The Staffing Show - Glennie

On the latest episode of The Staffing Show, Tim Glennie, managing partner and co-founder of BridgeView, shares his experience with co-creating a firm that blends consulting and IT staffing services. He talks about the importance of getting sustained, intentional feedback from clients as well as being a partner through each stage of a client’s journey. He also shares insights on the emergence of “Zoom cities” and their impact on how workers approach and assess their quality of life and compensation.


David Folwell: Hello everyone. Thank you for joining us again for another episode of The Staffing Show. I am super excited today to be joined by Tim Glennie, who is the managing partner and co-founder of BridgeView. Tim, thanks so much for being on the show today. To kick things off, why don’t you tell everybody a little bit about who you are and a little bit about BridgeView.

Tim Glennie: Great. Well, Dave, thanks for having me. Excited to be on the podcast. 

So a little bit about myself as, as you mentioned I am managing partner, co-founder of BridgeView with my business partner, Chris Beisler. We started the company back in 2005, based here in Denver, Colorado. Grown a lot over the years and worked throughout the U.S. and most of the major markets. We run technology consulting firm BridgeView. We started out working kind of a hybrid in the IT staffing space, doing a lot of contract, contract-to-hire, full-time search. On the search end, we’d always focus more on the leadership search. One of our big mantras as a company is, “building highly capable technology teams.” And when Chris and I started the business, we had both worked for larger companies where maybe there was a bit more of a shotgun approach. And really what we focus on is working with fewer clients and working with them more deeply.

Our general clients are enterprise clients that are generally over a billion dollars in revenue. They’re in different markets, they have large technology imprints. Not to say that we don’t work with companies that don’t fit that, but usually there’s a large imprint of technologists within their companies. If you compared a financial services company, that might be 10,000 people, they might have six or 700 in the technology group. But we work with technology companies that might be 2,000 people, but they have a thousand people in technology. So just more of a general guideline of the type of clients that we work with, but we definitely work in the higher-end of technology. As we moved over the years building teams, a bit more consulting and project work came our way. So we had an evolution into being more pure-play staffing to truly being a hybrid consulting firm. Really working with companies at a strategic level and advisory level, and really making sure that their business goals are being met and that they’re happy doing what they’re doing.

Specific to myself, I’ve been in the industry over 20 years. I started on the technology side. I graduated school out of Florida, moved up to Boulder, worked at a software company up there. And just learned a lot about software and technology and working with clients and implementations and software builds and working with software developers and project managers and product owners. So I learned a lot there. Also worked at a consulting firm where we were a boutique Java shop. I was at an international firm based out of France, where we did a lot of J2EE development back in the days when BEA WebLogic was huge and really the birth of the internet and helping big companies like Southwest Airlines, stand-up online ticketing systems, and eBay and those type companies. Had also worked in the IT staffing industry with some pretty large firms.

And one of the things that has been consistent throughout my career is I generally work for companies that were based elsewhere and were building up a Denver presence. And so I learned a lot about how to build up a team internally and to go from X amount in revenue to growing it 10 times. And one of my impetuses from starting my own business with Chris was I’d helped several companies build up their presence and felt that I wanted to have a little bit more ownership and fulfill my entrepreneurial spirit.

Folwell: Yeah. And then, so what was the moment when you decided to go out and launch BridgeView?

Glennie: Well, the last company, I was working for a large billion-dollar IT staffing consulting company. And I was doing stuff on the side and reading a lot of entrepreneurial books thinking about, “Hey, do I want to go get an MBA? And what am I going to do next?” Because I was on the track where I was quite successful in the company and I just saw that’s not where I wanted to be. And I’d started just some side businesses. I used to have some vending machines that I’d put out on the weekends. And I realized that was a hustle that I didn’t want to do.

So luckily Chris and I were friendly competitors and he approached me. And also had some desires and talked about starting something up with our common experience. And that’s when the light bulb went off for me. And I’m like, “Yes, let’s do this.” And we started planning it. We exited our companies and then founded BridgeView. Had great support from our wives. Neither of us had kids at the time. So it was just a perfect time to start. And we bootstrapped it, worked out of our houses, hired our first employees, we got office space, just kept growing, we launched another market. So it’s been a really great evolution.

Folwell: That’s pretty awesome. And I also know, I mean, you are one of the more dynamic people I know in staffing and some of the things that you’ve done have been pretty cool. And you guys recently went through a rebrand and we talked about this a little bit. How you guys were focused on more of the traditional staffing model, and now were shifting towards a solutions orientation. Maybe you could tell a little bit about the rebrand, what that means for you, what inspired the change and how your business has evolved over the years?

Glennie: Yeah. No, I appreciate that. It’s definitely been an organic thing. I mentioned earlier when we were working with clients, we weren’t the typical IT staffing company. And we were taking on these projects and building up teams and we worked on the East Coast with Wall Street Journal and they were doing a re-platforming of And we’re putting together teams, but they were all contract resources. And we came to a point where we said we wanted two things. One, we wanted dedicated resources that worked for us where we could get this experience to continue to leverage it for other clients and share experiences. And really what we learned is many times projects would get funded, but they didn’t have clear direction. And it was almost like they’re running before knowing the destination.

And we really wanted to get in at a strategic advisory level in their road-mapping phase and really make sure they had a roadmap. And they had to find goals. And the innovation ideation phase, where they’re trying to come up with what they want to do. Is that fully formed? Have they done any prototypes or MVPs? Have they gotten to the point where they’ve actually had some progress? Or no traction at all? And so we knew we didn’t have that skill in house. We were very fortunate, one of our original clients, she was a CTO and SVP, engineering of some very successful technology companies.


And she was at a point in her career where she was looking for something different. And we said, “Hey, how about joining us and helping us spin up the consulting division?” And she’d been on both sides of the fence. And I think the most important thing is when we are working with CTOs and CIOs and leadership teams and companies, she’s been in their seat. So there’s a lot of understanding and empathy that she can provide to those clients. And then we built a team around her with diverse skill sets to support each stage of project development from the inception phase, all the way to delivery, to adoption phase.

Folwell: And what are some of the advantages that you’ve seen by offering the consulting and also the IT staffing in combination?

Glennie: Yeah. Well, I think if you look at a bespoke model, which we see many times in larger companies, they’re working with many different partners and vendors. And a lot of times there are breaks in communications. And sometimes vendors are trying to cut out their piece of the pie for pure monetary reasons. But we really come in it as looking at the client’s success. And really wanting them, if they’re implementing Salesforce or they’re re-platforming older technology, to get to the finish line. And if we can get involved in each step of the process, we don’t have to have all the people there, and we’re not trying to be the only vendor. But we want to be the consistent vendor from the initiation phase through the adoption phase. And what we’ve seen is there’s management consulting firms that want to come in and be in the front end.

And then there’s the big four, they want to come in and take over the whole project and land and expand. And then there’s staffing firms that just want to take one-off resources. And you see a lot of competition and hodgepodge where there’s a lot of self interest and not really client interest. So what we’re really trying to do is elevate the client and say, “Hey, you’ve got a partner at each stage of your journey.” We might not be running the whole thing. But when we see miscommunications, or deadlines [not] being met, or just things that aren’t positive for the client, we want to highlight that and say, “Hey, here’s what we’re seeing. And we’re here to help however we can.”

Folwell: That makes sense. And with this, because I know I talked to a lot of IT staffing firms that are looking at, “How do they grow faster? What should their strategy be?” What are some of the challenges that have come along with shifting to having a consulting practice in addition to just the traditional IT staffing component?

Glennie: Yeah. I think it really depends what your entry point and relationship point is within the client. You’ve been in the industry a long time and there are many large staffing firms that grow by working with large clients on a vendor list, run by a vendor management system. Where they’ll select 20, 40 vendors and they’ll have tiers of vendors. And they’ll just pump out job requirements to them. And there’s really no client interaction. It’s basically you get a requirement, you send a resume in, you hope you get an interview and it’s really a hands-off approach. And so there’s really no collaboration. And one of our mantras as a company is we’re a partner, not a vendor. And if somebody’s just looking for a vendor to work through a system, that’s not what we do.

So we really eliminated that business from our model and went to all-direct business where we have a relationship with the leadership team or executives. It’s got to be at least a director or VP level. And we need to know, not that you just have a job, but what are you hiring for? What problem are you trying to solve? What project are you trying to launch? We’re in the most competitive talent market that we’ve ever been with technologists. And when we’re calling that candidate, they’re getting called by 20 other recruiters, we need a story. And we need to let them know, we just don’t need a full stack developer, is we need somebody who’s helping a company launch a new initiative or transforming platforms that are going to serve a million customers, and it’s in this space and here’s what you’re helping create versus you’re just going to be a coder.

Folwell: Yeah. And I feel like having recently hired a few senior engineers, that people want to be bought into what you’re doing, the culture of the team. It’s more than just, “Hey, here’s some money and come work on this with this code base.” How has this impacted your growth overall as you’ve had the rebrand and also the shift to consulting? Have you seen it accelerate things? Has it slowed things down temporarily or how has it worked for you guys?

Glennie: Yeah. No, it’s been great. I mean, before we went through the relaunch we picked our top clients and we talked with them about what we were doing. And we went through some iterations of the plans. Because we basically said, “Here’s what we’re seeing. And here’s how we think we can pivot and help you. How does that message land with you?” And we got really great feedback. We got great support and we listened to them. And because we said, “Once we get this, we’re coming right back and we’re going to want to have discovery meetings about what we’re doing and how we could help in a different way.”

So I think we really want to be informed and not just be in a box thinking about ourselves and thinking, “This is what clients want.” We’re like, “Here’s what we’ve heard from multiple clients. And here’s what we’re doing to address it. What do you think?” And so it was a really good in-the-door process of not just coming up at something and saying, “Hey, this is what we think you need.” It’s like, “You told us this is what you need. We put it in this package and now let’s talk about it.”

Folwell: Wow. That’s great. I mean, it seems like such a simple thing. But also something that I see missed so often is just getting the customer feedback on the concept, on the new feature, on the new build before actually rolling it out, making sure it aligns with what people want. And sounds like you’ve kind of built out the whole business unit that way.

Glennie: Yeah. I mean, even before we did this we’ve worked with some industry partners that really create this perpetual feedback loop. So in our business there’s always the client and there’s humans there working. And then they give us a project and we go get technologists to come in and do that work. And we want constant feedback from the client. “How is it going on the project? How is our resources and team doing for you?” And we want to know from the resources, “Hey, is this what you thought it would be? And are you enjoying it? Do you have any blockers in your path? Are there any issues you see or opportunities that things could get better?” And a lot of companies have found they don’t want the feedback. They just want people to keep billing. And for us we want the feedback early and often. And because when we get the feedback, we can make adjustments. And it’s like, “Yes, do more of this. Do less of that.”

And so we’ve based the company and we’ve used automation and technology and platforms and obviously human contact to really pronounce what is going on. Instead of just putting people out to work and just hope it works out. So it’s really intentional in the way we approach it.

Folwell: I love that. And with that, you brought the technology component. And I know you’ve been an early adopter, a lot of technology throughout, within staffing. But wondering if you kind of had a viewpoint and just like….one of the questions we hear all the time is what technology to go after? Or how to approach building your tech stack. Wonder if you had thoughts on how to do that, be intentional about that, and make sure you’re strategic about it as well.

Glennie: So in regards to our own technology stack, we started in 2005. And we never wanted a server. We wanted everything to be web-based and we wanted open APIs on our platform. So we could have a main platform, but then we could build on that and partner with other companies as needs changed over time. And so an important thing for me to do was to build relationships within the industry of partners that could support us. And I go to industry events, I network with people like yourself that are entrepreneurs that are building things and understand what they’re doing. Usually I get an early stage with those folks and I let them know the same thing. I don’t want you to be a vendor. I want you to be a partner to us. I want to understand your roadmap as a company, what you’re trying to do. And I want to try to help make your product better. 

Because most technology companies don’t have…that have been in our seat on our side. And so they’re very anxious to hear what we have to say, and they want to understand our business model and what our challenges are. And what I’ve found throughout the years is that we set the table right. We’re able to have a great relationship. I’ve worked with a lot of chief product officers at different companies with the development teams. Loom is one of my favorite things to use, because I could show them on my screen….

Folwell: It’s so great.

Glennie: …here’s what I’m seeing, right? And getting the strategy sessions with them and just offer my help and it always comes back tenfold. Because A, you build a great relationship with entrepreneurs, building a technology company and you know the space you want to play in.

Everybody’s usually coming at it from a good place. I think an important thing when we select a technology company is we never want to get locked in a long-term contract. Because a lot of companies are great at showing their software and all the things that work. But they don’t show you what works wrong. And we’ve gotten in situations where that’s happened. So we’re very intentional with our contracts. If there’s implementation costs. Just that we have an out, if it’s not what they said it is. And it’s like, “If this doesn’t work as described, as demoed, then we get to opt out.” And we’ve had to do that a couple times. But most times it does work. But we do a lot of vetting on our vendors and have a great consulting team that have built systems and know how to evaluate vendors.

We’ve got a great system for doing that and it’s really helped our growth. And we have a nice stack with many companies that we work with and we’re always evolving. We’re currently assessing a couple of new tools for our company that will help. And it’s always about using automation when automation is correct and removing friction from the process and making it easier for the client, making it easier for the technologist to get things done. We don’t want to impede. We want to just open the gateways for things to flow correctly.

Folwell: Awesome. And great answer to that question. And shifting gears a little bit, you and I were talking just briefly ahead of this call about remote work and brought up a term that I actually hadn’t heard: “Zoom cities.” I think it would be interesting to just dig into what is a Zoom city and what are some of the trends that you’re seeing with remote work and technologists across the country?

Glennie: Sure. Yeah. I mean, there’s definitely some traditionally big hubs, typically on the coast, of technology companies or just large companies using technology whether in financial services, government, healthcare. And they’re typically San Francisco, LA, Seattle, New York area, this research triangle. And so you have these big cities and what’s happened over time is they hire highly compensated individuals, house prices go up a ton and it becomes difficult for them to navigate their work-life balance and go to the mountains, go skiing, go to the beach, whatever it may be. And with the freedom that was created during the pandemic, we saw, maybe, 5, 10% of technologists would be allowed to work remotely. But majority, 90-plus percent, would have to physically be in a location. And when you’re hiring in San Francisco and it costs over a million dollars to get a 500-square-foot apartment, even if they’re making great money, they’re not having a great living.

When the pandemic hit, they started really seeking lifestyle places. So, Boise, Idaho was one of the first ones to really grow. Where once they knew they could work remote with Zoom, they were going and they were actually able to do cash offers on houses because whatever they sold their house for in San Francisco, the remaining balance was enough to buy a house in Boise. Montana is another Zoom city that we’ve seen. People love the outdoors. I mean, it’s 40 minutes of skiing there. There’s rivers, there’s biking. Great just culture within the town. And so we’re really seeing when Zoom works, hence the term Zoom cities. Tulsa is another one where there’s great cost of living.

Folwell: Really?

Glennie: They pay $10,000 rebates, I think, this year for technologists to move there. They provide them free coworking space if they want it. And again, there’s very affordable housing. So there’s really this in-filling that’s going on, where people are moving from the coast a little bit inward to where maybe the cities aren’t as crowded. Maybe the schools are a little bit better. The housing prices are lower and there are still vibrant cultures within these places.

Folwell: How’s that impacting, I guess, geo arbitrage? Or where you’re just like, “All right. Well, I’m going to hire developers out of Iowa or out of some area where there’s a low cost living.” Are you seeing that there’s still an advantage when it comes to hiring in geographies where there’s maybe lower cost of living or is that being leveled out?

Glennie: Three years ago, there was an advantage to that strategy. You could hire somebody down Alabama or Florida where cost of living was less. And you could probably hire them 20, 30% less than the market because their local jobs just didn’t pay as much. But we’re seeing it level out where location doesn’t really matter. Companies actually used to do compensation-based surveys. Like, “Hey, if you live in San Francisco we’ll pay you more. But if you move to Nebraska, we’re going to adjust your salary.” And with the supply chain issue, there’s obviously not a supply for developers and technologists. But there’s huge demand. They just say, “No.” And the companies have a choice to make, keep looking for that smaller number of people who still accept smaller salaries. But I really think we see equity changing across the board is, “My salary should be based on my skill. If I could be a remote worker, what does it matter if I’m in San Francisco or if I’m in Lincoln, Nebraska. If I’m delivering what you need as a company, then I should get paid the same as anybody in any other city.” 

Because equity is always an issue within companies if you have a development team. If people have the same level and the same skill, they need to be paid in the same salary band. And in many states like the state of Colorado, that’s now being enforced. That regardless of your location, your gender, whatever it may be, if you’re doing the same job, you get the same pay.

Folwell: To me that feels equitable. It seems like it makes sense. And I mean, we’ve seen the salaries for technologists go up so much in the last few years. Do you think, the supply and demand, this trend is here to stay? I know there’s a lot of changes in the economy right now. But any forecast on what you see the future looking like for pay rates?

Glennie:  If you look back to 2020, 2021, we were seeing almost 20% increases a year in salaries in many positions across the board. And it really depends with what stack they’re working with. But a lot of the JS stuff with React and Angular, it goes through phases which one’s hotter. But if you’re looking for the higher-end skills, as long as the demand issue is there, I think, they’re going to increase. But I think there’s going to be economic pressure on companies in certain industries to cap it. Because you can’t have sustained double-digit growth on salaries for multiple years. I’ve been doing this for 20-plus years and there’s always been a gradual increase of 3 to 5% per year.

But if you look at a 20% increase, you just cannot have that sustained. At a certain point, budgets will be cut. And really starts with, if you look at product companies, if you look at a Google or a Facebook or a Twitter or any of these companies that have huge margins, where they have a 40% margin, they have a decent budget to play with. And historically, especially the Microsofts and the Apples, during recessions, that’s a lot of time when they grow. They buy other companies, they hire more employees because they see other people slowing down.

But they know the cycle’s going to pick back up in a year or two. So they basically double down, maybe they get a little bit of a discount. So as long as they’re spending, there’s going to be a place. But I think when you get into more of the service sector, you’re dealing with healthcare, you’re dealing with financial services, telecom, they have a limit. They don’t have the same margin, some of the larger technology companies and they can only go so high. And the budget will hit the wall. I don’t see a complete level out, but I see the incremental change slowing down.

Folwell: And with that, what’s your forecast as we’re sitting in some uncertain times with the economy? Do you see, I guess, salaries flattening out a little bit? Do you see any other major trends from where you’re sitting in terms of job orders coming in? Or any indicators of potential recession at this point?

Glennie: Well, typically what I’ve seen in a down market, it’s been interesting because I’ve been through three recessions in my career and technology typically doesn’t flatten out. The legacy skill sets will. I mean, we saw the shift away from a lot of the infrastructure work when that got automated, got put in the cloud with AWS and 365. But now with the higher-end skill sets, I think companies are going to have to reduce workforce, but I don’t know that it’s going to be as much in the technology sector. I think that’ll be a growth area continued for them because they could do automation. For example, if there’s a call center, they could create new technologies to lessen the amount of call center employees or just anything that you could automate. I see companies getting more aggressive and leaning into technology with that.

So I do think there’ll be some contraction overall in the workforce. But, I mean, if you look at the Department of Labor stats, I mean, there have been, what is it, 12, 15 million open jobs in the economy. So maybe what we’ll see is a lot of the open jobs just get shut. But I think for the jobs that are continually open, for technology jobs that have been open for some time and the demand is still there. I think if you look at different skill sets, technology would be the cornerstone during the downturn where it’s at least steady, if not growing a small amount. But I think the contraction will come in other areas within the companies.

Folwell: Yeah. I think that makes complete sense and with the need for technology and what you can do with it feels like that’s just shifting of budgets, not necessarily reduction in demand overall. It just depends where you’re working at. Are there other major trends that you’re seeing in staffing right now, or any other things that are impacting your business?

Glennie: We work, obviously, in the staffing world and the consulting world. Again, in down economies, you do see they want to continue doing projects, but maybe they don’t want as much, sometimes, large consulting teams. They want more of a hybrid approach. Like, “Hey, we’ll onboard some consultants to do a lot of the advisory work.” But other roles where maybe they were using consulting across the board, they look more for a hybrid. Because consulting rates are much higher than traditional staff augmentation rates. So I think we’ll see more blending where they’re trying to get more value-based delivery than paying premium across the board.

Folwell: That makes sense. And with that, we’re going to shift gears a little bit to some of the additional questions that we add to the end of these podcasts. One of the areas that I think you probably have great insight on with your 20-year history in staffing. What advice do you wish you were given before entering the staffing industry?

Glennie: That’s a great question. Just embrace change, embrace the roller coaster of the business. Never get too high, never get too low. Really try to stay even-keeled with the change and make sure that you align yourself with an organization that could pivot. I had worked with larger organizations where it was harder for them to pivot. I’ll use the analogy of a large oil tanker versus a small speed boat in an obstacle course. And if new obstacles get…down with an oil tanker they’re going to have to have an hour’s notice, then they’re going to make these slight adjustments and the course is changing real time. They’re going to struggle. So I think even if you’re a growing company, the ability to pivot, remain agile is key. And to just listen to the market and really understand where things are going. And don’t say, “We’ve done it this way, it needs to keep happening this way.”

It’s, “Well, we’ve done it this way and it’s worked. It works till it doesn’t work.” And understanding that and then pivot. And again, that’s, I think, where competitive advantage comes in of having strong leadership teams is really understanding the market, really having confidence, and doubling down in yourself. So when we went through the rebrand, we did that during COVID. We knew many companies went into retreat mode and we actually decided to spend more money and invest more in the company and further push our consulting arm and go through the rebrand. Because we were confident we’re going to come out of it. And we wanted to come out of it in a stronger position than a retreat position.

Folwell: Oh, that’s great advice. Next question I’ve got for you is, in the last five years, what new belief, behavior, or habit has most improved your life? 

Glennie: A couple of things: about five years ago, we went through a transformation as a company where we were in a system called EOS. And we really dug into what is our “why” as our company, what is our “what,” what are our core values and to really live those values. And it becomes a filter for every single thing we do. And it transformed our company, transformed the culture and what we do. And I think just in general trying to be a good person is just have empathy for situations of the world. There’s been a lot of changes and really meeting people where they are. Sometimes a person could come into a situation and they have their belief system and you meet somebody else and they might be somewhere different. And I think instead of trying to assert where I’m coming from is really understand where they’re coming and meet there and then have them understand me as well. And because to me, that’s where true collaboration occurs.

Folwell: I love that. And you mentioned EOS there. Is that still what you guys use as your operating system?

Glennie: Oh, a hundred percent. Yeah. Yeah. And it’s grown a ton since we started doing it. I mean, there are tens of thousands of companies running it. I know a lot of folks that do it. I know it’s been transformational for us and for many other companies. So yeah, it’s part of the DNA of our company.

Folwell: Awesome. That’s great. And what is one of the best or most worthwhile investments you’ve ever made? Could be an investment of money, time, energy, et cetera.

Glennie: Yeah. I think investment in personal growth is super important. I think when I was coming up as a kid and a young person, there was this ethos of like “figure it on your own, do it on your own.” And as I started studying highly successful people, I realized they had built a team around them. If you take Derek Jeter, arguably one of the greatest shortstops ever, you look at him and how many coaches he had. I mean, there’s the obvious ones like the coach of the team. But then there’s a batting coach. There’s a fielding coach. There’s a hitting coach. There’s a strength and conditioning coach. There’s a nutritional coach. There’s a sports psychologist coach. There’s a life balance coach. I mean, Derek probably had a team of 15 to 20 people that were highly trained in their field to help him become the best version of himself.

So I think really being open to whether it’s finding a mentor or finding a nutritionist you work with, or a spiritual advisor or whatever it may be for your lifestyle, be open to getting help from other people and embracing it. And really trying to find people that they’re the best in their field like you aspire to be the best in your field. And if I’m looking for help from somebody, I want to know that they’re really good at doing it, they’ve helped other people. And then just give myself and that matter to them and say, “Let’s get better together.”

Folwell: That is great. I’ve not thought about it from a sports perspective. I absolutely love that. It makes sense. So what is the book or books you’ve given most as a gift and why?

Glennie: Yeah. If it’s for entrepreneurs, I love The E-Myth Revisited by Michael Gerber. I think anybody thinking about starting up a company or struggling with a company they’re launching, that is a top book to read. I think just from the more life perspective, I love the book The Alchemist. It’s just about the journey of your life and creating your own personal legend and sometimes where you start is where you end. I think that’s a great book. There’s probably a number of them. I think Drive by Daniel Pink is just great about really leadership in the 21st century. Where it gets away from that control and command approach or the carrot and the stick and really into the, Daniel’s three tenants are really around when you have a team is really giving them autonomy, giving them something to master and then having something to really having a purpose.

So we’re doing this for a reason. And for us as a company, philanthropy is highly important. We do karma days where we take time off of work in the middle of the day to go help other organizations. And so that’s really part of the purpose. And that’s, again, built into the DNA of what we do. But every person that works for us, we’re really driving them towards autonomy. So like, “Hey, you have a leader that you work with. But you’re really carrying your own bag. And you’re really driving what you do.” And then with the mastery is many people just get stuck in a job. But it’s like, there’s something each person could master on the team. And they’re the expert for that. And I think that helps go into the purpose. It’s like, “You might be a salesperson. But you’re the salesperson that understands sales strategy better than anybody on the team. When it comes to strategy sessions, you lead those and help develop your approach to engaging with clients.”

Folwell: That’s great. Great recommendations there. Last question I have for you is, how has a failure or apparent failure set you up for later success?

Glennie: Yeah. I believe in fail early, fail often. And I think using failure as a gift. I think there’s a stigma around, if you fail once, then you’re done. But I think failure is critical to business. We’ve tried to do many different things and some of them don’t work. And I think it’s really about failing, understanding what went wrong and how to change the next time you do it. Did you ask enough questions upfront? Did you do enough research? Did you talk to other people who tried to do the same thing? And what was their experience? Because some things are just hard to solve and people are like, “Oh, if you solve that idea. You get the million-dollar idea.”

But other things, there’s really a pattern of how to do it correctly. And I’ve realized sometimes I’ve tried to do something without really investigating it. I’ve built up a strong network of other business owners and leaders. And whenever I’m thinking about trying something new, there’s probably five to 10 people I’ll reach out to and say, “Hey, have you done this challenge? What worked? What didn’t work?” I don’t mind failing. But I definitely like success better.

Folwell: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. As do we all. So with that, do you have any closing comments for the audience?

Glennie: No. I would just say, people listening to this, if there’s anything I said that you’re curious about or want to engage, I’m very open to networking and I love to work with people and help people or learn from people. So please feel free to reach out. I love talking technology. I love talking consulting. I love talking business. Just grateful for you having me on the podcast and I just really hope there’s some value for folks in listening.

Folwell: Oh, thanks so much for being on, Tim. Really enjoyed the conversation today, and thank you guys for being here.

Glennie: Thank you, Dave. We’ll talk soon. Take care.