Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Pandora | iHeartRadio | Podchaser | Email | TuneIn | Deezer | RSS | More
Leadership Powered by Common Sense – Episode 491
Introduction
Hey, everybody. Doug Thorpe here again. You are listening to Leadership Powered by Common Sense. My guest today is a fellow military veteran and now a consultant and coach. He shares a common thread with me. We like to look at the world in a more simple way, with a clarity and hopefully a dose of common sense. My guest is a gentleman named Jimmy Burroughes. Jimmy, welcome to the show.
Thanks, Doug. Lovely to be here.
Meet Jimmy Burroughes
Yeah, I said, we’re fellow veterans, different armies. But tell us a little bit about that background of yours.
Yeah. So my first job out of university, I spent my first grown up job was as an Army logistics officer. So if you can imagine me as a fresh faced 24 year old arriving my unit in Germany being told I needed to get myself to the airport the following morning to fly to Kuwait, and then hitchhiking to Basra to catch up with the war effort that was in process.
That was the first gig, and my first six, 6 to 12 months in the Army were spent logistic resupply in Basra, fuel and what I would call kind of what you would now think of as internet shopping, you know, order online and go and pick it up, click and collect. We were doing that with bombs and bullets in the desert, setting up little distribution points, which is essentially the click and collect points all over the desert and and resupply and bombs, bullets and bits and bobs.
That career, I suppose, took me over the next few years down all sorts of really interesting tracks, both as a leader, but also as a student of leadership and learning how to build teams and create functional, high performing and enthusiastic engaged groups of people doing relatively dangerous things, and I ended up in the final stages of my career working basically as VIP Uber for politicians, ambassadors and the like in Kandahar province in Afghanistan. So I got to see both deserts.
I got to have some fun, and I very much enjoyed what I did. But it was a young single man’s game, I think. And so there came a time to move on.
From the Desert to the Boardroom: The Military-to-Civilian Transition
Yeah. And you did make that pivot into more of the corporate world. Tell us a little bit about those journeys.
Yeah, it’s very interesting. When I left the military, I also emigrated to New Zealand and basically started over. I found it very challenging to represent what it was I’d done in the military over that sort of six and a half, seven year period in a way that a civilian employer could understand it and could value it. So you basically rolled my sleeves up and got stuck in in a graduate level role, and within ten years had managed to work my way up to being a GM in an organization.
But most of that career was spent in the HR frame. So leadership development, training courses, culture, engagement, talent. But I realized pretty quickly, as I was sort of moving into my more senior roles, that you needed to understand how a business operated, you needed to understand how the PNL functioned and how the business made money.
And so that was why I went down the GM track and got my MBA and moved into the GM track to run an operational PNL and to build a business, which was great preparation for going out into the consulting world, of course, but also it gave me the sort of insight as a consultant to be able to have those business conversations with leaders as opposed to just an HR conversation with leaders. And I think that stood me in really good stead.
Yeah. So totally true. And you raise a good point. And it is a common challenge. Those who have served men and women in our armed forces globally, making that transition to the civilian world, the technical things and the nomenclature we put on things in the military is hard to translate sometimes into the civilian world, but ultimately, at the core of it, it is process and procedure many, many ways. And mastering that as a young person, the military is keen on giving large value assignments to young people. They’re not afraid to do that.
And I’ve spoken of that in my own experience, being 23, 24 years old and having been given, you know, huge asset value to manage. And when you think in terms of equipment and logistics and personnel. I mean, being second in command of a 400 man unit, you know, is kind of a big deal. And yeah, at 24, having that responsibility is not uncommon for the military. So.
And the thing I find so interesting though is that in the civilian world, often — and I think there’s a shift happening slowly, thankfully — it tends to be technical capabilities what gets you promoted and leadership is almost seen as a secondary. Whereas in the military, leadership and technical capability are both essential. And the thing that’s fascinating to me is as I went through my career, I’ve leaned more and more into the things I learned in the military about leadership and the things that differentiated me for promotion were military qualities or things that I picked up as military qualities.
So, you know, determination, hard work, problem solving, delivery, commitment and all these things that people weren’t recruiting for. But when you got the job, they were what made you stand out. And I wish that there was a way that I could go back in time almost, and reframe how I positioned myself with those qualities in front of mind.
And something that I did later on when I was in New Zealand, I started an ex-military networking group to basically help people like me who were transitioning or were struggling to move between roles to really understand their value and what they brought and to position themselves as a contender for good jobs because they were super capable people. Right? But they didn’t learn how to say that in the military.
Finding Common Ground: A Shared Philosophy
Yeah, I look back on my career and I’m very thankful for my transition out of the military. Through a college friend, I was invited to come interview at a bank of all places, and I’m like — bank.
I don’t know how bank works, you know, but yeah, sure, I’ll go see. And fortunately, and again, this is the blessing in disguise that I have long since come to value — more than half of the panel of executives I interviewed with to join that bank were themselves ex-military. So they — it was no bridge for them, you know, to make it.
They got it.
It. And knowing what they were doing and how they had learned it in the military. And so the nature of their questions was more specific about what did you really do in the Army? And, you know, when we talked about that, they made the translation. I didn’t have to do that for them. And that was a big blessing.
But enough about that. Let’s get into the idea — as I spoke of in our tease coming in here — you are an advocate of keeping things simple and using a little bit of common sense, which is a perfect fit for this show and our theme.
Tell us a little more about how you embrace that idea and have now become a champion of it.
The Case for Simple Leadership
Yeah. You know, it’s — I don’t want to dwell on the military thing, but I think it’s an important linkage to make — is that when you’re in the military and you’re learning battle drills, whatever you want to call it, you know, in the middle of a section or a platoon attack. And you need to rely on things that just work under pressure.
So you drill mnemonics and you drill phrases, and you drill easy to remember things that you can almost get into autopilot. So when the bombs and the bullets start flying, you can react and you’re not having to go — so what’s that 16 step thing that I need to remember with four different plugins and at different facets?
And that was something that I really took to heart when I started building the consulting business — looking at leaders that are out there today. They’re managing massive complexity. Somebody said to me, that our generation manages four times as much data in a week as our parents managed in a month.
And so this sheer volume of data complexity, the problems that are coming up, the novel challenges that we’ve never seen before that we’re having to deal with, doesn’t leave a lot of head space for complicated leadership. And I think HR as a profession has over complicated leadership, either through a misunderstanding of what good leadership looks like or more importantly, I think for them, trying to demonstrate the value of what they do.
So we have these enormous competency frameworks and big development books and the idea of, you know, good leadership is a massive recipe that has to be followed, letter for letter in order to get the best outcomes. And our leaders are saying, I just need something that works right now in the heat of the battle because I’m drowning. Throw me a lifeline.
And so the type of leadership that we do isn’t based on content and actually we don’t have any slides, we don’t have any sort of any long winded concepts that you have to get your head around.
It’s the A, B, C, one, two, three of leadership that just works when you’re under pressure. And I think that simplicity is what has led to us being recognized with various awards and being involved in working with some incredible organizations, which we’re extremely privileged to have done.
So because people want something that they can learn today and use today, and they don’t have to spend hours going, so how am I going to squeeze this into my working day? And when I’m less busy, then I’ll get time to try that out — because you’re never going to be less busy. They need something that when that problem comes up, their autopilot response is a better response than they had previously, and therefore they were a better leader than they were previously. That’s what they need right now.
Right? I call that Monday morning ready, you know.
Yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
And I agree with you, the complexity of some of the training programs and ideas that are out there now is just compounding the issue.
The “Watch” Analogy
I tell the story — I once had a client, and I won’t go into the details of where he was or what he was doing, but suffice it to say, the industry was complex. And I asked him a question about his thought on something to do with his team essentially moving from point A to point B, you know — what do they need to do? And he launched off on this doctoral dissertation defense, you know, discussion.
And I set back and about halfway through it, I kind of went — timeout, timeout, timeout. Wait, wait. And I said, I asked you how to get from point A to point B and now — you’re the classic joke. You know, I asked you what time it was. You’re telling me how to make the watch. And I don’t want to know that. I asked you point A to point B, and it stunned him.
He had a major mental effort to try to — I’ll call it dumb it down — to just go, we’re here now.
We’re going to go there. Here’s the straight line. And that kind of became the premise of our work, and for the duration of our engagement, was helping him stop thinking in such complex terms and whether there was a psychological need to prove his worth, you know, with all his regurgitation of technical ability, or not. It took him a while to develop that neural passageway that could think simply.
The 1% Shift: Small Actions, Big Results
Yeah. I think you hit something really interesting is that we do. Technical knowledge is often what gets people promoted. And people therefore believe that their worth comes from their technical smarts. And the reality is in leadership, it’s about clarity and simplicity.
And for most people, they haven’t got their headspace to think about ten steps ahead. They just need to know what’s the next thing. What should I focus on today, this week, this month, this quarter? Tell me that and I’m good. And then just keep reinforcing that with people. We work on the basis of 1% shifts.
So often you’ll go into an organization like — oh, we want a 20% uplift in budget or, you know, performance needs to improve by at least double our performance, whatever it is. And you’re like, well, that’s massive. How are you going to do that? That’s going to require enormous numbers of activities.
What would be the smallest activity you could do that’s going to have the biggest impact? And how do you compound that over time? So we use the impact matrix as one of our sort of most frequent tools. And what’s the smallest effort for the biggest impact? You could do lots of things and you could make it really complex and you could be really, really busy, or you could just do one small thing that is like a force multiplier that’s going to generate more than a 1%, more than a 1% shift.
The other thing that we see is people’s genuine confidence in their ability to double their numbers or have a 20% uplift is pretty low. So they’re immediately going into it with an uncertainty or potentially even a fear of not hitting that number, which immediately stymies their performance and their capability.
Whereas if you’re saying, how can you get a 1% improvement and what’s your level of certainty you could get 1%? Like, oh yeah, definitely. I could definitely do 1%. Cool. So go deliver 1% and then find another one and then find another one. Can you do that? Absolutely. I’m sure I can do that. Great. So go do that.
And what we see is the momentum builds momentum. You’re cranking this flywheel of performance improvement through smaller high impact initiatives versus trying to find that one game changer, which is a big swing. And if you miss that big swing it’s a loss.
Yeah, I love that thinking because it is so vital. And to your point, those big double digit numbers that companies often put out as the metric they want to achieve do in fact feel unachievable to most. And you might — if you’re in, you know, a subordinate leadership role, you’re going to nod your head and go — yes, sir. We’re going to go do it.
But in your gut you’re going, Holy cow, how am I going to get this done? And that’s when you start losing sleep and really impacting — it impacts your decision making because like you said, something you’re thinking about maybe that big swing for the fences. But you know in your gut if you miss, it’s going to be a colossal loss and potentially career ending and or the reason you don’t make the double digit goal and now that too is a fail.
So there you are. And you said something that I also totally agree with and advocate. And that is the clarity to the work team. And I’ve often said that if you’re capable of hiring reasonably good people that are good fits for what you’re wanting to do — they want to do good work. But as a leader, you’ve got to be able to tell them what that next right thing might be. And yes, they’re going to learn it over time. And there are certain things that they’ll be able to self initiate.
But in the early stages of developing a team or bringing a team together, the leader has to be the one setting the bar and articulating in a very clear and potentially simple way. This is the next right thing. This is our next milestone. This is our next goal post.
Getting the Whole Boat Rowing in the Same Direction
Yeah, I completely agree. The analogy that we paint or the picture we paint in people’s minds is an analogy of your team and you in a rowing boat and everybody’s rowing as hard as they can right now.
And you mentioned it. You know, you’ve got good people who are working hard and they want to prove themselves. So they’re all rowing the boats as hard as they can. Unfortunately, they’re all facing in different directions. They’re all rowing at different times. The boat is still — it’s still tied to the dock and you’re rowing in treacle.
And that’s the reality of what is happening in most teams. You know, there’s so much systemic friction and lack of alignment around what is the main effort, what’s the core focus, what’s the priority, and getting people clear on what they’re allowed to make decisions on and not make decisions on — what are their clear objectives and responsibilities? What support is available to them, what education and development they should be going through — that when you tidy that up, you create massive performance gains and people are working less hard because they’re not rowing a boat against each other.
All of a sudden they’re all rowing together and use very simple things that, you know, if we’re rowing the boat in opposite directions, we’re making decisions based on perceived main efforts that could be diametrically opposite and actually counterintuitive to each other’s main effort. We could be making resourcing decisions that are inappropriate spend of money. We could be making priority decisions that undermine one another.
And so one of the first things we do when we do any engagement with an organization is we get ready to close their eyes and point to north, and everybody thinks they know where north is, and everybody is pointing in different directions, but everybody’s making their decisions in exactly the same way. I think I know what the right answer is. I think I know what we’re doing, and I think I know what the priorities are. So I’m going to make all my decisions and might spend my budget and put my energy into these things when that could be directly hurting you. So let’s get everybody lined up facing the same direction in the boat.
Rowing at the same time. Take the anchor chain off the boat and start rowing in water, not through treacle. And all of a sudden things get a bit easier. Your smart people become more engaged because what they’re doing starts to make a difference, as opposed to them rowing as hard as they can, just to stand still and to feel like they’re not making any progress at all. Right.
Two Gears: Basic Performance vs. Discretionary Effort
And I talk about that in some of my writing, that when that sort of flywheel effect kicks in, there’s also the notion of everyone comes to work with basically two gears. They’ve got gear number one, which is the agreement that they’re going to perform the basic job description. They’re going to fulfill what is written in their scope. And that’s great. And arguably, you know, companies can do good things with that level of effort.
But there’s a second gear that as a leader, if you can convince people to tap into it, that’s their discretionary effort. That’s that — go the extra mile, the 110%.
All of those kinds of ideas. And that’s a voluntary contribution that employees can make. And when you, as a leader, build the environment where people are clear, they feel good, they’re excited and motivated and engaged — you’re going to get a lot more of that second gear effort most of the time, not all the time. But you’re going to get a lot more of it than you would otherwise with that first gear or mindset that’s going on. Yeah.
Yeah. And unfortunately, you know, reading the statistics online and if you follow the Gallup engagement survey and the workplace surveys, unfortunately we’re going backwards in that across the board. You know we had — I think it was a 16% drop in engagement statistics across the world, and confidence in leadership is lower than ever.
And I think part of that is because we’re still focusing on this continuous improvement and cost cutting and systems driving the system to be more efficient, when actually if we were to make the system clearer, simpler, easier to navigate and easier to do, your best working people would be giving more of that gear too.
They would be more switched on and engaged to do their best work.
Why Engagement Surveys Miss the Mark
Right. And I agree with you totally. And you’re right. The data that continues to come out says that engagement factor is eroding. And I know many of the big companies around the world, they do make an effort to do that. Internal employee satisfaction surveying. And time and time again data tends to erode rather than improve.
And so it’s almost like that joke — and it’s totally inappropriate politically nowadays — but “the beatings will stop when morale improves.” You know, that kind of mindset. And that’s another reason — not to get off on a tangent — but that’s another reason I’m a big advocate that by and large, the command and control leadership mindset is dead. I think the modern employee doesn’t suffer that kind of environment anymore, and those who were raised up or have chosen that as their method of managing their team — I won’t even give them credit for leading their team — just simply managing their team with that more heavy handed approach is going to continue to erode that connection and engagement 100%.
If you go back to that — what you mentioned about engagement surveys — I’ve seen two kind of schools of thought here. Number one is — well, let’s measure it and then we can see if we’re making progress or not. And then we’ll make some initiatives that potentially drive improvements in those numbers.
But unfortunately those are really hard things to do. So what we’re going to do is we’ll measure people and then we’ll cut costs and we’ll remove management layers and we’ll try and be more efficient and hope that next year the numbers get better, and we’ll do some fun along the way as well to make people feel better. So we’ll just do some pizza lunches or we’ll, you know, we’ll try and fabricate the numbers to improve.
But the reality is what we know is that people are screaming out for clarity and simplicity. It’s too complex, it’s too complicated. There’s too many things going on. I’m stretching too many directions, and I’m not really sure what’s important and if I’m making a difference.
If you can fix those things, the engagement so they fix themselves. And actually the best organizations that I’ve seen, they don’t even do engagement surveys. They have a constant pulse on what’s going on in the business, because their leaders are talking to their people and reporting back on what they’re hearing, and they’re constantly adjusting.
But there isn’t this great annual survey or monthly survey that goes out because they’ve got a handle on culture. So I see it as almost as a sign of immaturity in businesses that consistently rely on engagement surveys to tell them what’s going on and then wonder why the numbers don’t move.
Leadership vs. Management: Teaching the Wrong Things
Right. I couldn’t agree more. And as you were describing that, I had a friend and colleague who has now passed on, but one of his — he was an HR professional for most of his career, and he adopted a mantra that said, if we can fix our managers, we won’t have personnel problems. And what he meant by that was all of those things you described.
If we can, if we can coach and train up managers to be more responsive, be more clear in their directives, be more relatable and connected with their people so that those clarity discussions can happen, you know, then people will feel respected and engaged and less likely to cause a problem, you know, in the workplace.
Yeah. Unfortunately, what we see is most organizations that are doing leadership programs are actually doing management programs. You know, they’re teaching things like prioritization and coaching conversations and performance management. And that’s not — yeah, that’s not leadership. That’s management skills. And there’s a place for those. Absolutely.
But you can’t expect your leaders to get better if you’re not teaching leadership and leadership isn’t — isn’t is an art, and it’s like a fitness. You have to build it over time and you need to constantly work at it. Otherwise your fitness fades. The same thing with leadership.
But when we go into organizations, the majority of them have a what I would call a leadership 101 program, which is management. And then they have executive coaching for the chosen few, and then everybody else is left to work it out. And then we wonder why we’ve got some cultural systemic problems and why engagement is not going up and why confidence in leaders is down. It’s because we don’t teach leaders how to lead.
That’s right. We promote people who are really technically capable. We make them a manager, which is KPIs and numbers and systems and processes. And then we let them learn how to inspire and create vision, conflict, and remove the treacle for the people around them. By magic, they may be gone to university for many years to learn their technical skill. They’ve refined their technical capabilities over many years of practice, but they’re expected to lead from day one and we don’t support them. And then we wonder why they’re failing.
Being a Leader vs. Doing Leadership
Right? Well, and what I’ve discovered in my own work with hundreds, if not thousands of clients over a 14–15 year period, I have started as a pretty much standard practice — when I engage with an individual, I’ll ask him or her: have you ever thought about really, at the core, what kind of leader do you want to be? If you could write the story that everybody who works for you will say in the future about you as a leader, what would that story be?
And I’ve probably over that 15 year period, I’ve maybe had two people that have said, yeah, I’ve already been thinking about that.
Everybody else — they’ll say the honest answer is no. I haven’t thought about it. I’ve tried to emulate somebody. I’ve tried to copy somebody. I’ve tried to take a piece here and a bit there to kind of apply to my sense of leadership. But have I thought about it consciously? No. I don’t have a profile. I don’t — and I challenge them with the idea. You have to start there. You have to be something you know and represent some set of values.
And yeah, you can read books. There’s a lot of books out there that give you this list of attributes, and they’re not wrong. But the real core question is what can you do? You know, how are you wired, how are you positioned psychologically, emotionally, etc. to demonstrate these things? What does that look like? What would that be? And to your point —
You need a bit of a word there.
Once you have that, then you can go practice it. You can do the repetitions day by day to represent those things in a better, more meaningful way.
And over time, you build that leadership muscle memory. And all of a sudden you will wake up one day — kind of like going to the gym regularly. If you haven’t been in a while, you don’t see the results immediately. But all of a sudden one day you feel fit, look fit, you’ve lost some pounds and things are going well.
Leadership as a Fitness Practice
Yeah. No, I — you struck something for me that made my brain light up, which was the difference between doing leadership and being the leader. And doing leadership is a series of transactions. But when you are being a leader, there’s a — to me, there’s a more spiritual, ethereal part of that which requires some reflection and requires some slow thinking that a lot of people never have the time to do.
There’s never a space created for them, or they never create a space for themselves to sit and think about — what type of leader do I want to be, and who do I want to be as that leader? And therefore, what will I start doing? It’s just the doing stuff.
It just gets in the way and the delivery gets in the way, and they don’t take that slow thinking time to really consider and reflect. And I agree — it’s one of the things we do in our leadership program as well — we get people to record a video to themselves in 60 days time, what type of leader do you want to be?
And we get them to watch it back and we say, well, do you recognize that first? And is that now you or not? But have you achieved that over the course of the last 60 days of work? And we do it deliberately at 60 days. So we’ve got another 30 days for them to work on it, as they come towards the end of the engagement with us.
But it’s — I think it’s so interesting that you honed in on that being versus doing. I think it’s a really key facet that a lot of us miss, because we’re so consumed with the focus on delivery and getting stuff done right.
Well, it is interesting work, and I’ve watched people lean into that and start doing that level of it — it really is about changing beliefs, and beliefs drive behavior.
And when the belief changes, your behavior will change and the behavior drives the outcomes. So I’ve seen the positive result in that effort. And I’ve actually challenged people — once they established their own framework, I encourage a kind of a daily review and grading. You know, take 5 or 10 minutes at the end of the day. Look at your attribute list and ask yourself the question. Starting at 8:00 am. And in that first meeting, that first moment I had with somebody, did I represent what I say I want to represent — and grade yourself.
And, you know, don’t be overly critical. Just be fundamentally objective. And it’s not at that point much different than the world class athlete that’s going out to practice and hitting the thousand golf balls or shooting 300 free throws or, you know, whatever the sport might be — you have to do the repetitions to develop the muscle memory. And same ultimately can apply to your leadership effectiveness.
Agree. Agree completely. And to build on that, I think one of the mistakes that we make in the modern corporate world is we try and emulate these professional athletes.
The professional athlete trains for the majority of the week and competes a couple of times a week. So they’re building in nutrition and rest windows and physio and skills training. And then they have to perform every now and again. Whereas in the business world we’re performing all the time and we’re rarely training and resting.
And there’s an interesting sort of almost counterintuitive balance there that we as leadership thought leaders, experts need to reinforce in the workplace — is that you can’t be on, you know, you can’t be trying to win the Olympic gold every day. You’ve got to be focusing on rallying for the moments of importance. And the rest of the time, you’re training and practicing and looking after yourself. Because I think we’ve lost — I think we’ve lost our way there.
I totally agree, and it’s very well said — I think we have that analogy misplaced. I think is the best way to say it. Because to your point, yeah, world class athletes are only on the pitch occasionally versus the time they spend preparing, training and developing the skills to do it.
So. And you’re right, that doesn’t happen in the business world. It is the other way around.
Closing Thoughts
Well, Jimmy, I think we’re about up on time for this episode, sir. And thank you again for sitting in and sharing — what’s the best way people can get in touch?
Probably through our web page, which is JBL High Performance dot com, or you can find me on LinkedIn, Jimmy Burroughs — and always happy to have a conversation. On our web page we’ve got all sorts of free resources and stuff that would be useful before you even have to get into a conversation with us, but I do really welcome conversations. We don’t do sales or high pressure. It’s just literally — if we can add value and we can help, then we’d love to have a conversation.
Wonderful. Well, I appreciate that, Jimmy. And as always, folks, we’re going to have those links in the show notes. So check out Jimmy’s work there when you get a chance. I do like to remind you we have a video version of this show on YouTube.
The channel is the same name. Leadership Powered by Common Sense. Hop over there, check us out and join the channel if you will, and give us a comment about future guest, future topics. We’d love to hear from you. But for now we’re going to sign off. Say goodbye. Go out there. Make it a great day.
Meet Our Guest
Jimmy Burroughes is a former British Army Officer turned global leadership transformation expert and the founder of JBL High Performance. With experience leading up to 110 personnel across European and Middle East operations, Jimmy has translated the precision of military leadership into a practical methodology that Fortune 500 companies around the world rely on.
He has partnered with organisations including Bank of America, eBay, Samsung, Walmart, Fonterra, and SkyCity – designing enterprise-wide leadership programmes that have reached 1,000+ staff in single engagements across 8 countries.
Jimmy is the creator of the “Simplify to Amplify” methodology, which helps exhausted executives escape reactive, firefighting leadership and reclaim significant time without sacrificing results. His clients consistently report reclaiming 10+ hours per week and achieving measurable performance improvements within 90 days.
He is the author of two books: Beat Burnout & Ignite Performance and Escape the Multitasking Trap, and is the host of The High Performance Leader Podcast, ranked in the Top 10% globally.
SOCIAL MEDIA:
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmyburroughes/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jblhighperformance
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jimmybleadership/
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF2MViLKAZa03Ct-aFLvDPQ
Connect with Doug Thorpe
