP with honest good
[45:22] (2722.80s)
intentions, but at least in Amazon, you
[45:25] (2725.84s)
have your HR business partner and your
[45:27] (2727.52s)
boss asking you all the time, "How's it
[45:29] (2729.92s)
going? When are we going to exit that
[45:31] (2731.36s)
person? I need them on my quota." You
[45:33] (2733.36s)
know, if you actually want to take
[45:34] (2734.48s)
someone off a PIP, more than likely,
[45:37] (2737.12s)
your manager is going to be saying,
[45:38] (2738.56s)
"Well, who else are you going to put
[45:39] (2739.68s)
on?" Because we still have to meet the
[45:41] (2741.12s)
number. So you're then you're looking
[45:43] (2743.12s)
around and you're like, well, I put the
[45:45] (2745.12s)
lowest performing person on my team on
[45:46] (2746.96s)
and now I'm being told if I take them
[45:48] (2748.32s)
off of PIP, I have to put somebody else
[45:49] (2749.92s)
on. So of course you're like, well, so
[45:52] (2752.64s)
the conclusion is companies stink at
[45:55] (2755.20s)
performance management. They don't train
[45:56] (2756.96s)
managers how to do it. They don't train
[45:58] (2758.88s)
managers how to have the conversation
[46:00] (2760.72s)
early. They don't create a system where
[46:03] (2763.04s)
you can talk to people and say, you
[46:04] (2764.32s)
know, this isn't working out. Maybe you
[46:06] (2766.40s)
want to leave because that opens you up
[46:08] (2768.24s)
to a lawsuit. We just have a
[46:09] (2769.92s)
dysfunctional performance system.
[46:12] (2772.24s)
In your writing, you you wrote something
[46:14] (2774.48s)
that said a manager can fire anyone they
[46:17] (2777.60s)
want and HR is not there to protect you.
[46:20] (2780.72s)
I would have thought there's checks and
[46:22] (2782.48s)
balances to this that that is not true
[46:24] (2784.56s)
or I guess I would hope that it's not
[46:26] (2786.00s)
true. What What is stopping a manager
[46:28] (2788.16s)
from from painting their report in an
[46:30] (2790.32s)
unfair light? Or is there nothing
[46:32] (2792.08s)
stopping that?
[46:33] (2793.04s)
I love that you called this out. I agree
[46:34] (2794.88s)
with what I wrote. The nuance is as a
[46:37] (2797.44s)
manager I could get rid of any one
[46:39] (2799.12s)
employee I wanted but I can't get rid of
[46:41] (2801.12s)
every employee. And so if I create a
[46:43] (2803.68s)
pattern where I'm driving one employee
[46:45] (2805.44s)
after another out I will eventually get
[46:47] (2807.28s)
caught and burned for that because we do
[46:49] (2809.52s)
look at what is a manager's turnover
[46:51] (2811.28s)
rate. My point was for any single
[46:54] (2814.16s)
employee, I can absolutely, if I choose
[46:58] (2818.24s)
to end that person's career at my
[47:00] (2820.88s)
company. And at Amazon, it's as simple
[47:03] (2823.76s)
as put them on this list. It's partly
[47:06] (2826.56s)
who strikes first. So, by the time you
[47:09] (2829.04s)
go to HR, I've already put you on this
[47:11] (2831.44s)
list and told my story of why I think
[47:13] (2833.68s)
you're bad. And now you're going, "No,
[47:15] (2835.44s)
no, it's unfair. He hates me." Well, the
[47:17] (2837.68s)
problem is the people all the people
[47:19] (2839.60s)
they've heard from who are legitimately
[47:21] (2841.36s)
bad are saying the same thing, right?
[47:23] (2843.60s)
They're they're saying, "No, I'm
[47:24] (2844.80s)
actually good. It's my boss hates me and
[47:26] (2846.80s)
doesn't understand me." So, they hear
[47:28] (2848.00s)
that story every day. So, when you
[47:29] (2849.60s)
legitimately tell it and it's actually
[47:31] (2851.12s)
true and it's just I hate you, you just
[47:33] (2853.28s)
you end up sounding like everyone else.
[47:35] (2855.52s)
And so, that's why it's stacked in my
[47:38] (2858.00s)
favor. Now, I I have never done this,
[47:40] (2860.80s)
but I've looked at the system and just
[47:43] (2863.60s)
seen I have people all the time who say,
[47:45] (2865.76s)
"Well, my boss told a lie about me."
[47:47] (2867.44s)
Well, again, it's your word versus mine,
[47:49] (2869.52s)
and I'm the one who's got the higher
[47:51] (2871.04s)
level, maybe the more tenure. If I
[47:53] (2873.36s)
choose to say, "Well, you know, Ryan
[47:56] (2876.40s)
looks really busy, but he's mostly just
[47:59] (2879.36s)
doing pull requests on other people's
[48:01] (2881.84s)
code." I can downplay what you're doing.
[48:03] (2883.92s)
Because see, I can tell this story of
[48:06] (2886.32s)
Ryan is an amazing engineer. He makes
[48:09] (2889.84s)
everybody's code better because he does
[48:12] (2892.96s)
all these insightful reviews and he's
[48:16] (2896.08s)
upleveling the whole team. That's
[48:17] (2897.84s)
narrative one. Same facts. He did 700
[48:20] (2900.48s)
pull requests this quarter or whatever.
[48:23] (2903.04s)
Narrative two is, you know, Ryan
[48:25] (2905.60s)
actually doesn't contribute much. he
[48:28] (2908.00s)
thinks he does and he spends all this
[48:30] (2910.08s)
time doing code reviews, but look at how
[48:31] (2911.84s)
little he's actually written himself and
[48:34] (2914.48s)
really he's just busy nitpick nitpicking
[48:37] (2917.20s)
people and churning away. And sure, his
[48:39] (2919.76s)
numbers look good, but those numbers are
[48:41] (2921.36s)
actually a sign of the problem. Now,
[48:43] (2923.20s)
I've taken your same performance and
[48:45] (2925.36s)
spun it two ways. My point that people
[48:47] (2927.84s)
aren't going to like is a manager can do
[48:50] (2930.08s)
that. And maybe they're doing that
[48:51] (2931.92s)
because they're a jerk and they've
[48:53] (2933.20s)
decided you threaten them and they want
[48:54] (2934.88s)
to get rid of you. Maybe they just have
[48:56] (2936.80s)
a different view. You think you're doing
[48:58] (2938.88s)
really valuable stuff and they don't and
[49:01] (2941.44s)
they're saying what they honestly
[49:02] (2942.96s)
believe. But the point is performance
[49:04] (2944.96s)
that you would think is really easy to
[49:06] (2946.72s)
measure like look at these numbers. Look
[49:08] (2948.48s)
how many valuable code reviews I did can
[49:10] (2950.72s)
be used either way. Nothing about
[49:13] (2953.04s)
software engineering performance is so
[49:15] (2955.20s)
objective. And so bad managers, truly
[49:18] (2958.64s)
bad or evil managers do get caught
[49:20] (2960.72s)
eventually. But clever managers, you
[49:23] (2963.04s)
just want to get rid of one person would
[49:24] (2964.72s)
be able to do that because they're in
[49:26] (2966.64s)
the driver's seat. And more importantly,
[49:28] (2968.56s)
they get to make the preemptive strike.
[49:30] (2970.40s)
They get to tell the story about why
[49:32] (2972.00s)
that person's a problem before that
[49:33] (2973.68s)
person ever knows it's happening. And so
[49:36] (2976.08s)
it's kind of like, yes, you can slap the
[49:38] (2978.16s)
mosquito after it bites you, but it
[49:40] (2980.48s)
doesn't take away being bitten. I mean,
[49:42] (2982.64s)
it's it's unfortunate that that's true,
[49:44] (2984.56s)
but it also illustrates the power of
[49:47] (2987.28s)
storytelling in a way. The exact same
[49:50] (2990.48s)
facts can be spun as a bad thing or a
[49:54] (2994.64s)
good thing. So, people are going to hear
[49:56] (2996.48s)
this and believe like, oh, see, managers
[49:58] (2998.88s)
are just like personally firing people
[50:01] (3001.04s)
because they hate them. I am sure that
[50:02] (3002.96s)
happens. It's not in a manager's best
[50:05] (3005.60s)
interest. They they are judged on
[50:07] (3007.52s)
accomplishing their goals. that, you
[50:09] (3009.84s)
know, good managers are trying to find
[50:11] (3011.84s)
partners they can work with that will
[50:14] (3014.00s)
help everyone achieve. I just want to be
[50:16] (3016.56s)
honest that if you do have a difficult
[50:18] (3018.56s)
boss and you make them angry and they're
[50:20] (3020.48s)
a vindictive sort of person, beware they
[50:22] (3022.96s)
hold like you're bringing a knife to a
[50:25] (3025.04s)
gunfight. They're the one with the gun
[50:26] (3026.88s)
and you're probably going to lose. If
[50:29] (3029.20s)
you have a boss like that, don't get in
[50:30] (3030.88s)
the knife or gunfight. Either figure out
[50:33] (3033.44s)
what you can allow you to make friends
[50:35] (3035.28s)
with them or find a different manager.
[50:37] (3037.12s)
That's the actual point. Don't think
[50:39] (3039.36s)
that somehow HR is going to come
[50:41] (3041.28s)
investigate and rescue you.
[50:42] (3042.80s)
Definitely
[50:43] (3043.36s)
that just isn't what they do.
[50:44] (3044.96s)
Um I want to be mindful of your time and
[50:46] (3046.88s)
so I have you know one last question for
[50:48] (3048.96s)
you which is that if you could go back
[50:51] (3051.20s)
to your career right at the beginning
[50:53] (3053.36s)
when you had just graduated and entered
[50:55] (3055.60s)
the industry and give yourself some
[50:57] (3057.52s)
advice what would that advice be?
[51:00] (3060.16s)
So I'll answer in two ways. One of them
[51:02] (3062.08s)
I did and one of them I really didn't.
[51:04] (3064.00s)
The thing I would do is always prefer
[51:05] (3065.84s)
high growth. My whole career was in
[51:08] (3068.08s)
companies that were growing very
[51:09] (3069.60s)
rapidly. And I compare that, people talk
[51:12] (3072.08s)
about a career ladder. Well, my ladder
[51:14] (3074.16s)
was always an escalator. I could climb,
[51:16] (3076.32s)
but it was also moving up for me. And
[51:18] (3078.48s)
so, the reason I got where I went is
[51:20] (3080.56s)
because Amazon grew 100fold while I was
[51:23] (3083.76s)
there from 10,000 people to a million.
[51:26] (3086.32s)
Revenue grew like 80 times. The
[51:28] (3088.64s)
escalator went up and I rode it. I also
[51:30] (3090.88s)
climbed. So, that part I would keep the
[51:33] (3093.20s)
same. The thing I would change is
[51:34] (3094.96s)
probably not surprising you. I would
[51:37] (3097.36s)
wake up much sooner to jobs are still
[51:40] (3100.88s)
with other humans. It's great to be an
[51:43] (3103.20s)
expert. It's great to be right, but
[51:45] (3105.68s)
build the skills to have the
[51:47] (3107.60s)
relationships, make the friends, get to
[51:50] (3110.24s)
know lots of people, and you don't have
[51:53] (3113.20s)
to be an extrovert to do that. I was a
[51:56] (3116.32s)
classic introvert. I've certainly
[51:57] (3117.92s)
learned to be more extroverted, but with
[52:00] (3120.40s)
online tools like LinkedIn or pick your
[52:03] (3123.76s)
tool, you can make a reputation and
[52:06] (3126.24s)
build connections from the safety of
[52:08] (3128.00s)
your keyboard in your darkened room all
[52:10] (3130.48s)
by yourself. And so do do whatever works
[52:13] (3133.36s)
for you, but get known because it works
[52:16] (3136.80s)
so much better. You know, Amazon called
[52:18] (3138.56s)
me for the job, not the other way
[52:20] (3140.48s)
around. And you want that happening, so
[52:23] (3143.12s)
build that reputation.
[52:24] (3144.72s)
Awesome. Well, thank you so much for
[52:26] (3146.64s)
your time, Ethan. Um, you know, at the
[52:28] (3148.40s)
end of the interview, like to give you
[52:30] (3150.16s)
an opportunity. Where can people find
[52:32] (3152.08s)
you or is there something you'd like
[52:33] (3153.44s)
people to check out?
[52:34] (3154.40s)
So, the easiest place to find me is
[52:36] (3156.24s)
either Ethan EvansVP on LinkedIn or
[52:38] (3158.96s)
Ethan Evans.com, my website. I'm well
[52:41] (3161.28s)
known for teaching classes about how to
[52:43] (3163.44s)
get past the promotion hurdle we've
[52:45] (3165.20s)
talked a lot about. So, if my style of
[52:48] (3168.40s)
straight talk in this interview works
[52:51] (3171.60s)
for you, then that's what I do all the
[52:53] (3173.92s)
time. And if that's your flavor of ice
[52:56] (3176.16s)
cream, then I'm your vendor.
[52:58] (3178.16s)
Thanks so much, Ethan. Really appreciate
[52:59] (3179.84s)
your time.
[53:00] (3180.56s)
Yeah, my pleasure, Ryan. Thank you for
[53:02] (3182.24s)
having me.
[53:03] (3183.20s)
Hey, thanks for watching the show. I
[53:04] (3184.80s)
don't sell anything or do sponsorships,
[53:06] (3186.64s)
but if you want to support, you can
[53:09] (3189.28s)
subscribe on YouTube or you can leave a
[53:11] (3191.28s)
review on Spotify. And I'm always
[53:13] (3193.28s)
looking for new guests to interview. So,
[53:14] (3194.88s)
if anyone comes up who you think you
[53:17] (3197.20s)
really want to hear their career story,
[53:19] (3199.20s)
uh, let me know and I'll try to reach
[53:21] (3201.20s)
out to them and get them on the show.
[53:22] (3202.80s)
Thanks for listening as always and I'll
[53:24] (3204.64s)
see you next time.