Speaking and Communicating Podcast

If we're not clear about what the situation is, right, if we don't create clarity about what decision is required, what's going on, we can't have clarity about what to do about it.

And being able to articulate and then have the team understand, what are the expectations?

What are the norms?

What's the standard way we go about this?

It all comes back to clarity on the front end, though.

Welcome back to the Speaking and Communicating Podcast.

I am your host, Roberta Ndlela

If you are looking to improve your communication skills, both professionally and personally, this is the podcast you should be tuning in to.

Communication and soft skills are crucial for your career growth and leadership development.

And speaking of leadership, this exciting month of April, we have a special leadership series where every single guest will be a leadership coach, a leader in their own organization, and they will be helping us become better leaders ourselves.

And to top it off, we have three episodes per week instead of the usual two.

We will be publishing three episodes per week, Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays, instead of the usual two episodes a week in this special leadership series in April.

So stay tuned, become a better leader, and log on to Apple and Spotify to give us a rating and a review.

And let's get communicating.

Now, let's get communicating with Clint Rusch, who is a leader, innovator, team builder, and problem solver on a mission to highlight how any organization cannot thrive without what we call soft skills.

And he has something to say about them being soft as well.

And before I go any further, please help me welcome him to the show.

Hi, Clint.

Hi, Amruta.

Great to see you.

Good to see you as well.

Thank you for being here.

Welcome.

Introduce yourself, please.

Yeah, absolutely.

So short version on me.

I grew up in Minnesota.

I went to college at Wisconsin, spent time in the military, joined the army right after September 11th, ended up going back to school, finishing my degree, ended up back on active duty, was in Iraq from 2007 to 2009.

And when I got back from Iraq, or went into working in business, I started in transportation.

I've had roles in operations, quality, finance, business development, and then a lot of executive leadership roles.

And so I spent time in logistics, spent time in management consulting, I've spent some time in health care.

And one of the things that I've really learned through all of those experiences is really the universality of what we call soft skills.

And it's funny you mention it.

I don't think they're soft.

I think they're hard.

I think they're the tough ones.

They're the ones that are the difficult ones for people to obtain.

But I think they're also the ones that are the most essential to success, and they're essential across industries.

It doesn't matter if you're a diamond mine or an airline or a health care company or a trucking company.

You've got to find a way to connect with people, and you've got to find a way to communicate effectively.

And if you can do that effectively, you can be successful really independent of the discipline.

But if you can't, it doesn't really matter how much you have technical knowledge-wise.

You're not going to get ahead.

Absolutely.

And that's been proven through research, through company data, that has absolutely been proven to be true.

But back to your military background, it seems like you have gone to be in the military, and then you go back to corporate, and you go back and forth.

Is it easy to adapt from service duty to corporate?

Yeah, so great question.

My military experience, I walked into the recruiter's office the day after September 11.

I don't think they were expecting the influx of recruits that happened at that point.

So I came in and said, all right, let's do this.

And the recruiter said, well, let me tell you about what the Army has to offer you.

I said, let me tell you how to recognize buying signs.

I'm already here, man.

Let's get to work.

And the Army being the Army, it took three months to get all the paperwork done.

That's just how it goes.

But I spent some time enlisted, and then I put in my packet to go back to school, went back to school, and finished my degree, and then came back on active duty as an officer.

And so that interesting transition of being in uniform to being back to being a college kid, to being back in uniform, and then going into the corporate world, I think that series of transitions was really, it was helpful for me to directly answer your question of, is it tough to be able to make those trends?

It's very difficult.

It's very difficult because there's a different set of communicative norms and of behavioral norms for each one of those environments.

But I think the thing that makes it workable, and I was able to succeed with, was recognizing that while there might be nuances that are different, there are absolutely things that are common threads.

The vernacular, right?

When I was in the military, the F word was like a comma, just something that peppered my speech every day.

And I say that just to be clear, when I say like a comma, yes, that's partially it was that common, but partially we just used it as a comma.

You would use it in between words to set things apart.

Then I got into the professional world and realized you can't do that anymore.

It's a different set of norms.

So the vernacular is different, but the universality of the importance of clarity is something that's true in both cases.

I was lucky enough to serve under a guy, was really adamant about the idea that we understood the specifics of terminology.

So the Army has a manual they publish, which it's basically the Army glossary.

Every word has very specific meanings.

For instance, the word raid, if you have a raid in the Army, it implies that you attack, but you don't retain the territory.

So you raid and then you withdraw.

And so when you say we're going to conduct a raid, the withdraw portion of it is understood because it's part of what a raid is.

And so his theory, and he really drilled it into all of us, his subordinate officers, was if we're all speaking a common language, then we can be more efficient.

Because then you don't ever have to say, hey, we're going to raid and then withdraw.

Because the withdrawal part is already included in the raid, and we understand what that word means.

Well, in the civilian world, we don't do raids, thank goodness.

But we have our version of that.

We have our version of that.

And so when somebody says, hey, you need to coordinate a presentation, well, there are a lot of implied tasks that come along with that.

Unfortunately, where I think a lot of communication breaks down is that we don't have that common set of language.

We don't have that common set of terminology.

And so one of the things that I've carried from that military experience into my civilian experience has been the importance of having a common set of language, having a common set of terms, and being able to say, when we say X, here's what is involved in X.

Here's all of the things that go into it.

That's a tough thing to do, and it requires a lot of intentionality on the part of the leader.

It requires a lot of intentionality on the part of the speaker, but it also requires intentionality on the part of the listener to be able to say, hold on, that's a term that I think has some things in it.

Can we unpack that term?

And so that experience coming from the military and then bringing it into the civilian world has really helped from the standpoint of creating clarity and driving to that consistent outcome.

A glossary.

I think it would help in so many organizations because I cannot tell you how many times we have cases of leaders who, when I told them, there's so much ambiguity in the English language, I cannot tell you.

Not even misunderstanding, but like you said, there's so much implied in one word or instruction.

You don't know what I'm going to interpret, which interpretation I'm taking away to go back to my desk and my task.

Yes.

And I think there's a part of that that's absolutely, the responsibility for that is held by both parties.

It's held by both parties.

It's not just on one side or the other.

And when I think, when people stub their toe on it, it's largely because they think it's the other person's responsibility.

It's the speaker who says, well, it's your responsibility to tell me if you don't understand it.

And it's the listener who says, well, it's your responsibility to make sure it's fully communicated.

Well, the truth is, it's both of your responsibility, because you're having a conversation.

It's not a one-way distribution of information, right?

It's a conversation.

Just as if you use a word and I don't understand it in this conversation, I'm going to ask you, what does that word mean?

Right?

And if I do the same, you're going to ask me, what does that word mean?

But that's how we get to the point where that conversation becomes productive.

I think it's George Bernard Shaw's quote that like the greatest failure in communication is believing that it happened.

Yeah, exactly.

Exactly.

And I think that's what it is.

It's because we don't have that common vernacular that we're able to work together.

Those implied tasks become a problem.

And so it's incumbent upon good communicators to be able to say, this is what I'm explicitly meaning by this.

And it's incumbent upon the listener to make sure that they walk away with a full understanding.

Both parties own that responsibility.

Absolutely.

And then what else did you notice?

Because here's the other thing, and movies are guilty of making us believe this, that in the Army, leadership literally means, I instruct you, you don't talk back, you just go and do.

Because then we're talking about this soft skills, quotation marks, you engage, you ask them for their suggestions, and you get your team involved.

Is that really the case, first of all?

And if so, how do you then adapt to, okay, now I'm more an engaging leader when I was a tell-you-what-to-do leader in the Army?

I think there's some truth to that.

There are absolutely times where communication and leadership in combat environment or in uniform is directing and clearly giving orders.

I think that's true in business as well.

There are absolutely times where it's incumbent upon the leader to just say, this is what we're going to do.

This is what we're going to do.

That's it.

Like, here's the answer.

That's always going to exist.

But I think the percentage that it exists, right, in the movies, right, to your point, in the movies and military, that's the only way it exists.

And I don't think that's the case at all.

One of the things that I loved about my time in uniform was the degree to which we got to exercise our problem-solving muscle.

Look, the things we were doing didn't have doctrine.

Like, we hadn't figured the problem out before.

And part of that was the aphorism is always that the military is fighting the last war, right?

We're always fighting the last war because we learn something and go, okay, that's what we're going to carry forward.

But then you're always encountering these new problem sets.

And so in 2008, my guys and I were in charge of building this large barrier wall across outer city.

So we're emplacing these giant concrete barriers.

We're under fires.

We're doing it.

There's no book that tells you how to do that.

There's no army doctrine that explains how to do that.

There's no set of constructions.

There's just what we figured out.

And there were a lot of times where we go, okay, here's the plan.

Here's what we're going to do, right?

And we go implement it.

And about three to four minutes in, we go, this is not even remotely working.

Like, this is a disaster.

We're not doing this.

Let's go back and huddle up.

And that, hey, guys, this isn't working isn't something that the leader is the only one who sees, right?

That's something that your people are saying, hey, this doesn't seem to be working.

And you have to be receptive to that information.

And then you have to be receptive to the idea that that person might have an insight to help create a better plan.

And a leader who chooses not to listen to the people around them, they're really saying, all you are is hands, you're not brains.

And boy, what a missed opportunity.

Now, the flip side of that is you can't just be the person who says, I'm going to take a poll and whatever we all vote on, then that's what we're going to do.

Because at that point, you're not a leader, you're just an administrator.

Right?

And so I think the difficulty of communication and the difficulty of decision making comes down to being able to balance those things.

In a combat environment, you might be balancing it more toward a little bit of command and control because you don't have the time, you don't have the luxury of having that bigger communication.

In a business environment, you've got the ability to sometimes to say, hey, let's take a day and think about this.

But you don't always have that.

And so I think it's important for good leaders to be able to balance those two things and to be able to think about what's the time and the way in which I show up authentically with my team.

And the thing that I've taken from that is I've explained to people that I work with, there's two groups of problems, right?

There's two groups of things we face.

The one group, like one bucket of them is things that I just know the answer to, and we're just going to focus on doing that thing, right?

On the test, it says two plus two, and I know the answer is four, so we're not going to debate and vote on whether it...

We're just going to focus on implementation.

The second one, I've got an idea, but I don't know the answer.

And the difference is, in the first one, we need to very quickly go to an execution implementation mindset, and the second one, we need to figure it out.

Now, this bucket is really small.

The bucket of things that we know the answer to, that's small.

The bucket of the things we don't know the answer to is really big.

But it's my job, it's my job to articulate which bucket we're talking about when we talk about a problem.

Is this a situation where we just know the answer and it's time to execute, or is this a situation where we all need to really pick this problem apart and figure out what to do about it?

And if I don't do a good job of articulating which one of those it is, it's really setting the team up to be unsuccessful, because they're going to either, it's a problem where I want an opinion, and they're going to go, okay, let's just do that.

Or it's a problem where we need to shift our focus to implementation and execution, and they're going to go, well, what if, well, what if, well, what if?

And it's guys, look, we've got to put the right approach against the right problem set.

So one, clarity in understanding what the situation is, so that you can have then clarity in communicating to the team where we go from here.

That's absolutely it.

If we're not clear about what the situation is, if we don't create clarity about what decision is required, what's going on, what the issue we're attacking is, we can't have clarity about what to do about it, because we're punching at a cloud.

And so one of the things that I think, again, I'm going to bring it back to this point of shared vernacular, is having that idea, having that construct, having that model to be able to say, guys, this is one of the problems where we just need to be thinking about implementation versus, guys, this is a problem where we need to figure out a solution.

And being able to articulate which one of those we're in and then have the team understand when we're in one of those two situations, what are the expectations?

What are the norms?

What's the standard way we go about this?

It all comes back to clarity on the front end, though, because I think people crave that clarity, and they need it.

I had an instructor when I was in the military who said, there's no soldier that you're ever going to have who wakes up in the morning and says, I'm going to go suck at my job.

I don't think anybody says that, actually.

And I think that's a pretty universal thing, right?

Like, nobody wakes up and says, I'm going to be bad at it today.

When it happens, it's a reflection of something that happened before that point that's broken down.

And I think it's important for us to recognize the frequency with which that breakdown is communication.

Right.

And speaking of communication, so you've been in different departments of organizations.

What have you found have been the common threats based on what we've talked about?

They do different things, equality assurance, business development.

I want to see if what we call transferable skills apply in those situations as well.

Very different animals.

What has been common in those?

So the common things in those, when things don't work, the commonality is that it's always somebody else's fault.

It's always somebody else's fault, right?

The sales guys say it's the operations problem.

The operations guys say it's the sales guy's problem.

There's a lack of self-reflectiveness.

Whether that's departments, whether we're looking at it as a business department, however we choose to cleave society, right, we're all guilty of a lack of self-reflectiveness, all of us.

And the ability to control that and reduce that guilt makes us better.

And a lot of that comes back to understanding that, again, the importance of communicating clarity early on often falls by the wayside.

If the operator doesn't tell the salesperson, hey, here are the actual constraints.

The salesperson doesn't tell the operator, here's the customer's expectations.

And those two things, when there's an expectation that it's understood, we miss out on the middle.

So that's one thing that I think is consistent.

When things work, though, the other side of that equation, the commonality through them is the idea that we're bringing everybody to the table, and then we're all going away.

We don't have you and I have a conversation, and then you and somebody else, and then me and somebody else, and then you and that other person.

No, the siloed communication just doesn't work.

Instead, we go, hey, look, this is a thing that's got to get done.

Here are the 10 people that are involved in it.

Put all 10 people in a room.

Put them all in a Zoom call, whatever it is.

And let's have that conversation to get clear and understand what all of our expectations are.

That ability is something that transcends department.

I don't care if we're talking about the month-end close and the finance team, or if we're talking about how to deploy a new sales strategy.

If you have isolated conversations, you are guaranteed to have misunderstandings between people.

Guaranteed.

The only answer is get everybody together, have clear marching orders, and then everybody breaks apart and executes their own thing.

We should also create that common glossary, because we've spoken before with guests who say, we lose customers because, especially in the software engineering companies, we've lost a customer because sales didn't articulate to the software engineers how to code this customer's app.

And then the customer's angry because they told sales and sales understood, but sales didn't translate in the language that the software engineers understand.

So that communication breakdown lost us money, which means, back to what you said earlier, they don't have a common glossary.

They don't have a common definition of what everything means in that chain.

Yes.

One of the things I've been struck by in my career is when you meet someone in a particular department, or a particular function, who can speak the other function.

So you meet an HR person who doesn't speak HR, or you meet a finance person who doesn't speak finance.

They speak the language of another department.

When you find those people and you watch them longitudinally in their careers, they advance so quickly.

They advance so quickly.

And I think it really speaks to the importance of being able to understand the world beyond your own individual interactions.

When you've got that HR person who doesn't just speak HR, the business leader sees that person as a key advisor.

They don't see that person as, oh my gosh, I don't have to deal with a set of compliance requirements.

Yeah, like when you have the finance person who doesn't speak finance, the HR person sees them as a key advisor, not somebody who goes, okay, well, we're going to have to cut an extra 3% from it.

No, they don't see it that way.

They see it as somebody who meets them in the middle and creates something better.

And so what I think that really speaks to, what I think that really points toward is both the rarity and the value of being able to have that common language.

Because when we say it's a salesperson who speaks ops, what we're really saying is that person can translate to your point, right?

That person isn't just saying things that make sense for their people.

They're saying things that make sense across the, they can translate.

And so when we see those people advance at the pace we do, when we see them succeed in the way that they do, and we see the commonality of that ability to translate, I think there's an ability then to say, that's the thing we're always lacking.

That's the thing that really hampers a lot of organizations, and when they get it right, boy, it is at home.

If many of us are bad at something and you can be good at it, not just average, but good, boy, that's a differentiator.

As you said, your career advances, which also brings us to, we always say we don't get taught this at school or college, I think, unless you're doing a degree in communications.

But when you excel in college, in your technical skill, and now you must go to job interviews, I'm this, I graduated magna cum laude, we'll find that when we speak to HR executives, a lot of people struggle with articulating what it is they're good at.

They think the resume does all the talking.

So the eight second resume reading of an HR executive is going to be in the interview panel, is not going to do you any good.

How do you develop the skills to speak and communicate in such a way that they see that you will be so, add so much value to the team if they bring you in?

Yeah.

So it's funny you mentioned that eight seconds with the resume.

I had HR person who I've worked with in the past, and I have so much respect for her.

She said that the only thing you can ever do with a resume is lose.

No one wins with a resume, right?

There's no one who you read the resume and go, well, we're hiring that person today, right?

But boy, if you misspell your own last name, it's probably going to be in the loss column, right?

Yeah.

I think there's something to be said for the reason that the resume isn't where you win, but that communication is.

And I think that it comes back to this idea that we're wired to tell stories.

I think it comes back to the idea that humans are innately wired to want to hear stories.

We want to hear loops of stories where they follow the same arc.

And I'm sure you've seen the story branding framework, the SB7 framework, the idea that we're naturally wired to want stories.

And if you go back and look anthropologically, right, before we had written history, that's how we carried our history forward, was stories.

Resumes can't tell a story because they don't have context, because they don't have engagement, because they don't have interaction.

It's just a bunch of words on a page, and it's not enough.

There's not enough time for exposition to be able to bring somebody into a story.

If you read a book and the book is one page long, you're not reading that book, right?

That's not an interesting book, right?

When that book has depth and it has richness and it has context, you get to about page 30 and you go, okay, I'm definitely going to page 270, right?

Like, I want to know what's happening.

And so I think when we communicate in interviews and when we communicate with people, the ability to tell a story is what sets a great interviewee apart from somebody who really stubs their toe.

Hey, I grew sales by 36%.

Okay, that's a resumé bullet, and that's not interesting.

But here's the situation.

Roberta, I came into this business, and we were at a place where unless our sales grew by 25%, we were going to have to make a cut, and Marriott, the front desk, was going to get let go, and we loved Marriott.

So we got the team together and we said, hey, listen, what are we going to do in order to create this 25% growth in sales?

And one of the sales guys suggested launching a new marketing program, and so we did it.

We self-funded, and we figured it out, and we went on Fiverr and got this, and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

And at the end of it, we grew sales by 36%, and Marriott, she didn't even know all this work that had been done because we liked her so much.

Now that, same outcome, same exact outcome, grew sales 36%, really great story.

Those are the two things, it's just two different ways of contextualizing the exact same thing.

Now one of those, you see it and you go past it.

One of those, you want to meet Marriott at this point.

Right?

You want to understand who is this person that's so gravitating and so galvanizing that the whole sales team said, we've got to save Marriott's job.

And so the point is, effective communication relies on storytelling and it relies on context.

And if we think about the way that we provide information to our teams, it's the same thing.

If I don't tell you why we have to do something, you don't really have an ability to make decisions in ambiguity.

Right?

If I say, hey, we've got to do this thing, and I don't tell you why, when you hit a point where you've got a decision to make, you don't know what to do.

So you come back and ask.

Because now all you're doing is just tasks.

But if I give you context, if we effectively communicate, if I tell you the story of here's where we're going, here's the part you play in that journey, and here are the things that we have to accomplish between here and there.

One, you're inspired.

Two, you're motivated.

But three, because you have context, when you hit a moment of ambiguity, you know how to get there.

And so when people interview, the really compelling interviewees are the ones that can tell that story.

They don't just say, I grew sales 36%.

Sounds like the story has a human element to it as well.

Yeah, all good stories should.

Yeah, all good stories should have a human element.

You got to care about the protagonist, right?

You got to care about the people involved in the story.

You know, I think about the experiences that I've had in my career, and the things I'm most proud of, the things that really get me choked up when I think about them historically, none of them have anything to do with numbers on a spreadsheet.

They've all got something to do with people's lives.

They've all got something to do with the way that what I did professionally created opportunities for people or advanced their careers or gave them more meaning or we did something for them.

If you can't connect it to a person, it'll never be resonant.

Nobody gets excited about column B being bigger than column C in the spreadsheet.

That doesn't get us out of bed.

I work with finance people.

Very forgettable as well.

Yeah, exactly.

But yeah, it's really about creating that human element and creating that story and finding a way to communicate effectively with context.

The human element.

And if anybody is listening, Clint, what would you say to them if they say, okay, I'm really good at my job, but I know I need to work on these skills?

Yeah.

What can they do in order to invest time in that to grow these skills?

Because it's been proven time and time again, they do accelerate your career, put meaning into your work, and you're a lot happier as well when you go to work.

Couldn't agree with you more.

If you have that ability, if you have that context, it absolutely makes you happier, it makes you more contributing.

I think the biggest thing that they can do is look for meaning, look for context, find a way to turn what they're doing into a story.

If they're a leader, maybe that involves doing it with their team.

If there's an individual contributor, sit down with your leader and say, I'm trying to understand how I fit into this bigger picture.

How does what I do create this meaning?

And if the leader may say, I don't know, you tell me, right?

First of all, that's a great answer.

If that's what the leader says, like, you got a good leader.

Absolutely.

We want to self-define.

For that person to really invest in developing themselves and invest in being able to improve those communication skills, it's taking the things we're doing and translating them into stories.

That's the fundamental piece of it.

And because if you can do that, then it becomes really liquid content.

It becomes really liquid thinking, because you can pour it into different vessels, and it makes sense.

The ability to say, I'm going to use a military experience, I'm going to use something from when I was in Iraq.

We had a program that we really pushed pretty hard, and we used very effectively, called this micro grant program.

And so what we did was we put these small $2,000 or less infusions of cash into local businesses in our area.

The guy would have a shop, and he would say, look, the electricity goes out, and because the electricity goes out, I can't run my equipment.

And so because I can't run my equipment, I'm only able to operate for six hours a day.

If I could operate 24 hours a day, I'd obviously be able to make more widgets.

And so as a result, if I could buy a generator, my business would be more effective.

And we'd say, okay, great.

What's the generator cost?

And he'd say, well, I can get one for $1,200.

Okay, we'll give you $1,200, buy the generator, but you have to hire one person in the community.

And so what we found was by creating this tangible stake in people's...

By giving these people a tangible stake and helping them to take a tangible stake in the security and the economic growth of their community, they became less likely to disrupt those things.

If that person's shop isn't working, and there's a bomb out in front of the shop, he doesn't care, he's just going to destroy something of no value.

But if his shop is working and things are thriving, well, now it's going to hurt him, so now he's on our side.

And now we've aligned our objectives.

Okay, that ability to tell that story about the guy who's got the shop and he needs the generator, that is something that can then be taken and packaged in a bunch of different ways.

When I tell my soldiers, hey, listen, this is why we're going on this patrol, this is why we're doing this, I can explain it to them through the context of saying, by growing the economy and improving the vitality of this market, you guys are safer.

You guys are safer.

And so what we're doing today creates safety for all of us.

And they go, that's a good point, like we're invested in that.

When I go back and I talk to higher headquarters and I say, look, we need to expand this program, I can take that story and I can say, this guy became one of our allies.

He became somebody who is really aligned with what we want to do.

There are a hundred more of him.

We just need to go find them.

And so being able to really improve and augment this program is the key to that.

And they go, that's true.

That's a really good point.

And when I tell my kids about the things that dad did when he was a soldier, I have the ability to say to them, yeah, you know what, one of the things that I did was I helped revitalize this shop and it helped other people's dads have jobs.

And my kids go, that's pretty cool.

And so that same story, because I have the ability to think about it in context, now I can communicate it effectively to a variety of audiences.

And so it's important to say not, Clint gave $1,200 to XYZ shop, but instead to understand the why and understand the story behind it and the narrative and the ability to provide context.

Because if you can do that, then you can communicate with an effective glossary, you can have shared terminology, you can use it in a variety of contexts, a variety of settings.

And that creates a much richer dialogue with everybody you're talking to.

Absolutely.

And just as you mentioned before we wrap up, is that it's a global audience, anybody can resonate, anybody can relate when there is a story behind the numbers.

Yes, 100% agree with you.

Yeah, we're all looking for the same things in life.

We really are.

We all just want better lives for our kids, and we want to have something that gives our life meaning.

At the end of the day, that's what everybody's looking for.

So if we understand that universality, and then find a way to translate our experiences into it, it allows us to really break down those barriers and become very connected no matter where we are.

Words of wisdom from Clint Rusch, a leader, innovator, and problem solver, a military veteran.

Thank you so much for this amazing conversation and the power that you've shared with us on how we can change lives using the soft skills and the power of storytelling.

We appreciate you, Clint.

Thank you, Roberta.

So great to be here.

My absolute pleasure.

Before you go, where can we find you if we want to continue this conversation?

Best places to find me are LinkedIn or at clintrush.com.

clintrush.com.

Please spell rush for us.

It's R-U-S-C-H.

There's a pesky C in there.

So R-U-S-C-H.

R-U-S-C-H clintrush.com.

Thank you for joining us on the Speaking and Communicating Podcast once again.

Please log on to Apple and Spotify, leave us a rating and a review, and what you'd like for us to discuss on the show that will be of benefit to you.

We encourage you to continue to get communicating and let us know how communication skills continue to improve your life professionally and personally.

And stay tuned for more episodes to come.