The Tolstoy Test for Legal Leadership: Ron Bell of Collective Health (ex-Yahoo, Apple)

[0:00] Companies are really not interested in

[0:03] having lawyers. Like they're just not.

[0:05] They're interested in what lawyers bring

[0:07] them, right? Perspective, answers,

[0:10] values, deliverables.

[0:17] Welcome back to CZ Friends, where we

[0:19] talk with legal leaders, operators, and

[0:21] technologists shaping how companies move

[0:23] forward. I'm your host, Chichilia

[0:25] Zeniti. Today I'm joined by Ron Bell,

[0:28] the chief legal and administrative

[0:29] officer at Collected Health. Ron and I

[0:32] worked together years ago, literally at

[0:34] Yahoo, and I've always appreciated him

[0:36] as a lawyer, as a leader, and as a

[0:38] person. He brings judgment and

[0:40] perspective to complex situations

[0:42] without making he them heavier than they

[0:44] need to be. He's got an incredible

[0:45] history in Silicon Valley, including

[0:47] working for Apple, literally not just

[0:49] pre iPhone, but pre Apple being Apple,

[0:52] basically. He's got this rare ability to

[0:55] keep things clear, human, productive. He

[0:58] started off his career at big law, has

[0:59] seen incredibly high stakes situations

[1:02] across all kinds of industries. And he

[1:04] spent nearly three decades across big

[1:06] law, public companies, high growth tech.

[1:09] He was the general counsel of Yahoo

[1:10] during a pivotal chapter. He helped

[1:12] build some of the earliest legal

[1:13] operations functions and trust and

[1:15] safety functions in Silicon Valley. And

[1:17] he's led beyond legal teams as well with

[1:20] HR administrative functions as well.

[1:23] He's got a long view on leadership,

[1:25] value, legal teams, all of it. And I'm

[1:28] happy to say he's a friend. Was

[1:30] literally one of my first mentors. I was

[1:32] a patent and litigation parallegal at

[1:34] Yahoo back in the early 2000s. And um

[1:36] Ron is one of the people who inspired me

[1:38] to go to law school. So very excited for

[1:40] this conversation. Let's dive in. Ron,

[1:43] welcome to the show.

[1:44] Thank you for having me. I feel 20 20

[1:46] years in the making, right? Exactly.

[1:48] We've known each other a long long time.

[1:50] Literally incredible. All right. So,

[1:52] you've lived through some big

[1:54] transitions. Um, and including, I would

[1:57] say, the rise of in-house as a function.

[2:00] Yahoo doesn't get a a ton of credit for

[2:02] this, but I would say it was one of the

[2:04] first kind of tech legal departments in

[2:07] the in the valley. What do you what do

[2:08] you have to say say about that? What is

[2:10] in-house as a as a function?

[2:12] Well, I I think it's changed a lot as

[2:14] you said. I mean before before like sort

[2:16] of the mid '9s a lot of it was managing

[2:18] outside council and then I think really

[2:21] the rise of the internet was a big and

[2:23] technology in Silicon Valley was a big

[2:25] part of that sort of bringing a lot of

[2:28] functions inhouse sort of the u larger

[2:31] legal departments more specialized

[2:33] global interrelated and with a focus

[2:37] not so much just on getting answers but

[2:40] on driving value. How do you be

[2:42] proactive and help drive the business

[2:44] forward and anticipate what the issues

[2:46] might be, anticipate what the policies

[2:48] might be and how you can shape them and

[2:50] then working as a team right across

[2:53] functional not just legal but other

[2:55] business functions to help drive results

[2:58] for the shareholders. So it's it was

[3:00] kind of a switch if you think about the

[3:03] law firms as being very driven by their

[3:05] relationships, you know, with the

[3:06] individual companies that they're

[3:08] they're working with. it was um it was

[3:10] about being a full-time stakeholder and

[3:13] a sort of a in-house resident conigliary

[3:16] and a business strategist. So I think a

[3:19] lot of that was uh was driven by a lot

[3:21] of different factors in the in the

[3:23] environment but that was really what

[3:24] what uh the the change was. I think

[3:28] I still remember little story when we

[3:30] were at Yahoo your group used to be

[3:32] called the deal team. So literally like

[3:34] commercial transaction deal team.

[3:36] Yeah. And I remember that they went

[3:38] through a rebrand and you're like,

[3:40] "Okay, we're gonna we're gonna name it

[3:42] something else to reflect what we what

[3:44] we do."

[3:46] Why the rebrand? And what did you

[3:48] rebrand to if you remember?

[3:49] I I don't remember what we rebranded to

[3:51] exactly. I think it was transactions and

[3:53] business counseling or something similar

[3:54] to that. Um it was it was because I

[3:57] think legal functions often get um seen

[4:00] in one dimension. And if you if you just

[4:03] think about all the things that we do,

[4:05] there's at least three components to it.

[4:07] One is just the basic maintenance of

[4:09] keeping the business running, the stuff

[4:10] nobody finds exciting, filing all the

[4:12] corporate filing, so on so forth. Then

[4:14] there's the um the protection aspect of

[4:18] it, that's the risk management, right?

[4:20] the the litigation, maybe some policym,

[4:23] but the aspirational aspect of it, the

[4:25] part that's in service to the business,

[4:27] thinking strategically, how can we make

[4:29] these contracts more effective, more

[4:32] revenue generating, better terms, better

[4:35] relationships with our partners. That

[4:37] part sometimes gets short shrift and I

[4:39] think it's important to think

[4:40] holistically about that because I think

[4:41] that's one of the frankly one of the

[4:43] mistakes I think we make as lawyers is

[4:44] we let other functions define us as the

[4:47] naysayers, as the riskbears, right? And

[4:49] I think uh it's important to to to speak

[4:52] that language that lets them from the

[4:54] outset see who you are and what you're

[4:56] about.

[4:56] Along that vein, you were actually

[4:58] pretty early in recognizing legal

[5:01] operations as a function. So tell us

[5:02] about that. What did you do and if you

[5:05] can give us maybe even like a from to of

[5:08] like so Yahoo at the time obviously had

[5:10] millions of users,

[5:12] had a very advanced uh subpoena

[5:14] compliance team. It had you know I think

[5:17] probably hundreds of entities globally.

[5:19] So very complex that was the

[5:22] environment. What did you what were you

[5:24] seeing at the time and then how did that

[5:26] translate to legal operations? Of course

[5:28] at this time clock the corporate legal

[5:30] operations consortium did not exist.

[5:33] Operations as a function I don't think

[5:34] was a thing. So so tell tell us about

[5:36] that.

[5:37] Right. Well, it's funny you mentioned

[5:38] Clock because one of the first

[5:39] inspirations was a meeting I had with

[5:41] Connie Breton who is one of the one of

[5:43] the founders of Clock and she was kind

[5:45] of she took me out to breakfast one day

[5:46] and we were just talking about the

[5:48] complexity that all the legal teams were

[5:50] facing, right? The fact that now we had

[5:53] to go faster globally um across multiple

[5:57] jurisdictions. At least in the case of

[5:58] the internet companies, the laws weren't

[6:00] really well defined yet. the roles

[6:02] weren't defined, but we still had the

[6:04] and the departments were much larger and

[6:07] more complex to manage because they were

[6:08] they were often multinational with a lot

[6:11] of specialists. She she was kind of

[6:14] saying to me, I think there's a room for

[6:16] a new type of function. And I just saw

[6:19] it all of a sudden, we just need we

[6:21] can't continue to operate the function

[6:24] the same way that we have before. We

[6:26] have to adapt the function to the new

[6:28] reality which is all of the things I

[6:30] just said right and that means a

[6:32] professionalization of how are we

[6:34] interacting with our outside council how

[6:36] are we developing our people what

[6:38] systems do we have to support our

[6:40] lawyers in getting the job done and how

[6:42] do we know that we're delivering value

[6:43] right the from two would be like at that

[6:46] time despite the fact that Yahoo was an

[6:49] internet powerhouse one of the leading

[6:51] companies on the web at the time the

[6:53] bills were all paper and so they would

[6:55] passed around and often they were like

[6:57] these bills that would taste like Yahoo,

[6:59] you know, legal general and it would get

[7:01] it would have litigation items on it

[7:04] have transactional items or IP it'd be

[7:06] passed from, you know, father to son,

[7:09] you know, you know, mother to daughter

[7:11] like the Talmud around the office. And

[7:13] of course, the the problem with this,

[7:14] everyone had to sign off on their piece.

[7:16] And the problem with this is it took

[7:17] forever to get the bills paid. half the

[7:20] time the thing got lost on somebody's

[7:22] desk or somebody would go out on

[7:23] vacation and it would take like three

[7:25] years to pay the outside counsel. So the

[7:27] outside council were also like you know

[7:29] come on guys you got to do better and

[7:31] this was also around the time that

[7:32] ebilling was just taking off and so I

[7:35] had a conversation with our then general

[7:37] counsel Mike Callahan and and said I

[7:39] think we could do things a little bit

[7:40] different and to Mike's credit and Mike

[7:42] has always been a forward thinking

[7:43] person he im immediately embraced that

[7:45] and said yeah we we have to do better go

[7:48] out there find out what's out there and

[7:50] figure it out right so uh that's what we

[7:53] did and so the the transition was

[7:55] literally from being a paperdriven

[7:58] most, you know, monks in cubicles with

[8:01] little quill pens to suddenly being able

[8:03] to do bring to the work we were doing as

[8:06] a department some of the same

[8:08] technology, some of the same thinking

[8:09] that we were putting out there as a

[8:11] company. And it was really

[8:12] transformational because then all of a

[8:14] sudden Mike could say in real time here

[8:16] how here's how we're doing against our

[8:17] budget and here's what's trending and

[8:19] here's what's not and inform the

[8:21] decisions at the corporate level in a

[8:23] way that suddenly went from we're kind

[8:25] of flying blind or at least 3 to 6

[8:28] months delayed to really being able to

[8:30] know where we were putting our spend and

[8:32] how we how efficient we were being and

[8:33] where we needed to to make changes and I

[8:35] think that was hugely transformational.

[8:37] How have you seen legal how do you think

[8:39] about legal operations today?

[8:41] So I had the very good fortune to hire

[8:45] as um my head of legal operations a

[8:48] gentleman by the name of Jeff Frankie

[8:50] and uh who's one of the leaders in legal

[8:52] operations field now.

[8:55] Jeff was kind of my not just my head of

[8:58] legal oper operations but my chief of

[9:00] staff, right? He was the partner in

[9:02] sounding out like what are we going to

[9:04] do as a function? What message are we

[9:06] going to deliver to the team? What do

[9:08] people need to know? What do we what

[9:10] where are we seeing the problems and so

[9:11] on and so forth. So I think of legal

[9:13] operations now as kind of being the

[9:14] heart and soul of the legal department,

[9:16] right? They're the these these jobs of

[9:19] being general counsel are kind of lonely

[9:21] jobs, right? There's only so many people

[9:24] you can talk to about problems.

[9:26] Everybody's got an interest, sometimes a

[9:28] personal interest, especially if they

[9:29] work for you and whether they get X

[9:30] project or so on and so forth. Um,

[9:32] they've got history perspective. Having

[9:34] somebody you can bounce ideas off of and

[9:37] brainstorm who is really there to help

[9:41] you be a better, more effective leader

[9:44] is a rarity. And legal operations

[9:46] functions have that. I think too often

[9:49] they get jammed into that that niche of

[9:52] we just want to implement some software

[9:54] and your job is to sort of manage and be

[9:55] legal IT but really it's the opportunity

[9:58] to be a strategic partner. I see that is

[10:00] it's it is almost like the operating

[10:01] system of the department.

[10:03] How does that show up for stakeholders?

[10:05] Right. So your example of ebilling, you

[10:07] know, that sort of feels quite now, but

[10:09] obviously helpful in terms of like

[10:11] running legal like a business and really

[10:13] thinking like, okay, how do you uh

[10:16] mobilize resources, get the right level

[10:18] of risk, staff, etc. Cool. With you

[10:21] there,

[10:22] wondering is this something where, you

[10:24] know, when I think about the goals of a

[10:26] great legal team and, you know, when I

[10:29] see AI, I see stakeholders noticing,

[10:32] right? So, one of our users had their

[10:34] chief revenue officer say, you know,

[10:36] Amy, what the heck happened to Legal?

[10:38] Like, you guys are just fire lately.

[10:40] This is incredible. And the answer

[10:42] happened to Legal was they were using

[10:43] AI. So, that's cool. But I guess

[10:45] wondering like how do you see that

[10:47] impact? And you've been very close with

[10:49] boards with CEOs obviously, you know,

[10:52] that consiliary thing.

[10:54] You know, is there a from two story

[10:56] there in terms of the impact? Well, I

[10:58] think if you're talking about AI or even

[11:00] just a legal operations function, like I

[11:02] I used to sit down with Jeff every

[11:04] quarter and we would talk about what's

[11:06] coming up, like what board meetings do

[11:07] we have, what information do we need to

[11:09] get together, what do we need to make

[11:10] sure we have for finance, what are we

[11:12] anticipating in terms of our hiring and

[11:14] so on and so forth. Um AI you didn't

[11:17] exist at that time at least in our in

[11:19] our universe but like today it's a tool

[11:21] for efficiency for getting things done

[11:23] for getting answers faster for speeding

[11:25] up the work that you do every day.

[11:28] companies are really not interested in

[11:31] having lawyers. Like they're just not.

[11:33] They're interested in what lawyers bring

[11:36] them, right? Perspective, answers,

[11:38] values, deliverables, right? And AI is a

[11:42] tool to accelerate that. Not to replace

[11:44] I don't think the lawyers, although

[11:45] there's some people marketing it that

[11:46] way and I think it's silly, but I I

[11:48] think it's to it's to accelerate the

[11:51] value chain and enable you to do more so

[11:54] you can focus on the things that AI is

[11:55] not maybe as good at, which is the okay,

[11:58] let me think strategically and how do I

[12:00] build out these relationships and what

[12:02] do all the stakeholders here need to

[12:04] know and what are the company values and

[12:06] how are going to be reflected in my

[12:07] work. Like AI is a statistical engine.

[12:10] and it can give you like some great

[12:11] predictions and and answers uh you know

[12:14] uh around things that might be

[12:16] statistically an average right but if

[12:18] you're trying to think outside the box

[12:20] or apply things specifically to your to

[12:23] your company it's a compliment and

[12:25] that's that's how I think it's best used

[12:26] honestly

[12:28] I agree so you said something super

[12:30] interesting which is that companies

[12:33] don't want lawyers my some of the

[12:35] faithful listeners to this pot are my

[12:36] parents but my dad once g um you know

[12:39] career advice saying, "Hey, you know,

[12:41] he's an entrepreneur. Hey, you know, the

[12:43] amount that I want to spend on lawyers

[12:45] and accountants in an ideal world is

[12:47] goose egg." Like literally like nothing,

[12:49] right?

[12:50] That was an inspiration to me to do

[12:52] exactly what you said, which is like to

[12:54] think about it in terms of value

[12:55] driving. And I, you know, I still

[12:57] remember we had somebody on the pod, uh,

[12:59] David Morris of Sneak, and he said,

[13:00] "Hey, you know, it was really an apex

[13:02] moment for me when my whole team got

[13:04] invited to some product retreat or got

[13:06] invited to, you know, whatever as really

[13:08] like, hey, this is this is super

[13:09] important." So, I I I guess in that

[13:12] realm of, you know, strategic answers

[13:15] and guidance, you've been involved in

[13:17] some pretty big transactions. Obviously,

[13:19] Yahoo famously almost bought Meta like

[13:22] three times and didn't do it. and you

[13:25] know almost was bought by Microsoft. So

[13:28] in an M&A context specifically um any

[13:31] stories you can share about sort of

[13:34] really driving that value um or you know

[13:37] legal being part of part of that

[13:39] analysis in a way that is value that

[13:42] would not just be something you could

[13:44] get from an AI today.

[13:46] Um sure and I'll be I'll be judicious

[13:49] because of course privilege and all

[13:50] that. Um, you know, uh, there was one

[13:54] acquisition we were doing where one of

[13:56] the questions that was on the table was,

[13:59] do we build it ourselves,

[14:01] right, or do we acquire this company?

[14:04] The legal piece of that, the mechanics

[14:07] of that, you know, were relatively, you

[14:09] know, relatively easy in either scen

[14:11] scenario.

[14:12] The sitting down and saying, "This is

[14:14] what it will take to build it ourselves.

[14:17] This is the time. These are the

[14:18] contracts we'd have to put in place.

[14:19] These are relationships we'd have to

[14:21] establish. These are the the trust and

[14:24] safety issues we'd have to be able to

[14:26] address

[14:28] versus the time to market of acquiring a

[14:32] company that had already established a

[14:34] substantial presence in the area in

[14:36] which we were interested in, who had a

[14:38] good culture that was a nice complement

[14:41] to who we were and how we saw the world.

[14:44] um which was geographically located in a

[14:47] place that that would make it easier,

[14:50] right, to uh to work with them. And they

[14:52] were in SoCal, we were in no in Northern

[14:54] California at the time. Um and looking

[14:57] at it from the perspective of, you know,

[15:00] either way as a lawyer, I think you you

[15:02] you you get to a result. As thinking as

[15:05] a strategist, we would pick up all their

[15:08] patents. We would have that time. we

[15:11] would accelerate our time to market in a

[15:13] way that wouldn't have been possible if

[15:15] we' built it ourselves. And of course,

[15:16] there were engineers that wanted to

[15:18] build it and god bless them, right?

[15:20] There always are. And sometimes that is

[15:21] the right solution. But where you're

[15:24] talking about a more mature market,

[15:25] you're a new entrant, you don't have

[15:27] prior experience in the area and there's

[15:29] a way to accelerate uh the transaction,

[15:32] accelerate the value, acquire some

[15:34] valuable IP, right? some expertise like

[15:38] that's that's the part where I think as

[15:40] as an advisor in in any function

[15:42] honestly but certainly in a legal

[15:43] function you've got to say are we

[15:45] looking at this the right way right are

[15:47] we thinking about the chessboard the

[15:49] right way what if we've turned it around

[15:51] and thought about it a different way

[15:53] that's a big part of being a legal

[15:55] counsel I think is helping the business

[15:57] make place the right bets

[15:59] do you ever have to temper yourself or

[16:02] your teams from the desire to be right

[16:05] every Okay. At least for me, I have to

[16:07] remind myself that I'm not right. And I

[16:10] mean I I mean that like not like I'm

[16:11] deliberately wrong, but like there's a

[16:15] um there's a challenge that comes with

[16:17] expertise and um and tenure, which is if

[16:22] you're right enough, you start to drink

[16:24] your own Kool-Aid. And that's the most

[16:26] dangerous thing I think for a lawyer to

[16:29] do. Um because then you don't start

[16:32] asking the corner cases, what if I'm

[16:34] wrong? What if we did this a different

[16:36] way? What if we get we don't deliver on

[16:38] the way that I'm suggesting that we do

[16:39] it? Is there a more efficient and

[16:41] effective way to do it? Not just the way

[16:43] we've done it in the past, but could we

[16:45] use technology like AI to accelerate

[16:47] this process? And would that be more

[16:48] helpful? I think it's really important

[16:50] as an in-house council and particularly

[16:52] as a general counsel to be humble and to

[16:55] say, I don't have all the answers. I

[16:57] know people who can help me get the

[16:59] answers. I'm going to surround myself

[17:00] with really smart people who can help me

[17:03] brainstorm and think about the answers

[17:04] and and often drive them themselves. Um,

[17:07] but I don't need to be the quote unquote

[17:10] the smartest person in the room, right?

[17:12] I don't need to be Sherlock Holmes. I

[17:13] need to be more like Columbbo. I need to

[17:15] ask a lot of questions. I need to like

[17:18] right come in in my rumpled raincoat,

[17:20] right? Like I just one more thing about

[17:22] the marketing program. I just it's

[17:24] bothering me for my report, right? and

[17:26] help people, smart people that you're

[17:29] working with who also have their blind

[17:30] spots and their passions and their

[17:32] interest to come to decisions that they

[17:35] can feel proud of and that are the right

[17:36] answers for them after considering all

[17:38] the different angles. So, you know, I

[17:40] don't find that I work with a lot of and

[17:42] I certainly don't feel on my team I have

[17:43] people who are arrogant in any way. But

[17:45] I I think as a lawyer every time I have

[17:48] to remind myself you lose credibility if

[17:51] you are trying to be the smartest person

[17:52] in the room help other people who are

[17:54] equally smart as a partner in getting to

[17:57] the right answers.

[17:58] You've used what you call the Toltoy

[18:00] test. I am so intrigued by this. I don't

[18:03] read Toltoy, but I I

[18:05] You can fill in your your favorite

[18:06] Russian novelist or any

[18:08] Exactly. Exactly. I know it's good. So

[18:10] tell us about that. What and does it

[18:12] relate to what you just explained?

[18:13] Yeah. Well, the tool stray test is just

[18:15] a framing, right, for like everything

[18:17] that we do every day. There's a you

[18:19] every company, every company at any

[18:22] stage, public, private, is on fire a

[18:24] thousand different ways. There are, you

[18:27] know, a hundred issues or more that you

[18:29] can spend your time on, most of which

[18:31] will not move the needle. Some of which

[18:32] are essential, right? You got to do your

[18:34] corporate filings every taxes every

[18:36] year. Boring though it may be, you got

[18:37] to do it. make your filings on time, but

[18:40] you can really exhaust yourself and your

[18:43] business partners by trying to run down

[18:45] a lot of things that in the end don't

[18:47] really matter. And so for myself, I sort

[18:49] of came up with this with this

[18:50] benchmark, which is not I'm going to

[18:53] ignore everything, but how do I know if

[18:56] something is really important? And the

[18:58] answer is if it's something that if we

[19:00] get it wrong is going to be so

[19:03] melodramatic catastrophic that it would

[19:06] make a great plot for a Russian novel

[19:08] and you know the people who suffer you

[19:10] know who go to the why Chitilia did you

[19:13] not do it differently right that that

[19:17] person if you're going to be that person

[19:19] if your colleague is going to be that

[19:20] person if your company's going to be

[19:22] that person spend the time on that cuz

[19:25] that's 80% of the risk. maybe 80% of the

[19:28] value, right? Because it doesn't have to

[19:30] be a negative story. Think in terms of

[19:32] give a little bit of perspective.

[19:35] Not every um you know, not every

[19:37] haunting is a Ghostbusters level event,

[19:40] right? You don't have to bring out the

[19:41] the particle beams for everything. Take

[19:44] a step back and say, "Is this is this

[19:45] something I need to spend time on? And

[19:47] what are the consequences of it?" And

[19:49] then you'll be you'll be much more

[19:51] focused and you'll also be less

[19:53] exhausted and your business people will

[19:56] appreciate you more because you won't be

[19:57] the lawyer who comes in and says you

[20:00] know there's a new state law every day

[20:02] which there is and we need to change

[20:04] everything tomorrow which we may or may

[20:07] not need to do right provide a path

[20:09] provide perspective help guide it. I

[20:12] love that kind of I feel like now, you

[20:15] know, people talk about this as like

[20:17] main character energy, right? And it's

[20:18] like, okay, are you like gonna are you

[20:20] really the main character? Is what law

[20:23] you know that one of 16 new California

[20:25] laws like warrant main character energy?

[20:27] And the answer is probably it doesn't.

[20:29] But I I love that.

[20:31] It also helps you honestly think about

[20:33] other functions too, right? Because

[20:35] often the big dramatic legal issues can

[20:37] be marketing and communications issues

[20:40] as well, right? they can be board

[20:41] issues. So it helps you to sort of think

[20:43] about are there other stakeholders I

[20:44] need to bring along on this journey and

[20:46] and get involved. Um so it it also makes

[20:48] it less of a lonely function. I think

[20:50] I agree with that. You've talked about

[20:52] using RFPs and about like getting the

[20:55] right people in the right job. what what

[20:57] is your advice on kind of staffing at

[20:59] large and now let's take a step up like

[21:01] so obviously you have legal but you also

[21:03] have administrative HR other things

[21:06] like you know as a if if someone a

[21:09] listener is lucky enough to be in a

[21:10] position where they're deciding how to

[21:12] staff something um either a new

[21:15] litigation or any kind of matter really

[21:18] any problem at the company so I'm

[21:20] assuming you're you know you said you're

[21:21] a problem solver

[21:23] things come to you you know it's a

[21:25] healthcare company that you work for

[21:26] today, collective health, you know, huge

[21:28] plethora of things that that that could

[21:29] be. What What goes through your head in

[21:32] deciding who's the right person or team

[21:34] or resource for a job? And how do you

[21:37] get good at making those decisions?

[21:41] Well, experience and falling on your

[21:43] face is how you get good at making those

[21:45] decisions, but also watching what works,

[21:48] right? Seeing what works for others. I

[21:49] think when you're staffing, I I try to

[21:52] apply two rules. The first is kind of

[21:55] like a privacy concept, right? Minimum

[21:57] necessary information, minimum necessary

[21:59] staffing. More bodies does not

[22:01] necessarily make something more

[22:03] efficient or effective. The right bodies

[22:06] with the right experience, the right

[22:08] perspective. Who's done a deal like this

[22:10] before? Who could benefit from doing

[22:11] this deal? Are we going to do something,

[22:14] you know, this a line of business we're

[22:15] going to do in the in the future? Great.

[22:17] Who's going to be our expert? Who's

[22:18] going to be our point of contact? Right.

[22:20] for that we've often used uh sort of a

[22:22] um you know primary contact model for

[22:25] lawyers. So you know you you have repeat

[22:28] clients, you have repeat businesses that

[22:29] you work with, transactions you work

[22:31] with and of course in that case you

[22:33] might bring someone in. But then it's

[22:35] also looking around like are these cases

[22:37] where there are other functions within

[22:40] the legal or in company that you need to

[22:41] bring along too. So privacy would be a

[22:43] good example, security be a good

[22:45] example, international lawyers, can I

[22:49] get their input? How do I get their

[22:50] input? Let's say if I'm doing a deal

[22:52] early enough in this process or this

[22:54] procedure that I'm putting together or

[22:56] this contract that it's going to make a

[22:58] difference, right? And then really

[23:01] encouraging people, you're not just

[23:03] there to play your instrument, you're

[23:06] there to be an orchestra and to to to

[23:10] have a symphony together. that that is

[23:14] beautiful to the ear, right, and

[23:16] successful for the company. Um, so

[23:18] encouraging collaboration regardless of

[23:21] your level. Like I like I don't really

[23:23] care what people's levels are, right?

[23:25] Like that doesn't matter to me. Like at

[23:27] the end of the day, I want people to

[23:28] work together, be thoughtful, inform

[23:30] each other, keep each other up to date

[23:32] on things that matter within the

[23:34] business. And so I will, you know, I I

[23:36] also think there's a cultural component

[23:38] to staffing as well. make sure that not

[23:41] only people have the right knowledge and

[23:43] mindset on how to do whatever it is that

[23:46] we want to do but on also on how to work

[23:48] together. I was speaking with well

[23:50] actually this person was from Yahoo but

[23:51] a friend in finance and I had been

[23:54] struggling with finance as a as a

[23:57] function because now as a CEO I'm you

[23:59] know I would say I manage finance now

[24:01] had never done it before and

[24:04] was the financial model was confusing to

[24:06] me anyway I was like struggling with

[24:08] with staffing that and I talked with my

[24:12] friend and I said hey you know how much

[24:14] would you expect that you know the

[24:16] stakeholder in this case me the CEO

[24:18] would understand of the financial model

[24:20] and what goes into it and so on. And uh

[24:23] the response was kind of similar to what

[24:25] you said, which is, you know, if I had

[24:28] to explain to you how to play the

[24:30] saxophone, like it would be laborious

[24:33] and it would suck and or you know,

[24:35] someone explained to me how to play the

[24:36] saxophone, like all the different

[24:38] whatever, like it would be a a difficult

[24:41] exercise, probably not worth it. But the

[24:43] advice from this person was, "Hey, but

[24:45] you know what good saxophone music

[24:47] sounds like." And when you're listening

[24:49] to it, you know, and and that symphony

[24:51] concept is the same thing where it's

[24:53] like as the leader, like I'm assuming,

[24:55] you know, when you started took

[24:56] responsibility for HR, you hadn't

[24:58] necessarily done it before. How do you

[25:00] know what good music sounds like then?

[25:03] And do you, you know, did you have to

[25:05] shed some of the legal knowledge? When

[25:08] did you kind of start wearing the hats?

[25:10] People use the hat metaphor, people use

[25:11] other metaphors, but how did you how did

[25:13] that evolution happen for you? And what

[25:15] advice do you have for others?

[25:17] Well, that's a that's quite a question.

[25:19] Let's talk first about like doing a

[25:22] function other than legal or taking that

[25:23] on like that the people the people

[25:25] function. First thing you got to do is

[25:26] remember it's a different function and

[25:28] we lawyers get really comfortable with

[25:30] the way that we operate and the way that

[25:32] we give answers and the way that we

[25:33] provide things. People is a whole

[25:35] different ballgame. Obviously, there's a

[25:37] lot of legal components to it, but it's

[25:40] also emotion. Like compensation is not

[25:43] just a question of like is it quote

[25:46] unquote consistent with market. It's

[25:48] also a psychological question. Does this

[25:50] person feel motivated? Are they being

[25:52] compensated relative to their

[25:53] contribution to the company? And many of

[25:55] the conversations you're having are the

[25:57] softer skill conversations which lawyers

[26:00] like clean answers, right? Like we like

[26:02] to say, this is the way to go. This is

[26:03] the way not to go. Being a chief people

[26:06] officer is often about the gray, right?

[26:08] There's a lot there's 20 different ways

[26:10] you can return to the office. None of

[26:12] them are illegal. Some of them have more

[26:14] moral, you know, more friction

[26:17] associated with them than others. And

[26:18] there's a communication component. So,

[26:20] it's it's relying on people who are in

[26:23] those functions to help you understand

[26:25] the questions to ask. It's obviously

[26:28] looking at external resources if you

[26:30] have it. It's understanding the cadence

[26:32] of the function like when do you do like

[26:35] compensation decisions or promotion

[26:37] decisions or whatnot and then working

[26:40] backwards and trying to take not ignore

[26:43] the lawyer part of it but remember in

[26:44] that function you're acting as a

[26:46] business person as well as a lawyer just

[26:49] as the GC you're acting as a business

[26:50] person and not just as a lawyer but it's

[26:53] a little different when you're seen as

[26:55] the person in charge of people or

[26:57] something like that the larger issue I

[26:59] think to Chilia independent of uh which

[27:01] goes to part of your question is I think

[27:03] one of the most important things like

[27:04] advice pieces of advice I could give to

[27:06] somebody I was at Yahoo for a long time

[27:08] I think almost 17 18 years I've lost

[27:11] track of it was a long time um so I was

[27:13] in one place for a long time not in the

[27:16] same role and the benefit of that I

[27:19] think was that I got to experience

[27:21] firsthand that old saw about the the

[27:23] blind men and the elephant like one

[27:25] grabs the trunk and says it's a snake

[27:26] and one grabs the the leg and says it's

[27:29] a tree and the answer is the elephant is

[27:31] all of those things and companies are a

[27:35] lot of different functions and

[27:37] ecosystems internal external and so on

[27:40] and so forth. And so one of the best

[27:42] things you can do for your career to

[27:45] develop that mindset of service is to

[27:47] start thinking about who are the

[27:49] necessary stakeholders for every

[27:51] problem. Who's going to be concerned

[27:53] with this? Is finance concerned with

[27:54] this? Is the CEO concerned with this? Is

[27:55] the board concerned with it? outsider or

[27:58] the investors, the the regulators like

[27:59] who is concerned about this? What would

[28:02] they want to know or what would they

[28:04] want me to do in this situation? And am

[28:07] I or my team doing those things,

[28:10] providing that information, thinking

[28:12] about how to draw that circle and then

[28:15] doing that right and what are some

[28:17] examples? I mean, play as lawyers, we

[28:18] always see examples of things that

[28:19] didn't go well, right, elsewhere. But

[28:22] what can I learn from those examples

[28:23] that might illustrate how I do that?

[28:26] Because I think thinking in terms of

[28:28] stakeholders and ecosystems gives you a

[28:30] much better perspective and it becomes

[28:33] much more important the more senior you

[28:37] become in the department and certainly

[28:38] for the general council where you're

[28:40] leading a function of the company but

[28:42] you're also a leader of the company. So

[28:44] you pull one strand and you have the

[28:47] world's best contract and it's airtight

[28:49] but it slows down the commercial

[28:50] pipeline to a crawl. That has

[28:52] consequences, right? as lawyers, we're

[28:54] always adding friction or we're adding

[28:56] we're speeding things up. So thinking in

[28:57] terms of ecosystems, I think is also

[28:59] important and that's that's true also in

[29:01] the in the people function.

[29:02] One of the things you reminded me of is

[29:06] so there was more maybe two or three

[29:09] years ago. I don't hear about it as much

[29:10] now, but there was a trend around the

[29:13] sort of hating on middle management. So

[29:15] it was like at Meta, you know, it was

[29:17] like, okay, we're going to have, you

[29:19] know, a span of control where any one

[29:21] manager is going to have nine plus

[29:24] reports. And the idea is that the people

[29:27] doing the work should be should be doing

[29:29] it. And, you know, even now for me

[29:31] today, you know, I I get to choose what

[29:34] kind of org I want. Is it going to be

[29:35] flat? Is it going to be, you know, uh,

[29:38] more hierarchical? And, you know, I've

[29:40] obviously had different models. I was at

[29:41] Yahoo. I was at Amazon. I've been at

[29:43] variety of small companies.

[29:45] But that kind of ability to to see the

[29:49] ecosystem as you described is a little

[29:52] bit in conflict with that view um as

[29:55] expressed. And I think AI, other forces,

[29:59] return to work, uh you know, the super

[30:02] high revenue per employee that a lot of

[30:04] these tech companies enjoy are are all

[30:06] factors in that. But how do you

[30:09] reconcile that? And do you share that

[30:13] sort of I guess at least expressed bias

[30:16] against sort of folks in the in the

[30:20] middle?

[30:21] It's a great question. First of all, I

[30:23] would say like where does that come

[30:25] from? Companies

[30:27] don't tend to grow, you know, like when

[30:30] you read the business case studies, it's

[30:31] always like it's always very efficient,

[30:33] you know, then the company did this and

[30:34] that and the other. I mean, the reality

[30:35] is like, [ __ ] we're doing X. Okay, I

[30:37] think we need an expert on that. Let's

[30:38] bring someone in. Oh, someone left.

[30:40] Let's restructure and put that. And

[30:42] like, there's all these decisions that

[30:44] get made that sort of leave you with a

[30:45] hodgepodge. So, every so often it is

[30:48] helpful to take a step back and say,

[30:50] okay, if I were starting from scratch

[30:53] and looking at where we need to go, does

[30:55] this make sense? Do I have the right

[30:57] people in the right roles? Do I even

[30:59] need all the roles that I have?

[31:02] And what what do I need going forward?

[31:04] like and I think that's helpful for

[31:05] companies and for departments

[31:07] independent of any you know bias against

[31:09] middle management but because many many

[31:11] times people are trying to solve

[31:12] problems by bringing in other experts or

[31:16] other resources or amassing teams of

[31:18] scale because they perceive that'll let

[31:20] them move up and so on and so forth.

[31:21] There's also a need again to just look

[31:24] and and and ask yourself those

[31:26] questions, right? Um because organically

[31:29] you might not get to the right place.

[31:31] That said, I don't have a bias against

[31:32] middle management. I I have had you know

[31:35] I have been a middle management there

[31:36] and there are many middle managers who

[31:38] have worked for me. To me it's really a

[31:40] question of how quickly and effectively

[31:42] can you make decisions and act. Are you

[31:45] overstaffed or understaffed? And are you

[31:48] thinking sensibly right about how you're

[31:51] building your business and I think

[31:52] sometimes these things are just

[31:53] shortcuts if we're honest. Some things

[31:55] are sometimes these things are shortcuts

[31:57] not even aimed at legal but because like

[31:59] the company as a whole hasn't been as

[32:01] attentive to that right and I find like

[32:04] functions at a company especially one

[32:05] that's growing quickly mature at

[32:07] different rates if you invest a lot like

[32:10] you're investing a lot in tech I bet

[32:12] your tech team is awesome but if you

[32:14] don't invest a lot in marketing which

[32:15] you do but if you didn't your marketing

[32:17] team would be lagging and at some point

[32:19] your marketing team is behind your tech

[32:21] team in terms of staffing and and

[32:23] resourcing so then the question becomes

[32:25] how do I restructure it to balance that

[32:27] out if it's important that I have better

[32:30] marketing, right? So, I think these are

[32:31] these the things are tools and short

[32:33] hands. I'm not a like a big fan of

[32:34] things like middle management. We don't

[32:37] need middle management or we don't need

[32:39] we don't need no stinking lawyers. Like

[32:40] at the end of the day, I I don't you

[32:42] know, I don't know whether you do or you

[32:44] don't, but I know it's a question that a

[32:46] mantra doesn't answer. It's a maybe a

[32:49] rule of thumb, but you know, maybe you

[32:52] should look at the other fingers too

[32:53] every so often and think about if you're

[32:54] if that's the right call for you at that

[32:57] time and in that place. And maybe it's

[32:58] using technology, maybe it's bringing in

[33:00] more people, maybe it's restructuring,

[33:01] whatever it may be. Whatever makes you

[33:03] more efficient, effective, capable, able

[33:06] to execute, that's what you should be

[33:07] thinking.

[33:09] I love that. I had a heard a podcast

[33:11] this weekend um by the CPO of Ripling,

[33:15] the HR software company, and he said

[33:17] he's got a mantra or or at least

[33:19] somebody mentioned that uh to your point

[33:21] about understaffing. He said, you know,

[33:23] you want your teams to be like a little

[33:24] bit dehydrated so they're like thirsty

[33:26] and motivated and moving fast, but like

[33:28] you can't obviously have them, you know,

[33:30] like passing out. I guess like do you

[33:32] see that you know at Amazon actually I

[33:35] would say pretty intentionally

[33:37] understaffed relative in-house lawyers

[33:40] relative to revenue and the idea was

[33:42] that it would force focus on the most

[33:44] important things. Have you found that?

[33:46] I think that's an excuse honestly. I

[33:48] think people say it's going to force

[33:50] focus on the most important things but

[33:51] what they really want to do is keep the

[33:52] cost down and they see the legal

[33:53] function as maybe an adjunct to that.

[33:55] Having said that, you know, look, every

[33:58] team I do I do agree that it's useful

[34:00] for teams to be a little lean because it

[34:03] does force prioritization. However, I

[34:06] would challenge the notion that legal

[34:08] teams as a in general should be, you

[34:10] know, starved because legal touches so

[34:12] many other different functions that if

[34:14] you have, for example, a commercial

[34:16] legal team that can't keep up with the

[34:18] deal flow, you're not going to close the

[34:20] deals and book the revenue. And so,

[34:22] yeah, sure, maybe you can accelerate

[34:23] that with other tools. doesn't have to

[34:25] be people. Could be GCAI for example,

[34:26] right? Could be be helpful. But like

[34:28] make sure that you're staffing

[34:30] appropriate to the business need and

[34:33] making sure that teams that touch so

[34:35] many different functions and can be huge

[34:39] value accelerant, strategic, you know,

[34:41] intelligent execution are not impeded in

[34:44] a way that literally makes them the the

[34:47] molasses that slows down the whole

[34:48] operation. Because what isn't fair is to

[34:50] underst staff or underresource and then

[34:52] look at the function and go why can't

[34:54] you you know in legal you make this

[34:57] happen like and that happens all the it

[34:59] happens all the time right but

[35:01] philosophically

[35:02] saying like I don't want to start with a

[35:04] hundred people or a thousand you know

[35:06] lawyers sure like start there but then

[35:08] but then map it to what what reality is

[35:11] and what you need to do and not every

[35:12] function is different and not every

[35:13] industry is the same

[35:15] I see that across the board I see that

[35:17] with our customers I see that in about

[35:19] us, you know, we obviously because we

[35:21] sell to lawyers, everybody wants to

[35:22] negotiate our MSA, including, you know,

[35:24] small small deal. And so it's it's been

[35:26] really it's been interesting where

[35:28] and and then you tell them afterwards,

[35:29] if you used GCAI, you would have

[35:31] negotiated this faster.

[35:33] I think we are incredibly lean. RGC um

[35:36] she's amazing. you know, we we but we

[35:38] these issues. It has surprised me how

[35:40] much um you know, it really is the

[35:43] day-to-day issues of like we've got the

[35:44] end of the fiscal year coming of like

[35:46] okay like we literally legal is like a

[35:48] revenue driver in in this scenario of

[35:51] like you know holding firm and then

[35:52] there's been the rise of the deal desk

[35:54] and you know yeah super fun that that

[35:57] resonated a great deal. I knew that that

[36:00] middle management comment has always

[36:01] kind of sat weird with me even though

[36:04] the proof is in the pudding in terms of

[36:05] Meta's revenue and how fast they've been

[36:07] able to move and the plethora of issues

[36:09] that they deal with, but that was

[36:10] definitely something that I at the time

[36:13] was a little a little not sure about.

[36:15] All right, so let's see what you

[36:17] mentioned AI.

[36:19] So let's talk about AI.

[36:20] Heard of it. Let's you've been in tech,

[36:23] you know, since since forever,

[36:25] literally at Apple in in in the 90s,

[36:28] right? So,

[36:29] yeah,

[36:30] I I got to ask the question. Did you

[36:31] know then that Apple would be what it is

[36:33] today?

[36:35] Clearly not because I I left and went to

[36:37] Yahoo, but I I was there. I will say I

[36:40] was there through Steve Jobs's return,

[36:42] the launch of the original iMac, and the

[36:44] last I think the last product that I

[36:47] worked on, I supported PowerBook's

[36:50] printers and displays. And the last

[36:51] product that I helped contribute to, I

[36:54] shouldn't say worked on because that's

[36:55] probably a little highutin. Um, was the

[36:57] iBook, which was one of the first, if

[37:00] not the first laptop with Wi-Fi in it.

[37:02] Wow. Um, okay. So, so, so you left Apple

[37:06] though because it was I guess it was a

[37:07] time of rebuilding for Apple.

[37:09] Apple when I started, which I think was

[37:11] 19 God, I'm not even sure. When I

[37:13] started at Apple, let's go with that. If

[37:14] you look it up on LinkedIn, when I

[37:16] started at Apple, the first day that I

[37:19] joined was the day that I think it was

[37:21] Wired magazine came out with a with a

[37:24] cover that was the m then multicolor

[37:26] Apple logo surrounded by a crown of

[37:29] thorns and a single word, pray. This was

[37:32] my first day on the job. I mean, Apple

[37:35] was really struggling, right? It had it

[37:38] had not, you know, it had the Mac and it

[37:40] had the early Macintosh, but there was a

[37:42] a lack of focus. There were a lot of

[37:43] different products that were going on.

[37:45] It was a large company. It was it was

[37:47] seeing inroads into the education area,

[37:49] which had been an early strong point.

[37:51] Laptops were not I mean, Apple laptops

[37:54] were more were great, but they were more

[37:55] expensive than their comparable PC uh

[37:58] counterparts. And so um you know it was

[38:01] a challenging challenging time. A

[38:02] company actually took a if I recall I I

[38:05] don't remember it was a loan or a patent

[38:07] cross deal but there was a a deal with m

[38:09] Microsoft at some point in there u

[38:11] literally to get the money to keep it

[38:12] afloat longer. So we would we would see

[38:15] layoffs on the regular. So it was a

[38:16] really really tough time. But you could

[38:19] see after Steve returned and after the

[38:23] company began to focus on not a hundred

[38:26] products but say four or five, you could

[38:28] see that discipline and focus returning

[38:30] and you could see uh it it beginning to

[38:33] move into the ascendancy. Could I have

[38:35] called out how it would be today? No.

[38:37] Although it is funny that some of the

[38:38] the execs I supported back then,

[38:40] including Tim Cook, are still there.

[38:41] They've done very very well. Yahoo on

[38:43] the other hand was a young company that

[38:45] was lighting up the world as one of the

[38:47] formative uh portals in the internet

[38:49] space. Um and uh you know so I made I

[38:54] thought that was a a a technology that

[38:58] was worth pursuing from a career

[38:59] standpoint because it seemed to be a

[39:02] faster growth more differentiated area

[39:04] than say hardware and software were but

[39:06] you know uh who could have called it

[39:08] yeah it was

[39:09] I mean the prayer has clearly worked

[39:11] right $3.8 8 trillion dollars later.

[39:13] It's incredible.

[39:15] The thing is, you can't know. I mean,

[39:16] this gets to your thing about decision-

[39:18] making, right? Like, you cannot know at

[39:20] the time. And I I had a mentor to me

[39:22] tell me, you know, hey, you live in

[39:24] Silicon Valley.

[39:26] You're you're going to have a bunch of

[39:27] near misses and you're you know, this

[39:29] person is my mentor. So, they're pretty

[39:31] they they were positive. They said,

[39:32] "Chillia, you're really smart. So,

[39:33] you're probably going to have like eight

[39:34] near misses where like could have

[39:36] joined. We had folks from Yahoo who

[39:38] joined Meta very early um that left or

[39:41] joined Google relatively early and you

[39:43] know they own islands and whatever now.

[39:44] So right but right

[39:46] but I mean separate from that like you

[39:47] know this satisfying incredibly

[39:48] rewarding career that's taken you here

[39:51] like you you you've done okay. So so

[39:53] let's go back to let's talk about AI. Um

[39:55] so

[39:56] you're not um you've obviously seen tech

[39:58] very early. You saw the internet, you

[39:59] saw Apple, you've seen concierge

[40:01] medicine, other other innovations.

[40:05] What's your view on AI and then what's

[40:07] your view on AI for legal work?

[40:09] Well, I think AI is and has the

[40:11] potential to be one of the most

[40:13] transformative technical advances ever,

[40:17] right? Because it has the capability to

[40:20] interact and simulate some of those

[40:23] higher level thinking processes that

[40:25] previously we haven't like you haven't

[40:27] had technology that could say your

[40:28] marketing or edit your your contract

[40:30] previously in a way that you could do

[40:32] today. So that in alone is a huge gain

[40:35] in efficiency. Sometimes unfortunately

[40:37] it will it will cost jobs in some cases.

[40:40] That's amazingly transformative. And

[40:42] then to like move things between

[40:43] languages and cultures right on the fly

[40:46] right and you know and rewrite your copy

[40:49] like that's that's incredible.

[40:52] I think we are going to see way more use

[40:54] of it in ways over time that make more

[40:57] sense. I feels like we're going through

[40:58] this period where everybody's like you,

[41:00] can AI do that? And they're like, sure,

[41:01] sure, it can absolutely do that. It can

[41:03] fly you, you know, fly you a car. Sure.

[41:05] It'll we'll figure out, as we did with

[41:07] the internet, where are the places where

[41:09] it's strong and where are the places

[41:10] where it is less capable and we'll apply

[41:13] it sensibly over time. And I think the

[41:16] place to apply it sensibly is right now

[41:17] is as a tool to help others, right?

[41:21] Rather than in all cases as a standalone

[41:24] tool to do something independently.

[41:26] Maybe customer service, some of those

[41:28] things within a limited bound makes

[41:29] sense, but I think ultimately it's going

[41:32] to be more of a tool for legal. Look, I

[41:34] think legal teams are probably a bit, if

[41:36] we're honest, enamorative AI and fearful

[41:38] of it at the same time, right? Like, is

[41:40] it going to replace me? Is it going to

[41:43] take my job? Is is the ability of AI to

[41:46] spit out something that purports to be

[41:48] an NDI instantaneously going to be quote

[41:51] unquote good enough that nobody feels

[41:52] that they need lawyers? Um, I don't

[41:56] think that's the case. I think for it

[41:58] makes the easy stuff easier just like

[42:00] forms did before it. It makes you a

[42:03] better, more effective attorney who can

[42:06] get more things done and make sure

[42:08] you're test pressure testing things

[42:09] against perspective, right? Like, have I

[42:11] thought of all the issues here? Is there

[42:13] anything I missed? Is there something

[42:14] that's unclear? Testing it against

[42:16] potential audiences. If I'm a board

[42:19] member looking at this, what questions

[42:20] do I have? So, I think it's a huge value

[42:22] accelerant. um for that where I think we

[42:26] will struggle a little bit is there's an

[42:27] entire generation of people who will

[42:29] come in and start using AI and won't yet

[42:31] have developed maybe some of those

[42:32] strategic chops to think about the

[42:34] higher level stuff and that's going to

[42:36] that's going to be a challenge for the

[42:38] profession in terms of making sure that

[42:40] we're also mentoring people and helping

[42:42] them to not to over rely on the

[42:46] technology and to have a good just as

[42:48] calculators before calculators didn't

[42:50] replace scientists you have to have good

[42:52] math sense Of course, use the

[42:53] calculator, but like also know like that

[42:56] doesn't really make sense. Like, you

[42:58] know, know when to question the answers

[42:59] and ask and ask questions. I think

[43:01] that's something we'll need to focus on

[43:03] as a profession to to make sure that

[43:05] we're helping the next generation be as

[43:07] as effective and and using the

[43:09] technology to be even more effective.

[43:12] Awesome. All right, Ron, you've seen the

[43:15] legal profession, you've seen in-house

[43:17] legal evolve over a long time. If you

[43:20] could leave listeners with one thought

[43:22] about being great at being a great legal

[43:26] leader, what would it be?

[43:28] Well, the first thing is adaptability.

[43:32] Probably the core thing is adaptability.

[43:34] The technology will change, the people

[43:36] will change, the companies will change.

[43:37] You were using the analogy of like you

[43:39] join a company and you don't know where

[43:41] it's going to go and so on and so forth.

[43:43] You don't really know what techn I mean

[43:45] the technologies the companies that I

[43:46] have worked with in my career didn't

[43:48] exist when I graduated from law school.

[43:51] Don't be afraid of change. Embrace it

[43:54] but also be conscious on the parallel.

[43:58] Technology brings a need for change

[44:00] management. Leadership brings a need for

[44:03] change management. That is something as

[44:05] a leader that we need to focus very

[44:08] intensely on and help tell the story.

[44:10] bring along why this advancement makes

[44:12] sense or this change in the department

[44:13] and procedure makes sense or adapting

[44:16] our contract makes sense. Help thread

[44:18] that narrative. Help people with the

[44:20] change management and help yourself not

[44:22] get locked into a one vision of the

[44:25] world. Always be thinking about where's

[44:26] the world going, where's the puck going

[44:28] and try to be there yourself. Love that.

[44:31] All right, let's go to the lightning

[44:32] round. What is a myth about uh

[44:38] being a general counsel that you'd like

[44:40] to debunk or are there any myths about

[44:42] about Silicon Valley, about GCS,

[44:45] anything?

[44:46] First thing I learned as a general

[44:47] counsel is it's a team sport. Um no

[44:50] general counsel knows everything and

[44:52] every general counsel has a lot of

[44:54] stakeholders that are counting on them

[44:56] every single day. the board, the CEO,

[44:58] the the regulators, their direct

[45:00] reports, their other functional leaders.

[45:04] You are both the boss and you are the

[45:06] boss,

[45:08] the boss. And and the sooner you realize

[45:12] that you actually in a way had more

[45:14] freedom that when you were in that

[45:16] junior role, when you first started in

[45:17] the department, than you are when you're

[45:18] in the senior role, where everybody's

[45:20] looking to you for the answers that

[45:21] nobody has and there are a thousand

[45:24] things on your plate and you got to

[45:25] figure out your way and everyone has a

[45:27] claim on your time and a legitimate

[45:30] interest in what you're going to say and

[45:31] making sure that you do it right. a

[45:33] great responsibility. But as as gentle

[45:35] Uncle Ben said, with great

[45:36] responsibility, with great power comes

[45:38] great responsibility and great

[45:40] accountability.

[45:41] I love that. Um, all right. So, book,

[45:43] idea, or mentor that has shaped how you

[45:46] lead?

[45:47] Oh, that is a wonderful question. I

[45:49] would say as an idea, you know, one of

[45:51] the I had an interesting experience once

[45:54] which I was given one of those online um

[45:58] uh you know, sort of photo assignments

[45:59] like someone will post like take a photo

[46:01] of X every day and it was like take a,

[46:03] you know, gloomy moody photo and I

[46:06] thought I know exactly what I'm going to

[46:07] do. I'm going to go to a cemetery in KA

[46:09] which is for those who are around here

[46:11] is sort of this area outside of San

[46:13] Francisco where San Francisco has a lot

[46:15] of cemeteries and that's where they are.

[46:17] And I went to this really old cemetery

[46:18] with a lot of headstones and tombstones.

[46:20] And I was starting to take photos, moody

[46:22] photos, and I realized all of a sudden

[46:24] like I didn't know the vast majority of

[46:27] the people on the name graves. The rich

[46:28] and the poor may have had bigger or

[46:31] smaller gravestones, but they were in

[46:33] the same place. And many people in the

[46:35] cemetery had been buried there longer

[46:37] than they had been alive. And in the

[46:39] end, all of them would.

[46:42] And what I took from this is a reminder

[46:44] that accomplishments and fame are kind

[46:47] of fleeting, right? Um, you know, there

[46:50] were 12 Apollo astronauts. How many of

[46:52] them can you name? And they literally

[46:53] went into, you know, to the moon, right?

[46:55] Yeah.

[46:56] And so the experience really reminded me

[46:58] to think about the long-term

[47:00] consequences of my decisions and the

[47:03] people I'm working with and the legacy

[47:06] I'm building and how I'm going about my

[47:08] life, right? Um, am I being a jerk? Am I

[47:10] acting with integrity? Am I growing

[47:13] people? You know, our lives are short

[47:15] and what lasts is the legacy that we

[47:17] build and how we treat others and the

[47:19] dreams we help to elevate. And I think

[47:21] all of us are candles and we just got

[47:22] I'm Jewish and we just got through

[47:24] Hanukkah. So you use the center candle

[47:26] and you light all the other candles. So

[47:28] all of us can be the light to light

[47:30] everyone else and make our time here and

[47:32] here better. So that's how I try to

[47:34] think.

[47:35] Wow. All of us are light. Incredible.

[47:37] Ron, thank you for joining me and

[47:39] bringing such an incredible perspective

[47:41] to this conversation.

[47:43] Thank you for having me. I just

[47:44] delighted to be here.

[47:46] What a delight. That was my conversation

[47:47] with Ron Bell, the chief legal

[47:49] administrative officer at Collective

[47:50] Health and who reminds us that we can

[47:53] all be the light. That great legal work

[47:55] is about judgment. He had so many bombs

[47:58] of wisdom here. I just I I I just I'm

[48:00] like I I don't even know how we're going

[48:02] to do the social post around this

[48:04] podcast because the boss and the boss.

[48:06] be the light. Um, you know, recognize

[48:09] the elephant. All this incredible

[48:10] wisdom. Thank you so much. Follow CZ and

[48:13] friends wherever you get your podcast to

[48:15] learn how legal teams are using AI to

[48:17] work smarter and better and implement

[48:20] some of the leadership things that we

[48:21] talked about today. Visit gc.ai or find

[48:24] me on LinkedIn. You can find Ron on

[48:27] LinkedIn as well. Um, he's very active

[48:29] on social, so you can find his wisdom

[48:32] about AI leadership um, and everything

[48:34] else on LinkedIn as well. Thank you for

[48:36] listening. We'll see you next time.