You don't get a deal on people.
As a budget conscious business professional, I love to get a good deal for my company. If I can save $20/month by changing vendors--I’ll do it. No amount is too small. There is, however, one place I will never skimp—people. Trust me. You don’t get a deal on people.
While money isn't everything, compensation relative to the market is a pretty good indicator of how much a company values an employee. Paying someone less simply because I can will not be a winning strategy for any company in the long run. We may save capital in compensation but will also decrease engagement, kill productivity, and drastically increase turnover by telegraphing on the 1st and 15th every month that we don't value our team. You get what you pay for.
I specifically mentioned candidates in the previous paragraph because interviews are the most likely place employers look for a bargain. Asking a candidate what they made in their last position has become part and parcel of most interviews and compensation offers are usually anchored to that number. I think this is wrong. Would you ask how much a previous company appreciated a candidate and then set your appreciation based on that figure?
Imagine this conversation in an interview:
"On a scale of 1 to 10 how much did your previous employer appreciate you?"
"I’d say 1 or 2."
"I’m prepared to set your base appreciation level at 3 with a bump to 3.5 in six months and a 0.5 bonus at the end of the year based on performance."
Anchoring appreciation levels to that of a previous employer is not a recommended leadership strategy. Basing salaries on previous pay should be just as taboo. Considering previous compensation when determining a candidate's qualification or salary level is akin to allowing their last manager to determine who is right for our team and what they are worth. Previous pay is not proof positive of a candidate's qualification nor is it an adequate indication of their value in our organization.
Don't let another manager at another firm decide who you should hire and what you should pay. Take control of your own hiring process and compensation plan. Do the legwork. Vigorously interview applicants. Seriously check their references. Then, after you have decided the candidate is qualified based not on what the last guy paid them but rather on what they can do, offer the applicant what you have budgeted for the position. There are some things for which you should pay full price and a qualified candidate is one of those things.
You don’t get a deal on people.
Best Regards,
Most AI initiatives don’t fail because the technology is weak. They fail because leadership deploys AI into disorganized systems and expects magic. AI isn’t the fix—it’s the multiplier.
Everyone loves the strategy deck. But the operating model? That’s where the hard choices live—who stays, who goes, what gets cut, and who’s really ready to lead. This is a post about the gritty side of strategy execution—the side no one likes to talk about but every leader has to face.
I used to think great leadership meant doing it faster, better, smarter. But it turns out, one of the most powerful things a leader can do is… nothing. Not because they’re checked out—but because they’ve built an organization that doesn’t need them in every decision. This is a story about a snow shovel, a shutdown, and the real meaning of delegation.
When executives over-attend meetings, teams underperform. This post breaks down how leadership presence—when overdone—creates bottlenecks, erodes ownership, and signals a lack of trust. The best way to empower your team? Step out of the room.
Return-to-office mandates are everywhere. But if you lead a multi-location company, you’re focused on the wrong test. Try this instead: mandate a remote week for your HQ team and see what breaks. What fails without hallway access or proximity? That’s where your structure is weakest—and where scale will fail.
Flat orgs feel empowering—until they fall apart under their own weight. As companies grow, the nostalgia of early connection often gets in the way of the structure required to scale. This post uses a childhood toolset as a metaphor for why clinging to “flatness” is less about culture and more about control—and how SHIELD Illinois grew fast by adding structure, not red tape.
Most workplace emergencies aren’t emergencies. They’re just symptoms of poor prioritization and unclear expectations. This post breaks down how to define true emergencies and structure escalation before everything feels urgent.
Meetings are like goldfish—they grow to the size of their tank. If you give them an hour, they’ll take an hour. This post challenges default meeting durations and lays out a case for shorter, sharper, more effective conversations. Stop scheduling 60 minutes. Keep the goldfish in the tank.
When executives over-attend meetings, teams underperform. This post breaks down how leadership presence—when overdone—creates bottlenecks, erodes ownership, and signals a lack of trust. The best way to empower your team? Step out of the room.
Flat orgs feel empowering—until they fall apart under their own weight. As companies grow, the nostalgia of early connection often gets in the way of the structure required to scale. This post uses a childhood toolset as a metaphor for why clinging to “flatness” is less about culture and more about control—and how SHIELD Illinois grew fast by adding structure, not red tape.
Most workplace emergencies aren’t emergencies. They’re just symptoms of poor prioritization and unclear expectations. This post breaks down how to define true emergencies and structure escalation before everything feels urgent.
Meetings are like goldfish—they grow to the size of their tank. If you give them an hour, they’ll take an hour. This post challenges default meeting durations and lays out a case for shorter, sharper, more effective conversations. Stop scheduling 60 minutes. Keep the goldfish in the tank.
Good ops integration isn’t about who won the deal. It’s about what you build together. This post walks through what integration should look like—and how ego and mistrust destroy potential before it even starts.
Growth gets the headlines. But scaling? That’s where companies break—or break through. This post breaks down my approach to building systems that let companies grow fast without losing their footing, based on real lessons from companies like SHIELD Illinois.
Employees shouldn’t need a map to get help. If your internal support system wouldn’t survive five minutes with customers, it’s time to redesign it—because your employees are your most important customers.
For our inaugural Ask An Entrepreneur, I spoke to my good friend Shannon Gail Clemonds owner/operator of Shannon Gail. Shannon Gail is a Chicago-based event planning firm producing 90+ weddings and events per year locally and across the United States. The team is comprised of a unique blend of business and event professionals with backgrounds in finance, marketing, design, venue management, hospitality, and catering and prides itself on being the go-to expert in all areas of event production. In its 10 years of business, the company has continued to set the bar for event management standards and has built an impressive resume of corporate and social clientele.
You don’t need to go full hierarchy but adding a level of middle management will acknowledge the dynamics that are already present and make your organization more efficient. You can hold onto your principles and organizational culture while still providing a framework that adequately specifies delegated decision making throughout the organization.
Len Musielak is an operations professional with over 10 years of experience managing operations in finance, recreation, and special events. In addition, he provides freelance operations and management consulting services. He also volunteers as a Community Teaching Assistant for the Wharton School of Business Introduction to Operations Management offerings on Coursera and as a member of the board for the Leukemia Research Foundation's ABC7 Jim Gibbons 5k.
Why AI is accelerating better metrics built on stronger mathematical foundations—and why leaders should focus on inputs, validation, and outcomes, not equations.