Kevin Hourigan, President and CEO, Bayshore Solutions (Tampa, FL and Denver, CO)
Kevin Hourigan is President and CEO of Bayshore Solutions, a digital agency that started in 1996 as a branch of a managed services provider – a 3-member team building and maintaining client networks. Two years later? Thirty employees.
Decades ago, one of the Kevin’s engineers developed a company website and asked 100 of the company’s clients if they would be interested in a 3-page website for $500. Client responses were either “What’s a website?” or “We’ll never need one of those.” One client agreed to give it a try. That $500 website cost $5,000 to build, but two years later, in 1998, clients came begging for websites, which were now more profitably priced at $7,500 and up.
The company failed in its attempt to go public in the late 90s and survived the dot com crash in the early 2000s. Its base of paying clients plummeted 90%. In response, the company slashed its staff from 225 to 12 in a year. Larger agencies, the ones Kevin considered as his mentors, the ones that went public . . . failed. Bayshore Solutions is one of only 2% of the digital agencies that survived the dot com collapse.
When Kevin realized that what he had left of the company would never again be “an aspiring dot-commer on the verge of going public, spending money like it’s going out of style with clients spending money with us like it’s going out of style,” he knew it was time to rebrand. He wanted the new name to be “agnostic,” that is, not tied to any transient technology. Bayshore Web Development could become obsolete. Baysore Solutions, on the other hand, would not be tied to any here today, gone tomorrow technology.
For almost 25 years, BayShore Solutions has helped clients create advertising campaigns that drive qualified traffic. It designs and develops powerful stakeholder-targeted websites with the right marketing mix to help its clients succeed. The agency markets itself as a digital expert, applying strategies horizontally across a variety of verticals, transferring experience from one vertical to another completely unrelated (and non-competing) vertical. Every solution is unique, with a balance of the “bleeding edge of new and the tested, tried, and true.” Around 90% of implementation strategies are things Bayshore KNOWS will work. The 5 to 15% that is experimental will vary depending on the phase of an industry’s business cycle.
After Kevin had excellent experience working with a CEO coach, he decided to let his leadership team hire an executive team coach. The result? Tighter vision and a better definition of core values (working together, winning together, and solving problems together), with the team all learning together, rather than receiving the information from “an informed Kevin. He says, “Having a team coach, we’re hearing the same thing at the same time.”
In response to the impact of Covid-19, Kevin explains that his company has reduced unnecessary expenses and increased its marketing budget by 50%. He says the company’s strategy is to market and sell its way through the crisis, rather than trying to cut its way through. The results so far? Leads are up, traffic is up, and sales have met December’s forecasts. He plans to continue operating this way and says the agency’s next 90-day plan is to remove unnecessary operational expenses and reinvest that money in sales and marketing efforts.
ROB: Welcome to the Marketing Agency Leadership Podcast. I’m your host, Rob Kischuk, and I’m joined today by Kevin Hourigan, President and CEO of Bayshore Solutions based in Tampa, Florida. Welcome to the podcast, Kevin.
KEVIN: Hey, good morning, Rob. Nice to be here.
ROB: Fantastic to have you here. Why don’t you start off by telling us about Bayshore Solutions and where you are excellent?
KEVIN: Appreciate that, Rob. Bayshore Solutions, we’re a company that’s about to celebrate our 25th year of providing services to our clients. I think what makes that special – we started this company in January of 1996, when America Online or AOL or however you might know of them was still on Version 1, and many people were still just getting introduced to the internet.
As a digital agency, we’ve probably been around more than probably the top one percentile of the industry’s experts. For almost 25 years, we’ve been helping our clients design and develop the correct website that’s going to speak to their primary stakeholders as well as creating the advertising campaign that’s going to drive qualified traffic and help our customers grow through a combination of the right website to the right audience with the right marketing mix. Enjoyed 25 years and still having fun at it.
ROB: That’s remarkable. Congratulations on those 25 years. If we rewind to 1996, what do websites look like, and what do your scopes of work look like at that time?
KEVIN: It’s too funny. I love telling the story, Rob. In January 1996 when we went to market, this was a new division of a company that I had. Back then, we would be what you might call a managed services provider or your outsourced IT department. But essentially, my company at the time really helped companies manage their computer networks – which, back then, there was no cloud; they were all in some kind of closet in the corner of a company’s office space. We managed their servers, their desktop computers and things of that nature.
One of our engineers was getting into web design and built our company’s website and wanted to see if we could do the same for a couple of our clients. I told him I don’t have any blockers to it. I wasn’t super excited about the idea, but he was knocking on our clients’ doors, and he was offering them a three-page website for $500. Of the first 100 people that he asked that were existing clients, they had two responses: “What is a website?” or “We’ll never need one of those.”
Finally, finally, one of them said yes. We built them a three-page website. Really, all it was, was a digital version of a trifold brochure that they had, but I think we spent $5,000 building this $500 website. But sooner or later, all that came back. About a year or two later, all of those companies that said, “What is a website?” or “we’ll never need one of those” were banging on our door and saying, “Hey, listen, that website thing you talked about a year or two ago – I think we need one of those.” But the good news is they weren’t $500 anymore; they were $7,500.
I think we were such an early adopter to this that we were truly to educate a market on a need they were going to have, and they weren’t ready yet. But when they were ready, they came back to us, and I think that’s part of our viability. We’re fortunate; we’re one of only 2% of the agencies who survived the dot-com bubble burst. I think it was those early seeds we planted in building a good client base that helped us survive the dot-come bubble.
We were a company that went from three employees when we got started to two years later having 30 employees to a year after that having 225 and blowing up huge in the dot-com bubble. But when the bubble burst, we went from 225 employees down to about 12 in a matter of a year period of time. If it wasn’t for that early foundation of clients that we had found, I don’t think we would have survived. There’s an old saying, “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” Certainly, we learned a lot of experiences from that. But very thankful for that original client base that we had.
ROB: In that timeframe, a lot of web companies went tremendously, tremendously upmarket. I don’t think people realize how little you would get sometimes for a million-dollar website in that era.
ROB: Kind of the iXLs and the Razorfishes of the world. Did you ever swim up to that scope and scale of website, or did your MSP roots also keep you grounded in –
KEVIN: As I tell the story, we started out in ’96 with $500 websites. In 1998, the average value got to be $7,500. In 2000 that went to $216,500. You just see how that was growing. iXL and Razorfish were what I would call my mentor companies. I’m very fortunate that I’ve had some great personal mentors in my career, but I had some corporate mentors. I looked at iXL and Razorfish as those two companies.
I don’t know if these are the right words, but I think we got cocky a little bit. We put billboards right above the headquarters of iXL of our company’s brand. [laughs] So companies or employees going in there knew who we were, and we used that as one of our marketing tactics.
Then, fortunately, I got a chance to actually go through the offices of Razorfish on a couple different occasions as our company was about to go public in the journey, and the bankers that were going to take us public also took Razorfish public. So, we got a chance to go see how Razorfish operated and things of that nature.
But I think one of the blessings we ended up receiving was just that we didn’t go public. iXL didn’t survive; Razorfish changed ownership numerous times, bought and sold for losses during the journey. Because we didn’t go public, I got to own the decisions that we had to make to navigate that journey. While it was no fun to deal with the downside of the dot-com bubble bursting, I do think it was a savior that we were able to make the changes necessary and nimble enough to be able to survive, where some of those mentors that I looked up to didn’t have the same outcome.
ROB: It’s interesting. I think everybody in that time was a little bit cocky. You mentioned you had the billboard by iXL, and Milchem today puts billboards near their competitors just to spite them a little bit, although they are a cash machine. But iXL I believe also had a movie theater on their roof, so I think everyone was a little bit cocky.
KEVIN: For sure. Cocky or stupid or a combination of each. Unfortunately, I think a victim of the times – everyone thought those were the right things to do. At that time, I joke like everyone in 1999 or 2000 was changing the name of their company to something “dot com.” I remember seeing State Farm change their name to “StateFarm.com.” Sears changed their name from Sears to “Sears.com.” Everyone thought if they didn’t do that, they weren’t going to survive, but fear was motivating their decision, and often good decisions aren’t the outcome of fear.
I think the dot-com bubble exploded for numerous different reasons, but one of them is everyone was chasing after something they didn’t understand, and everyone got caught up in that momentum. The good news is that wasn’t the right momentum, and correction needed to take place, and it did and everyone got better and stronger as a result of it.
ROB: For sure. Amazing that you were even able to survive. How do you navigate that sort of path from 200+ employees to around 12? Obviously, there’s the financial aspect of it, but there’s also the psychological aspect, the identity of the company and your role shifting so quickly. How did you navigate that healthily and keep the business rolling as well?
KEVIN: Of course, downsizing is never fun for anybody at all, but the reality is that the companies who paid me $500 for a website or later $7,500 stayed with me. The companies who were paying $216,500, it wasn’t their money. They had investors, and when the dot-com bubble burst, those investors weren’t funding those projects anymore. 90% of my clients could no longer pay their bills anymore, so I had to send a cease and desist letter to all my clients that if they couldn’t meet their current financial obligations to our company, we had to sever services. 30 days later, I lost 90% of my client base.
But who did I still have left? The people who paid me that $7,500, who had realistic expectations of what their investment was going to make for their business and how it was going to help them grow. The ones who had unrealistic expectations were someone who raised zillions and millions of dollars with this fantastic idea and spending money like it was going out of style – and then it went out of style, and there was no money to be had.
I think in the journey of going down, some of my coworkers were cognizant enough to know that what we thought we all were working towards, the opportunity had gone. Others weren’t quite there yet, and I think there was a hope that it would go back to the way it was. Unfortunately, some self-selected themselves to go somewhere else, and unfortunately we had more than one round of layoffs that helped some of that reduction as well.
At the end of the journey, Rob, to your point, I ended up rebranding our company because the company that we were wasn’t the company that we were going to become. I didn’t want that brand of who we were – an aspiring dot-commer on the verges of going public, spending money like it’s going out of style with clients spending money with us like it’s going out of style – that went away, and I think I had to rebrand my company and find people how accepted the fact that it was never going to be what we thought it was, where we are going to have stock options and be worth a lot of money. I had to find a core team who realized that wasn’t on the table anymore. I had to change the company’s brand because I didn’t want us hanging onto a lost hope that wasn’t going to be a new reality.
ROB: Wow, that’s quite a shift, but it’s tremendous to think about getting the right team on board for that shift. You mentioned you’ve been in business almost 25 years.
ROB: One thing you see with agencies that stay in business for a while is sometimes they get mired in the previous generation of the marketing that was hot. There are still web design development agencies. There are still SEO and pay-per-click agencies. But the bar keeps on moving. The target keeps on moving. How have you navigated which lines of service and which technologies, which tools, which marketing channels to bring into the mix and which ones to hold at arm’s length?
KEVIN: That’s a great question. When I rebranded the company, we came up with the brand Bayshore Solutions. Why’d you come up with Bayshore Solutions? The reality is very similar to the question you just asked. I named our company Bayshore Solutions, one, because our office was adjacent to Bayshore Boulevard in Tampa, Florida, so that’s where the “Bayshore” came from. [laughs] But the “solutions” piece was I didn’t want our company’s name to be associated with any service that I didn’t know would survive the outcome of the dot-com bubble burst.
At the time, it could’ve been Bayshore Web Design. It could’ve been Bayshore Web Development. It could’ve been Bayshore SEO. It could’ve been any of those. But I didn’t want to tattoo the name of our company and associate it to a service that may not be what the new norm was going to become. So, very agnostically, I used the word “solutions.” That gave us an opportunity to not be positioning our brand name with a particular area of the industry that you didn’t know would still be surviving.
Then on an ongoing basis, under Bayshore Solutions, the services that we provide – I’ve always said that at the end of the day, the value that we bring to our clients is a level of expertise over and above what they have. Our tagline is “Digital expertise to grow your business.” It’s my job and our company’s job to continue to find a balance between the bleeding edge of new and the tested, tried, and true. It’s finding a solution that isn’t too risky to be on the bleeding edge but isn’t that lack of scalable to be leveraging the tested, tried, and true, and always be bringing a solution to our clients that balances a little bit of both, minimizes their bleeding edge risk, but maximizes their ability to have their investment have some scalability.
It’s always having that next level of expertise that our clients value and can appreciate, and the services around what we can do for them are going to help them move their needle towards growth.
ROB: Is there a percent range of budget you recommend, often, towards more experimental channels? Less proven, in your words?
KEVIN: It’s a great question. I think while every client would love to hear every dollar that they spend absolutely is intended for strict ROI, the opportunity to find the right mix is putting a percentage in the media budget and services to some experimental type things. I think while every solution is unique and different, some are in the 10% range. Give or take 5 points is probably the right answer. So 5% to 15%.
Often that variance can be where particular industries are in their particular cycle. Almost every vertical market has cycles. Some are in an upcycle, some are in a downcycle. Where you spend your exploratory dollars on an upcycle is probably a bigger percentage, and on a downcycle it’s probably a smaller percentage. But it’s finding that right mix, whether it’s opportunity to grow in each particular vertical market that we’re providing services for, and educating our clients that part of the opportunity to find their secret sauce is finding a budget that we can use for some exploratory services.
The other neat thing that we do, Rob, is we market ourselves as digital experts horizontally across numerous verticals. When I talk to our clients every month and I ask about what’s the value we bring back to them, what I hear them say is they have a choice of picking an agency with vertical market expertise or one who’s more of a generalist across many vertical markets, and they appreciate picking Bayshore Solutions, who has this horizontal approach to many different verticals, because we’re bringing ideas to their vertical that, if they had a vertical-focus-only agency, that agency wouldn’t have that awareness from.
And as we’re able to share that expertise that we’re learning in other verticals, it’s not coming at a competitive risk that we learned it on one company that may be competing against another company; it’s coming from experiences outside from another industry. So as we have that exploratory budget for each of our clients, a lot of the learning lessons don’t come at the cost of their budget, but it comes from the learning lessons of other verticals and what seems to be working that can be applicable to that particular industry.
ROB: I hear a through line, a sense of balance across what you’re talking about. You talk about there’s a balance in the channels of not too, too experimental and not too staid and old. There’s a balance in your client base. There’s a balance in choosing solutions as being forward-thinking but also flexible.
Even in the Bayshore part, people who have been to Tampa and know Tampa know that there are parts of Bayshore Boulevard that are tremendously lovely and picturesque and evocative to someone who is from there and may or may not be able to afford to live on Bayshore Boulevard, but it seems flexible also. You mentioned that you also have an office in Denver. So, the name itself even can be about a place but is also not about a place, is also more general.
When you have two offices, how are you thinking about that balance of local clients, regional clients, or location agnostic clients? What’s the reasoning on the second office?
KEVIN: That’s a great question. The real purpose of the second office, Rob, was just an opportunity to expand our talent pool. Tampa’s been amazing to us, but we wanted a complementary talent pool to be able to find digital experts in. Secondarily, we want to be able to serve our clients as easily as possible, and our clients are nationwide. So, we wanted a second office for that talent pool opportunity, but also to be able to serve our clients in their same time zone or one time zone away.
As we expanded to a second office 8 years ago, we looked at either Mountain Time or Pacific Time, and that would give s the ability to serve same time zone or one time zone away. We looked at 13 communities and ended up picking Denver, Colorado, and couldn’t be happier that that’s where we ended up picking. I had no idea Denver would go gangbuster great and we’d be this community that’s just been thriving like crazy, but I’m so fortunate that we did.
It’s funny, talking about Bayshore Solutions – I thought I was so crafty in coming up with this agnostic name. While it wasn’t very attractive or – I hate to use the word “sexy” – it was very agnostic at the time, but certainly “Bayshore” in an application in Denver doesn’t necessarily fit. I remember opening up the office out there, I’m like, man, I wonder if someone’s going to question, “Why Bayshore Solutions? What’s ‘Bayshore’ mean?” out in Denver.
It was probably about 3 years into being in Denver that we were having a kickoff meeting for a pretty significant size company, and the CEO of that business wanted to attend the first hour of that kickoff meeting. He said he was going to exit and leave it up to the rest of his team; he wanted to take me outside for just a moment and say a couple words. He goes, “I’ve got to ask you. Bayshore Solutions – are you guys from here?” I was like, finally someone asked that question. I knew it was going to come. [laughs] And it happened to be a company that was probably about $800 million in revenue that the CEO asked me for that. I’m sure if it was Denver, it should be “Snowcap Solutions” or something along those lines.
What’s really interesting about our journey is that very intentionally, we’re headquartered not only to be able to serve our clients in the same time zone or one time zone away, but secondarily, Colorado and Florida are two of the top eight states that have the most digital talent within them. The advantage to Denver and to Florida is we don’t have the cost burdens of a few of the others, but certainly California, Illinois, and New York.
So very strategically, we are in two of the top eight most digital-rich talent states, but without the cost burdens, and secondarily, able to serve clients in the same time zone or one time zone away. That isn’t accidental. That’s very intentional, and I think it’s been a benefit to our company and our customers as a result of some of that very intentional decision-making.
ROB: It also seems aligned from a city culture – I have not lived in Denver per se, but both places are places where there are reasons to get outside. Those reasons are different, but both places have very many reasons to have a life outside of work that isn’t just going to your house and hiding in the air conditioning, as if you’d gone to Phoenix or something.
KEVIN: Right, exactly. No doubt about it. Culturally, we were a fit. In our dot-com rise, we did go from one office in Tampa – we had six offices total. Two of them were in California and one of them was in Chicago. I think we gelled well culturally with our Chicago coworkers. California was always different. We did research in four cities in California when we were doing our expansion, and when we got down to the final datapoints of what we were seeking from a data perspective, the list of 13 communities we looked at got narrowed down to just two. It was Denver, Colorado or Orange County, California.
Then I had to make a decision, and I used this terrible logic to make my decision, but it was twofold. One was about 20 years ago, I made a commitment to myself I would never fly on a redeye the rest of my life. I only cheated on myself one time, and it was coming back from Orange County, California, and the only return one-way flight to Tampa from Orange County is a redeye. So, for that reason, it had a scar. Secondarily, I recalled having two offices in California, one in San Francisco and one in Los Angeles, and culturally, while they did a great job performing, there was always a cultural riff between our California coworkers and the remaining part of our company.
For those two reasons, I picked Denver, Colorado, and again, I think I’m very fortunate that that’s what the final decision was. I couldn’t be happier about our progress in the Denver community.
ROB: That’s fantastic. Kevin, you mentioned that you made it not only through the dot-com bust, but the financial crisis. I’m sure come around March, or maybe sooner or maybe slightly later depending on how you look at things, in 2020, there was probably a little bit of a sense of, “Oh, here we go again” with the pandemic and the knock-on effects from that. Was there anything you did when you started seeing things shut down – how did you react and prepare, and how are you thinking about the situation now?
KEVIN: There isn’t a “COVID for Dummies” book published yet, so we’re all flying this with our own experiences as a navigating tool. I think everybody’s approached this in different ways. My company has taken a stance that when times get tough, we’ve reduced a lot of not necessary expenses, but we’ve actually increased our marketing budget by 50%. We’re aggressive in trying to market and sell our way through this versus cut our way through this.
We’re having some upward trends. Our leads are up, our traffic is up, sales met expectations from our December forecast. We’ve had a couple months where we actually met those forecasts where I don’t think, if we didn’t go more aggressive from a marketing perspective, we’d have any ability to do so. Our company has tried to market our way through this, and that’s continued to be what I think we’re going to see ourselves do for the remainder of 2020.
When people say, “Hey, what are we going to do in…?”, I’m not stating or committing to anything I can’t own. Right now, I feel like I can own 30 days, 60 days, maybe 90 days, but I’m not comfortable that I know I can really own anything much further out than that.
So, we are communicating frequently with our team on what our next 90-day plan is and removing any unnecessary operational expenses and reinvesting that into sales and marketing. We haven’t had to lay off any people. We’re trying to keep our great team together, and the way to do so isn’t by cutting; it’s by being aggressive and going to find business a little bit more intentional, a little bit more aggressive. There’s companies out there that need help, and we’re out there seeking those companies. That’s how we’re positioning ourselves in this pandemic.
ROB: I think not even cautiously optimistic, but just optimistically – not even cautious. There’s just an intentionality to it that I think is really worth looking at and listening to. It’s not panicked. It’s looking at opportunity without being opportunistic. I think that’s a really good stance to consider.
When you look back at the overall journey, it sounds like you’ve navigated a lot and learned a lot through that path, and we’ve talked through some of the changes, but overall if you look back and you could do some things over, what are some lessons you’ve learned along the way that you would maybe do differently if you were starting this 25-year-old company today in 2020?
KEVIN: That’s a great question. I used to have a CEO coach, and he asked me this loaded question one time. He said, “Hey Kevin, do you know how you get experience?” And I knew it was a loaded question. I knew his answer was going to be the only answer. I’m guessing, and he’s like, “No, that’s not it. That’s not it.” I was like, “Coach Chris, tell me, how do you gain experience?” He said, “You gain experience by making mistakes and learning from them.”
As I look back, I certainly didn’t make every right decision, but I’ve gained a lot of experience. I think some of the things I might do differently – one is when we started our company in the dot-com era, we had a very, very focused culture that we were driving towards, but it was caught up into the dot-com era, which wasn’t real. Then when that dot-com bubble exploded, that culture had expectations that weren’t necessarily real.
I think part of it would just be making sure that our culture is partially organically created and we have likeminded people that fit our core values, but also intentionally corporate-driven and that it’s meeting the expectations of our customers, our coworkers, and our company altogether. So, I think maybe an added focus on an intentional organic culture as opposed to an intentional focus or an organic focus. It’s a combination of both of those.
Over the last few years, I think our company has really worked on a great balance of an intentional organic culture and really spending more time identifying the core values of Bayshore Solutions and finding people to work with us who meet those core values and use those as real true guiding posts. The result of that is the amount of internal friction within our organization is significantly less than it has ever been before.
The cohesiveness of the team – they have fun together and meet all of our goals and objectives. I think in the past, we either had fun and didn’t meet our goals and objectives, or we highly met our goals and objectives but sacrificed fun. Today I think I’ve learned that there is a fine way to balance both out and meet goals and objectives with a team that you appreciate working with every day, and everyone’s having fun in the journey.
ROB: You mentioned core values. Are those something you’re able to share with us? I think it can often be helpful for others to hear each other’s core values.
KEVIN: Absolutely. First up, we work together, we win together, we solve problems together. Those are probably the three core values that we live by. We have a few others, but certainly we work together, and it’s not just as a company. We work together with our clients on one digital team. We form a digital team with our clients and our coworkers on it. We work together, we win together, we solve problems together.
We come to work with a positive winning attitude every day, problem-solving. We own our own accountability; we don’t point fingers at others. That’s really worked well, finding people who have that likeminded approach to who they want to work with and how they want to work – not only from a coworker perspective, but we see clients that meet those values also. Clients who don’t necessarily share those same values become clients who maybe you don’t have the same relationship with. So, it’s not only who we work with, but who we work for, finding likeminded customers and coworkers. In that journey, we’ve enjoyed that journey much better from a customer and a coworker perspective.
ROB: You mentioned a coach that you used to work with. Sometimes it’s interesting to hear people’s processes on working with a coach. Do you still work with a coach? How have you met that need for a voice outside of yourself?
KEVIN: I don’t have a personal CEO coach anymore, but our company has hired a coach, and in my journey of having a coach, it was great. It helped me see the blind spots that I couldn’t see. So, the coach was very beneficial.
But almost 2 years ago, I elected to switch from having a personal CEO coach to my leadership team having an executive coach. We all picked a coach together, and we started following Gino Wickman’s Traction program called the Entrepreneurial Operating System. It goes by the acronym EOS. We found an implementer to be all of our team’s coach – not just Kevin having a coach.
The journey using Traction’s EOS has been amazing for I think our entire leadership team and our entire company. It’s given us a tighter vision, a better definition of what those core values are that we just were talking about. But instead of me learning on my own and trying to bring those lessons in to my leadership team, we’re learning that all together as one cohesive team. When we hired our implementer, we made it a team hire, not “Kevin found one and brought him to the table.” It’s our coach, not Kevin’s coach.
There’s an old saying, “If you want people to be part of the plan, make them part of the planning process.” Having a team coach, we’re hearing the same thing at the same time. Following Gino Wickman’s Traction Entrepreneurial Operating System, this is stuff we’re learning together. We’re all part of the planning process. So being part of the plan comes much more easily and understandably to the whole team versus me creating this on my own and bringing it to them. It’s just been far more understanding and aware and excitable as we’ve gone from “Kevin’s CEO coach” to a team coach.
ROB: That’s a great lesson in bringing a lot of the pressure, even, off of yourself, bringing your team into the decision. I think we all need to think about and learn from that a little bit more. I was reminded yesterday when somebody on my team solved a problem better than I ever would have, but I felt like I needed to solve it at first.
KEVIN: No doubt. Quite frankly, it’s just finding the right people in the right roles. It’s helped us complement each other. I don’t have to have all the answers, and I think prior, I had to have all the answers. Today we have a very strong, strong leadership team here. We all know what we do well and the areas of the business that others do better. We’re comfortable being very vulnerable and exposing where our strengths and our weaknesses are and dividing and conquering, and working together as one cohesive team. It’s been highly effective.
I used to joke, before we were following this Entrepreneurial Operating System, which goes by the acronym EOS, prior to all of us following the EOS, I joke we were following the KOS. People are like, “What’s the KOS?” I’m like, “That’s the Kevin operating system.” No one’s written a book yet about the Kevin operating system, but there’s tens of thousands of companies following this EOS. For sure it’s been great guideposts to help us continue to find the right people to help us accomplish the things that our company seeks to do.
ROB: Super-duper solid. Love it, Kevin. When people want to find you and find Bayshore Solutions, where should they go look you up?
KEVIN: BayshoreSolutions.com, find us there. Love to hear from everybody. I’d like to have some ongoing dialogue. I’m easy to reach; it’s just firstname.lastname@example.org. Rob, I enjoyed the opportunity to share some of the Bayshore Solutions story with you today.
ROB: This was great. It sounds like an excellent journey, and it’s still rolling, so congratulations.
KEVIN: Thank you.
ROB: Be well, Kevin. Thank you.
KEVIN: Thank you.
ROB: Thank you for listening. The Marketing Agency Leadership Podcast is presented by Converge. Converge helps digital marketing agencies and brands automate their reporting so they can be more profitable, accurate, and responsive. To learn more about how Converge can automate your marketing reporting, email email@example.com, or visit us on the web at convergehq.com.