July 1, 2025 • 46 mins
“The longer the tenure, the more things become, you know, this is the way we've always done it. And so an entrepreneur is someone that can go in and see that pretty quickly. What are the bits that are stale? Where are the potentials and opportunities for improvement?” - Dave Gregurke
In this episode, you’ll hear about:
- Aligning stakeholders with different priorities
- Balancing innovation with security in high-risk settings
- Working around resistance to change
- The importance of customer research and involving executives
- Methods for breaking habitual behaviours in large organisations
- Using simple tools to collaborate across tech stacks
- Building trust in risk-conscious cultures
- Shifting from waterfall to iterative design practices
- Future-proofing change and sustaining momentum
Key links
About our guest
Dave Gregurke is a designer of many things, born in Texas, USA where fell in love with baseball. From there the family moved to Yeosu, South Korea where he almost got kidnapped with his dog. Now long settled in Melbourne, Australia gave him a new home and accent.
For over 20 years across brand and customer experience, Dave has been a trusted end-to-end designer for Services, Product and Go-to-market.
He has deep experience in complex environments across startups, government & enterprise. Kicking-off in corporate design, he quickly fell in love with the interactive world and all its possibilities. Dave has big brands like Amazon, University of Melbourne, NAB and State Governments among his collaborators.
After founding two businesses, Dave currently focuses on complex problem spaces, including fintech payments. He’ll run your innovation and design sprints, as well as coach and train your team to develop that knowledge internally.
About our host
Our host, Chris Hudson, is an Intrapreneuship Coach, Teacher, Experience Designer and Founder of business transformation coaching and consultancy Company Road.
Company Road was founded by Chris Hudson, who saw over-niching and specialisation within corporates as a significant barrier to change.
Chris considers himself incredibly fortunate to have worked with some of the world’s most ambitious and successful companies, including Google, Mercedes-Benz, Accenture (Fjord) and Dulux, to name a small few.
He continues to teach with University of Melbourne in Innovation, and Academy Xi in CX, Product Management, Design Thinking and Service Design and mentors many business leaders internationally.
For weekly updates and to hear about the latest episodes, please subscribe to The Company Road Podcast at https://companyroad.co/podcast/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Chris Hudson (00:07):
Hey everyone.
Welcome back to the Company RoadPodcast, where we explore what
it takes to drive real changewithin organizations.
I'm your host, Chris, thispodcast is created specifically
for you intrapreneurs, changemakers, and the people, the
leaders navigating the world oforganizational transformation in
some sort of way in the complexwaters that we find there.
And today I'm joined by DaveGregurke, who's a master of a
(00:28):
designer.
He specializes in untangling themessiest most complex problem
spaces within organizations.
He's got a heap of experience.
So he's done 20 years plus ofexperience across startups,
government, enterpriseorganizations and environments.
And Dave's become a master atnavigating the challenges that
come with organizational change.
He's got a diverse background.
(00:48):
He is worked with a heap ofdifferent people, brands like
Amazon, nab, university ofMelbourne, and various state
government departments.
He's founded two businesses aswell currently focused on the
complex problem space offintech's payments and how to
make sense of all of that.
And yeah, I think what bringsDave's perspective to us and
what makes it so valuable is,his ability to really break
through that this is how we'vealways done it mentality and the
(01:11):
approach that is really plaguingso many organizations and
there's so much change that'strying to take place right now,
but people are still fitting alittle bit like, oh, is it the
right time?
Given the current, economicenvironment and context.
So he's gonna share somepractical insights, align and
competing stakeholders,balancing security with
innovation and implementingchange in environments that are
(01:32):
resistant to new ideas.
So Dave, huge welcome to theshow.
Thanks for coming on.
Dave Gregurke (01:36):
No worries, Chris.
Thanks for having me.
Chris Hudson (01:38):
Great.
So, Dave, let's start with a bitabout yourself if we can.
So maybe just describe yourselfto those who don't know you
we'll open up with that.
Dave Gregurke (01:44):
Yeah.
So for those that don't know me,I'm a designer basically my
whole life.
Even as a little kid, I wasfascinated by art and graphic
art particularly.
Throughout my, learnings beyond,graphic design into digital
design and the dawn of theinternet, and beyond into
product.
They've always, fascinated me inthat space.
And now of course sitting behindthe scenes a little bit more
into the strategy behind it.
Chris Hudson (02:05):
Okay.
And where did it all begin foryou?
What's your journey been?
Dave Gregurke (02:08):
Yeah.
So, I guess it all started, Iwas born in Texas I've lost that
accent long ago.
Can you still do it, make you doit?
I wouldn't even try.
But yeah, I've still got acitizenship there and a
connection to my home state.
I'm a big fan of baseball andit's a big passion of mine.
Technically, still playing,dunno how I'm doing it, but, I'm
still doing it.
And my club, hello NewportBaseball Club is one of my last
(02:30):
passions.
Great community down there.
Chris Hudson (02:32):
Alright.
And around intrapreneurship,what's your take on that word,
intrapreneur?
What do you think about that andhow would you define it
yourself?
Dave Gregurke (02:39):
Yeah, so I think ultimately it comes with wearing
a lot of hats, right?
If you are an entrepreneur,you're starting a business and
trying to make a doll that noone else made.
At the end of the day, you'vegotta do it all until you can
build out the team you need.
You can't do it without bringingin the right people and the
right amount of income.
So in a organization, doesn'thave to be gigantic, but
(03:00):
enterprise certainly, you end upwith quite a lot of silos.
And of course the longer thetenure, the more things become,
you know, this is the way we'vealways done it.
And so an intrapreneur issomeone that can go in and see
that pretty quickly.
What are the bits that arestale?
Where are the potentials, andopportunities for improvement.
Chris Hudson (03:16):
And what are you looking out for there?
In terms of what stale, what aresome of the warning signs there?
Dave Gregurke (03:20):
I think probably one of the more common things,
certainly recently is thereseems to be a little bit of a
poster kind of methodology ofcustomer obsessed and that kind
of thing.
It's interesting culturally itmakes sense to do that.
But when you don't see it inpractice for example, you've
got.
One department that's doingfairly regular customer testing.
(03:41):
Taking in those insights andpassing them on and making
improvements throughout the way.
And then you've got other teamsthat, might do it every six
months.
How do you square that circle interms of the consistency there?
Being able to highlight thosethings and be able to draw on
those really big wins, get theright stakeholders to turn up to
even just one interview, I'vefound has made a huge change to
(04:01):
the way they really understandwhat customer obsession is.
Chris Hudson (04:04):
Yeah.
Totally right.
I think, I've been running aload of research recently as
well, and it's a different gamerun.
It feels like research testing,once upon a time was expected,
it was left to a few people andthen it was played back, you get
presented with a 30 50 pagereport, and it's just left on
somebody's desk.
Then the work is done.
You move on, take the learningsand you build out what you're
gonna be building.
(04:24):
But I feel like the process ofgetting to research is now a
little bit trickier.
There's something to be saidfor, how people are doing that
there's also campaigning aspectyou've gotta evangelize.
If you're in that team, youknow, you're thinking about how
you can really emphasize itsworth to stakeholders.
Like you're pointing out, who doyou get into the room?
Who needs to hear the customervoice firsthand?
(04:45):
Is that ringing true for you aswell?
What's your experience been?
Dave Gregurke (04:49):
I think the main thing is send the invites out
for a start.
You want to know the peoplearound you, the people that are
gonna be able to potentiallymake effective change or take on
those insights that really stickto kind of go this process is
really worth continuing.
So yeah, part of that process isobviously making sure you've got
your squad nice and tight.
(05:09):
You want diverse thinking in theinterview process.
Whether note taking, moderating,observing.
Particularly for the, say, evenat the executive level.
People that weren't working onthe tools or in the project, but
were more really at the end of afew sprints coming and checking
in, that were definitely thepeople I would really, really
push to have at least turn up toone interview because it just
(05:29):
makes a huge difference to theway they understand what other
people are doing in theirorganization.
That's just what's worked for meanyway.
Chris Hudson (05:37):
Yeah, what value do you think they get from it if
they're in the room?
What have you noticed there?
Dave Gregurke (05:41):
I think, a couple of good examples, but maybe I'll
start with the first most broadone they obviously know what
people are doing?
They're sitting there listening.
They're literally just listeningto what people say.
It's one of those things thateasy to hear, but to actually
watch it happen.
Watch how people struggle or ifit's not an actual usability
test, it could be just a q and atype of interview.
(06:03):
That qualitative informationyou're getting through.
Yes, of course.
It's subjective, it's people'sopinions, but it's real, you're
getting to see what they say.
The next part is to see whatthey do, they start to
understand how you piece thattogether better.
And particularly in usabilitytesting, you do have that
bookend.
Usually they'll say one thingand they'll do another and they
won't realize it.
Chris Hudson (06:24):
Yeah.
Totally.
What you observe and what theydo, what they say, you know,
those can be different things.
It can be interesting to seethat.
There's definitely a lack ofrepresentation within a lot of
organizations around thecustomer voice and the empathy
is missing because thecustomer's not adequately
represented in some sort of way.
So it might be that a customeris quoted or there's some
statistical analysis, quantresearch or heavy documentation,
(06:48):
and a kind of theorized customerspeak and insights, obviously,
recommendations, things that gettranslated into strategy and
then implemented.
So how have you found it's bestto represent the customer within
your organization?
Dave Gregurke (07:02):
Well, I guess the truth is if you don't actually
have any data to go by in termsof having spoken to them, then
you've gotta be.
Fairly firm in terms ofbroadcasting that part of it.
And saying this is a gap.
We're essentially writing onassumptions.
And push that process a littlebit more for forward to the
front, I guess.
Tying back to that invitingprocess, similar thing whether
(07:22):
it's before projects get spun upjust making sure that you are
aware of your team and who'ssitting above you, who's making
those decisions.
And making sure it's a regularpart of your discussions,
particularly when there'sbroader, longer term projects
that are getting broken downinto chunks.
There's a lot of assumptionsthat are getting made, making
sure that they're aware thatyou're on it and that.
(07:43):
You are going to be highlightingthose gaps, which will be
candidates to talk to people.
Chris Hudson (07:48):
Yeah.
There's lots of things you cantry.
Just putting photos or images ofpeople into your presentations
or quotes can often help, videoclips in terms of quotes like a
little reel can help support andinsight and really show that it
was grounded in somebodyactually saying it or believing
that or valuing this or notvaluing that.
I think that can be reallyhelpful.
Even the basic thing of invitingcustomers into your business and
(08:11):
having them in your environmentcan be a real icebreaker within
a meeting room or a boardroomcontext because your leaders and
other stakeholders, might nothave seen that or heard that in
that environment either.
It can be a good reset.
I was gonna ask you aboutorganizational support and when
you've got an inkling of atransformative idea and you
think this is gonna be veryexciting, but we need to get it
(08:32):
off the ground.
How do you build up support?
What are your methods aroundthat and how do you approach it
usually?
Dave Gregurke (08:39):
Well, I think you've gotta have some pretty
robust workshopping up untilthat point.
If you haven't got a decentpresentation to make, you don't
wanna end up with a 50 pagereport that gathers digital
dust.
It's gotta be somethingpractical that you can walk
someone through fairly rapidly.
If they want more detail, you'regonna have it at that point.
But the key stakeholders, I'mtalking about, say in my time at
(09:01):
nab where you are working veryclosely with the product lead
and the tech leads.
Yeah.
Just making sure you, you'retrying to really distill
everything you can as early aspossible, as to what are we
focusing on?
Get that problem statementsorted and take that forward,
make sure it's communicated aswell as possible so they can ask
as many questions as they wantto.
But it really just helps bevery, very clear, like, what's
(09:22):
the purpose?
What are we doing next?
Why are we prioritizing aparticular thing?
They can be part of thatprocess.
Chris Hudson (09:27):
You been in that situation where leaders or
stakeholders that you've invitedin think that you're wasting
their time, how do you managethat side of things?
Dave Gregurke (09:36):
Oh, absolutely.
It's not that it happens everytime, of course, but it's
definitely something you, you'vejust gotta, like, if it hasn't
happened to you, I'd love tohear from you, put it that way.
But at the end of the day,that's part of the job.
And actually it's a big,probably a big part of.
My career as a designer is,putting forward more than one
idea.
You might get all of them shutdown.
Often what ends up happening is,you know, in bigger
(09:58):
organizations the highest paidperson starts to really mold
things.
trying to avoid that is a bigpart of what the process is
supposed to do, which is makesure that all voices are heard,
that people can vote silently orall the things that would try
and reduce that kind of bias.
But at the end of the day, ifit's, you know, say whether it's
doesn't have to be at the bank,it could be, a small business
owner operator, particularly thefounders tend to be fairly
(10:21):
strong minded, and that'scompletely fine.
That's their choice.
All you can do is present thebest data you can, removed of
all that bias.
It's up to them.
Chris Hudson (10:30):
Yeah.
I mean, it all sounds very calm,considered and under control in
the way that you describe it inthe moment.
How are you coping?
What are you feeling?
What are you seeing?
How do you respond?
You know, is there anythingthere that you can give us
advice?
Dave Gregurke (10:42):
Yeah, I think at the end of the day, if there's a
good reason, you want to knowit, but you might not, you just
gotta be prepared for the factthat you may not ever get that
answer.
And to be honest, sometimespeople have a bad day,
executives make bad decisionstoo.
Just as much as owner operatorsand you and I, day to day will
get things wrong.
So, you know, having a bit ofempathy for that process is
(11:03):
important.
Everyone's human so, have achat.
It's easy to follow up certainthings, particularly if it's a
big meeting and a big decision'sbeing made and it's a no or
something that's gonna heavilyaffect what you feel that the
agreement with the data is thenfrom there, all you can do is
really basically pick up phone,you know?
Send a DM and say, Hey, can wejust quickly go over that again?
(11:26):
I wanna make sure that, we're onthe same page.
I hear what you're saying.
Let's go a little further if wecould.
And if that can't happen, thenso be it.
You've done what you can.
Chris Hudson (11:35):
Yeah.
I mean, I think, it'sinteresting that you point out
that decisioning point, becausethere's often a kind of, it's a
fabricated pressure, right?
It's in that environment wherethere's a deadline and if you
don't hit that gate and it's nota yes, but a no, then there's
going to be a knock on.
There's a huge weight on yourshoulders or the team's
shoulders when you're trying toget past that stage.
It's kind of like, if it was ano, how do you plan for that and
(11:57):
what are you gonna do next?
People don't really wanna thinkabout that, but they have to.
So what do you do in thatsituation?
Dave Gregurke (12:03):
Yeah.
First of all, you want to havesome sort of documentation about
the process to be sure that youcan, check your work.
Maybe you got it wrong.
So it's nothing wrong with doinga sense check on that as well.
But there's been plenty of timesand there's some, good classic
examples like you said, wherethat no has a domino effect.
And it could be, for example,something that you believe
(12:24):
personally as well as what theresearch is saying is gonna
affect how a customer trusts thething or the overall adoption.
Especially if that no is gonnapush it months.
Maybe even a year down thetrack.
That can be hard to sit with.
So just resting on the idea thatyou've got the correct
information, double check yourwork and make sure you submit
(12:45):
it, and put it in the system,whatever system they've got for
that kind of backlog, hygiene tomake sure that it is there and
it has been deprioritized, butyou've had the voice of the
customer first.
First and front.
Chris Hudson (12:56):
Yeah definitely.
It plays to the next sort oftheme that we might go into,
which is around navigatingorganizational complexity a
little bit.
I'm wondering, from your pointof view, obviously there are
barriers to change within anyorganization.
What are some of the main thingsyou see coming up?
Dave Gregurke (13:11):
Organizations trying to take on AI assisted
tools is gonna be a massiveheadache.
I imagine everywhere is goingthrough this from small
companies all the way up at themoment, it feels like it's sort
of an unspoken thing, likeeveryone's just paying for their
own perplexity or chat GPTaccount and doing the best they
can to self-educate.
It is a wild time to be alive.
(13:33):
I can tell you that the effectthat it's having, what three
years later already the vastchanges of had time to play
around with everything from vibecoating across to even motion,
full video clips, from stillimages just blows me away.
But what I'm seeing does gimmeconcern for larger companies,
because there's a lot of screwups before you get to the right
(13:55):
output.
Even in some of the most highlytouted five coding tools, I am
seeing a very clear black boxeffect and that's gonna be
really difficult for someone tosign off on at enterprise level.
And I can fully understand that,where do you draw the line on
that appetite for that risk?
It's gonna change.
Clearly people are doing smallpilots with it and that makes
(14:18):
the most sense, I don't envythose decisions because at the
end of the day, who is governingit?
Well, no one is, they're openlyadmitting they're flying by the
seat of their pants and SamAlton's happy to do that and
that's fine.
But there's more than one toolout there and which one do you
pick?
And what is the cost to theorganization?
I mean, per seat, all that stuffis real.
So yeah, I don't envy thosedecisions.
Chris Hudson (14:40):
Okay.
So big barriers around AIadoption.
Any others that are popping intoyour head there?
Dave Gregurke (14:45):
Probably, yeah, probably for me, we're still
going through the idea that workfrom home is not doable for some
organizations.
I think, you know,realistically, obviously there's
plenty of places that did thislong before the pandemic and I'm
just thinking, what's MattMullenweg's company.
Automattic.
Yeah.
I think that they've beenglobal, they've got six, seven
(15:06):
countries.
They have offices in a sense,but they work from home.
They've always been.
So, you know, there's some roleswhere that's absolutely
appropriate.
I think for me there still needsto be, I guess, a rebalance in
some sense, because there's alot of places where it's just
impossible for you not to be onthe factory floor.
That makes sense.
But switching back on, right.
Everyone back at work full timewhen people have completely
(15:29):
changed their lives.
Particularly parents it's notthat black and white.
It takes some nuance and I hopethose conversations continue and
get better.
At the moment it seems to bejust manage one person at a time
until your boss says, no, that'sit.
Chris Hudson (15:41):
Yeah, So I felt like there was a period of time
where it was trying to be workedout, and then it was just, no,
we're not gonna work it out.
We're just gonna change it.
So, sure.
You know, there was some kind ofcompromises made, some
allowances obviously for peoplewho had certain arrangements,
but yeah, now it's three daysback, everyone's gotta do it.
Whether it's something to stillbe solved for, whether it's high
on the list from a leadershippoint of view, there are bigger
(16:03):
things going on in terms ofeconomic stability and political
changes and other things that,you know, it feels like there
are big things that needs to befixed as well.
But whether people are in theoffice or not.
Do you still think it's a bigtheme?
Dave Gregurke (16:14):
Look, it's one of those things you only see what's
on your feed, right?
If I'm going like, say forLinkedIn, it's no different to
the other social media, right?
It's an algorithm that'sthrowing you your version.
So you never really knowentirely the story, but
certainly it does seem mixed atthe moment.
Maybe there's a generationalthing in terms of leadership.
Maybe there's a certain agebracket where it hits.
I'm not entirely certain of,I've seen evidence of a direct
(16:37):
like, oh, this is exactly howit's happening.
But I think the discussions arethere.
If your company is rentingbuildings that are, you know,
the renters in the hundreds ofthousands, per month, then of
course they've got those thingsto consider, do they end that
lease, cut their losses?
It's something that they need towork out, but if they want
people to do their best work andbe productive and feel trusted
(16:59):
that they're gonna do that work,I think it needs a bit more
discussion.
Chris Hudson (17:03):
Yeah, what bearing do you think it has on
innovation and design?
Do you think it has a specificneed to bring people together,
what have you found that'sworked in your practice?
Dave Gregurke (17:13):
Yeah, I suppose my advice is gonna come from the
fact that I've been doing it inperson my whole career.
So for the younger folk outthere that maybe were five years
in and then had five yearsdisrupted.
Yeah.
It's not much, is it?
So they will have had thoseworkarounds.
I remember, doing.
Digital design and supportingcustomers trying to actually fix
(17:35):
their logins.
And you know, the classic stuffwhere you're like, you've built
this thing for them and you justdo a screen share and they've
actually just got cap lock on,you know, the classic stuff, but
you just can't do, you couldn'tdo that over the phone.
So those tools came in fairlyearly, but I never considered
what we'd end up doing andactually replacing every single
thing that we were doing incommunication with a group meet.
(17:56):
So I think for me the design andinnovation stuff does seem to be
better in person.
But I'm more than happy to say,we've made it work, where we
have to remotely and that opensup other doors, collaborating
with international clients, whenthey've just gotten up and you
are just about to shut down.
It's pretty handy.
Pluses and minuses.
Chris Hudson (18:15):
Yeah, I can relate to that.
I mean, I feel like there's thismassive wave rapid adoption
around the tech and then, peoplegot on board with it and
companies, tech stacks probablydoubled, tripled in that time,
right?
Because they were like bringingin all these tools and all of a
sudden, for us who work intransformation it was adopted
rapidly.
Now the consequence of that isthat nothing works together and
(18:35):
they're still trying to fix itwith, one tool or this tool or
that tool.
You bring it in, but cohesivelyit doesn't work across the
organization.
Everyone's using differentthings and it's all splintering.
And some people have got adifferent understanding, levels
of adoption are kind of variedacross the organization.
Not everyone needs to use it.
The whole SaaS world andlandscape interesting in that
respect.
Dave Gregurke (18:56):
Exactly.
It doesn't matter if it's$5 amonth, if you've got 50 of them,
it gets untenable.
I don't think that problem'sgoing away anytime soon.
This is where, 37 signals comesin and usually pipes in the
chat, Jay, free will, trophieslittle comment like that's what
base camp's for.
Keep it all in one place.
Chris Hudson (19:11):
yeah.
That's what this is for.
It's my products
Dave Gregurke (19:13):
No, exactly.
But that's the truth.
If you really could do it, justdo everything Microsoft.
Yeah.
Great.
That's awesome.
But.
I don't know of any place thathas just one.
Chris Hudson (19:23):
Yeah.
I mean, ties into maybe the nextpoint, which is around the
approach to innovation.
And that's how we've always doneit.
And how do you move past andbreak through some of those
habitual behaviors that sitwithin organizations?
Not just at the leadershiplevel, I'm thinking more broadly
because it feels like sometimes.
So, what techniques have youbeen using to help overcome some
of this entrenched thinking andapproaches there?
Dave Gregurke (19:45):
Yeah, so I suppose back in volcanic days
the benefit of running theworkshops early with each
customer gave you that reallyintimate experience that they
were likely new to.
So that wasn't so difficult.
What I found at bigger placesand bigger clients is you will
get that same opportunity in thelandscape inside will be
(20:07):
different politically.
So there can be that, you know,but why do we need to do this?
We've already got the idea.
they've already worked out thesolution.
Right.
So having, experience to breakthrough that and just get
through the process, make sureit's sharp as well.
It's gotta be a fairly quickprocess with a clear agenda.
And setting guess expectationsimmediately, from the get go.
(20:27):
Not just from that, the factthat they may not have read that
agenda, but you read it outagain when you kick off,
introduce people, give them anopportunity to express if
they've got concerns about whatthey're expecting to get out of
it.
But yeah, the biggest example ofthat I can imagine is walking
into a place and, you know,squad one, you've had your
discussion and everything'sfine.
(20:48):
They're running agile.
The next one is runningwaterfall and the guys running
waterfall.
They're so used to that process,they've got so long to deliver
the thing and then find outwhether it was actually the
right thing or not, they'veskipped the usual what I would
say is the modern way of doingit and miss those opportunities
to actually, even if it's apaper prototype, do something
(21:08):
you get in front of people.
Where did you get thisinformation?
And try and reverse engineertheir product knowledge to look
at, well was this just literallysomeone just filled out a form
and they just had to submit thatby a Tuesday and that more KPI
based kind of thing.
And as opposed to like, no, wesat together and, you know, it's
crazy.
We went in there thinking thisis the thing that we were trying
(21:31):
to work out and it turned outthat wasn't it.
And that's what we move forwardwith.
Two weeks later, we've gotreasonable evidence to say that
was the right call and again,you go on the pathway that the
data points you to.
Chris Hudson (21:43):
Yeah.
I mean there's a lot of focus onthe what and the how.
Sometimes it's not so much aboutthe do, but the do can really
inform, the what if you flip itthe other way around.
So have you worked that systemwithin a larger corporate?
Dave Gregurke (21:56):
Yeah, so like certainly at at NAB it was a
pretty awesome opportunity towork with a bunch of people.
There were definitely squadsthat had done design sprints
before or similar types ofworkshop structure.
That was fantastic.
You know, it made things a loteasier to get started.
think about examples where therewas clear resistance from the
(22:16):
beginning, in terms of trying tobook the people in.
And even if you were actuallybrought in specifically for a
given need we had theopportunity to actually pilot,
and cementing a real discoveryphase, which weirdly wasn't in
this particular area.
It was a really, really coolopportunity to do it on the fly,
(22:37):
in live projects and get it in.
Okay.
Like there was literally oneproject where we stopped and we
started again, and we went backto what I would say is the right
way to kick off.
And that was an interesting onebecause not only we doing that
sort of live, but I suppose in asense we were kind of training
each other, but I was trying toget people into that mindset of
this does not need to take verylong.
(22:59):
But these boxes need to beticked sometime later we had a
very robust, essentially theycalled it a different name to
what you and I would probably behappy calling it.
But the point is it was cementedas a must have at the beginning
rather than halfway into thebuild.
They were kind of doing itbefore and even then, they
weren't necessarily doing itwith a way that would be able to
(23:22):
have the ship turn around if itneeded to, if that makes sense.
So you are sort of set up forfailure if you did any research
after that anyway.
Yeah.
So what I found over time isthat absolutely did work and,
myself and one of my peers, wereable to run those pilots
continuously for a while untilit became the norm for that
particular area.
And then from what I've heard,it's become standard across the
(23:43):
organization, which is fantasticto hear, right?
That feels like progress.
So the next part is what arepeople building?
For those organizations you'relooking at years often for the
bigger things.
I've seen some incredible stuffturn around in six to 12 months,
which would be unheard of at NABprior to that, based on what I'd
heard you can just imagine thespaghetti of difficult
(24:05):
dependencies that they have.
Something like 2000 differentsystems that they have to deal
with.
And certainly you would say atleast God, it could be at least
a hundred mission critical.
So it's not so easy to just turna new thing on or put in a new
integration.
Geez, it took nine months oncejust to get a team, an external
team onto a teams chat.
So, you know, it's a littleslower than you'd like.
Chris Hudson (24:28):
Yeah.
I mean, that's it.
I mean, If you break down that,there's obviously quite a few
facts to consider.
Anyone in the outside worldwould wonder, if you're just you
and I talking as designers, wewouldn't really understand how
that would be possible, that itcould take so long.
But obviously there are many,many things to consider.
The other thing is theconstraint around the status
quo.
The way it's always been done isprocess methodology.
(24:50):
Large organizations and teamsfeel comfortable with
methodologies.
They want outputs and, they'requite focused on KPIs and
outcomes as well, yeah, it feelslike the methodology is like a
safe space to, get behind.
Because as long as you can agreeto the method, then you'll get
to the outcome, and that feelslike it's a good thing.
So in the case that you'redescribing, that was in a way
challenged compared to howpeople used to working.
(25:13):
What do you think the key or thesecret to unlocking that was in
flipping from one way of workingto another, what made it
possible, do you feel?
Dave Gregurke (25:21):
Oh, I just think, you just gotta do it.
I think it's important to stressas well.
The guys that were doingWaterfall, I would've been
exactly the same because that'sthe way I was allowed to work
and I was brought up in thatstructure and if I'd been doing
that for 15 years not knownanything else, that's not
because they want it to be theold way, they don't know that.
(25:41):
Right.
So it's important to understandwhen you're going in, if you are
able to give people that upfrontagenda of a breakdown of the
things we're gonna do.
And ultimately that was whatcame outta this pilot is we had
a really nice blend of thethings that they were familiar
with, with the things that theyhad then had some experience
with that was turned aroundquite quickly.
(26:03):
Everyone understood what washappening at the end, everyone
was aligned.
It was like, you know what?
We decided that's rubbish andwe're not gonna do that.
Or that's really cool and we'regonna push for this.
They were able to pitch withsomething they'd all had a
shared understanding with.
Certainly taking that, beyondthe enterprise thing.
I wouldn't go any other wayeither.
It's just enhanced, thebreakdown of design sprint,
(26:24):
ideas in fact, I actually justgot Jake Knapps, click just got
delivered, yesterday.
I can't wait to get into it.
But that short form methodologyof it doesn't have to be
perfect.
We just need to know is it areal problem to solve or not?
Do people understand what you'redoing?
Depending on whatever you'reprototyping at the end is huge,
but didn't just have to bephysical products.
(26:44):
It could be other things.
It's a really good process and Ithink if you give it a short
wind of say one week is enoughfor people to really start to
feel comfortable with theprocess.
Chris Hudson (26:54):
Yeah.
So taking out, some of the keyprinciples, maybe from what
you're just saying, so we'vegot, outlining an outcome and
aligning around that.
Then we've got the methodologywhich you can sketch and put in
front of people, but maybe heldloosely in case things need to
change.
That's probably another part toit.
And then, probably not with atotally new approach, but
blending it with some thingsthat people are already used to
(27:15):
working with in methodologies,and not just changing everything
all at once.
That feels like that would behelpful too.
Dave Gregurke (27:20):
Absolutely, jargon's another good one too,
so you can get stuck in thosechecklists and people dunno how
you're talking about.
So yeah, just make sure you'respeaking the same language.
Chris Hudson (27:29):
Yeah, discovery process gives a mixed
perspective sometimes.
A lot of people think it's anindulgence, it gets a mixed bag
of reviews, right?
So some people love it, somepeople hate it.
But, it hugely valuable.
Some people think it's reallydrawn out and then they just
wanna get to the, do you know?
So how have you found thatbalance working for you?
Dave Gregurke (27:47):
You want the, I dunno if you remember this
Simpson episode when Homerdesigns the car.
Chris Hudson (27:51):
Yeah,
Dave Gregurke (27:51):
for me, that's the end result of just doing it
the old way.
There's a lot of disappointmentwith that.
Right.
Not to mention, they didn't sellmore than one.
I don't think so.
But I think the other key thingis with these processes, yes, it
might feel like an indulgencefor people that haven't done it
before.
But the power comes from whatyou get out of that short
(28:11):
period.
Because you don't have to polishthe presentation into your 50
pages.
And you don't have tonecessarily do that.
I mean that you just have themturn up.
Be there for day one and daytwo.
For a design sprint scenario,Wednesday and Thursday, you're
not necessarily for them, butdepending on how quickly you do
it, you can have them turn up tothose interviews on Thursday or
Friday, depending on how you'regoing.
Chris Hudson (28:33):
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I often see it as a
necessary hygiene step.
It's like brushing a reallyknotty head of hair, on your
kids but you can't get to asense of order.
And I think, sometimes theconfusion within the stakeholder
landscape, there's a lot ofdiscussions.
Everyone's talking aboutconflicting priorities and you
dunno what's gonna surface thetop.
But I think that process canreally help crystallize some
(28:54):
thinking there and it helpspeople understand, what's
important or less important.
The prioritization's a huge partof it, in seeing what the most
valuable problem to solve isreally.
So, yeah.
Lots of good stuff from there,I'm sure.
Dave Gregurke (29:05):
It's interesting, one example of where, we had
really effective data to saythat actually we didn't have
something to solve, thishypothesis going in was
businesses needed X and everysingle person we spoke to was
like, meh.
It was as clear as that.
You could just re-watch thevideos or just take out word for
(29:27):
it on the bullet points, but atthe end of the day, those
verbatims were really valuable.
Right.
And I tend to lead like mycovers that always, at least the
best verbatim I can get.
Purpose, right?
If Tony look at the cover, atleast they get something
interestingly, I believe thatparticular project, even though,
long after we presented it andthought that was the end of
that, it turned out they did goahead with it.
(29:49):
you just never know what's gonnahappen and who's gonna make what
decision.
But.
At that time, it seemed fairlyclear that we had that
information, but I know thepeople in that particular sprint
had not done that processbefore, and they'll never forget
that.
That's for them, I think for theorganization and then for them
personally, It's really valuablefor their careers.
'cause they can see sometimesthe right data doesn't get
(30:11):
listened to and you know thatthat's something you just have
to be able to accept.
Chris Hudson (30:14):
Yeah.
I mean, that's your role, isn'tit?
It's a responsibility on yourshoulders to put forward the
information that is, the mostcompelling, of course, but, that
would be most transformative insome way.
So the point you were makingaround, even just as simple as
which quote you're gonna featureon the front page, or what the
sizzling start is?
We forget that we're in chargeof that narrative.
And if people are just hearingit for the first time, then
(30:36):
we're playing a massive role inhow that information is received
for the first time and thenpassed on, we're in a role of
influence.
Dave Gregurke (30:41):
Absolutely.
And you talk about, say twocompletely different scenarios,
but if you are consulting anddealing directly with the
founder or the CEO, they'relikely to be only focusing on
your thing for that particularmeeting.
But they've got a billion otherthings on.
It's not necessarily differentfor the executive in your
domain.
If you're in an agileorganization where you've got,
(31:02):
split solid squads that arepresenting.
Particular things for the nextquarter or for the next year.
You dunno what that guy's got onhis plate, but you probably
should assume that they've gotmore than one thing.
So you want to cut through asquickly as possible.
This probably, actually, funnilyenough, loops back to that idea
of being at work.
The most effective, traction youcan get personally is not just
(31:24):
to be good on a zoom call.
Like you, you really want to beable to walk past someone in the
hallway and say, Hey, what didyou think about that thing, that
came up and stand up orwhatever.
The thing was not just to suckup to the people above you, but
to actually get to know them.
I think that's a hugelyeffective way to actually have,
particularly if you're sharingdocumentation, asynchronously as
(31:45):
well, that you're able toconnect with them, in different
ways and tailor it to.
Hopefully the right prescriptionlenses that they have.
Chris Hudson (31:53):
Particularly during the lockdown times, one
thing a lot of people saw wasthat.
business kind of got reduced andthere's this swell of
productivity because the sideconversations were, less
present.
And so, yeah, I mean, that'sincredibly important.
If you reduce it down to whatbusiness actually is, which is,
making something, sellingsomething, delivering it to
market and you're just focusedon the tasks, then the rest of
(32:16):
it is missed served tohighlight, how important human
interaction now is and whatvalue that can bring if done
well.
So I think it's probably uptwice as individuals to decide
how we wanna balance that.
A lot of people have preferencefor more personal interaction
and some people prefer not to aswell.
So yeah, it's a difficult one.
But knowing each other'spreference is probably the
(32:36):
starting point.
Dave Gregurke (32:37):
Oh, absolutely.
And again, your work and yourhome life aren't necessarily the
same thing, right?
Yeah.
But you wanna be as authentic asyou can, but also, like,
everyone knows, 50% of theworld's not gonna like you by
default.
You just have to accept that.
And if you can't get, a rapport,at least with key stakeholders,
it does make it really difficultto, to even have raw data, speak
(33:00):
for itself because you are themessenger, it is crucial part
of, of your life, to not just beable to interact with others,
that you may, may notnecessarily agree with, or just
people that don't have much timeand can appear potentially graph
or, not, not leaning towardsyour side you've gotta make that
part of your life and, and tryand improve it as you can.
Chris Hudson (33:20):
Yeah.
I was gonna ask you about riskand, security conscious
environments you kind of exudethis sense of calm, you're in a
tranquil setting, your dog'svery comfortable in the
background.
I dunno if that's part of yourapproach, to get people feeling
more comfortable with, morerisky conversations or ideas.
In working in a bank, you'veworked in a lot of environments
where risk is a very real thing.
You've gotta address it, you'vegotta confront it.
(33:42):
And innovation experimentationcan look a little bit lofty and
unpredictable and it can make alot of people uncomfortable.
So how do you manage some ofthat?
Dave Gregurke (33:52):
Yeah, so I guess it depends.
Risk comes across not just theactual, projects themselves and
how they impact colleagues andthe business market, or
depending on what you're doing,there could be multiple
different archetypes you'reworking with.
Those risks are very real.
They tend to be the easier onesfor everyone to align on.
But it's interesting for me thatthe risks internally, we're
(34:13):
talking about the potential forpeople bringing on AI assisted
solutions.
That's classic one that wasparticularly at a place like a
bank, you have extraordinarylevels of security.
Even things that you could pasteinto a particular thing, some
raw data, whether it's from aslide or from your own research.
(34:33):
Those things being ingestedinto.
A different system can be a realproblem.
The bank spends a lot of timemaking sure that everyone is up
to their compliance andunderstanding those risks, and
they have policies in place, butyou get used to it over time.
It does have, a good effect onbeing more considered about what
you share, you should always beconsidered about your personal
identification.
(34:54):
Any data that you're pastinginto a thing, back in the day
people were really resistantabout even just putting, making
a payment online, but now we'vegot digital natives, and my kids
will speak to this they don'thave a version of privacy that
you and I will it's actually areally interesting psychological
thing, that I've had to get pastis they just don't, they do not
see privacy in the same way.
(35:15):
They're literally two venogramsthat crossover somewhere, but.
They're just different.
That has been a reallyinteresting, thing and it has
helped me, with, working withothers as well, depending on
where their aspect is comingfrom.
Because those definitions canfeel like privacy and risk.
They can feel like one thing,but Yeah.
You've gotta really ask thequestion and find out what
(35:35):
you're dealing with.
Chris Hudson (35:37):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Definitely.
I mean, there, there aredifferent, I suppose different
approaches, but it's gonna bereceived differently by
different people.
So, yeah.
How do you go about buildingtrust as stakeholders who might
be feeling threatened or thatthe risk is gonna be exposed in
some sort of way?
Dave Gregurke (35:52):
Yeah.
We had multiple examples wherethat got really tricky.
I think what seemed to standout.
Often the resistors were at thehead of a large series of
complex dependencies.
It's understandable.
It's complicated.
You mess around with one thing.
There was one that stands out aninterview with a colleague, a
(36:13):
head of a particular area, insupport.
They were very upset just fromthe agenda of our call.
It was not a series of properinterviews.
This was just an introductory toorganize seat interviews.
And it was really interestingtheir version of risk to them.
Was any change at all?
Because they feel like they'reconstantly having to adjust to
(36:33):
changes that are getting madeand
mm-hmm.
Everything they were saying was completely fine.
There's no issue.
But we were the messaginggetting yelled at because, all
we needed was for them to helpus, hook up with a few people to
speak to.
Chris Hudson (36:44):
Did you change the agenda or what happened?
Dave Gregurke (36:46):
No, no.
We, we, I, look it was reallyimportant for them to have this
say.
And it was easy for us to passthat on too.
Like, yeah, there was some veryreal concerns about increased
workload in the end, which Ithink a lot of us can relate to.
It's like, okay, cool.
So you've just gotten used tosay you're a Google person and
now you're a Microsoft person,and you're switching between
those different setups, whateverthe thing is.
(37:08):
You think, oh, it's supersimple, but people get really
frustrated when they have to dothis stuff and at scale, like
when, if you are on support andyou've got, quotas to meet in
terms of how many calls you'retaking and all that kind of
stuff, and you're managing awhole team and you come in and
say, oh, by the way, we've gotthis new thing that they're
gonna have to add.
not replace, add to their plate,different story.
(37:29):
So hearing that and passing thaton was actually really valuable.
You've gotta be ironclad withyour taking of critique,
especially when it wasn't uscausing this change.
It was us simply researching, aspainless as possible.
Well, it started out painful,but that's okay.
That's kind of part of it,right.
So yeah, we're able to pass thaton but you can't always fix
these things.
It was the same with fraud.
(37:50):
You know, we spoke to fraud andevery single time, their
headaches are very different toyours and mine, Chris.
Chris Hudson (37:56):
And I think, you can't look past this human
element again, because obviouslythe process, the systems, the
tools, the platforms, and itgets into the world of the
rational quite quickly.
Once that's changed, it feelslike it's a little bit fixed and
then all of a sudden there's newprogram work that comes in from
the side and you're notexpecting it.
And actually having those humanconnections, relationships, and,
(38:16):
being able to help peoplethrough those steps is really
important, from a connectionpoint of view, like you were
saying, everyone feels like.
Just the language you're usingaround, feeling maybe a little
bit vulnerable, a little bitvictimized, you wouldn't
understand that, you wouldn'tpick on up on that nuance if
everyone was just, on thescreens and working off the
technology without that humaninteraction as much either.
(38:37):
So yeah, introducing humanconnection point, feels pretty
important during those times.
Dave Gregurke (38:42):
Yeah, that's right.
I guess another interestingparallel risk, version that came
across was operationally justtrying to communicate between
multiple parties.
We had a particularly odd setupwhere there was multiple third
party vendors, but they werepotentially competitors.
So it made sense that wecouldn't necessarily be on the
(39:05):
same chat channels, but thiswas.
Similar to that, story I wassaying before about getting,
taking nine months to get onteams just so you could do
instant messaging.
Yeah.
You know, what do you do?
Like, you, you gotta workaround, for example, we had
firewalls on things like sharingFigma in certain ways, like all
the normal ways of working thatwe had for every other project.
Yeah.
So just kind of 70%.
(39:25):
And then you just got blockedand we had to work it out on the
fly, but the risks there werecertainly draining people's
clocks in terms of wasting a lotof time trying to screw around
and make, basically make excelin work like Figma, which is
insane.
Chris Hudson (39:41):
Yeah.
Dave Gregurke (39:41):
The only way I knew how to get every single
person with their tech stack towork was like, okay, we all have
Excel can they type?
Cool.
Awesome.
So, doing your best to try andtake the great things that come
from a.
Shared whiteboard experiencelike Figma, but in this
particular case we were, it wasservice blueprint, so it was a
little bit more practical to doit in a matrix.
(40:03):
But yeah, it's not always gonnabe that way.
Those are odd risks that Ididn't necessarily think I'd
ever come across.
But the risks to those vendorsin terms of potentially sharing
certain information that theymay not even know they're doing.
So it's again, another greatreason why we should be really,
really careful about what wepaste into chats and talk about
when we don't know necessarilywho's on the group call.
Chris Hudson (40:25):
Yeah, you forget, how easy the technology has made
it for certain teams anddepartments, but then adoption
is not always there, even withMiro, some straightforward
whiteboarding tools or you know,this or that, not everyone's
due.
And, you know, I think asleaders, facilitators of some of
those interactions, we cansometimes forget that not
everyone's on board with it.
In a breadth of experience, somepeople will know about how it
(40:46):
ran before those things existed.
I remember organizations.
Even just going five years back,we're flat out refusing to use
Slack and instant messaging.
They just didn't want to use it.
They were using email and it wasall kept and maintained that
way.
You find workarounds, but unlessthose steps are introduced into
your process, you just assumethat you can use the latest
stuff, but often isn't possible.
Particularly within certainorganizations.
(41:07):
So I think it's a really goodpoint to make around, how to set
up for success from the start,what are you gonna be using?
What are some of the lowestcommon donated tools.
What can people use, everyonecan access it, that kind of
thing.
So, a pretty good point.
Maybe we just finish on a bit ofa point around, implementation
and then looking beyond intofuture proofing a little bit.
Have you got any thoughts aroundhow to make things stick?
(41:28):
You've obviously introducedchange through the process and
we've talked about how to dothat sensitively and in a human
way.
How do you sustain momentum inhow you work and how do people
still continue to take on someof the practices that you've
showed them, that kind of thing.
Is there anything in that spacethat you wanna share?
Dave Gregurke (41:44):
Yeah, I suppose instinctively the answer is that
you're just leading by justdoing.
The ability to not just sharewhat you're doing when people
wanna deep dive, when theyactually go, no, I still don't
get it.
That's gonna be huge.
Your communication is crucial,obviously.
Not just as a designer, but theprocess is the ability to try
and have, I think you mentionedthis before and it's so true.
(42:06):
You're gonna have your outline,you're gonna have your
framework, but what actuallyhappens on the day, no one
knows.
And that's the beauty of it,right?
You are essentially all guidesto the data.
You're just guiding it into thislittle funnel, and then you put
a lid on it.
It's kind of amazing for peopleto experience that firsthand,
especially when they've neverdone it before in an
organization.
(42:26):
So providing and making surethat they have.
Really easy tools that they canshare.
And again, we talked aboutwhether they have access to
figma or Miro or whatever thelicensing is.
Make sure that there's a way forthem to carry on that work in
the same way so that they canbenefit from those new
learnings.
Because the stickiness comesfrom being consistent.
(42:46):
Over time, you take designsprints into AJ Smart and AJ
Smart go, you know what,actually we can knock all day
off.
And that's what happens.
You provide a framework, someonewill innovate, create a nice
polished round corner thatwasn't there before and it just
makes sense and you're like,cool, we're doing this now.
And that's progress.
Chris Hudson (43:05):
Yeah.
Definitely.
I think I like that.
It's optimistic and not fixed.
It feels like sometimes peoplejust introduce these
methodologies.
This is the way.
You know, not to quoteMandalorian, but you gotta allow
for people to get on board withit a little bit.
Before you start preaching, thisis what you're gonna have to use
forever because it's open tochange.
Business is probably more fluidthan people give it credit for a
(43:26):
lot of the time, so.
Yeah.
Yeah,
Dave Gregurke (43:28):
yeah.
That's right.
Chris Hudson (43:29):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Alright.
Any sort of big opportunitiesyou see for intrapreneurs, based
on your experience, particularlywithin established organizations
or, more constrained, workingenvironments, anything you see
there as being bigopportunities?
Dave Gregurke (43:43):
Yeah.
I think particularly for thebigger places, it's probably
more pertinent to you will havea spidey sense for it, that gut
feel of like, you know what, Ithink we could probably do that
better.
Yeah.
Don't sit quietly and there'snothing wrong as well with
having a crack at at yourself.
So, you know, sometimes it'sbetter to turn up with what you
(44:04):
believe to be, for example, aproblem statement.
There are times when you don'twant to do that.
Absolutely.
But, it could be a journey map,it could be anything you've got
the ability in your experienceto understand a thing and go
with that instinct, document it.
Even if it's a crappy whiteboardsketch, put it on a post-it,
take a photo on your phone,whatever you need to do, and
(44:25):
start that process internally ofdiscussion about what if, try
and try and understand thatthere will usually be appetite
for a small amount of work.
It doesn't have to be gigantic.
If you come in saying, right, weneed to change massive chunks of
things or in our case, we don'tdo discovery properly in this
particular area.
That's significant change.
(44:46):
And it was quite ambitious, overa long period we were able to
prove the effectiveness of itfor someone just starting out or
coming in new with all thosetools, it really is just a
matter of, having thosediscussions getting to know the
people as quickly as possible.
Understand your colleagues,what's keeping them up at night?
And you will almost certainlyhave a gut feel for what tools
(45:08):
you have to bring to help themtackle that problem.
Chris Hudson (45:12):
Yeah.
No, that's really good advice.
Thank you Dave, reallyappreciate you coming onto the
show and sharing your thoughtsand wisdom, and some stories
from your experience as well.
There's a lot that goes onwithin the walls of big
corporates and theseorganizations that, other people
don't always experience, buthearing about it would really
help and enrich their ownworking careers lots to learn
from it.
So I really appreciate comingon.
Thanks so much, Dave.
(45:32):
Oh, no worries.
Thanks for having me in spring.
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
what is your secret to keepingso calm?
Dave Gregurke (45:37):
Just one
Chris Hudson (45:38):
more
Dave Gregurke (45:38):
thing.
Chris Hudson (45:40):
What are your coping mechanisms?
Dave Gregurke (45:42):
Oh, at the moment it's this lovely rec room that,
I took a couple of months offlast year to turn our carport
into, put four walls on it andactually make it into a proper
separated studio away from thehouse.
Yeah, nice,
Chris Hudson (45:54):
nice.
Dave Gregurke (45:54):
And it really is a little bit zen.
Chris Hudson (45:57):
I mean, I'm feeling that, and I think, the
environment definitely, affectshow you work and how you think
and everything else.
So really, really good.
Hey, if anyone had a questionand they wanted to get in touch,
how would they find you?
Dave Gregurke (46:07):
Yeah, so LinkedIn's definitely the
simplest way.
You can direct message me thereor check out my links and bio
from there.
Chris Hudson (46:14):
Yeah.
Perfect.
All right.
Well thanks so much for comingon the show, Dave.
We'll leave it there.
Thank you.
Yeah, no worries Chris.
Good on
Dave Gregurke (46:19):
you.
Chris Hudson (46:19):
Thanks.
Hey everyone.
Welcome back to the Company RoadPodcast, where we explore what
it takes to drive real changewithin organizations.
I'm your host, Chris, thispodcast is created specifically
for you intrapreneurs, changemakers, and the people, the
leaders navigating the world oforganizational transformation in
some sort of way in the complexwaters that we find there.
And today I'm joined by DaveGregurke, who's a master of a
(00:28):
designer.
He specializes in untangling themessiest most complex problem
spaces within organizations.
He's got a heap of experience.
So he's done 20 years plus ofexperience across startups,
government, enterpriseorganizations and environments.
And Dave's become a master atnavigating the challenges that
come with organizational change.
He's got a diverse background.
(00:48):
He is worked with a heap ofdifferent people, brands like
Amazon, nab, university ofMelbourne, and various state
government departments.
He's founded two businesses aswell currently focused on the
complex problem space offintech's payments and how to
make sense of all of that.
And yeah, I think what bringsDave's perspective to us and
what makes it so valuable is,his ability to really break
through that this is how we'vealways done it mentality and the
(01:11):
approach that is really plaguingso many organizations and
there's so much change that'strying to take place right now,
but people are still fitting alittle bit like, oh, is it the
right time?
Given the current, economicenvironment and context.
So he's gonna share somepractical insights, align and
competing stakeholders,balancing security with
innovation and implementingchange in environments that are
(01:32):
resistant to new ideas.
So Dave, huge welcome to theshow.
Thanks for coming on.
Dave Gregurke (01:36):
No worries, Chris.
Thanks for having me.
Chris Hudson (01:38):
Great.
So, Dave, let's start with a bitabout yourself if we can.
So maybe just describe yourselfto those who don't know you
we'll open up with that.
Dave Gregurke (01:44):
Yeah.
So for those that don't know me,I'm a designer basically my
whole life.
Even as a little kid, I wasfascinated by art and graphic
art particularly.
Throughout my, learnings beyond,graphic design into digital
design and the dawn of theinternet, and beyond into
product.
They've always, fascinated me inthat space.
And now of course sitting behindthe scenes a little bit more
into the strategy behind it.
Chris Hudson (02:05):
Okay.
And where did it all begin foryou?
What's your journey been?
Dave Gregurke (02:08):
Yeah.
So, I guess it all started, Iwas born in Texas I've lost that
accent long ago.
Can you still do it, make you doit?
I wouldn't even try.
But yeah, I've still got acitizenship there and a
connection to my home state.
I'm a big fan of baseball andit's a big passion of mine.
Technically, still playing,dunno how I'm doing it, but, I'm
still doing it.
And my club, hello NewportBaseball Club is one of my last
(02:30):
passions.
Great community down there.
Chris Hudson (02:32):
Alright.
And around intrapreneurship,what's your take on that word,
intrapreneur?
What do you think about that andhow would you define it
yourself?
Dave Gregurke (02:39):
Yeah, so I think ultimately it comes with wearing
a lot of hats, right?
If you are an entrepreneur,you're starting a business and
trying to make a doll that noone else made.
At the end of the day, you'vegotta do it all until you can
build out the team you need.
You can't do it without bringingin the right people and the
right amount of income.
So in a organization, doesn'thave to be gigantic, but
(03:00):
enterprise certainly, you end upwith quite a lot of silos.
And of course the longer thetenure, the more things become,
you know, this is the way we'vealways done it.
And so an intrapreneur issomeone that can go in and see
that pretty quickly.
What are the bits that arestale?
Where are the potentials, andopportunities for improvement.
Chris Hudson (03:16):
And what are you looking out for there?
In terms of what stale, what aresome of the warning signs there?
Dave Gregurke (03:20):
I think probably one of the more common things,
certainly recently is thereseems to be a little bit of a
poster kind of methodology ofcustomer obsessed and that kind
of thing.
It's interesting culturally itmakes sense to do that.
But when you don't see it inpractice for example, you've
got.
One department that's doingfairly regular customer testing.
(03:41):
Taking in those insights andpassing them on and making
improvements throughout the way.
And then you've got other teamsthat, might do it every six
months.
How do you square that circle interms of the consistency there?
Being able to highlight thosethings and be able to draw on
those really big wins, get theright stakeholders to turn up to
even just one interview, I'vefound has made a huge change to
(04:01):
the way they really understandwhat customer obsession is.
Chris Hudson (04:04):
Yeah.
Totally right.
I think, I've been running aload of research recently as
well, and it's a different gamerun.
It feels like research testing,once upon a time was expected,
it was left to a few people andthen it was played back, you get
presented with a 30 50 pagereport, and it's just left on
somebody's desk.
Then the work is done.
You move on, take the learningsand you build out what you're
gonna be building.
(04:24):
But I feel like the process ofgetting to research is now a
little bit trickier.
There's something to be saidfor, how people are doing that
there's also campaigning aspectyou've gotta evangelize.
If you're in that team, youknow, you're thinking about how
you can really emphasize itsworth to stakeholders.
Like you're pointing out, who doyou get into the room?
Who needs to hear the customervoice firsthand?
(04:45):
Is that ringing true for you aswell?
What's your experience been?
Dave Gregurke (04:49):
I think the main thing is send the invites out
for a start.
You want to know the peoplearound you, the people that are
gonna be able to potentiallymake effective change or take on
those insights that really stickto kind of go this process is
really worth continuing.
So yeah, part of that process isobviously making sure you've got
your squad nice and tight.
(05:09):
You want diverse thinking in theinterview process.
Whether note taking, moderating,observing.
Particularly for the, say, evenat the executive level.
People that weren't working onthe tools or in the project, but
were more really at the end of afew sprints coming and checking
in, that were definitely thepeople I would really, really
push to have at least turn up toone interview because it just
(05:29):
makes a huge difference to theway they understand what other
people are doing in theirorganization.
That's just what's worked for meanyway.
Chris Hudson (05:37):
Yeah, what value do you think they get from it if
they're in the room?
What have you noticed there?
Dave Gregurke (05:41):
I think, a couple of good examples, but maybe I'll
start with the first most broadone they obviously know what
people are doing?
They're sitting there listening.
They're literally just listeningto what people say.
It's one of those things thateasy to hear, but to actually
watch it happen.
Watch how people struggle or ifit's not an actual usability
test, it could be just a q and atype of interview.
(06:03):
That qualitative informationyou're getting through.
Yes, of course.
It's subjective, it's people'sopinions, but it's real, you're
getting to see what they say.
The next part is to see whatthey do, they start to
understand how you piece thattogether better.
And particularly in usabilitytesting, you do have that
bookend.
Usually they'll say one thingand they'll do another and they
won't realize it.
Chris Hudson (06:24):
Yeah.
Totally.
What you observe and what theydo, what they say, you know,
those can be different things.
It can be interesting to seethat.
There's definitely a lack ofrepresentation within a lot of
organizations around thecustomer voice and the empathy
is missing because thecustomer's not adequately
represented in some sort of way.
So it might be that a customeris quoted or there's some
statistical analysis, quantresearch or heavy documentation,
(06:48):
and a kind of theorized customerspeak and insights, obviously,
recommendations, things that gettranslated into strategy and
then implemented.
So how have you found it's bestto represent the customer within
your organization?
Dave Gregurke (07:02):
Well, I guess the truth is if you don't actually
have any data to go by in termsof having spoken to them, then
you've gotta be.
Fairly firm in terms ofbroadcasting that part of it.
And saying this is a gap.
We're essentially writing onassumptions.
And push that process a littlebit more for forward to the
front, I guess.
Tying back to that invitingprocess, similar thing whether
(07:22):
it's before projects get spun upjust making sure that you are
aware of your team and who'ssitting above you, who's making
those decisions.
And making sure it's a regularpart of your discussions,
particularly when there'sbroader, longer term projects
that are getting broken downinto chunks.
There's a lot of assumptionsthat are getting made, making
sure that they're aware thatyou're on it and that.
(07:43):
You are going to be highlightingthose gaps, which will be
candidates to talk to people.
Chris Hudson (07:48):
Yeah.
There's lots of things you cantry.
Just putting photos or images ofpeople into your presentations
or quotes can often help, videoclips in terms of quotes like a
little reel can help support andinsight and really show that it
was grounded in somebodyactually saying it or believing
that or valuing this or notvaluing that.
I think that can be reallyhelpful.
Even the basic thing of invitingcustomers into your business and
(08:11):
having them in your environmentcan be a real icebreaker within
a meeting room or a boardroomcontext because your leaders and
other stakeholders, might nothave seen that or heard that in
that environment either.
It can be a good reset.
I was gonna ask you aboutorganizational support and when
you've got an inkling of atransformative idea and you
think this is gonna be veryexciting, but we need to get it
(08:32):
off the ground.
How do you build up support?
What are your methods aroundthat and how do you approach it
usually?
Dave Gregurke (08:39):
Well, I think you've gotta have some pretty
robust workshopping up untilthat point.
If you haven't got a decentpresentation to make, you don't
wanna end up with a 50 pagereport that gathers digital
dust.
It's gotta be somethingpractical that you can walk
someone through fairly rapidly.
If they want more detail, you'regonna have it at that point.
But the key stakeholders, I'mtalking about, say in my time at
(09:01):
nab where you are working veryclosely with the product lead
and the tech leads.
Yeah.
Just making sure you, you'retrying to really distill
everything you can as early aspossible, as to what are we
focusing on?
Get that problem statementsorted and take that forward,
make sure it's communicated aswell as possible so they can ask
as many questions as they wantto.
But it really just helps bevery, very clear, like, what's
(09:22):
the purpose?
What are we doing next?
Why are we prioritizing aparticular thing?
They can be part of thatprocess.
Chris Hudson (09:27):
You been in that situation where leaders or
stakeholders that you've invitedin think that you're wasting
their time, how do you managethat side of things?
Dave Gregurke (09:36):
Oh, absolutely.
It's not that it happens everytime, of course, but it's
definitely something you, you'vejust gotta, like, if it hasn't
happened to you, I'd love tohear from you, put it that way.
But at the end of the day,that's part of the job.
And actually it's a big,probably a big part of.
My career as a designer is,putting forward more than one
idea.
You might get all of them shutdown.
Often what ends up happening is,you know, in bigger
(09:58):
organizations the highest paidperson starts to really mold
things.
trying to avoid that is a bigpart of what the process is
supposed to do, which is makesure that all voices are heard,
that people can vote silently orall the things that would try
and reduce that kind of bias.
But at the end of the day, ifit's, you know, say whether it's
doesn't have to be at the bank,it could be, a small business
owner operator, particularly thefounders tend to be fairly
(10:21):
strong minded, and that'scompletely fine.
That's their choice.
All you can do is present thebest data you can, removed of
all that bias.
It's up to them.
Chris Hudson (10:30):
Yeah.
I mean, it all sounds very calm,considered and under control in
the way that you describe it inthe moment.
How are you coping?
What are you feeling?
What are you seeing?
How do you respond?
You know, is there anythingthere that you can give us
advice?
Dave Gregurke (10:42):
Yeah, I think at the end of the day, if there's a
good reason, you want to knowit, but you might not, you just
gotta be prepared for the factthat you may not ever get that
answer.
And to be honest, sometimespeople have a bad day,
executives make bad decisionstoo.
Just as much as owner operatorsand you and I, day to day will
get things wrong.
So, you know, having a bit ofempathy for that process is
(11:03):
important.
Everyone's human so, have achat.
It's easy to follow up certainthings, particularly if it's a
big meeting and a big decision'sbeing made and it's a no or
something that's gonna heavilyaffect what you feel that the
agreement with the data is thenfrom there, all you can do is
really basically pick up phone,you know?
Send a DM and say, Hey, can wejust quickly go over that again?
(11:26):
I wanna make sure that, we're onthe same page.
I hear what you're saying.
Let's go a little further if wecould.
And if that can't happen, thenso be it.
You've done what you can.
Chris Hudson (11:35):
Yeah.
I mean, I think, it'sinteresting that you point out
that decisioning point, becausethere's often a kind of, it's a
fabricated pressure, right?
It's in that environment wherethere's a deadline and if you
don't hit that gate and it's nota yes, but a no, then there's
going to be a knock on.
There's a huge weight on yourshoulders or the team's
shoulders when you're trying toget past that stage.
It's kind of like, if it was ano, how do you plan for that and
(11:57):
what are you gonna do next?
People don't really wanna thinkabout that, but they have to.
So what do you do in thatsituation?
Dave Gregurke (12:03):
Yeah.
First of all, you want to havesome sort of documentation about
the process to be sure that youcan, check your work.
Maybe you got it wrong.
So it's nothing wrong with doinga sense check on that as well.
But there's been plenty of timesand there's some, good classic
examples like you said, wherethat no has a domino effect.
And it could be, for example,something that you believe
(12:24):
personally as well as what theresearch is saying is gonna
affect how a customer trusts thething or the overall adoption.
Especially if that no is gonnapush it months.
Maybe even a year down thetrack.
That can be hard to sit with.
So just resting on the idea thatyou've got the correct
information, double check yourwork and make sure you submit
(12:45):
it, and put it in the system,whatever system they've got for
that kind of backlog, hygiene tomake sure that it is there and
it has been deprioritized, butyou've had the voice of the
customer first.
First and front.
Chris Hudson (12:56):
Yeah definitely.
It plays to the next sort oftheme that we might go into,
which is around navigatingorganizational complexity a
little bit.
I'm wondering, from your pointof view, obviously there are
barriers to change within anyorganization.
What are some of the main thingsyou see coming up?
Dave Gregurke (13:11):
Organizations trying to take on AI assisted
tools is gonna be a massiveheadache.
I imagine everywhere is goingthrough this from small
companies all the way up at themoment, it feels like it's sort
of an unspoken thing, likeeveryone's just paying for their
own perplexity or chat GPTaccount and doing the best they
can to self-educate.
It is a wild time to be alive.
(13:33):
I can tell you that the effectthat it's having, what three
years later already the vastchanges of had time to play
around with everything from vibecoating across to even motion,
full video clips, from stillimages just blows me away.
But what I'm seeing does gimmeconcern for larger companies,
because there's a lot of screwups before you get to the right
(13:55):
output.
Even in some of the most highlytouted five coding tools, I am
seeing a very clear black boxeffect and that's gonna be
really difficult for someone tosign off on at enterprise level.
And I can fully understand that,where do you draw the line on
that appetite for that risk?
It's gonna change.
Clearly people are doing smallpilots with it and that makes
(14:18):
the most sense, I don't envythose decisions because at the
end of the day, who is governingit?
Well, no one is, they're openlyadmitting they're flying by the
seat of their pants and SamAlton's happy to do that and
that's fine.
But there's more than one toolout there and which one do you
pick?
And what is the cost to theorganization?
I mean, per seat, all that stuffis real.
So yeah, I don't envy thosedecisions.
Chris Hudson (14:40):
Okay.
So big barriers around AIadoption.
Any others that are popping intoyour head there?
Dave Gregurke (14:45):
Probably, yeah, probably for me, we're still
going through the idea that workfrom home is not doable for some
organizations.
I think, you know,realistically, obviously there's
plenty of places that did thislong before the pandemic and I'm
just thinking, what's MattMullenweg's company.
Automattic.
Yeah.
I think that they've beenglobal, they've got six, seven
(15:06):
countries.
They have offices in a sense,but they work from home.
They've always been.
So, you know, there's some roleswhere that's absolutely
appropriate.
I think for me there still needsto be, I guess, a rebalance in
some sense, because there's alot of places where it's just
impossible for you not to be onthe factory floor.
That makes sense.
But switching back on, right.
Everyone back at work full timewhen people have completely
(15:29):
changed their lives.
Particularly parents it's notthat black and white.
It takes some nuance and I hopethose conversations continue and
get better.
At the moment it seems to bejust manage one person at a time
until your boss says, no, that'sit.
Chris Hudson (15:41):
Yeah, So I felt like there was a period of time
where it was trying to be workedout, and then it was just, no,
we're not gonna work it out.
We're just gonna change it.
So, sure.
You know, there was some kind ofcompromises made, some
allowances obviously for peoplewho had certain arrangements,
but yeah, now it's three daysback, everyone's gotta do it.
Whether it's something to stillbe solved for, whether it's high
on the list from a leadershippoint of view, there are bigger
(16:03):
things going on in terms ofeconomic stability and political
changes and other things that,you know, it feels like there
are big things that needs to befixed as well.
But whether people are in theoffice or not.
Do you still think it's a bigtheme?
Dave Gregurke (16:14):
Look, it's one of those things you only see what's
on your feed, right?
If I'm going like, say forLinkedIn, it's no different to
the other social media, right?
It's an algorithm that'sthrowing you your version.
So you never really knowentirely the story, but
certainly it does seem mixed atthe moment.
Maybe there's a generationalthing in terms of leadership.
Maybe there's a certain agebracket where it hits.
I'm not entirely certain of,I've seen evidence of a direct
(16:37):
like, oh, this is exactly howit's happening.
But I think the discussions arethere.
If your company is rentingbuildings that are, you know,
the renters in the hundreds ofthousands, per month, then of
course they've got those thingsto consider, do they end that
lease, cut their losses?
It's something that they need towork out, but if they want
people to do their best work andbe productive and feel trusted
(16:59):
that they're gonna do that work,I think it needs a bit more
discussion.
Chris Hudson (17:03):
Yeah, what bearing do you think it has on
innovation and design?
Do you think it has a specificneed to bring people together,
what have you found that'sworked in your practice?
Dave Gregurke (17:13):
Yeah, I suppose my advice is gonna come from the
fact that I've been doing it inperson my whole career.
So for the younger folk outthere that maybe were five years
in and then had five yearsdisrupted.
Yeah.
It's not much, is it?
So they will have had thoseworkarounds.
I remember, doing.
Digital design and supportingcustomers trying to actually fix
(17:35):
their logins.
And you know, the classic stuffwhere you're like, you've built
this thing for them and you justdo a screen share and they've
actually just got cap lock on,you know, the classic stuff, but
you just can't do, you couldn'tdo that over the phone.
So those tools came in fairlyearly, but I never considered
what we'd end up doing andactually replacing every single
thing that we were doing incommunication with a group meet.
(17:56):
So I think for me the design andinnovation stuff does seem to be
better in person.
But I'm more than happy to say,we've made it work, where we
have to remotely and that opensup other doors, collaborating
with international clients, whenthey've just gotten up and you
are just about to shut down.
It's pretty handy.
Pluses and minuses.
Chris Hudson (18:15):
Yeah, I can relate to that.
I mean, I feel like there's thismassive wave rapid adoption
around the tech and then, peoplegot on board with it and
companies, tech stacks probablydoubled, tripled in that time,
right?
Because they were like bringingin all these tools and all of a
sudden, for us who work intransformation it was adopted
rapidly.
Now the consequence of that isthat nothing works together and
(18:35):
they're still trying to fix itwith, one tool or this tool or
that tool.
You bring it in, but cohesivelyit doesn't work across the
organization.
Everyone's using differentthings and it's all splintering.
And some people have got adifferent understanding, levels
of adoption are kind of variedacross the organization.
Not everyone needs to use it.
The whole SaaS world andlandscape interesting in that
respect.
Dave Gregurke (18:56):
Exactly.
It doesn't matter if it's$5 amonth, if you've got 50 of them,
it gets untenable.
I don't think that problem'sgoing away anytime soon.
This is where, 37 signals comesin and usually pipes in the
chat, Jay, free will, trophieslittle comment like that's what
base camp's for.
Keep it all in one place.
Chris Hudson (19:11):
yeah.
That's what this is for.
It's my products
Dave Gregurke (19:13):
No, exactly.
But that's the truth.
If you really could do it, justdo everything Microsoft.
Yeah.
Great.
That's awesome.
But.
I don't know of any place thathas just one.
Chris Hudson (19:23):
Yeah.
I mean, ties into maybe the nextpoint, which is around the
approach to innovation.
And that's how we've always doneit.
And how do you move past andbreak through some of those
habitual behaviors that sitwithin organizations?
Not just at the leadershiplevel, I'm thinking more broadly
because it feels like sometimes.
So, what techniques have youbeen using to help overcome some
of this entrenched thinking andapproaches there?
Dave Gregurke (19:45):
Yeah, so I suppose back in volcanic days
the benefit of running theworkshops early with each
customer gave you that reallyintimate experience that they
were likely new to.
So that wasn't so difficult.
What I found at bigger placesand bigger clients is you will
get that same opportunity in thelandscape inside will be
(20:07):
different politically.
So there can be that, you know,but why do we need to do this?
We've already got the idea.
they've already worked out thesolution.
Right.
So having, experience to breakthrough that and just get
through the process, make sureit's sharp as well.
It's gotta be a fairly quickprocess with a clear agenda.
And setting guess expectationsimmediately, from the get go.
(20:27):
Not just from that, the factthat they may not have read that
agenda, but you read it outagain when you kick off,
introduce people, give them anopportunity to express if
they've got concerns about whatthey're expecting to get out of
it.
But yeah, the biggest example ofthat I can imagine is walking
into a place and, you know,squad one, you've had your
discussion and everything'sfine.
(20:48):
They're running agile.
The next one is runningwaterfall and the guys running
waterfall.
They're so used to that process,they've got so long to deliver
the thing and then find outwhether it was actually the
right thing or not, they'veskipped the usual what I would
say is the modern way of doingit and miss those opportunities
to actually, even if it's apaper prototype, do something
(21:08):
you get in front of people.
Where did you get thisinformation?
And try and reverse engineertheir product knowledge to look
at, well was this just literallysomeone just filled out a form
and they just had to submit thatby a Tuesday and that more KPI
based kind of thing.
And as opposed to like, no, wesat together and, you know, it's
crazy.
We went in there thinking thisis the thing that we were trying
(21:31):
to work out and it turned outthat wasn't it.
And that's what we move forwardwith.
Two weeks later, we've gotreasonable evidence to say that
was the right call and again,you go on the pathway that the
data points you to.
Chris Hudson (21:43):
Yeah.
I mean there's a lot of focus onthe what and the how.
Sometimes it's not so much aboutthe do, but the do can really
inform, the what if you flip itthe other way around.
So have you worked that systemwithin a larger corporate?
Dave Gregurke (21:56):
Yeah, so like certainly at at NAB it was a
pretty awesome opportunity towork with a bunch of people.
There were definitely squadsthat had done design sprints
before or similar types ofworkshop structure.
That was fantastic.
You know, it made things a loteasier to get started.
think about examples where therewas clear resistance from the
(22:16):
beginning, in terms of trying tobook the people in.
And even if you were actuallybrought in specifically for a
given need we had theopportunity to actually pilot,
and cementing a real discoveryphase, which weirdly wasn't in
this particular area.
It was a really, really coolopportunity to do it on the fly,
(22:37):
in live projects and get it in.
Okay.
Like there was literally oneproject where we stopped and we
started again, and we went backto what I would say is the right
way to kick off.
And that was an interesting onebecause not only we doing that
sort of live, but I suppose in asense we were kind of training
each other, but I was trying toget people into that mindset of
this does not need to take verylong.
(22:59):
But these boxes need to beticked sometime later we had a
very robust, essentially theycalled it a different name to
what you and I would probably behappy calling it.
But the point is it was cementedas a must have at the beginning
rather than halfway into thebuild.
They were kind of doing itbefore and even then, they
weren't necessarily doing itwith a way that would be able to
(23:22):
have the ship turn around if itneeded to, if that makes sense.
So you are sort of set up forfailure if you did any research
after that anyway.
Yeah.
So what I found over time isthat absolutely did work and,
myself and one of my peers, wereable to run those pilots
continuously for a while untilit became the norm for that
particular area.
And then from what I've heard,it's become standard across the
(23:43):
organization, which is fantasticto hear, right?
That feels like progress.
So the next part is what arepeople building?
For those organizations you'relooking at years often for the
bigger things.
I've seen some incredible stuffturn around in six to 12 months,
which would be unheard of at NABprior to that, based on what I'd
heard you can just imagine thespaghetti of difficult
(24:05):
dependencies that they have.
Something like 2000 differentsystems that they have to deal
with.
And certainly you would say atleast God, it could be at least
a hundred mission critical.
So it's not so easy to just turna new thing on or put in a new
integration.
Geez, it took nine months oncejust to get a team, an external
team onto a teams chat.
So, you know, it's a littleslower than you'd like.
Chris Hudson (24:28):
Yeah.
I mean, that's it.
I mean, If you break down that,there's obviously quite a few
facts to consider.
Anyone in the outside worldwould wonder, if you're just you
and I talking as designers, wewouldn't really understand how
that would be possible, that itcould take so long.
But obviously there are many,many things to consider.
The other thing is theconstraint around the status
quo.
The way it's always been done isprocess methodology.
(24:50):
Large organizations and teamsfeel comfortable with
methodologies.
They want outputs and, they'requite focused on KPIs and
outcomes as well, yeah, it feelslike the methodology is like a
safe space to, get behind.
Because as long as you can agreeto the method, then you'll get
to the outcome, and that feelslike it's a good thing.
So in the case that you'redescribing, that was in a way
challenged compared to howpeople used to working.
(25:13):
What do you think the key or thesecret to unlocking that was in
flipping from one way of workingto another, what made it
possible, do you feel?
Dave Gregurke (25:21):
Oh, I just think, you just gotta do it.
I think it's important to stressas well.
The guys that were doingWaterfall, I would've been
exactly the same because that'sthe way I was allowed to work
and I was brought up in thatstructure and if I'd been doing
that for 15 years not knownanything else, that's not
because they want it to be theold way, they don't know that.
(25:41):
Right.
So it's important to understandwhen you're going in, if you are
able to give people that upfrontagenda of a breakdown of the
things we're gonna do.
And ultimately that was whatcame outta this pilot is we had
a really nice blend of thethings that they were familiar
with, with the things that theyhad then had some experience
with that was turned aroundquite quickly.
(26:03):
Everyone understood what washappening at the end, everyone
was aligned.
It was like, you know what?
We decided that's rubbish andwe're not gonna do that.
Or that's really cool and we'regonna push for this.
They were able to pitch withsomething they'd all had a
shared understanding with.
Certainly taking that, beyondthe enterprise thing.
I wouldn't go any other wayeither.
It's just enhanced, thebreakdown of design sprint,
(26:24):
ideas in fact, I actually justgot Jake Knapps, click just got
delivered, yesterday.
I can't wait to get into it.
But that short form methodologyof it doesn't have to be
perfect.
We just need to know is it areal problem to solve or not?
Do people understand what you'redoing?
Depending on whatever you'reprototyping at the end is huge,
but didn't just have to bephysical products.
(26:44):
It could be other things.
It's a really good process and Ithink if you give it a short
wind of say one week is enoughfor people to really start to
feel comfortable with theprocess.
Chris Hudson (26:54):
Yeah.
So taking out, some of the keyprinciples, maybe from what
you're just saying, so we'vegot, outlining an outcome and
aligning around that.
Then we've got the methodologywhich you can sketch and put in
front of people, but maybe heldloosely in case things need to
change.
That's probably another part toit.
And then, probably not with atotally new approach, but
blending it with some thingsthat people are already used to
(27:15):
working with in methodologies,and not just changing everything
all at once.
That feels like that would behelpful too.
Dave Gregurke (27:20):
Absolutely, jargon's another good one too,
so you can get stuck in thosechecklists and people dunno how
you're talking about.
So yeah, just make sure you'respeaking the same language.
Chris Hudson (27:29):
Yeah, discovery process gives a mixed
perspective sometimes.
A lot of people think it's anindulgence, it gets a mixed bag
of reviews, right?
So some people love it, somepeople hate it.
But, it hugely valuable.
Some people think it's reallydrawn out and then they just
wanna get to the, do you know?
So how have you found thatbalance working for you?
Dave Gregurke (27:47):
You want the, I dunno if you remember this
Simpson episode when Homerdesigns the car.
Chris Hudson (27:51):
Yeah,
Dave Gregurke (27:51):
for me, that's the end result of just doing it
the old way.
There's a lot of disappointmentwith that.
Right.
Not to mention, they didn't sellmore than one.
I don't think so.
But I think the other key thingis with these processes, yes, it
might feel like an indulgencefor people that haven't done it
before.
But the power comes from whatyou get out of that short
(28:11):
period.
Because you don't have to polishthe presentation into your 50
pages.
And you don't have tonecessarily do that.
I mean that you just have themturn up.
Be there for day one and daytwo.
For a design sprint scenario,Wednesday and Thursday, you're
not necessarily for them, butdepending on how quickly you do
it, you can have them turn up tothose interviews on Thursday or
Friday, depending on how you'regoing.
Chris Hudson (28:33):
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I often see it as a
necessary hygiene step.
It's like brushing a reallyknotty head of hair, on your
kids but you can't get to asense of order.
And I think, sometimes theconfusion within the stakeholder
landscape, there's a lot ofdiscussions.
Everyone's talking aboutconflicting priorities and you
dunno what's gonna surface thetop.
But I think that process canreally help crystallize some
(28:54):
thinking there and it helpspeople understand, what's
important or less important.
The prioritization's a huge partof it, in seeing what the most
valuable problem to solve isreally.
So, yeah.
Lots of good stuff from there,I'm sure.
Dave Gregurke (29:05):
It's interesting, one example of where, we had
really effective data to saythat actually we didn't have
something to solve, thishypothesis going in was
businesses needed X and everysingle person we spoke to was
like, meh.
It was as clear as that.
You could just re-watch thevideos or just take out word for
(29:27):
it on the bullet points, but atthe end of the day, those
verbatims were really valuable.
Right.
And I tend to lead like mycovers that always, at least the
best verbatim I can get.
Purpose, right?
If Tony look at the cover, atleast they get something
interestingly, I believe thatparticular project, even though,
long after we presented it andthought that was the end of
that, it turned out they did goahead with it.
(29:49):
you just never know what's gonnahappen and who's gonna make what
decision.
But.
At that time, it seemed fairlyclear that we had that
information, but I know thepeople in that particular sprint
had not done that processbefore, and they'll never forget
that.
That's for them, I think for theorganization and then for them
personally, It's really valuablefor their careers.
'cause they can see sometimesthe right data doesn't get
(30:11):
listened to and you know thatthat's something you just have
to be able to accept.
Chris Hudson (30:14):
Yeah.
I mean, that's your role, isn'tit?
It's a responsibility on yourshoulders to put forward the
information that is, the mostcompelling, of course, but, that
would be most transformative insome way.
So the point you were makingaround, even just as simple as
which quote you're gonna featureon the front page, or what the
sizzling start is?
We forget that we're in chargeof that narrative.
And if people are just hearingit for the first time, then
(30:36):
we're playing a massive role inhow that information is received
for the first time and thenpassed on, we're in a role of
influence.
Dave Gregurke (30:41):
Absolutely.
And you talk about, say twocompletely different scenarios,
but if you are consulting anddealing directly with the
founder or the CEO, they'relikely to be only focusing on
your thing for that particularmeeting.
But they've got a billion otherthings on.
It's not necessarily differentfor the executive in your
domain.
If you're in an agileorganization where you've got,
(31:02):
split solid squads that arepresenting.
Particular things for the nextquarter or for the next year.
You dunno what that guy's got onhis plate, but you probably
should assume that they've gotmore than one thing.
So you want to cut through asquickly as possible.
This probably, actually, funnilyenough, loops back to that idea
of being at work.
The most effective, traction youcan get personally is not just
(31:24):
to be good on a zoom call.
Like you, you really want to beable to walk past someone in the
hallway and say, Hey, what didyou think about that thing, that
came up and stand up orwhatever.
The thing was not just to suckup to the people above you, but
to actually get to know them.
I think that's a hugelyeffective way to actually have,
particularly if you're sharingdocumentation, asynchronously as
(31:45):
well, that you're able toconnect with them, in different
ways and tailor it to.
Hopefully the right prescriptionlenses that they have.
Chris Hudson (31:53):
Particularly during the lockdown times, one
thing a lot of people saw wasthat.
business kind of got reduced andthere's this swell of
productivity because the sideconversations were, less
present.
And so, yeah, I mean, that'sincredibly important.
If you reduce it down to whatbusiness actually is, which is,
making something, sellingsomething, delivering it to
market and you're just focusedon the tasks, then the rest of
(32:16):
it is missed served tohighlight, how important human
interaction now is and whatvalue that can bring if done
well.
So I think it's probably uptwice as individuals to decide
how we wanna balance that.
A lot of people have preferencefor more personal interaction
and some people prefer not to aswell.
So yeah, it's a difficult one.
But knowing each other'spreference is probably the
(32:36):
starting point.
Dave Gregurke (32:37):
Oh, absolutely.
And again, your work and yourhome life aren't necessarily the
same thing, right?
Yeah.
But you wanna be as authentic asyou can, but also, like,
everyone knows, 50% of theworld's not gonna like you by
default.
You just have to accept that.
And if you can't get, a rapport,at least with key stakeholders,
it does make it really difficultto, to even have raw data, speak
(33:00):
for itself because you are themessenger, it is crucial part
of, of your life, to not just beable to interact with others,
that you may, may notnecessarily agree with, or just
people that don't have much timeand can appear potentially graph
or, not, not leaning towardsyour side you've gotta make that
part of your life and, and tryand improve it as you can.
Chris Hudson (33:20):
Yeah.
I was gonna ask you about riskand, security conscious
environments you kind of exudethis sense of calm, you're in a
tranquil setting, your dog'svery comfortable in the
background.
I dunno if that's part of yourapproach, to get people feeling
more comfortable with, morerisky conversations or ideas.
In working in a bank, you'veworked in a lot of environments
where risk is a very real thing.
You've gotta address it, you'vegotta confront it.
(33:42):
And innovation experimentationcan look a little bit lofty and
unpredictable and it can make alot of people uncomfortable.
So how do you manage some ofthat?
Dave Gregurke (33:52):
Yeah, so I guess it depends.
Risk comes across not just theactual, projects themselves and
how they impact colleagues andthe business market, or
depending on what you're doing,there could be multiple
different archetypes you'reworking with.
Those risks are very real.
They tend to be the easier onesfor everyone to align on.
But it's interesting for me thatthe risks internally, we're
(34:13):
talking about the potential forpeople bringing on AI assisted
solutions.
That's classic one that wasparticularly at a place like a
bank, you have extraordinarylevels of security.
Even things that you could pasteinto a particular thing, some
raw data, whether it's from aslide or from your own research.
(34:33):
Those things being ingestedinto.
A different system can be a realproblem.
The bank spends a lot of timemaking sure that everyone is up
to their compliance andunderstanding those risks, and
they have policies in place, butyou get used to it over time.
It does have, a good effect onbeing more considered about what
you share, you should always beconsidered about your personal
identification.
(34:54):
Any data that you're pastinginto a thing, back in the day
people were really resistantabout even just putting, making
a payment online, but now we'vegot digital natives, and my kids
will speak to this they don'thave a version of privacy that
you and I will it's actually areally interesting psychological
thing, that I've had to get pastis they just don't, they do not
see privacy in the same way.
(35:15):
They're literally two venogramsthat crossover somewhere, but.
They're just different.
That has been a reallyinteresting, thing and it has
helped me, with, working withothers as well, depending on
where their aspect is comingfrom.
Because those definitions canfeel like privacy and risk.
They can feel like one thing,but Yeah.
You've gotta really ask thequestion and find out what
(35:35):
you're dealing with.
Chris Hudson (35:37):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Definitely.
I mean, there, there aredifferent, I suppose different
approaches, but it's gonna bereceived differently by
different people.
So, yeah.
How do you go about buildingtrust as stakeholders who might
be feeling threatened or thatthe risk is gonna be exposed in
some sort of way?
Dave Gregurke (35:52):
Yeah.
We had multiple examples wherethat got really tricky.
I think what seemed to standout.
Often the resistors were at thehead of a large series of
complex dependencies.
It's understandable.
It's complicated.
You mess around with one thing.
There was one that stands out aninterview with a colleague, a
(36:13):
head of a particular area, insupport.
They were very upset just fromthe agenda of our call.
It was not a series of properinterviews.
This was just an introductory toorganize seat interviews.
And it was really interestingtheir version of risk to them.
Was any change at all?
Because they feel like they'reconstantly having to adjust to
(36:33):
changes that are getting madeand
mm-hmm.
Everything they were saying was completely fine.
There's no issue.
But we were the messaginggetting yelled at because, all
we needed was for them to helpus, hook up with a few people to
speak to.
Chris Hudson (36:44):
Did you change the agenda or what happened?
Dave Gregurke (36:46):
No, no.
We, we, I, look it was reallyimportant for them to have this
say.
And it was easy for us to passthat on too.
Like, yeah, there was some veryreal concerns about increased
workload in the end, which Ithink a lot of us can relate to.
It's like, okay, cool.
So you've just gotten used tosay you're a Google person and
now you're a Microsoft person,and you're switching between
those different setups, whateverthe thing is.
(37:08):
You think, oh, it's supersimple, but people get really
frustrated when they have to dothis stuff and at scale, like
when, if you are on support andyou've got, quotas to meet in
terms of how many calls you'retaking and all that kind of
stuff, and you're managing awhole team and you come in and
say, oh, by the way, we've gotthis new thing that they're
gonna have to add.
not replace, add to their plate,different story.
(37:29):
So hearing that and passing thaton was actually really valuable.
You've gotta be ironclad withyour taking of critique,
especially when it wasn't uscausing this change.
It was us simply researching, aspainless as possible.
Well, it started out painful,but that's okay.
That's kind of part of it,right.
So yeah, we're able to pass thaton but you can't always fix
these things.
It was the same with fraud.
(37:50):
You know, we spoke to fraud andevery single time, their
headaches are very different toyours and mine, Chris.
Chris Hudson (37:56):
And I think, you can't look past this human
element again, because obviouslythe process, the systems, the
tools, the platforms, and itgets into the world of the
rational quite quickly.
Once that's changed, it feelslike it's a little bit fixed and
then all of a sudden there's newprogram work that comes in from
the side and you're notexpecting it.
And actually having those humanconnections, relationships, and,
(38:16):
being able to help peoplethrough those steps is really
important, from a connectionpoint of view, like you were
saying, everyone feels like.
Just the language you're usingaround, feeling maybe a little
bit vulnerable, a little bitvictimized, you wouldn't
understand that, you wouldn'tpick on up on that nuance if
everyone was just, on thescreens and working off the
technology without that humaninteraction as much either.
(38:37):
So yeah, introducing humanconnection point, feels pretty
important during those times.
Dave Gregurke (38:42):
Yeah, that's right.
I guess another interestingparallel risk, version that came
across was operationally justtrying to communicate between
multiple parties.
We had a particularly odd setupwhere there was multiple third
party vendors, but they werepotentially competitors.
So it made sense that wecouldn't necessarily be on the
(39:05):
same chat channels, but thiswas.
Similar to that, story I wassaying before about getting,
taking nine months to get onteams just so you could do
instant messaging.
Yeah.
You know, what do you do?
Like, you, you gotta workaround, for example, we had
firewalls on things like sharingFigma in certain ways, like all
the normal ways of working thatwe had for every other project.
Yeah.
So just kind of 70%.
(39:25):
And then you just got blockedand we had to work it out on the
fly, but the risks there werecertainly draining people's
clocks in terms of wasting a lotof time trying to screw around
and make, basically make excelin work like Figma, which is
insane.
Chris Hudson (39:41):
Yeah.
Dave Gregurke (39:41):
The only way I knew how to get every single
person with their tech stack towork was like, okay, we all have
Excel can they type?
Cool.
Awesome.
So, doing your best to try andtake the great things that come
from a.
Shared whiteboard experiencelike Figma, but in this
particular case we were, it wasservice blueprint, so it was a
little bit more practical to doit in a matrix.
(40:03):
But yeah, it's not always gonnabe that way.
Those are odd risks that Ididn't necessarily think I'd
ever come across.
But the risks to those vendorsin terms of potentially sharing
certain information that theymay not even know they're doing.
So it's again, another greatreason why we should be really,
really careful about what wepaste into chats and talk about
when we don't know necessarilywho's on the group call.
Chris Hudson (40:25):
Yeah, you forget, how easy the technology has made
it for certain teams anddepartments, but then adoption
is not always there, even withMiro, some straightforward
whiteboarding tools or you know,this or that, not everyone's
due.
And, you know, I think asleaders, facilitators of some of
those interactions, we cansometimes forget that not
everyone's on board with it.
In a breadth of experience, somepeople will know about how it
(40:46):
ran before those things existed.
I remember organizations.
Even just going five years back,we're flat out refusing to use
Slack and instant messaging.
They just didn't want to use it.
They were using email and it wasall kept and maintained that
way.
You find workarounds, but unlessthose steps are introduced into
your process, you just assumethat you can use the latest
stuff, but often isn't possible.
Particularly within certainorganizations.
(41:07):
So I think it's a really goodpoint to make around, how to set
up for success from the start,what are you gonna be using?
What are some of the lowestcommon donated tools.
What can people use, everyonecan access it, that kind of
thing.
So, a pretty good point.
Maybe we just finish on a bit ofa point around, implementation
and then looking beyond intofuture proofing a little bit.
Have you got any thoughts aroundhow to make things stick?
(41:28):
You've obviously introducedchange through the process and
we've talked about how to dothat sensitively and in a human
way.
How do you sustain momentum inhow you work and how do people
still continue to take on someof the practices that you've
showed them, that kind of thing.
Is there anything in that spacethat you wanna share?
Dave Gregurke (41:44):
Yeah, I suppose instinctively the answer is that
you're just leading by justdoing.
The ability to not just sharewhat you're doing when people
wanna deep dive, when theyactually go, no, I still don't
get it.
That's gonna be huge.
Your communication is crucial,obviously.
Not just as a designer, but theprocess is the ability to try
and have, I think you mentionedthis before and it's so true.
(42:06):
You're gonna have your outline,you're gonna have your
framework, but what actuallyhappens on the day, no one
knows.
And that's the beauty of it,right?
You are essentially all guidesto the data.
You're just guiding it into thislittle funnel, and then you put
a lid on it.
It's kind of amazing for peopleto experience that firsthand,
especially when they've neverdone it before in an
organization.
(42:26):
So providing and making surethat they have.
Really easy tools that they canshare.
And again, we talked aboutwhether they have access to
figma or Miro or whatever thelicensing is.
Make sure that there's a way forthem to carry on that work in
the same way so that they canbenefit from those new
learnings.
Because the stickiness comesfrom being consistent.
(42:46):
Over time, you take designsprints into AJ Smart and AJ
Smart go, you know what,actually we can knock all day
off.
And that's what happens.
You provide a framework, someonewill innovate, create a nice
polished round corner thatwasn't there before and it just
makes sense and you're like,cool, we're doing this now.
And that's progress.
Chris Hudson (43:05):
Yeah.
Definitely.
I think I like that.
It's optimistic and not fixed.
It feels like sometimes peoplejust introduce these
methodologies.
This is the way.
You know, not to quoteMandalorian, but you gotta allow
for people to get on board withit a little bit.
Before you start preaching, thisis what you're gonna have to use
forever because it's open tochange.
Business is probably more fluidthan people give it credit for a
(43:26):
lot of the time, so.
Yeah.
Yeah,
Dave Gregurke (43:28):
yeah.
That's right.
Chris Hudson (43:29):
Yeah.
Yeah.
Alright.
Any sort of big opportunitiesyou see for intrapreneurs, based
on your experience, particularlywithin established organizations
or, more constrained, workingenvironments, anything you see
there as being bigopportunities?
Dave Gregurke (43:43):
Yeah.
I think particularly for thebigger places, it's probably
more pertinent to you will havea spidey sense for it, that gut
feel of like, you know what, Ithink we could probably do that
better.
Yeah.
Don't sit quietly and there'snothing wrong as well with
having a crack at at yourself.
So, you know, sometimes it'sbetter to turn up with what you
(44:04):
believe to be, for example, aproblem statement.
There are times when you don'twant to do that.
Absolutely.
But, it could be a journey map,it could be anything you've got
the ability in your experienceto understand a thing and go
with that instinct, document it.
Even if it's a crappy whiteboardsketch, put it on a post-it,
take a photo on your phone,whatever you need to do, and
(44:25):
start that process internally ofdiscussion about what if, try
and try and understand thatthere will usually be appetite
for a small amount of work.
It doesn't have to be gigantic.
If you come in saying, right, weneed to change massive chunks of
things or in our case, we don'tdo discovery properly in this
particular area.
That's significant change.
(44:46):
And it was quite ambitious, overa long period we were able to
prove the effectiveness of itfor someone just starting out or
coming in new with all thosetools, it really is just a
matter of, having thosediscussions getting to know the
people as quickly as possible.
Understand your colleagues,what's keeping them up at night?
And you will almost certainlyhave a gut feel for what tools
(45:08):
you have to bring to help themtackle that problem.
Chris Hudson (45:12):
Yeah.
No, that's really good advice.
Thank you Dave, reallyappreciate you coming onto the
show and sharing your thoughtsand wisdom, and some stories
from your experience as well.
There's a lot that goes onwithin the walls of big
corporates and theseorganizations that, other people
don't always experience, buthearing about it would really
help and enrich their ownworking careers lots to learn
from it.
So I really appreciate comingon.
Thanks so much, Dave.
(45:32):
Oh, no worries.
Thanks for having me in spring.
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
what is your secret to keepingso calm?
Dave Gregurke (45:37):
Just one
Chris Hudson (45:38):
more
Dave Gregurke (45:38):
thing.
Chris Hudson (45:40):
What are your coping mechanisms?
Dave Gregurke (45:42):
Oh, at the moment it's this lovely rec room that,
I took a couple of months offlast year to turn our carport
into, put four walls on it andactually make it into a proper
separated studio away from thehouse.
Yeah, nice,
Chris Hudson (45:54):
nice.
Dave Gregurke (45:54):
And it really is a little bit zen.
Chris Hudson (45:57):
I mean, I'm feeling that, and I think, the
environment definitely, affectshow you work and how you think
and everything else.
So really, really good.
Hey, if anyone had a questionand they wanted to get in touch,
how would they find you?
Dave Gregurke (46:07):
Yeah, so LinkedIn's definitely the
simplest way.
You can direct message me thereor check out my links and bio
from there.
Chris Hudson (46:14):
Yeah.
Perfect.
All right.
Well thanks so much for comingon the show, Dave.
We'll leave it there.
Thank you.
Yeah, no worries Chris.
Good on
Dave Gregurke (46:19):
you.
Chris Hudson (46:19):
Thanks.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.