Cameron Kinloch

I am a Board Director, former CFO & COO, and advisor to high-growth CEOs and CFOs with experience across SaaS, consumer, fintech, and global markets. Over 20+ years, I’ve led 4 exits, supported 2 IPO journeys, and partnered with founders, boards, and investors through the moments that define a company’s trajectory.

My career spans high-growth venture-backed companies, public-company transitions, and complex strategic situations. I bring experience from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, as well as executive roles where I’ve scaled companies through hypergrowth - from tens of millions to hundreds of millions in revenue.

Examples of impact:
↳ Led Weights & Biases through a strategic exit to CoreWeave after 10x ARR growth
↳ Turned around a $200M+ P&L at Bulletproof, achieving profitability in six months
↳ Scaled Sunrun and Box through their IPO journeys, building FP&A and public-company readiness
↳ Guided multiple VC-backed companies through successful exits to private equity and strategic buyers
↳ Served as Board Director across public and private companies, including Finance, Audit, Risk, and Governance Committees

Today, my work centers on three areas:

1. Board Service
I serve on public and private boards, including EROAD (NZX/ASX) and Copper Cow Coffee, partnering with CEOs on strategy, governance, M&A, and scaling through inflection points.

2. Advising CEOs & CFOs
I help leaders navigate growth, fundraising, M&A, and strategic alternatives, with a focus on the leadership alignment required during critical transitions.

3. Finance Leadership at Inflection Points
I work with sitting CFOs and CEOs during the moments that matter most: first 100 days in role, preparing for IPO, leading M&A, scaling the finance function, and strengthening the CFO–Board partnership.

If you’re navigating a pivotal moment - or preparing your company for its next chapter - reach out at cameron.kinloch@gmail.com.

Chief Financial Officer

We are building the best in-class, enterprise grade tools for AI developers. Our vision is to be the single system of records for all things AI within an organization.

Used by teams at NVIDIA, OpenAI, Lyft, Blue River Technology, Toyota, and MILA, W&B is part of the new standard of best practices for AI.

After 15 years in the C-suite and 4 board seats, I’ve noticed the same mistakes that quietly stop talented finance leaders from becoming CFO:

1) They think like controllers, not operators.

CFOs don’t just report numbers - they shape decisions.

If you never talk about customers, product, competitive pressure, or revenue levers, you’re signaling you’re a functional expert… not an enterprise leader.

2) They build relationships up, not across.

Great CFOs aren’t just trusted by the CEO and board.

They’re trusted by GTM, Product, Ops, and People because they show up early, listen, and help solve real problems.

3) They can model a forecast but not tell the story.

The CFOs who earn board confidence connect everything in one clean thread: what’s happening, why it matters, what options exist, and the trade-offs behind each path.

Boards remember the narrative - not the spreadsheet.

4) They wait to be invited in.

Future CFOs don’t sit back. They initiate scenario plans, pressure-test strategy, and surface risks before anyone asks.

5) They stay stuck in precision mode.

Perfect accuracy slows companies down.

Standout CFOs set decision thresholds, embrace scenario ranges, and call out the unknowns so the business can move faster.

6) They solve today’s problem, not the next stage.

Boards choose the leader who can scale the company from $20M → $50M, $50M → $200M, or pre-IPO → public.

Your mindset must shift with the stage.

7) They underestimate how much the CFO role is leadership.

Most misses aren’t technical - they’re about influence.
CFOs lead rooms, drive alignment, and bring clarity in moments where ambiguity is high.

The difference between a great finance leader and a CFO isn’t technical skill.
It’s how you think, how you lead, and how you show up.

PS: I coach finance leaders on strategic storytelling, board communication, and executive presence. If you’d like to explore working together, send me a DM.

Board Director | CFO & COO | 4 Exits, 2 IPOs | Advisor to High-Growth CEOs and CFOs

Forbes called her the most powerful and influential CFO of the last decade…

But when Google hired Ruth Porat in 2015, most analysts doubted she was the right fit.

A Wall Street operator at an innovation-driven tech giant? 
Many assumed her discipline would slow Google down.

The opposite happened:

📈 Alphabet’s market value grew past $3 trillion during her tenure
🚀 The stock jumped after her early earnings calls
💡 The company consistently beat revenue and profit expectations

Here’s what she actually changed - and what today’s CFOs can learn from her:

1) Anchor decisions in data.

Porat was famous for saying, “The answer is a number.”
Data over opinions. Signal over noise. It cut through politics fast.

2) Replace passion projects with real frameworks.

She introduced structure to how Google funded big bets.
Teams had to prove why they deserved capital - not just ask for it.

3) Challenge the status quo.

She pushed back on excess, tightened spend, and reset expectations.
Not to clip innovation - but to fuel the right innovation.

4) Think in decades, not quarters.

Her support for AI and Cloud was grounded in long-term value creation.
CFOs don’t just protect the present. They underwrite the future.

5) Earn investor trust through transparency.

By separating core results from “Other Bets,” she gave investors clarity.
Clarity → confidence → multiple expansion.

Porat didn’t shrink Google. She sharpened it.

That’s the new era of finance leadership:

CFOs don’t just keep companies healthy. 

They shape strategy.
They influence product priorities. 
They build investor conviction. 
And they make the long term impossible to ignore. 💪

PS: If you’re a CFO or VP of Finance preparing for that next step, I coach leaders on the real levers of the role: strategic narrative, board communication, and enterprise leadership. 

DM me if you want to explore working together.

After 9 years as a board director, I’ve seen CFOs walk into a board meeting and lose credibility in minutes.

Not because of the numbers. But because of a weak CEO–CFO dynamic.

Boards don’t evaluate executives in isolation. 🔍

They assess how the leadership system functions.

And the CEO–CFO relationship is the core of that system.

Here’s what boards are actually watching for:

1) Shared narrative 🎯

Do the CEO and CFO tell the same story about the business?
Or does alignment start to drift once questions begin?

2) Respectful tension

Do they challenge each other cleanly?
Or does disagreement feel defensive, corrective, or personal?

3) Decision flow

Does alignment speed decisions up?
Or does the board slow down because something feels unresolved? ⚠️

4) Signals under pressure

When the topic gets uncomfortable, do they stay aligned?
Or does the partnership fracture in real time?

The most credible CFOs I’ve worked with do one thing exceptionally well:
They resolve tension before the board meeting.

Specifically, they:

✅ Align with the CEO on a single narrative
✅ Resolve disagreements privately
✅ Clarify which decisions the board is being asked to make and why
✅ Pressure-test sensitive topics together

What boards want to see in the room is cohesion.

One direction. Clear ownership. Leadership that holds under pressure.

That’s what earns trust.

I recently sat through a board meeting where an independent director challenged a core assumption.

What the Chair did next changed the room in seconds 👇

Instead of brushing past the moment, the Chair leaned in and:

- Slowed the discussion
- Separated ideas from identity
- Asked “why” before defending positions
- Pressure-tested the assumption in real time
- Pulled quieter directors into the conversation
- Sat in the discomfort until clarity emerged
- Made it explicit that challenge ≠ lack of support

The result → a stronger decision, with full alignment behind it.

I’ve sat on boards across scaled CPG brands, public companies, and PE-backed companies.

And I’ve seen dissent mishandled when boards:

- Take pushback personally
- Default to hierarchy over logic
- Letting power dynamics decide what gets airtime
- Rush to a vote to escape tension
- Push real debate into hallway conversations
- Boards are designed for dissent.

Not as disruption.
As a governance tool.

The best boards don’t avoid tension. They use it.

They create enough psychological safety for dissent to surface, and enough rigor to turn it into better judgment.

Handled well, dissent accelerates insight.
Handled poorly, it delays the truth.

When I got promoted to my first CFO role, the #1 piece of advice I heard nonstop was:

“Be a strategic business partner to the CEO and the Board.”

No one explained what it actually meant.

After four CFO roles, here’s the simplest definition I’ve landed on...

A strategic CFO doesn’t just report results.

They actively shape:

🎯 Decisions
⚖️ Trade-offs
📈 Outcomes

Here’s what that looks like in practice 👇

1/ Strategy = owning the “so what” 🎯

Every real strategy decision is a trade-off. 

Being strategic isn’t about better slides. It’s about making those trade-offs explicit.

- What we gain
- What we give up
- What happens if we wait

At Adobe, leadership made a fundamental shift.
They stopped selling one-time software licenses and moved to subscriptions.

Finance clarified the trade-off, short-term revenue pressure, and long-term recurring growth.

✅ Strategy is helping leadership commit with eyes open.

2/ Partnership = influencing before decisions are locked ⚖️

Decisions aren’t shaped in the boardroom.
They’re shaped well before the meeting.

Real partnership happens upstream.

- Pressure-testing ideas early
- Challenging assumptions privately
- Helping the CEO see second-order effects

At Oracle, alignment didn’t start at the board table.

Safra Catz shaped major M&A and the company’s pivot to cloud well ahead of board approval.

✅ Partnership is influence before positions harden.

3/ Implementation = turning strategy into action

Great CFOs don’t just approve strategy.

They make sure it actually gets executed.

- Pulling capital from underperforming areas early
- Funding the next growth engine
- Accepting short-term discomfort to avoid long-term stagnation

At Netflix, leadership made a clear choice.

They leaned into original content and international expansion.
Spencer Neumann supported sustained investment despite rising cash burn.

✅ Implementation is forcing strategy into motion.

Being a “strategic business partner” isn’t a title upgrade.

It’s the moment finance stops describing reality and starts helping leadership decide what to do about it.

That’s when CFOs earn real influence.

Here’s the difference between a VP of Finance and someone the Board trusts as CFO:

Most finance leaders think it’s about experience. Boards know it’s about how you show up.

VP of Finance thinking 👇

- Measures success by a clean close and forecast accuracy
- Optimizes the finance function
- Brings analysis and waits for direction
- Executes the CEO’s agenda as given
- Prepares board decks and walks through the numbers
- Frames impact primarily in dollars
- Operates mostly inside the company
- Explains what went wrong after the fact

Board-trusted CFO thinking 👇

- Measures success by better decisions made earlier
- Optimizes enterprise value
- Brings a point of view and recommends a path
- Partners with the CEO to shape the agenda
- Controls the narrative and decision flow in the boardroom
- Frames trade-offs across growth, risk, and resources
- Brings an external lens: investors, markets, benchmarks, and capital conditions
- Reorients the business and clarifies what happens when something goes wrong

Becoming CFO isn’t about being better at finance.

It’s about owning how the company competes, allocates capital, and creates value.

That’s the real shift the Boards are watching for. 🎯

P.S. After 15+ years in the C-suite, 4 exits, and 2 IPOs, I now coach finance leaders on strategic storytelling, board communication, and executive leadership.

If this resonates, feel free to reach out via DM.

34% of CFOs moved into a President or CEO role in 2025.

That’s not a coincidence.

Boards aren’t “promoting finance leaders.”
They’re recognizing enterprise leaders who already operate at CEO altitude.

Here’s why the CFO role has become one of the strongest pipelines to the top seat, and the shifts that matter most 👇

1️⃣ CFOs see the whole system, not just the numbers.

Finance sits at the intersection of strategy, capital, operations, risk, and incentives.

That vantage point makes patterns visible early:

→ Growth that looks good but breaks the org
→ Cost cuts that quietly kill momentum
→ Functional wins that damage enterprise outcomes

Boards want CEOs who understand second-order effects, not siloed optimization.

✅ The shift to make

Stop framing recommendations as financial outcomes.

Start framing enterprise trade-offs, downstream impacts, and the risks the company is consciously underwriting.

2️⃣ CFOs are trained to make decisions under volatility

Finance leaders spend years making irreversible calls with incomplete data across pricing, headcount, M&A, and cash.

That builds judgment under constraint.

In volatile environments, boards value leaders who can decide, adapt, and course-correct without freezing.

✅ The shift to make 

Move from scenario modeling to decision ownership. 
Take a clear position, name the risk, and define what would trigger a change in direction.

3️⃣ CFOs understand incentives, power, and where execution breaks

Most strategies don’t fail because the idea was wrong.

They fail because:

→ Incentives pull leaders in opposite directions
→ Capital is allocated cleanly but deployed politically
→ Accountability diffuses once execution gets hard

Finance operates where pay, capital, and performance collide. That’s where real behavior shows up.

✅ The shift to make

Design decisions with incentives and ownership upfront.

Be explicit about who owns the outcome, who has authority, and how behavior should change when things drift.

The shift from CFO to CEO isn’t a leap.

It’s the result of operating as an executive leader long before the title changes.

P.S. After 15 years in the C-suite and serving on four boards, I now advise finance leaders on the skills that matter most: partnering with CEOs, communicating with boards, and leading at the executive level.

If you’re sharpening those muscles, feel free to reach out.

I’ve been both a CFO and a Board Director. This is where strong CFOs still lose the room.

↳ They speak finance. Boards speak trade-offs.

Here’s an example:

Early in my tenure, I told the board in a quarterly meeting: “The risk is too high.”

A director smiled and asked: “Compared to what?”

That question changed how I show up in boardrooms. 💡

Most CFOs learn to see risk in absolutes:

- Can we afford it?
- What’s the downside if it fails?
- How does this hit the plan or forecast?

Those are necessary questions, but they’re incomplete.

Boards think in portfolios.

They’re asking different things:

- What does this unlock that staying safe won’t?
- Is the upside meaningfully larger than the downside?
- Which risks are reversible, and which ones lock us in?

Here’s the bridge between CFO thinking and board thinking 👇

1) Frame risk relative to the whole business

Not “this could fail.”
But “this risk is small relative to our growth gap, capital base, or strategic exposure.”

Context changes the conversation.

2) Separate visible risk from hidden risk

What shows up in the forecast isn’t always the biggest risk.
Inaction, delay, and missed learning compound quietly.

Boards are very aware of that. ⏳

3) Pair every risk with a lever for action

If the risk starts to show up, what do you do?
Slow it down, narrow the scope, cap the spend, or stop the initiative altogether.

Boards aren’t risk-averse.

They appear risk-averse when the risk isn’t framed in context. 🧭

When CFOs learn to speak in their language, they stop sounding like the brake.
And start sounding like the guide.

I’ve watched brilliant Directors and VPs of Finance get passed over for the CFO seat because of this one mistake…

↳ You wait for the title before adopting CFO-level ownership.

Every CFO I’ve worked with started acting like one long before the title showed up.

Because those years of owning outcomes build trust with the CEO, create visibility with the board, and sharpen judgment under pressure. 🎯

All of which quietly drives the promotion.

Here’s what CFO-level ownership actually looks like:

1️⃣ You optimize for enterprise value, not just finance outcomes
You balance growth, risk, capital, and talent instead of chasing a single metric.

2️⃣ You earn trust outside finance 
🤝 You understand what motivates functional leaders, where they’re constrained, and the trade-offs they’re making.

3️⃣ You take a position 
Not just “here are the numbers,” but what you would do, why, and what it means if you’re wrong.

4️⃣ You think in second-order effects 🔍 
You explain how today’s decision shapes behavior, incentives, culture, and flexibility over the next 12 to 24 months.

5️⃣ You own outcomes when plans miss 🧩 
You frame a clear narrative on what happened, what it means, and what changes next.

6️⃣ You act as a true thought partner to the CEO 
You pressure-test strategy, surface blind spots, and share accountability for results.


The pattern is always the same:
CEOs promote the person who already thinks, decides, and owns like a CFO.

Be that person today.

I’ve served on boards across $200M CPG brands, public companies, and PE exits. And the more boardrooms I sit in, the clearer this becomes 👇

Fiduciary duty gets referenced constantly
Yet it’s misunderstood just as often.

Some directors think it means loyalty to management.
Others think it means aligning with the room.

Neither is right.

Fiduciary duty is loyalty to the process that protects the company. 🛡️

What that actually looks like in practice:

1️⃣ Asking the uncomfortable question

Not to be difficult, but to surface risk, trade-offs, and blind spots before they become expensive.

2️⃣ Testing assumptions before approving decisions

Every decision teaches the organization what to optimize for.
If short-term wins erode retention, pricing power, or trust, fiduciary duty is to call it out.

3️⃣ Anchoring decisions in long-term value

Today’s incentives shape tomorrow’s behavior.

If this quarter’s results are borrowed from future credibility, it needs to be named.

4️⃣ Holding the line between oversight and execution

Boards own decisions and consequences. Management owns the how. Blur that line, and accountability breaks.

Fiduciary duty isn’t about being agreeable.

It’s about being accountable to the work, even when it creates tension.

And accountable boards build resilient companies. 💪

1999: Joined Oracle as a Senior VP
2005: Became CFO
2014: Named Co-CEO and helped scale Oracle to a $1T company

The board didn’t promote Safra Catz for financial excellence.

They promoted her because her decisions reshaped Oracle’s business model and long-term relevance.

And that’s the gap most CFOs never close.

Here are 4 moves that earned her the top seat and what other CFOs can learn from them.

1) She was already functioning as a de facto co-CEO before the title

Safra didn’t stay inside finance. 
She took ownership of the company’s hardest decisions across M&A, operating trade-offs, leadership changes, and long-term bets.

The Co-CEO title didn’t expand her scope. It formalized it.

✅ You don’t get promoted into scope. You expand scope first and let the title catch up.

2) She turned capital allocation into the company’s growth engine

Safra reframed the CFO role from financial stewardship to enterprise design.

- Every dollar was a strategic lever
- M&A followed a thesis, not one-off deals
- Acquisitions like PeopleSoft helped Oracle skip long build cycles and reshape its platform

✅ Use capital to shape how the business grows, not just to protect performance.

3) She earned trust with the Board and CEO by owning the hardest calls

She didn’t just report to Larry Ellison. She helped shape the strategy with him.

By the time she became Co-CEO, the board had already seen her navigate hostile acquisitions, activist pressure, cost discipline, and leadership changes under real stress.

✅ Credibility compounds when you show judgment when pressure is highest.

4) She steered Oracle through its most disruptive pivot

The shift from on-prem to cloud wasn’t incremental. It was existential.

Safra balanced short-term pain with long-term survival and kept stakeholders aligned through years of uncertainty.

✅ Top leaders don’t avoid disruption. They turn it into durable growth.

Most CFOs master cost control, forecasting, and governance.
Few build the judgment to shape the company’s future.

Boards don’t promote CFOs who protect today’s P&L.

They promote CFOs who help the company survive its next reinvention.

That’s how a CFO becomes a CEO.

40% of CFO dismissals come down to one thing:
A strained relationship with the CEO or the board. ⚠️

And yet, CFOs are still expected to:

- Challenge the CEO
- Say no when momentum is high
- Deliver bad news before there’s a fix

After serving as a 3× CFO and 4x board director, here’s how the best CFOs manage this tension without becoming “the problem” 👇

1️⃣ They align strategy with finance

Boards push for ambition. CFOs protect discipline. The best CFOs bridge the gap by:

- Translating strategy into cash, margin, and capital risk
- Modeling outcomes: what hitting X costs, what it earns, and what breaks if execution slips
- Framing decisions as explicit trade-offs

2️⃣ They eliminate surprises

Trust erodes when issues show up late or without context.

- Surface problems early
- Use simple dashboards the board can read in seconds
- Explain why numbers moved and how the team is responding

3️⃣ They challenge the CEO in private, align in public

- Push hard behind closed doors
- Present a unified leadership team in the room
- Never put the board in a position to choose between the CEO and the CFO

This protects the CEO’s authority and the CFO’s credibility.

4️⃣ They design the decision framework before taking a position

Strong CFOs don’t start with “no.” They structure the conversation.

- Separate facts, risks, and recommendations
- Make opportunity cost visible
- Frame choices, not ultimatums

This shifts the CFO from blocker to decision architect.

5️⃣ They manage confidence as much as accuracy

In a miss, boards read presence before precision.

- Stay calm under pressure
- Anchor discussion on what changes next, not who was wrong
- Surface second- and third-order effects instead of re-arguing the decision

Great CFOs don’t avoid tension. They structure it so the CEO, the board, and the business can make better decisions. 🎯

P.S. I coach CFOs and VPs of Finance on strategic narrative, board communication, and enterprise leadership. 

Slots are full until mid-March. Reach out if you’d like to join the waitlist.

Most CFOs think being “board-ready” means knowing their numbers cold.

It doesn’t.

Every CFO who’s ever been hired has clean financials, a tight forecast, and answers to last quarter’s variances.

If technical competence were the bar, boards would never struggle to find leaders.

But boards don’t evaluate you the way operating teams do.

They’re not asking, “Is this person good at finance?”
They’re asking, “Can this person help us govern uncertainty?” 🎯

That’s a very different test.

Here’s what boards actually look for:

1) Alignment

If every executive tells a slightly different story, the board sees fragmentation immediately.

Reporting results isn’t the job.
Unifying the narrative is.

Strong CFOs connect strategy, risk, capital allocation, and execution into one coherent story.

2) Thought discipline

Boards look for your ability to separate signal from noise and surface the decisions that matter most.

That means you:

✅ Frame the 2–3 variables that actually move outcomes
✅ Name what’s immaterial, and why
✅ Prevent the discussion from drifting into operational weeds

3) Confidence without rigidity

When assumptions break, the board isn’t judging the miss.

They’re judging how quickly you recalibrate capital, priorities, and expectations. 🔍
“I believed X. Here’s what changed. Here’s how we adapt.”

4) Scenario thinking

Boards don’t want a single forecast.

They want confidence you’ve pressure-tested multiple futures and understand the trade-offs.

The most credible CFOs don’t say, “Here’s the plan.”
They say, “Here’s the plan if conditions hold and here’s how we’ll respond if they don’t.”


The real test is simple…

Can you clearly explain:

- What’s happening
- Why it’s happening
- What you’ll do if the world shifts tomorrow

When a CFO can do that, the board stops seeing a functional leader.
They see a business leader. 🧭

And that’s when trust deepens, influence expands, and bigger roles quietly open up.

I’ve seen seasoned ex-CEOs join boards and fail in the role within 90 days.
Here’s what they get wrong 👇

Board meetings turn into operational working sessions because they default to execution instead of judgment.

- They dig into the org.
- They second-guess execution.
- They try to “oversee” the CEO.

And this quietly erodes trust and authority. ⚠️

Boards are not there to run the company.
And directors are not there to replace management.

When directors operate instead of govern, three things tend to break:

1) The CEO loses air cover when directors step into execution.

2) The board loses altitude when time shifts from strategy, risk, and capital allocation into operational details.

3) Accountability breaks when directors do the work, because ownership of outcomes becomes unclear.

This is the shift new directors have to make. Being a good director means:

✅ Asking the questions management can’t or won’t
✅ Setting direction without prescribing execution
✅ Holding the CEO accountable without undermining them

The strongest directors I know are disciplined about where they engage.

They influence outcomes without stepping into the line.

Getting the seat is the milestone.
Learning how to stay out of the weeds is the real work. 🎯

If you’re early in your board journey...

What’s the hardest instinct you’ve had to unlearn, or expect to unlearn?

I'm a CTO with 15+ years of experience leading globally distributed cross-functional engineering and product teams of 70+.  I specialize in scaling teams and products (or getting them back on track).

This is how Claude summarizes quotes about me by former CEOs, colleagues and team members:

Kevin is an exceptional leader who combines technical expertise, interpersonal skills, and strategic vision. He builds trust through genuine care for his team and maintains composure during crises. Known for decisive judgment and solving complex challenges, he excels at cross-organizational collaboration that breaks down silos. His business acumen allows him to contribute strategically at the executive level, integrating technology with organizational goals. Kevin elevates both his team and the entire organization, making him essential to executive leadership.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Career highlights:
  - Grew startup from 0 to over 170 countries
  - Doubled customer base and SaaS AUM to $100 billion
  - Cut infrastructure costs by 75%
  - Slashed support TTR from 2.4 weeks to 48 hours
  - Reduced production rollbacks 78%
  - Filmed for NBC Today Show segment on innovation
  - Appeared in multiple national publications for industry work
  - Partnered on three patents
  - Multiple exits
  - 1 of 15 hired for Halliburton Global Executive Development Program

I believe in:
  - Servant leadership
  - Clarity in communication and expectations
  - Accountability
  - Collaboration
  - Positive cultures
  - Operational excellence
  - Technology for business impact (not technology's sake)
  - Continuous improvement
  - Mentoring while leading by example

Kevin Howren

There’s (what seems to be) a dilution of meaning in tech role titles.

I see it in the job ads that get injected in my feed.

I see it when people hit me up to tap my network to fill a role.

It’s always been this way, but it’s getting worse.  Tech is always evolving - even on the org design level.  The acceleration is acute and more poignant from the effects of AI.

They say they’re looking for a CTO.  They’re really looking for an architect or principal.  They say they want a senior engineer.  What they really want is an engineering manager.  They say they want a CTO, but really want a CIO.

The worst is when they say they want a developer.  The JD describes an entire IT department.

Unfortunately, I attribute a lot of this to laziness, ignorance and, in some cases, the desire to get something for nothing.

Anyone else noticing the acceleration of this trend?

CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER Scaling Teams and Transforming Organizations through Servant Leadership

You ever follow someone after reading a great post, see new posts from them in your feed the next day, and then wonder what you were thinking?

1) I hope I’m not the person you followed and then feel that way
2) Do you too not have the heart to unfollow them?

Good times…

A conversation I had yesterday reminded me of a simple fact.  I’m terrible at acronyms.

It doesn’t matter if I’ve known them for ten years.  I still look them up to clarify.

It stings me in conversations as I have to take extra cycles to grab context and bring it up into mental RAM.  By that time, I’m usually behind in the conversation.

It’s really bad since I’m in tech; A jargon heavy industry.

Anyone else have the same struggle?

"Hands-on" in a job description is corporate speak for "we haven't thought this through."

I've seen this term plastered across JDs for years and it came up again last week in the comments of one of my posts.

Take a technical leadership role. What does "hands-on" actually tell you?  Are you coding? Pulling cables? Deep in architecture reviews? Managing by walking around? All of the above?

Nobody knows. And that's the problem.

Less than 10% (my guess) of job descriptions bother to clarify.  The rest? Pure filler. A placeholder for actual analysis on the needs of the role and org.

"But it means you're active in the day-to-day!"

So is literally everyone else with a job. Even C-suite executives stay connected to their teams - they just operate at a different altitude.

If you're writing a JD and find yourself typing "hands-on," stop. PLEASE. Start over and write what you actually mean:

"You'll spend 40% of your time in code reviews"
"You'll troubleshoot production issues alongside the team"
"You'll design systems, not just approve them"

Specificity respects candidates' time. Vagueness wastes it.

taplio

The Battle

Cameron Kinloch

Kevin Howren

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreCameron Kinloch's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreKevin Howren's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Cameron Kinloch

Kevin Howren

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Cameron Kinloch's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreKevin Howren's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreCameron Kinloch's LinkedIn Performance