What’s The Point? A Value Conversation
October 26, 2023 | On the Soloist Women Podcast
Katie Burkhart appeared on the Soloist Women podcast for a conversation with host Rochelle Moulton. She talked about how we can do more of what we (and our clients and buyers) value—and less (or better yet, none) of what we don’t.
Listen to the episode below.
read the transcript
excuse any typos as we tried to capture the conversation as it happened.
Katie Burkhart: I'm a big believer that you need your core, which has five pieces: purpose, vision, outcomes, mission, and values. Because we need to know what that core is so that we can make choices based upon it. That's what constitutes a strategy. And when you think about impact, right--Impact is the caboose that comes in at the end. We need to deliver value and have value delivered successfully in order to hopefully make an impact, right? And impact is difficult to measure. It's difficult to put our hands around, but we--most of us--and it sounds like soloist women are really looking to make that impact. And I know a lot of the people I work with do too.
Rochelle Moulton: Hello, hello. Welcome to Soloist Women, where we're all about turning your expertise into wealth and impact. I'm Rochelle Moulton, and today I'm here with Katie Burkhart, who is an essentialist thinker, entrepreneur contributor, thoughtful speaker, and, my favorite, jargon slayer. She is also the Mastermind behind Matter Logic, which is a system for running a business in the value economy. Katie, welcome.
Katie: Thank you so much for having me! I'm really excited to be here.
Rochelle: Well, I'm excited to have you. So, one of the reasons that I just had to have you on the show is your focus on turning “what's the point” into this key question that we ask with our work, and this idea that you can make saying “no” the way that we get more done, and to make value our focus. And I know you normally work with teams inside organizations, but when we met, I was fascinated with how your principles apply to the soloist model. So, I wanna spend some time on that.
Katie: A hundred percent. So, I’d love getting to know you a little, separately, and then spend some time really digging into what a soloist is. Which I think you've crystallized really well. And I think we assume work--if businesses, big teams are doing it, small teams may not be doing it. But the great thing about this is it applies to people as people. It applies to soloist businesses, it applies to small teams, it applies to big teams. And the way I wanna sort of chat about this is through a story. So, I don't know if you ever did this as a kid, but my grandparents held an Easter egg hunt every Easter when we were really little. And they used to put a lot of time into putting coins into some of the eggs and candy into some of the eggs.
And, you know, the Easter egg hunt was not really the thing. You could just go eat the candy later, but as a kid, you didn't understand that you were really excited for the Easter egg hunt. And in my mind, there are two ways of doing the Easter egg hunt: the way most people do it, which is to take their bucket and, as soon as the thing goes off, run as hard and as fast as they can in all sorts of different directions. They're bumping into all the other kids. In some cases, they're smashing the eggs. They're trying to throw whatever they can in into the basket. They're a hot, sweaty mess by the time they get to the end, and they have really variable results.
The other way to go about doing it is to determine, very specifically, what value it is that you wanna deliver. What is it that you're really looking at? Set a specific focus. And to be able to go out and assess the eggs that you are confronting and then put the ones that fit into your basket at the end. You're gonna have a lot less eggs, most likely, but you are gonna be in a much stronger position because you're not exhausted, you're not hot and sweaty, you're not super distracted. And the eggs that are in your baskets are good ones. They're whole, they're not crushed, and they're what you really need to have to actually be able to get the job done and move forward. And that's the way I really like to look at this, is to really be able to say, “what's the point?”
What's the point of why my business exists? Whether you're a soloist or a bigger team, you need to be able to answer that question. And in the value economy, it needs to be based on the value that you deliver to someone. Actual, meaningful value. I'm the first to say that that comes in many different shapes and sizes. You don't have to change the whole world. You do not have to save the world, but you need to deliver value that you can articulate and that means something to the person you deliver it to. Once you know that point, everything that you go through should have a point and should align with that fundamental point. And that's where that “no” piece comes in, right?
This isn't about minimalist, about, “well, we just wanna have less.” That's true. But “no” is really a strategic tool to say, “these don't fit.” This is aimless, this doesn't have a point, or its point does not really fit with the strategy that we're here to advance. We need to say “no.”
Rochelle: Well, I feel like you were watching me at my first Easter egg hunt, so there's that. And I was the first one, not the second one, let's be clear. So Katie, what made you--I mean, you started your business, what made you start your business? And then, did you immediately focus on this? I mean, did you land on this mission right away? Or was this a process?
Katie: Oh, it was a process. Mostly accidental. When I started my--My very first job was as a lifeguard, and I worked at a pretty safe pool. And I spent a lot of time sitting on my chair staring at mostly empty pool water or the same two or three kids who came every day, who we know were not going to drown. So, you were pretty much there by yourself on this chair, listening to the clock sort of tick by your life in 15-minute increments until you went to the next chair and you did it again. And what I walked away from that experience with was, that was not how I wanted to spend my life. Time was far more valueable than that. And I think you and your soloist manifesto really recognize that true wealth isn't simply money. Time and the ability to have true time freedom is really where wealth comes in.
And once I understood that, that was particularly motivating to me. I both wanted to pick a career, something that utilized my skills and my interests, however broad that might be, and then, flip side, how do I help other people kind of not waste their time and what it was that they were doing? And I started, as young people do, very focused on the first. And I actually spent time as a designer and did work all over the place. In theater, in systems, in data, in all--Anything where you wanted to design a broader system, I was willing to take it on. And I ended up backing into my first company, Matter7, which still exists today.
Where we initially did branding and big brand systems, we have shifted over the years to being truly focused on where, non-surprisingly, our clients are looking for value, which is how they tell their story. And at this point, our storytelling studio.
But that process led me to see how difficult it actually is for companies and bigger teams to be that second Egg Hunt team. To really have that level of discipline, to have structure and systems that allows them to do that. And I really set out to, “how do I build a methodology? How do I come up with an approach? How do I create tools? How do I ultimately teach them how to go about doing that?” So it was a, a little bit of a following where there was a need or where there seemed to be an ability to do something better, and seeing if I couldn't find a way to do that.
Rochelle: It's interesting the way you described that. You were focused on designing things, but you were spreading your efforts in a lot of different directions, which is something most soloists, myself included, can identify with, especially at the beginning of their journey. When you're figuring out--In those first, typically two or three, years, you're trying to figure out how to make your business model sustainable and have some consistent revenue. And so, we take on some things that later we go, “oh yeah, I wouldn't do that now.”
So, let's just talk revenue for a moment, and then I wanna dive back into the--into your specialty. But, so, do you remember how long it took you to hit your first hundred thousand?
Katie: Probably two years, although I'd have to really sit back and think about that. But I think it was two years with the first company. My second company--the company I’ve spent most of my personal time with at this point, the MatterLogic company--, we initially started as a technology company, so we sort of went into it knowing the first couple years would be non-revenue generating. But when we shifted away from that and wanted to go out into market in a different capacity, that took me slightly more than a year to get us to our first hundred thousand. Which was exciting and very cool to do.
But you made a point about, when we first start, we kind of go out and take on whatever knocks. And that, especially as a soloist that kind of--And admittedly, if you're a smaller team, it doesn't actually go away. It just looks different. That fear that if I don't say yes to this project, there won't be another one.
One of the things I've learned is that there are many projects that cost more than they pay. And that strategic ability to say no--it takes some exercising and take some practice to learn when to say no. But as you're looking at clients and assessments, one way to always look at it is when it's early. We took a lot because I wasn't sure exactly where I wanted to land. I can't say I really set out to, quote unquote, “make a business.” But once I started to figure out, “these are the types of people I like to work with, here's why. These are the types of clients that can afford to work with us so that we can do a really good job, here's why.”
We could start to develop a better profile of mutual benefit where I'm excited, and ultimately my team's excited to do the work, and they're in a position to actually invest enough to get the value that they're looking for. So, you know, a hundred percent trial and error starts. But I did it. It took me a little longer than I wish it would have to start saying, “no, I'm sorry, you aren't really a good fit for us.” And then to be able to take the time I would have spent on that project and invest it into another area of my business, which would help me get to that right fit client, versus struggling with a client who wasn't right fit. I'm sorry if that was a tangent.
Rochelle: No, that wasn't a tangent at all. In fact, I was really struck by something. You said that many projects cost more than they pay. And that is so true. And I think for soloists, especially, 'cause we're selling our expertise, right? We're not selling a widget. And so we're--hopefully we're not selling our time, hopefully we're selling our expertise based on value. But a lot of times when soloists first start, they're selling time and it's easy to not think of your time as a cost. Until it starts to get ugly, and then the light bulb goes off.
Katie: So, time is my focus, and starting to get people, even though I think there are some people who recoil and are like, “that's so transactional.” Our goal isn't to make it transactional, but to recognize that you can make more money, but you cannot make more time. So really thinking hard about, “what's the point of doing this,” and really making sure that that's gonna be worth the time you exchange for it, is a critically important question. And sometimes the answer is--in my case, watching the Karate Kid for the 87th time is because I like it and I'm going to find it relaxing and I'm good with that. But I asked the question, rather than doing it and then finding out later that this wasn't a good use of time. I think it's James Clear or someone else makes the statement that, or it's an adage, that “every yes is a no to everything else you could have done with that time.” So make sure that you're good with that.
Rochelle: Yeah. The yes is a critically important word.
So, one of the things that you talk and write about is the old assumptions about work that keep pulling us back from the brink of changing them. Will you talk some more about that? And I'm curious, especially in this soloist experience, because I found that a lot of soloists when they're in a big corporate environment and then they leave, they tend to strip away all of those must-dos, at least when they first start. But then some of those old habits kind of come slowly back into the business.
Katie: Well, I know that you actually have full corporate experience. What was the phrase you used, “suit with the pearls?” Sort of curious, before I answer your question: what were the things that you were really walking away from specifically? And, are you finding that people are still walking away from those things? Or are they walking away from different things?
Rochelle: Oh, that's a good counter-question. I was walking away from being told what to do by people who weren't good at what I did. And I kept feeling like my value system was bumping up against a corporate--and I say corporate, it was a big consulting firm, but against a system--that didn't allow me enough flexibility to do what I thought was right for my clients and for the business. So, it was mostly that.
But yeah, I didn't really wear the pearls much after. But it was less about that because, I have to be clear, I really loved my work. I loved what I did. I really enjoyed most of the clients. I enjoyed a lot of my colleagues. But it was time to do what I wanted to do. So, it was those kinds of things. So, I don't think I was rebelling against a corporate structure so much as saying, “you are not gonna let me do what I want, and I'm tired of you trying to put me in a box, so I'm gonna go build a new box.”
And 'cause my first thing wasn't as a soloist. It was building a firm that was run the way that I was envisioning a good, healthy firm would be run. But what I see a lot, in terms of other women--and it's funny, I saw it back when I first did this, and I see it now--is that a lot of women are saying, “I want a different kind of life.” And it's probably not about whether they have to wear stockings, god forbid, or a suit, but it's about having time for the other things in their life. And a lot of times that's children or taking care of elderly family. But not always. A lot of times it's--You'd be surprised at how many people just have these other interests in their life, and they're just kind of done donating or dedicating a good percentage of their life energy to somebody else's goals.
Katie: Yeah. So, I have so many ways to try to respond to that. So, I'm gonna try to do this in a way that makes any sense. A little bit of sense at least. Because you're hitting on a number of just really good points. And one of the things that I like to talk about when we're looking at the value economy, and this is a big one for people to get comfortable with, is that work is anything into which you invest your time. We've always seen “work equals job.” I.E., it's the thing that I get paid to do. That is one aspect of work. But investing time in friendships is work. It takes time. Investing in your family takes time. Investing in that hobby that you really love to do takes time.
And I think fundamentally, whether people realize it consciously or unconsciously—soloists tend to realize it much more consciously and are very actively doing something about it--they're looking to build a full life with all manners of work working together. Versus, I think, very strict corporate job boxes, as they were--and funny enough, as I often call them myself--do not understand that. And they’ve sort of created this false sense of one of my least favorite phrases, “work-life balance.” As if work was something different than life. And I'm like, “I hate to tell you this, but it's all one life, my friends.” So that's a big piece.
But to sort of walk through the different assumptions, 'cause you asked for them, I should give them. I really like to go all the way back to right before the industrial revolution when Adam Smith wrote his manifesto, the Wealth of Nations, which we still, as a free market economy, draw from routinely. And there's an awful lot in there that I'm a huge proponent of, with the exception that he talked about how workers would work in this type of economy.
And the industrialists sort of took that, stripped it of any nuance, and were like, “yes, this is exactly how we need to be doing work.” And unfortunately, even today, we haven't quite dropped them. So, the assumptions that he makes are as follows.
First, people only work for the payoffs it produces, namely pay. As long as the work produces adequate payoffs, it doesn't matter what work people do. There must be an authority monitoring people to ensure they're doing the work. And that the way we work is about production efficiency and the ability to scale. And the fifth one is the one that I actually started with: the work is what we do for pay.
I would make the argument that these are still why you end up in a lot of the positions that you end up with. And in very much what you just went through and described, that there is somebody managing you that, whether they're doing it consciously or unconsciously, they are not comfortable allowing you to make decisions on your own because they have to make sure that you do it. This entire “bringing people back to the office” debacle is all rooted in people in, quote unquote, “management” roles who are there. By the way, management means to control, to make sure that your butt is in your seat and you're doing work, because they are still abiding by this belief that if they're not sitting there watching you type, you couldn't possibly be doing work.
Which, it’s just amazing how long these have stayed and have really hitched on to the way we're going about doing things. Despite all the changes, despite, in a lot of cases, manager's own interests in going about doing things differently, these inevitably creep up around the edge and get people to go, “I'm not exactly sure what I'm supposed to do.” For soloists, I can absolutely see the, “it's about efficiency and the ability to scale.” Well, do you have to scale? Do you have to go out and hire employees and build a big business? Is that the only way to be considered successful?
So, looking at the value economy, I would say we need to make different assumptions. One, people work to create, to be challenged, to achieve mastery of their skills, to grow, to build relationships, and to contribute to something beyond themselves. This is a very different motivation for why people are coming to work. And one that I think you're seeing increasing and was grossly accelerated by the pandemic.
Second, the work people do must be meaningful. How they go about doing it does actually matter. It is no mistake that the primary reason people quit is because their boss sucks or they really don't like who they're working with.
Third, because they're working for reasons they care about, they can do quality work without being constantly monitored by an authority. Really, people actually can, and if you went in with that assumption, you may be pleasantly surprised that, while you may have a bad apple in your bunch, the other nine are doing amazing work and are much more excited to do it.
Fourth, the way we work is about effectiveness and growth. Okay? Being bigger for bigger's sake, it's not necessarily productive, and that doesn't really get at value delivery. And that serving more people thinner, spreading the jelly on the toast thinner is not necessarily better. Going deeper may actually be better. Being able to get to a solution more effectively may be better.
And then the last piece, which I talked about, that anything into which we invest our time is really work. And understanding how that's driving value, both to us and to other people. These are very different assumptions that I think--I would be interested to see your reaction--I think soloists would understand as far as what they're trying to get to.
Rochelle: More than understand, “embrace” is the word that came to mind. And there are people in any profession who left their former employer to start a business because they felt--I'm gonna use the word oppressed in a very specific way--oppressed from being able to do what they really wanted to do, what they knew they needed to do for their mission, or the business's mission, or to make their work more meaningful.
So, I mean, we see that a lot, but the thing that I love the most in what you said is--I believe, in the US especially, there is this cultural view that a business is only successful when you start hiring employees. And whether that's big picture or a small picture. I think it's both. I mean, I've met people at the grocery store, as an example, just locally who say, “oh, well how many employees do you have?” It is this cultural measure of success. And for those of us who went into this with these cultural notions, it takes a while to get rid of them and do what is right for us. Which could be building businesses with employees. But in the case of soloists, it’s not. We are looking for something different.
Katie: And I think what's interesting--and this is a 100% posit to the future, and I'm not really big on predicting the future, so I just put that very large asterisk there. But I think that there's--that this whole concept of jobs. The concept that we have this job, and I have to have a job description that's similar to other job descriptions on the market, so that if you move as ACFO or a bookkeeper or whatever from my company to another company, the job descriptions will be largely indistinguishable. And then we can have commensurate pay and whatever. I get it. I get the neat, sort of, “in industrial job box order” that that comes with, but it doesn't really help companies necessarily. Which surprises people. But so often--so I'm gonna tie this back to soloists in a minute. Bear with me.
So, often I'll walk in and be like, “okay, let's talk about your workflow.” And what does the business do? And make sure that everything that we're taking action on is actually driving value and advancing your strategy as a business, and get rid of the things that are not. Because those are uses of our time we don't need to put in there. And look at where we maybe have opportunity to deepen value in the way that we go about doing things.
But that second conversation is, “okay, well, then these are the roles and contributions that you need.” And one of the ways to start thinking about that, which is usually a long conversation with some of my clients, is, when I say role, that role can be occupied by a full-time employee, by a part-time employee, by an external consultant, a soloist, by an agency, or maybe even perhaps by a piece of technology.
Do we really understand based on what we need done? What the contributions are to the workflow? What type of contributor should be sitting in this role? And starting to look at that a little more openly. Because I think--and this is where the future piece comes in--I think that hopefully there will be a lot more, maybe not massive companies, but smaller, midsize to smaller businesses, basically bringing together soloists for collaborations.
My own agency, Matter7, does that frequently. And I'm very open about how I need you to be amazing doing what you're doing, and I basically wanna give you the structure to do what you're amazing at with other people who are doing what they do and are really good at what they're amazing at, and figure out how to make that happen.
And really, I see that as the future of where things are going. Because people are looking for that ability to self-select, and to do projects that work for them. To craft what they do and what they don't do. For that to be more of a mutual conversation. Versus a sort of industrial prescriptive, where you just kind of fit in and do it, and it may not really make sense why we have you, but we're a business and we're supposed to have ACFO, so you're here. There's no point to that. And I just, my skin crawls.
Rochelle: Well, and then you let them go when you finally figure out that they don't need it. And you may have spent 10 years of your life in that role.
But the interesting thing, just a quick sidebar, is that when I created my first company, that's exactly what I was thinking, the way you were describing it. And what we wound up with is we had, I called them circles. We had the inner circle, which was myself, a business partner, and a handful of employees. We got up to…I think six at one point was the biggest number. And then we had a second circle. And the second circle were all contractors. They had their own businesses, but they really liked to work with us. Like, we had a really fun group of people. And so, they never wanted to be an employee. They always wanted that independence, but we would bring them in pretty regularly.
And then we had this outer circle, and the outer circle usually were people that had such a specialized expertise, we just didn't have enough volume to keep them busy. And some of them would've liked to have been employees, but most not. They just loved doing. They were the ultimate subject matter expert in a fairly narrow thing that we only needed so often. But part of what I did was to stay in touch with them and give them opportunities when I could manifest them for them to be part of the team. And it was a very fluid organization. We didn't put--We didn't have job descriptions, but we also didn't put these labels on people's heads that implied to others that they were more valuable or less valuable than someone else.
Katie: Yeah. And I think that concept of “who's valuable, who's not valuable” is really interesting. And I'd sort of be curious for your take on two things. One: you started this ages ago. I've got one company that's doing it now. Are you seeing more people figure this out and actually start to do it, and do it well, or people still struggling?
And then, that sense of how these boxes and ways that we're putting people within companies, instead of doing what I think businesses think they do, which is give them a ladder for people to work up: Does it in any way, by virtue of having different titles and whatever, devalue people and, based on those old assumptions, end up making it so that people leave? Because putting 10 years in just to get someone to listen to your opinion seems like a very long time.
Rochelle: Well, you just described the consulting firm. And I left after becoming a partner, so I worked really hard. I became a partner really young, and I was listened to when I got to that point. But what I didn't understand in my naivete was that all the work that I'd done to get there was--I now had to double that to keep going. And to--And it wasn't so much about climbing the ladder, although I was pretty competitive in those days. So, I liked the idea of climbing a ladder, in all honesty, but I also wanted to really make a difference and work a certain way. And, you know, they weren't having that one bit.
Katie: Oh.
Rochelle: Yeah.
Katie: Yeah. I think it's, at least in what I'm seeing, there are groups out there that are saying, “I'm really interested in doing it differently, but I'm not exactly sure how.” And my hope for people is that we start to put out more practical responses, which I'm working to do. That's the thing that gets me excited, is “how do we put out ways for people to start to move in this direction?” And I'm thrilled for the work in you and other soloists are doing and saying like, “Hey, this is an option, if you can't--you're not fortunate enough to get to one of the companies and teams that have figured it out, that are making genuine strides to doing work differently or have figured it out.” That you have another option to get to doing the work that delivers real value and makes real impact in a manner that works for your whole life, as opposed to your quote unquote “job.”
Rochelle: Yeah. I mean, I was thinking about your question, about “is there anybody doing this well.” And I do see some of those, and some of them have been in traditional agency models, and they wanted--They came out of that model and wanted to do it differently. Like brand strategy, for example. A graphic design. There's a firm I know that is--They would call themselves leadership consultants, but they have a bunch of silos, and they have just an incredible roster of really talented global people that are good at these things. But I think, at least in my own experience, the common denominator in the ones that are doing it well is that there's somebody, either the founder or whoever's running it now, that is really committed to this. Because it is not easy. It's what you are doing. It's what we soloists don't do.
And it's that you're constantly dealing with people who have some role in your business, and you can't just, like, call them up every six months and go, “Hey, got a job for you.” There is a process. It becomes a culture that you create, and how you stay in touch with people and how you create a consistent experience, which is not easy. It looks--It is simple, arguably, but it is not easy. And it requires a lot of care and attention by someone in the lead roles who then models that behavior for everyone else so that they're not alone.
Katie: Yeah. I would definitely agree with that. And hopefully--one of the things that I think you talk about with soloists is that these are people that want to live and work in their “genius zone” and do the things where they're using their very best talents. One of the questions we always ask is, how do we support people in doing their best work?
And I think leaders are starting to think about that a little differently. I think there's such a--We've created, with these old assumptions, such an adversarial relationship between employees and leaders. Versus saying,”Hey, we're actually all playing for the same team, and I would be much more successful as the leader if I were doing—" Within reason. There are extremes that can't be met. But, within reason, finding a way to put you in a position to do your best work. For many companies, we have the technology. We have the tools. We have the ability to do it, but it takes being comfortable with that change.
And I think, more importantly, not just being told you have to change to make your employee happy but saying “this is the way that they're gonna be able to do their best work, and my clients are gonna be better and better off and my business better off if we're all here doing our best work.” And it seems to me that that's a lot of--not all of it, but there's a big thread of that through being a soloist. It’s “I wanna be able to set myself up to do my best work.”
Rochelle: Yes. And especially if you've had experiences where you haven't been able to do that. And I did have a client, a number of years ago, who was the poster child for doing this well, and he'd gotten--I wish I could remember where he'd—He went for some sort of training and he came back, and this was before I knew him, and the light bulb went off and he shifted how he worked in the business, became many times more effective, and literally had multiple conversations over extended timeframes with each employee on what they saw. They didn't use the term “genius zone,” but what they saw is the things they did really well and wanted to make a contribution for.
And when I first started working with him, the first thing he said to me was, “okay, I don't understand anything about what you do. I just want you to help me to do this. This is the goal, and I'm gonna have opinions, and you're gonna tell me when my opinions are educated and when they're ill-informed, and I'm not gonna work in your genius zone,” basically. And he was a great client, and the people that worked with him loved him. There was so much loyalty. And it was a very small firm. They had maybe 10 or 12 people. So, that's obviously possible, but it's way more rare than I wish it was, which is why I'm so glad you're out there doing this work. It needs to be done.
Katie: Well, thank you so much. And I think something that applies to soloists also is being able to sit down and say, “what's the point of my business? Even though it's just me or me and my assistant existing, what value do we deliver?” And being really clear on that core of their business and being able to make deliberate choices. At the end of the day, it's all about choices. And the more choices that you can get, then when you say, “okay, what's the point of making this choice? What's the point of doing this thing,” and you have a really clear answer, generally speaking, the better off you're going to be, and the more likely you're gonna get to having more money, more time, and hopefully more freedom.
Rochelle: Well, and the other piece of that equation is more impact. And--I don't wanna equate value with impact because I think they're different.
But with impact, you do have a chance to really make a difference. Whether that's in the change that you're creating that has a high value to your client or your buyer, whether it's the change that you're making there in that relationship, or it's a change you're pushing out in the world a little bit more. So, you're--yes, you're working on the client, yes, you're working on the transformation, but there's also a bigger goal that you're working towards in your work and in your life.
Katie: You indicated that there's a difference between value and impact, and how important making an impact is. And some people will ask, “is that important for an individual/for a small business/for a big business/for a soloist business?”
And the answer is, I don't quite know how to answer it for people. I think everyone individually, personally, needs to do what works for them. But when I'm talking to anybody who's running a business of any size, solo and up, I'm a big believer that you need your core, which has five pieces: purpose, vision, outcomes, mission and values.
Because we need to know what that core is so that we can make choices based upon it. That's what constitutes a strategy. And when you think about impact, impact is the caboose that comes in at the end. We need to deliver value and have value delivered successfully in order to hopefully make an impact.
And impact is difficult to measure. It's difficult to put our hands around. But we, most of us, and it sounds like soloist women, are really looking to make that impact. And I know a lot of the people I work with do too.
So, the vision piece helps to sort of crystallize that by actually illustrating the world that you're trying to create. I always like to say to clients, when you can create a vision that you can be solely responsible for, that's amazing, but realistically speaking, true impact, you're going to have other effects in the ecosystem that bring all of that about. You're contributing towards that world.
And what's nice about that is it's another place that helps us to say “no.” That if we're confronted with an opportunity or a way of delivering value or a potential partnership or really anything else, and we say, “that's not gonna help build that world, that's not gonna help get me to that impact I'm ultimately trying to achieve.” We say no. And sometimes that's a “no thank you,” and sometimes that's a “hell no,” because it's really muddying the picture. And it's not getting to that ultimate impact.
Rochelle: I think I may have to quote you in the future on “impact being the caboose,” because it's so true. And I always love to have it in everything that I say. But if you're not providing value, you won't have a chance to make an impact. You've gotta be, “no, ma'am.” I mean, it's still the capitalist system. We've gotta figure out a way to create value, and then we can have an impact. So, thank you for my future quote. I will give you credit, I promise.
So, I think just, just one final question, Katie, and then we can talk about how listeners can find you. So, if you could go back to who you were when you first started your business, what is the one thing you would advise her to do?
Katie: Build relationships better. And I think, speaking for myself, when I started, I would've been considered a soloist, although the concept would've totally escaped me at the time since I hadn't yet even figured out I was an entrepreneur. People talk to me about networking. And many of us have heard the phrase “your network is your net worth,” or whatever. That didn't really make any sense to me. Like I didn't understand what they were trying to tell me.
What I was--what I ultimately learned or ultimately came to understand was, to really be successful--and funny enough, to get to real impact--it is truly difficult to do that all by yourself. Whether that's looking at building good relationships with your clients. Whether that's looking at building good relationships with other soloists who maybe you can partner on things or learn from. Whether that's building good relationships within your company. Whether that's building strong personal connections and, frankly, just building relationships with people who you think are freaking interesting because they're interesting. And they add some value to your life, and hopefully you add some value to theirs, for no other reason than maybe you share a common interest or you share absolutely no common interests and you enjoy their perspective.
And really looking at that through the prism of ways that you can build relationships and how exciting that actually can be, because I think the traditional framing of network and net worth makes it a very transactional process.
And I was very tunnel visioned in the way I went about building my initial network. And now I would go back to that Katie and say, “Katie, all these people like you. You need to open your window much wider and be really excited that if you had coffee with someone and enjoyed the conversation and wanted to have a second conversation, that's a good enough reason to keep track of that person and stay connected with them.”
Rochelle: Well, it's actually why we talked: because you're freaking interesting and we had a great conversation, and I still remember you said, “what can I do for you?” And I was, this podcast was still just an idea. And I said, “Ooh, would you like to be a guest on my new podcast?” And there we went. And so now lots more people now know that you were freaking interesting. So that's pretty awesome.
Katie: Well, thank you. But yes, that's exactly the idea. And I met you, who I think is a fabulously interesting person with such a great journey through how you got from where you were, and all the things that you've been able to achieve and do and test out. And I just, I would be very excited to ask lots of questions 'cause there's so much I could learn.
Rochelle: We had a great conversation, both of our conversations. So, Katie, we're gonna be putting links to you and some of your content in the show notes, but where's the best place for people to learn more about you?
Katie: Oh, so there are two ways to really learn more about me, depending on how you wanna do it. I am pretty darn active on LinkedIn, and I accept every request that comes through. I will only block you if you do something really heinous, and you have to work at it. So if you want to get connected to me, see what I might be posting on LinkedIn, or wanna actually drop a message and find a time to meet, that's a good way to do it.
The other way to get ahold of me is through my Substack, which is called WTP, which stands for “What's the Point.” And if you go to wtpfocus.substack.com, you can subscribe there. And that's a way to get-- If you found this conversation interesting, you will likely enjoy the articles and posts that I write there.
Rochelle: And I'll put that link in the show notes to make it easy for people. So, Katie, I just wanna say thank you so much for being generous with your ideas and your time and thinking about how the work that you're doing really falls over into the Soloist camp. I truly appreciate it. Thank you.
Katie: Oh, you're so welcome. I was really glad to be here. And I love what you're doing and continue to love the term. I think I mentioned to you in our first conversation, I've heard “solopreneur,” but it still feels like somehow, you're an entrepreneur who didn't figure it out. “Soloist” is determined by itself, and I appreciate you staking out that space.
Rochelle: Awesome. So, that's it for this episode. I hope you'll join us next time for Soloist Women.