Facilitating Workplace Transformation Through Executive Coaching with Stephanie Schott

Stephanie:

I work with so many leaders, and not a single one of them would say, “I lack empathy.” They all think they have the most empathy. They believe they’re the greatest listeners. But when I have them actually practice empathetic listening, they fail 100% of the time.

And it’s not because they’re bad people—it’s because we’ve been conditioned to jump in with solutions or try to make the person with the problem feel less pain. We want to help them; we want to move them along. But often, what we should really be doing is sitting, listening, asking more questions, and going deeper. That’s just not how we’ve been taught or trained.

Gillian:

Thank you for being here. Welcome to Future Works, a podcast dedicated to conversations about innovation in the workforce space. We’re thrilled to scrutinize research, dive into conversations, share inspiration, and give folks a glimpse into what we’re building at Aspect.

We get to dive in with guests like Stephanie today and have conversations that will truly help people reinvent the way they show up within the workforce industry. I’m Gillian.

Michelle:

And I’m Michelle. We’re your hosts, here to lead you through these conversations about what’s happening in the world of work—and how it can be better.

Today, I’m so excited to talk with Stephanie. Transformation is a word we toss around easily, but it’s one of the most difficult things to achieve. Unless you’re a caterpillar destined to be a butterfly, it’s incredibly challenging—especially when it comes to transforming workplaces.

But that doesn’t faze Stephanie. She believes transformation at work is possible, not just because she’s seen it happen, but because she’s the one inspiring it. She’s tackling this monumental task for companies everywhere, backed by research and genuine listening and connection.

This conversation has the potential to be life-changing. So, let’s dive right in.

Gillian:

No pressure.

Stephanie:

Nope, really low bar here.

Michelle:

I always try to set a low bar.

Gillian:

Well, this is a low-stakes conversation.

Stephanie:

I’m so excited to be here. If we can inspire even 1% change, we’ve done our job.

Gillian:

Agreed. With that fantastic intro and bar-setting from Michelle, let’s hear more about you, Stephanie. Tell us about your background. We know you’ve started more than one company, and we’d love to hear what you’re doing now.

Also, we know there’s a farmhouse in your story—don’t leave that out!

Stephanie:

Of course! I’m so happy to be here. Thank you for inviting me to have this conversation—it’s one of the most important topics we can discuss.

A bit about me: I identify as an entrepreneur, first and foremost. You mentioned multiple companies—I’ve been obsessed with building things for as long as I can remember. Right now, I’m building a company called Amplify. It’s a bit of an “antique” company in that I’m deliberately keeping it small and lifestyle-focused.

I’m based in upstate New York, and despite Amplify’s size, we have a bold hypothesis: we can help big companies evolve and transform simply by helping leaders change their minds.

We do this through executive coaching. This is a safe space, right? So I’ll admit—I’m an accidental executive coach. For a time, I even looked down on coaching, thinking it was for people who’d “tapped out” of the work.

Gillian:

That’s honest!

Stephanie:

Yeah, I used to think coaching was all about offering simple advice like, “Just breathe.” And I’ll say two things about that:

First, I was wrong about the coaching profession. The people in this field are incredibly brave. Second, I was wrong about the advice. The simple solutions—like breathing—are often the way forward. But we resist them because they seem too simple.

At my last company, Bionic, I changed my mind about coaching. We were leading massive corporate transformations for some of the biggest publicly traded companies in the world. At first, we tried the traditional consulting model: drop off the answer, collect the check, and leave.

It didn’t work. They weren’t listening.

So, we pivoted quickly and began co-creating solutions with our clients. We wanted to work with them, not for them, and build their capability to continue the work on their own. Essentially, we set out to fire ourselves.

Gillian:

That’s a unique business model!

Stephanie:

Right? It’s a good thing we were bootstrapped. If we’d told investors, “Our goal is to fire ourselves from clients in three years,” I doubt they’d have funded us.

At Bionic, we introduced new mindsets and ways of working grounded in venture capitalism and entrepreneurship. For context, this was around 2014–2015, when entrepreneurship was booming post-recession. Companies like Airbnb and other unicorns were emerging, and venture capitalists—these “cool” California dudes investing big money and experimenting with psychedelics—were getting huge returns.

This timing was crucial because we were stepping into companies like P&G and Citigroup—huge corporations. And here’s the thing: not many CEOs are willing to sign up for a classic strategic or organizational transformation. They just won’t do it.

Gillian:

Are we talking about ego here?

Stephanie:

Kind of, but it’s more than that—it’s because those transformations don’t work. If they did, their egos would be fine. But it’s risky, and there are so many unknowns. We’re talking about massive business model transformations, not small product launches. There’s no guarantee of success, which makes CEOs hesitant.

A lot of them stop playing to win and start playing not to lose, which was a huge problem. So, we needed to reframe it in a way they could buy into. We essentially “snuck” it onto their desks by using the ecosystem of venture capitalism and entrepreneurship and framing it as what we called the Growth Operating System.

It’s a growth model they can step into iteratively—they don’t have to transform the entire organization all at once. The whole ecosystem is based on acknowledging the uncertainty of the future and de-risking bets, something corporate leaders weren’t used to. They were accustomed to allocating $5 million to the loudest person in the room with the “best” idea, which is why innovation failed for so long.

So, we Trojan-horsed our way into these companies. But really, what we were doing was a massive, classic organizational transformation. I think it’s hilarious—we broke into their psyche by asking, “Don’t you want to be like the Silicon Valley guys, allocating capital iteratively?” And they’d say, “Yeah, we do. We really do.”

Michelle:

So good.

Gillian:

Paint an appealing picture, and they’ll come.

Stephanie:

Exactly. I’ll never forget my first few months in this space. I was sitting with the C-suite of a publicly traded company, and we suggested they consider shifting from a B2B model to direct-to-consumer.

This was in the context of 2014–2015, with the rise of the internet and all its potential. The ensuing argument lasted hours. It was deeply emotional, and I remember thinking, “We’re just talking about a business model shift.”

But that moment showed me the gravitas of the decisions we were asking leaders to make. These are company-making or company-killing decisions. They’re also career-making or career-killing moves.

Transformation, disruption—all those corporate buzzwords—we talk about them as strategic endeavors, requiring data and planning. But the truth is, it’s profoundly personal.

When I saw this pattern consistently across 42 Fortune 500 companies, I realized this was the real challenge to address. It wasn’t just about the Growth Operating System or the latest leadership model. It was about helping leaders and teams build the capability to continually evolve themselves and those around them. That’s incredibly difficult.

Gillian:

It probably works to your advantage that a new generation of leaders is stepping into these roles. This generation is more self-aware and mindful of how they show up.

Have you noticed that over the last five years? Are today’s leaders more receptive to your approach?

Stephanie:

In conversations, we’re there. Generationally? Not quite.

For the first time in the history of companies—which, by the way, is only about 80 years old—we have four, sometimes five, generations working together.

When millennials entered the workforce, I was so excited. They were pushing boundaries, challenging the status quo, and asking for change. But as they climbed the ladder, many melted into the existing leadership style.

Now, I’m watching Gen Z enter the workforce. They’re louder and, in some ways, have less to lose. They’re challenging how we craft strategy and make decisions—big, important things.

Gillian:

I hope they stay that way.

Stephanie:

Me too. I hope they maintain their contrarian perspective long enough to create something better—not a Gen Z way, or a millennial way, or a boomer way, but a third option that’s right for companies today.

Gillian:

It feels like the millennial generation was more of a petri dish, especially in tech companies. Over the last 10–15 years, as tech boomed, people were getting leadership roles without proper training or experience. Titles like “Director” were handed out quickly and easily, skipping crucial steps in leadership development.

It’s fascinating to watch that evolution play out, even on platforms like LinkedIn.

Stephanie:

That ties back to something you said earlier: awareness. Generationally, we are increasing our self-awareness, but we’re also decreasing it in some ways.

Gillian:

Yes, exactly.

Stephanie:

I think we have an amazing opportunity, but we’re also losing it to impatience and our addiction to speed and technology.

Michelle:

How do we spot when a culture needs to change? And do we ever get to a place where it simply doesn’t work anymore?

Stephanie:

I think a lot about workplace toxicity. There are so many forms of it, but the one I focus on stems from unchecked mindsets, beliefs, and behaviors that have been reinforced over time.

Maybe I’m an optimist, but I don’t think many leaders wake up and decide, “Today, I’m going to choose violence.” It’s not about bad intentions. It’s a result of something that started long before we were born.

Businesses as we know them began around the turn of the 20th century, with industries like railroads and oil, where precision and control were critical. At the same time, the workforce was largely illiterate, which created a need for management styles that emphasized predictability and control.

Frederick Winslow Taylor and other academics observed these dynamics, and Henry Ford became a prime example, introducing dehumanized management techniques in automobile manufacturing. It worked, and the academics formalized it into what we now call the MBA—the Master of Business Administration.

That’s the genetic history of our leadership models. Fast-forward to today, and you have younger generations stepping into the workforce and wondering, “Why do I have to wait for a promotion?” The economy ten years ago was different, and expectations of getting a director title by age 25 are often unrealistic.

But one unintended consequence is that people were thrown into leadership roles without proper training. The only models they had were antiquated, rooted in control and predictability. Yet today’s world is volatile, ambiguous, and anything but orderly.

Trying to lead with a control mindset in this environment creates toxicity. Research shows it’s not intentional—it’s systemic. Think about some common leadership styles:

• Prioritizing short-term results over long-term impact. This isn’t made up; it’s the reality of quarterly reporting for publicly traded companies.
• Leaders addicted to being right. Most leaders got to their positions by having the right answers at the right time. They were rewarded and promoted for it, so their brains are conditioned to seek that reinforcement.

Stephanie:

I work with many leaders, and not one of them would admit to lacking empathy. They think they’re the greatest listeners. But when I have them practice empathetic listening, they fail 100% of the time—not because they’re bad people, but because they’ve been trained to jump in with solutions or alleviate someone’s pain.

What they should be doing is sitting, listening, asking more questions, and going deeper. But that’s just not how we’ve been taught or trained.

Gillian:

What does that look like in practice? How do you arm leaders with the tools to practice empathy?

Stephanie:

Here are two simple exercises people can try:

1. Active Listening Exercise:
2. Ask a volunteer—someone on your team or a colleague—to talk about what they want most in the world. As the listener, your job is to listen without smiling, affirming, or jumping in with reassurance. You must maintain a neutral expression.
3. At first, leaders tell me, “They’ll think I’m not a nice person!” But at the end, I ask the speaker how they felt. Recently, one speaker said, “I feel like I just made a best friend.”
4. That shows how far off we are—we think we need to affirm or guide people, but in doing so, we distract them from going deeper.
5. The Coaching Habit Questions:
6. Inspired by Michael Bungay Stanier’s book The Coaching Habit, these seven questions systematically guide a conversation:
7. • What’s on your mind?
   • And what else?
   • What’s the real challenge here?
   • What do you want?
   • What’s possible?
8. I’ve seen leaders practice this, and every time, the “advice monster” comes out. They want to jump in with a solution, but I warn them to resist and instead ask, “And what else?”
9. Most people bring up what they think is the problem, but it’s not the real issue. Asking “And what else?” reveals surprising insights.

Gillian:

That’s fascinating. How often do these conversations shift from business issues to personal ones?

Stephanie:

I don’t have hard data, but I’d estimate 80–90% of my coaching conversations are about the human being, not the business.

People in leadership roles often already know what they need to do. The struggle arises when they lose sight of what they can control. Coaching provides space to think, reflect, and ask themselves, “If this is the problem, what can I do?”

Sometimes, the answer is nothing—you can’t change other people or systems. Sometimes, you have to change yourself. As the saying goes, “The obstacle is the way.”

Gillian:

That links directly to the ask of leaders not to respond when their colleagues share their thoughts. Sometimes, you just have to sit in the discomfort and see what comes of it.

Stephanie:

Yeah.

Gillian:

I love that.

Stephanie:

Another example, if it’s helpful: leaders often come to me and say, “My team isn’t stepping up—they lack ownership.” Or, “I don’t feel empowered.” Then they ask me to come in and teach their teams how to think strategically.

I’ll agree, but first, I want to talk to the team and observe what’s actually happening. This has happened several times now, so I use it as an example often.

When I audit meetings, I find that the leader is talking 80–95% of the time, leaving little space for team members to speak, share, or think. Leaders unintentionally create a codependency where the team doesn’t think for themselves because they’re not allowed to. Then the leader gets frustrated when the team isn’t taking initiative, and the team feels unheard and checks out.

Gillian:

That’s fascinating. I want to dive a little deeper—thank you for sharing all of this. It’s incredibly interesting. I’m curious about culture shifting: how do we identify when something in the culture needs to change? How do we shift it effectively without falling into trends like the superficial “Kool-Aid cultures” in tech—ping-pong tables and the like?

How do we break through that noise?

Stephanie:

One of the first questions I ask is: Are you able to do what you set out to do as an organization? Can you execute on your vision and mission? If the answer is no, there’s probably something wrong in the culture.

Ultimately, businesses are groups of human beings solving difficult problems together. If they’re not doing that well, the business won’t succeed.

Another question I ask leaders is: If you were to design the perfect environment for toxicity to thrive, how close is it to your company’s culture? Often, there are just a few small issues that, if left unchecked, can spread and lower the bar for everyone.

Cultural transformation doesn’t have to be a massive, multi-step process. Sometimes it’s about addressing two or three key areas. For example:

1. Allowing gossip or backchanneling instead of encouraging direct feedback breeds toxicity.
2. Avoiding difficult conversations instead of addressing them head-on creates a culture of avoidance.

These are small but critical behaviors that, over time, can drain an organization.

If you’re in an organization and want to impact the culture, don’t worry about doing everything. Focus on one game-changing behavior and commit to it. Neuroscience supports this—mirror neurons mean people unconsciously mimic each other’s behaviors.

If you show up to a meeting stressed out from spilling your coffee or dropping off your kid, your team will pick up on and mirror that stress. The same principle applies to positivity: if you show up consistently with integrity and calm, others will follow.

This is where agency becomes essential. In corporate environments with more than 150 people (Dunbar’s number), it’s easy to feel like things are happening to you. But you can always parse out what you can control, what you can influence, and what you need to let go.

For example, you can’t control a pandemic or economic downturns, but you can control how you show up each day.

Gillian:

You mentioned backchanneling as a behavior that feeds toxicity. It’s so tangible in today’s world of Slack, Teams, and similar tools. I’ve been in situations where I could tell backchanneling was happening—it affected the work, the drive, and the energy around a project.

It doesn’t feel powerful to tell people to stop backchanneling, but it’s necessary. How do you advise leaders to handle this in the context of modern tools?

Stephanie:

We’re leading in the age of transparency more than ever before. Whether it’s on Slack, Teams, or even text messages, what we do gets scrutinized. That makes it crucial to behave consistently in alignment with our values.

As for backchanneling, there are typically two main reasons it happens:

1. Gossiping feels good. It’s juicy, and our brains love it.
2. People don’t feel comfortable addressing issues directly.

Gillian:

It’s addictive.

Stephanie:

Exactly. Gossip gives us a dopamine hit. It’s hardwired into us, and I don’t know how to change that.

Michelle:

That’s one of those “can’t-change” things.

Gillian:

Different kind of coach, I guess, after that one.

Stephanie:

Exactly. You have to hold the humanity of people. But on the flip side, there’s a real reason why people start backchanneling in a toxic way. I do think there’s “fun tea” and “toxic tea.”

In one organization I’m working with, people have been backchanneling like crazy. When I dug into why, it turns out they don’t feel safe to tell the truth.

What’s even more interesting is that, since Amy Edmondson popularized the term “psychological safety,” many leaders have skimmed an HBR article about it and assumed, “I’m fine. I create a psychologically safe environment.” But they don’t.

Psychological safety is so much more than just not “screwing up” your team. It’s really about listening to people. Here’s an example:

This particular leader is guiding a team through a transformation. The team raised serious concerns and said, “We need to face these issues head-on.” The leader, instead of addressing it, brushed them off with toxic positivity—trying to cheerlead them through the situation.

The result? The team felt unheard, gave up, and started backchanneling to others. They realized they were in a car heading off a cliff, and they weren’t being listened to.

Gillian:

Yeah, the problem hasn’t been solved.

Stephanie:

Exactly. Their egos then step in to manage the cognitive dissonance: “We’re in the car, it’s going off the cliff, so let’s talk about how everyone else isn’t making the right decisions.”

They’re not wrong in this case. The leader’s behavior, while well-intentioned, was contextually wrong. This is where many leaders get tripped up—they assume that what got them here will get them there.

Most leaders don’t have the time to evaluate every single behavior or decision they make and ask, “Does this align with the impact I want as a leader?” That’s why creating space to reflect is crucial. It’s not a sign of weakness; it’s a sign of strategic depth.

Gillian:

I love that. We don’t all need real-time feedback. It’s okay to take a pause—we don’t have to answer every question on the call.

Michelle:

Diving into that feeling of not being listened to really resonates. I can see it in myself. When I get frustrated, I’ve definitely messaged someone else who feels the same way, because I feel like, “I’ve done all the right things, I know this is a problem, and the people who can fix it aren’t listening.”

Stephanie:

Exactly. That’s when the advice monster comes in. We place a lot of value on our ability to solve problems. When we can’t solve them, we excuse or deflect instead.

But part of our job is to manage uncertainty. We need to accept that others will make mistakes and that’s okay. Give grace to moments that aren’t perfect, and instead of spiraling, step back and keep moving forward.

Michelle:

We’ve talked a lot about leadership, but what about individual contributors? How can they bring authenticity and reflection if they’re not in leadership positions?

Stephanie:

I don’t separate individual contributors from leaders. Everyone is a leader in some capacity. Sometimes you’re leading yourself, your peers, a team, a function, or an entire organization.

At the end of the day, leadership is about aligning your beliefs, behaviors, and impact—no matter the size of your remit.

Gillian:

And ideally, you’re preparing for what’s next. You’re learning, experimenting, and growing in ways that will influence you in future roles.

Stephanie:

Exactly. It’s less about “training” and more like chiseling a marble statue—you’re sculpting yourself over time.

Gillian:

I love that metaphor. I’m still thinking about transparency. A few years ago, there was an exposé in Fast Company about a startup with severe leadership toxicity.

The article published Slack communications from the leadership team and detailed how their behavior was affecting employees’ mental health, family time, and overall well-being. As someone who grew up in startup culture, it felt so relatable—and necessary.

How does that kind of transparency help the leadership community make better choices?

Stephanie:

I’d hope that the executive team of that company stepped back and asked themselves some really hard questions.

The benefit of this level of transparency is awareness. When issues like this are exposed, leaders are forced to reflect on how their actions contribute to the culture and conditions they claim not to want.

Stephanie:

Again, I have to believe that executive team didn’t wake up and choose violence.

Gillian:

Yes, exactly.

Stephanie:

I have to believe they went off course at some point and didn’t know how to find their way back, or maybe something uncontrollable happened. There are all sorts of contextual factors, but the most important thing transparency provides is the opportunity to reflect.

This is why 360-degree feedback and feedback of all kinds are so important. We need to recognize when we’re complicit in creating the very conditions we say we don’t want. That’s a hard pill to swallow, but it’s necessary.

Gillian:

Yes, and in that situation, it was a lot of written communication affecting people deeply. I’m curious how you guide leaders on team communication, culturally speaking, especially when written words can land so differently than spoken ones.

For example, taking time to prepare for a meeting where something is delivered verbally versus spitting it out over Slack in a couple of minutes. How do you advise leaders on choosing the right format and approach for communication?

Stephanie:

It’s funny you ask—I got into a bit of a micro argument on LinkedIn about this a month ago. Someone argued that HR should manage this for leaders, and I disagreed. It’s the leader’s job to manage their people, no matter how busy they are. That’s the role.

When I see poor written communication or off-the-cuff conversations—especially during the pandemic when a lot of things were recorded and shared—it’s clear that communication isn’t seen as central to their role.

My biggest advice to leaders is this: don’t think of communication as a “nice-to-have” or something you do on the edges of your job. Your entire job is communication. How you show up for the people around you is the job.

We know written communication can be misinterpreted in countless ways. It’s always better to have difficult conversations face-to-face or via a real-time discussion than for a person to read words that might have been crafted by ChatGPT, your PR team, or both.

Gillian:

That’s great advice.

Stephanie:

The downside is this takes more time. Leaders have to slow down and be intentional, especially in this age of transparency. It’s a shift, but it’s necessary. Make space for it.

Gillian:

The message to “slow down” needs to be amplified across all fronts. I often think back to my early career during the days of phones, early email, and faxes. People had more time to communicate thoughtfully.

It’s not just about completing tasks—it’s about being intentional with communication, which is something we’re losing. I’m curious, are there other questions you arm leaders with to guide their teams? How can independent contributors adopt your coaching approach within their organizations?

Stephanie:

Oh, I have a whole bank of questions!

Gillian:

What are your top three?

Stephanie:

Great question. Here are my favorites:

1. “What can I do more of to make you even more successful? And what can I do less of to help you succeed?”
2. This question builds trust and safety within the team. Leaders often think they’re helping when they’re not, so creating space for this feedback is crucial. I borrowed this from Laszlo Bock at Google—it works.
3. “What’s one thing we’ve done successfully in the past month, and how can we apply it to the coming weeks?”
4. This question is about leveraging past wins. Many teams are feeling disengaged and unmotivated right now due to the economic slowdown, layoffs, and other challenges.
5. Previously, teams thrived on the dopamine rush of rapid growth and success. Now that things have slowed, people are going through withdrawal. This question helps them focus on strengths and mastery, shifting their mindset from “How do we win?” to “How do we get better?”
6. “What’s one thing I struggled with last week, and what did I learn from it?”
7. This question helps retrain the brain to seek out and embrace discomfort. When we can find something positive in a challenge, we become more comfortable facing hard things.

Leaders need this ability—we can’t avoid difficult situations.

Gillian:

Yeah, and like you said, leaders typically don’t like to be wrong. I love when anyone in an organization starts a sentence with, “I’m prepared to be wrong” or “I’d love to be wrong.” It just levels the playing field and changes how I receive the information. It’s a great little leadership hack to encourage humility.

Stephanie:

There’s a great book by Daniel Coyle called The Culture Code, and he talks about the importance of admitting when you mess up. Ed Catmull at Disney is a great example. When you walk into their beautifully renovated $20 million office, he’ll look at you and say, “It was a mistake. We screwed up. We didn’t create hallways big enough for people to have conversations or enough space to collaborate.”

Another example is from the Navy SEALs. They have a leader, Dave, who regularly says to his team, “I messed that up.”

Gillian:

Yeah, we definitely need more of that. Eliminating the fear around communicating failure is so important.

Stephanie:

Absolutely. We need to shift our mindset about failure, especially as we face increasing unknowns.

Gillian:

I’m so annoying with this one-liner I tell my husband, my child, and myself all the time. It’s not original, but I love it: “If you’re not falling, you’re not trying.”

I learned it skiing with a group of tough guys in college, and it stuck with me. It’s so true—you can’t improve if you’re just gliding through life perfectly. I think it applies just as much in corporate environments. Try, see what happens.

Stephanie:

And yet, we don’t like to do that.

Gillian:

We don’t like to wobble.

Stephanie:

Exactly. We want to feel comfortable and safe because careers aren’t just careers—they fund our homes, our kids, and our future opportunities. There’s a lot riding on it.

But if we don’t push ourselves out of our comfort zones, we stay exactly where we are. Ironically, that’s often how leaders fail. Not because they tried something new and it didn’t work, but because they stayed the same.

Gillian:

Amazing. This has been so insightful. We do need to let you get on with your day, but before we go, tell us how people can follow along with what you’re doing or work with you.

And, before you answer, I need a quick spiel about your farmhouse life—we didn’t get to that yet!

Stephanie:

Yes, okay. On the first point, you can find me in a lot of places now—much to my discomfort because I’m eating my own dog food.

You can find me on TikTok, where I share micro-coaching advice, or on any podcast platform with Mindset Mastery, which I just launched. It’s curated micro-meditations and mantras for leaders. If you’re feeling stressed or lacking confidence, these are specifically created for moments like that.

We also have an enormous amount of resources online at amplify.com, including newsletters and other fun things. We’re maniacally obsessed with democratizing access to executive coaching. Everyone should have access to it from the moment they start their careers to the moment they retire on a farm like me.

We’re also launching a new product by the end of the year, so follow along for updates!

As for the farm, because I apparently don’t like free time or sleep, I have a side business called Lingwood Farm. It’s my 34-acre paradise at the foothills of the Berkshire Mountains.

I love buying and renovating houses, and this one is becoming a retreat center. It’s a space for leaders—individually or in groups—to come and reset. We offer holistic wellness services, from therapy to Reiki to coaching, with guided or self-led retreats.

I truly believe access to space and time is critical, especially for leaders on the verge of burnout. I only have about four hours a week to dedicate to it right now, but it’s growing. You can follow us on Instagram or visit LingwoodFarm.com.

Gillian:

You’ve answered the age-old question: How can I expense my Reiki session?

Stephanie:

Exactly.

Gillian:

That’s amazing. Listeners, if you’re interested in booking time there, Instagram or the farm’s website is the best way to go, right?

Stephanie:

Yes, the house has its own website, LingwoodFarm.com, and you can book directly through there.

Gillian:

Awesome. This has been so insightful. I’m inspired and ready to get back to the team to pep them up and keep them motivated.

Stephanie:

Michelle, did we hit our goal? Did we crack the code on transformation?

Michelle:

Probably not, but we got 1% there.

Stephanie:

Maybe the crack is there. Thank you so much for this conversation. It’s been a pleasure, and I hope to have more in the future.

Gillian:

Amazing. Thank you, everyone, for listening! Follow along, subscribe, and we’ll keep you updated on these leadership conversations.

‍