The Conversational Sweetspot

Business901 Podcast Transcription
Implementing Lean Marketing Systems
Working Conversations
Copyright Business901
The Conversational Sweetspot
Guest was Craig Weber
Sponsored by
Related Podcast:

Craig is the founder of The Weber Consulting Group, an alliance
of experts committed to helping organizations and teams build
their capacity for engaging tough, wicked, adaptive challenges.
He’s consulted to an expansive roster of world-class clients,
helping them improve their
performance by treating dialogue as
a discipline. His unique work is
outlined in his ground-breaking new
book, Conversational Capacity: The
Secret To Building Successful Teams
That Perform When The Pressure Is
On.
Craig has worked with leaders and
teams from such diverse
organizations as Boeing; Boeing
Defence Australia; The Royal Bank
of Canada; NASA; Clif Bar; Los Alamos National Labs; NASA;
Novo Nordisk; The CDC (The Centers for Disease Control &
Prevention); Pfizer; Vistage: An International Organization of
CEOs; legislators from the states of Georgia, Alabama, North
Carolina, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Colorado; Suncorp
Insurance & Finance (Australia); and The Upper Valley Waldorf
School.
For more information visit us at weberconsultinggroup.net or see
The Weber Consulting Group on Facebook.

Transcription of Podcast
Joe Dager: Welcome everyone. This is Joe Dager, the host of the
Business901 Podcast. With me, today is Craig Weber. He is the
founder of Weber Consulting Group and an international
consultant specializing in team and leadership development. He
has spent the last 18 years helping to grow a roster of world class
clients improve their performance by treating dialogue as a
discipline. His unique work is outlined in his new book,
“Conversational Capacity: The Secret to Building Successful
Teams That Perform When the Pressure Is On.”
I would like to welcome you Craig. I’m impressed that someone
can make a living off creating better conversations. Could you fill
in the gaps and start off by telling us what you do and if I had
simplified it too much.
Craig Weber: No, not at all Joe. First, I’ll thank you for having me
on your podcast. I appreciate being invited and I look forward to
talking to you about this. You did a good job of setting it up. As
you said, I work with a lot of clients around the world big and
small not just businesses but organizations, governments you
name it. Helping them have more productive conversations by
bringing a little more rigor, a little more discipline, and a little
more structure to how they communicate about their toughest
issues. There is a particular framework I help them develop for
doing that. I’ll say at the outset, the stuff I do, it’s not stuff I’ve
made up which is not uncommon in my field of work. My
background academically is in organizational development and
organizational psychology and not the most rigorous fields in the
world.
The core idea is I kind of help people develop and cultivate our
grounded in a phenomenal body of social science research, Chris
Argyris and his collaborative work with Don Schon at MIT. The

founding fathers of what we can call organizational learning. What
I do is make some of those core ideas perhaps a little more user
friendly over the last couple of decades.
Joe: So all these ideas aren’t made up. There is research behind
them.
Craig: Yeah, which isn’t always the case, a lot of the ideas out
there about improving conversations are sometimes sadly, it is
from people who just kind of made things up. There is a lot of
good research behind the work I do. In the beginning of my book,
I actually talk about standing on the shoulders of giants to
paraphrase Sir Isaac Newton. I really am as I present these ideas
standing on the shoulders of very impressive intellectual giants.
Joe: I thought your book looked like it was well researched. As I
read through it, the references showed that you were very well
read. Each chapter had great references in it, and I wanted to
compliment you. It was obvious there was a lot of background in
it. Let’s start out by what is conversational capacity?
Craig: It’s kind of an interesting concept. There are several ways
you can talk about it. The simple definition is conversational
capacity refers to the ability of an individual or a team or an
entire organization and for having open balanced learning focused
through non-defensive discussions about inherently difficult
topics. Let’s say a working relationship or teams with high
conversational capacity can put its most difficult, wicked painful
issue on the table and get good work done around it. That doesn’t
mean there isn’t tension, conflict, disagreement. I mean despite
this, they’re able to hang tight and do good work. Low
conversational capacity means a minor difference of opinion can
screw up a meeting or a discussion or a decision. So, you can
have the right people at the table, you can have a great product
or service, you can have a good strategy or a goal in mind, but if

the conversational capacity of the team, the working relationship
is too low relative to the challenge you’re taking on, it is going to
go sideways on you when it counts. That’s kind of the working
definition of conversational capacity.
Joe: Do you find that people are not trained in having dialogue or
conversation?
Craig: Yes, very much, I think that is part of the problem. I
always like Joan Magretta’s quote at the Harvard Business
School. She said, “Managements business is building
organizations that work.” I love that. It’s elegant, it’s simple, and
you know that building an organization that works at different
challenges depending on what you’re asking your organization to
do, but it’s a great high level definition. What I see happen is
when thinking about building an organization or team that works.
What tends to happen is we think about the technical aspects of
the challenge; financing, strategy, structures, staffing, process
and systems, which are all important. What we tend to
underestimate is how well people can interact and work together
when they’re dealing with difficult problems.
So we don’t focus on the conversations much, partly because we
lack the frameworks. We’ve got a lot of good frameworks and
strategies out there for how to structure an organization, how to
set up your IT. Yes, all the technical stuff we’re good at. The
conversation stuff we kind of lack a little structure, lack a little
rigor. We’re just not trained to pay attention to it or to give it as
much focus as we’re at other aspects of building a good work
relationship.
Joe: Why do you think topics like this are coming to the forefront
now? I mean we’re starting to talk more about people issues, and
we’ve all this technology. Is technology solving the other issues
or they created new issues for us?

Craig: I think probably a little of both. I think in some ways the
technology makes it easier to communicate and connect with
people around the globe. What we’re doing right now is a great
example of that. This is incredible. On the other hand, what it
doesn’t do is address more of the fundamental issues that we
have. We’ve haven’t been paying as much attention. For instance
conversational capacity, maybe a critical aspect of building a
company or a team that works well under pressure but
technology can help us build our conversational capacity.
Something we have to do internally, some hard work we have to
do as human beings and no amount of technology can
compensate if our conversational capacity is too low.
The second part of that question is why is this getting more
attention now? I think because our world is getting much more
complex, much faster paced partly because of technological
development. We’re far more interconnected, the world is a more
dynamic place where change is coming quite rapidly. I think we
realize that the skills that may have served us well in the past
aren’t the same skills that will get us where we’re going in the
future. The complexity and the rapid fire change are something
we’ve to get better at.
Joe: We talk about the T shape person. We talk about the
specialist. Then, on the other hand, when I taught to people
within the organization, they said, this department over here just
tosses it over to us, and we have to deal with it. Is that the type
of thing that we’re looking for in conversational capacity is how to
solve those types of problems?
Craig: I think if we’re going to solve those kinds of problems, we
will require high conversational capacity. The tougher the
problem you’re facing, the more stringent the change you’re
trying to foster, the tougher the strategic direction you’re trying

to head. The higher the conversational capacity we need. When
you’ve got an either a friction point in an organization or you’ve
got what I would refer to us as a baton pass. So when one group
is got to hand that project or a decision off to another group, we
need a lot of good conversational capacity to manage that baton
pass in a productive way or else it just becomes a flip it over the
wall and let them worry about the problem, and that doesn’t tend
to serve complex problems solving well.
Joe: In my world we talk about DevOps. Where it’s the
development side and the operational side getting together. We
all stand in front of this wall to discuss things. That doesn’t solve
the conversation issues; we still have to have the conversation.
Can you explain, what gets in the way?
Craig: That’s a great question and so maybe we can back up a
second. We want to do another definition of conversational
capacity, and this is the one I use in the book, quite a lot is a
concept called the sweet spot. In any meeting or conversation
there is a sweet spot, and that’s that place where the
conversation is as we mentioned are open, they’re balanced,
they’re learning focused. It’s where good work gets done and
what tends to happen in difficult circumstances is that people will
trigger out of the sweet spot towards the more defensive ends of
the behavioral spectrum. Some people start to shut down. They
become more guarded, more cautious, and more careful about
what they’ll say. Other people go the other direction and start to
heat up, they get loud, they get argumentative, and they get
upset. We can define conversational capacity as that ability to
stay grounded in the sweet spot doing good work in situations
where most people and most groups will trigger out of it.
What tends to trigger is out of strong differences of opinion,
misunderstandings, conflict, competing definitions of the best way
to get something done. When you got to say, operations and

development sitting down in a meeting to kind of do a baton
pass, they need higher conversational capacity to manage their
ability to stay in the sweet spot especially when there are strong
differences of opinion or some sort of misunderstanding.
Operations have one idea about how to move forward and
development has a completely different idea. You need to
negotiate those differences in a productive way. What tends to
hold this in a sweet spot is relative balance between candor and
curiosity.
I’m comfortable sharing with you what I think we should do to
move forward. I’m equally curious to hear what you think
especially when I recognize you may have a different point of
view, and that’s what tends to holds us there. Now what often
happens is under pressure I drop one pole or the other and if
drop my candor, I’m guarded, I’m cautious, I’m being overtly
careful. I’m telling you I agree with your idea when I don’t. If I
drop curiosity, I become arrogant, argumentative, combative and
as often say my mind shuts and my mouth opens. That’s a real
problem here. That’s why it’s so hard in an organization, when
we’re dealing with top problem with strong differences of opinions
or we’re trying to manage one of those baton passes in the
organization where we’re talking with different, we’re talking
about a problem from different functional perspectives. You need
high conversational capacity, but our differences often trigger
those two reactions. I drop candor or I drop curiosity, and now
we’re in trouble.
Joe: I’m doing this podcast and thinking, what’s going to be my
next question sometimes rather than listening to you. How do we
get over something like that because that seems like a big part of
what you’re talking about?
Craig: That can be a problem, and a bit of a conundrum. If you
were not doing that, you wouldn’t be doing your job effectively. I

liked Ron Heifetz, a gentleman at the Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard and he wrote a book called “Leadership
without Easy Answers” and he talks about when exercising
leadership, we often spend too much time down on the dance
floor kind of work the problem in the detail. We’re not upon the
balcony thinking strategically. And often in a tough circumstance,
we need both abilities at once. I need the ability to be in the
conversation engaging people but I also need part of my mind to
be up on the balcony kind of saying, we’re focused on what’s our
purpose here, what we’re trying to accomplish? How do we in
Lean terms, maximize the value in the meeting and minimize the
waste let’s stay on focus.
I think when you’re orchestrating a podcast like this one; you’ve
got to be doing both answering questions, engaging the speaker.
At the same time, you need to be upon the balcony thinking
what’s the next question. That’s hard, that’s really hard.
Joe: How do we build it? I mean are there steps; is there a way
that we can get better at this?
Craig: Yes, that’s the good news. The bad news is conversational
capacity is really hard to build because in some times our own
human nature works against it. As I mentioned, we’re in the
sweet spot of having those balance conversations when we fly off
center to one pole or the other, what tends to trigger is the issue
so is it conflicting perspective, a different point of view. Someone
says something in a way that’s kind of catches me wrong and
suddenly I react and when we’re triggered what’s been triggered
internally is that the fight-flight response. The low conversational
capacity is usually the manifestation of the fight-flight response
playing out in the conversation. If I flee the discussion, I’m
shutting down, I’m leaving the conversation early, I’m pretending
to agree when I don’t and when my fight response gets triggered
I can get loud, I can get argumentative, I can be dismissive, I

can call people names, I can be extremely aggressive in the
discussion.
That is not an easy tendency to get rid of in fact you can’t, it’s
hard wired in our human nature. What you need to do is develop
the ability to start recognizing a little more clearly when one of
those two tendencies might be pulling you off your conversational
game and in developing the capacity to manage those reactions
in a more disciplined way to stay in the sweet spot balancing
candor and curiosity when a tremendous amount of emotional
energy maybe trying to pull you off center and that takes a lot of
work.
Joe: Should we try to be doing this in all our dialogue or
sometimes not. Should we always try to be in the sweet spot?
Craig: That’s a great question actually. No, I think there are a lot
of situations where it’s not that critical for instance casual
conversation. We don’t need to spend a lot of time focusing on a
more structured disciplined approach to a casual discussion and if
there is a fire in the building we don’t need to worry about it
either. Someone barking orders, taking control and you know,
even screaming out loud to get people moving out of the building,
so that, you get out safely. That’s appropriate. I think where we
need to focus on the conversational capacity, a lot of those issues
where it’s really difficult to put on the table because it’s strongly
different points of view. There is conflicting perspective. There
are some serious mistakes. It’s important. When it’s difficult and
important, that is where we would need to slow down and maybe
take a more structured approach to how we craft our dialogue.
Joe: My listeners are mostly Lean and Agile people. We’re
improving businesses. Improving conversation seems not a
priority to spend our time with. Should we?

Craig: The tougher the problem you’re facing. The more difficult
the change, you’re asking people to make. I think the higher the
conversational capacity you need to have productive influence
and to deal with the defensive reaction you’ll provoke in people. I
like the notion that there is what they call in law enforcement or
military operations, operational momentum. An organization
develops a certain culture or inertia, a certain way of doing
things. For instance, we’re going to try to become more Agile, we
are going to focus on becoming more Lean. We’re going to have
some hard decisions to make and some hard changes to address.
Conversational capacity is a key part of that. You can have the
best idea in the world on how to build a more Agile or Lean
enterprise, but if you can’t orchestrate productive conversations
that actually move the needle on the decisions and changes, it’s a
good idea they’ll go anywhere. I think it’s a fundamental
leadership tool that ability to both recognize when the
conversational capacity is in where it needs to be and the ability
to build it. I always liked Bob Keegan, an adult developmental
psychologist at Harvard. He said, “Any organization is a
community of discourse, leadership is about shaping the nature of
the discourse.” If we’re going to exercise the kind of leadership
that helps us build more resilient, more agile, more effective
organizations that perform when things are difficult. We can’t
ignore conversational capacity.
Joe: Can these ideas be utilized by the entire organization? I
mean is this something that the entire organization has to buy in
to or how do we start this with an organization?
Craig: That’s another good question. I see that happen in a
variety of ways. Sometimes one individual starts, learning the
skills, they attend a workshop or something and learn these
skills, get excited about it and then they go back in the business
begin using these skills to try to foster more effective meetings.

Other people pick up on what they’re doing and it starts that way.
A lot of my work I start with executive teams and they’ll start
learning the skills to work at the executive level and then when
they’ve developed a certain confidence, they start filtering it
down into the organization. So it really depends.
What I like about these skills is that they aren’t dependent on
everyone knowing them for them to work well. One person with
the high conversational capacity can sort of affect a meeting in a
very productive way. Now everyone in the meeting is aware of
the same skills. It’s even more powerful. But it’s not necessarily
required.
Joe: Do you need a facilitator sometimes to make this all happen?
Craig: Yeah, sometimes that can be a helpful way to go. In fact,
in a lot of the teams I worked what they end up doing is appoint
someone and it often rotates a member of the team to either be
the kind of a conversational capacity monitor or facilitator and the
monitor would pay attention to how well we’re doing this thing in
the sweet spot balancing candor and curiosity. They’re actually
tracking the use of the skills and then from time to time, they
provide the group feedbacks. Listen what we’re doing really good
on the candor side of the scale, a lot of rigorous discussion but
we’re a little short on the curiosity side after the break, I suggest,
we focus on X, Y or Z.
A facilitator would actually intervene to help the group stay in the
sweet spot. Some groups find that a little too intrusive other
groups really like it. But yes, having someone who is assigned to
sort of help the group pay attention to how well they’re using the
skills is important. And that’s what nice about the framework is
there are tangible skills for how we can actually shape the
conversation in a more productive direction.
Joe: When we think people talking in diversity and we always

think of our sales guys, OK, our sales people. Is this a skill that
they should develop?
Craig: Yes, absolutely. I think whether you’re running an
engineering group or you’re heading operations, whether you’re a
line supervisor down there trying to do improve performance day
by day. That ability to have hard hitting pragmatic balance
discussions about difficult issues is key and so it’s I would be hard
pressed to find a role where these skills wouldn’t be useful. So it’s
certainly not just for sales. I mean the higher you’re going in an
organization, typically the tougher the issues are grappling with,
the harder the choices you have to make and therefore the higher
the conversational capacity you need to exercise your role
effectively.
Joe: What would you recommend for someone to improve their
skills? How would you get them to just, you know, the first couple
of steps?
Craig: First, I’ll really start thinking about what are the situations
and what are the issues and what are the maybe the behaviors
even the kind of people that tends to push me out of the sweet
spot. So becoming more conscious of your tendencies, what are
the circumstances where I tend to drop my candor and become
more guarded and cautious in a meeting? Then maybe, when
someone raises their voice or when someone brings up a strong
opinion and asserts it is an absolute truth. I tend to shy away
from the conflict by pretending to agree when I don’t. It may be
just the opposite when someone does one of those things, my
hair rises on the back of my neck and I start to get
argumentative because I’ve take a front of being, told to how to
think. So becoming aware of your tendencies is really important
and then developing the skills that help balance those tendencies.
What I mean by that is we talked about two tendencies in

conversational capacity. I dropped candor and what I would call
minimizing. I’m minimizing tension, I’m minimizing conflict, I’m
minimizing the level of negative emotion in the discussion often
at the expense of what I’m trying to accomplish. So I’m being
careful when I should be speaking up. At the other end of the
spectrum we lose curiosity, we trigger to win, to win the
conversation to be right, to get my way. I want to sell my
perspective to the team. So, I’m just raw unadulterated advocacy
and I’m doing a lot of listening and I’m not doing a lot of
enquiring in other views. When I’m being triggered into one of
those two states, there are some counterbalancing skills that can
help us manage the reaction. So for instance, I tend to be a
strong minimizer. I don’t like conflict, I like to be Mr. Agreeable
and what helps me in a meeting avoid being overly cautious and
guarded are two skills. I develop the ability to put my clear point
on the table, my position, my idea, my view, my concern or my
suggestion and then I develop the capacity to explain the thinking
behind it.
What I’m basically saying in a meeting when my tendency would
be to be a little guarded. For example, let me tell you what I
think we should do to solve this problem and give me a couple of
minutes here to describe why I think it’s a proven course of
action. And those are the two candor skills. Putting forward a
clear position and explaining the thinking behind it. I can practice
this. In fact, every meeting provides an opportunity to get better
at those two skills.
If on the other hand my tendency is to win, to get argumentative
when someone says something I don’t like. The two skills that
help me manage that tendency would be to test my own
perspective to actually encourage people to challenge my thinking
because they may be seeing things I’m not. They may have a
data I don’t have access to. I need to put forward my view to
explain and to test it. I’ve laid out my thinking in terms of what

we should do and why. You may have a different take on this.
You’re from a different side of the table than I am. What’s your
reaction to what I’ve just put on the table? What I’m really doing
is treating my view or my idea or my suggestion more like a
hypothesis and less like a truth. It makes perfect sense in my
own head right now but Joe may have some ideas that might
change how I’m looking at this if I listen. I’m going to invite him
into the conversation specifically asking him to share his reaction
to how I’m looking at this. The other skill is inquiry when you say,
I got to be honest I don’t think you’re suggesting will fly rather
than get defensive and say, “Oh, OK, forget about it.” What I
would do is inquire into it to try to understand more of the
thinking behind your point of view, behind your position. And so
to answer your question what can I do to kind of get better at
this. Well, learn to recognize when you’re flying off center one
way or the other and learn to instead of responding in your
habitual way use these four skills to stay grounded in the sweet
spot.
Joe: Maybe I just have a few cheat notes on each side of my
notepad. So I know when I am moving one way or the other from
the sweet spot?
Craig: You know, that’s not a bad strategy, in fact in a lot of the
organizations in which I work, they actually have a frame posters
up in meeting rooms where they have a sweet spot up on the wall
with two arrows, one going upwards, the minimize side of the
spectrum, the other going out towards the win side, right. So it’s
kind of a visual reminder of what we got to be watching out for
and they don’t have a separate sweet spot below it with the four
skills. So on the one side is position and thinking, the candor
skills pushing away from the minimize side of the spectrum back
towards the sweet spot and on the other side of the sweet spot,
they’ve got testing and enquiry to curiosity skills pushing from
the win side of the spectrum back towards the sweet spot.

So it’s a great reminder of what’s going on in the meeting, let’s
pay attention to how well, we’re doing and if we’re noticing we’re
not where we need to be, here are the things we need to be
conscious of, here are the things we can do, this more disciplined
structured approach to conversation, to make sure we’re
grounded in the sweet spot.
Joe: So really to get something out of the conversation, we want
to be moving towards sweet spot but moving back and forth and
always working towards it.
Craig: Yeah, if we start to slide in one way out of the sweet spot,
we can actually use the two skills to get back. If, we notice the
meeting starting to overheat for instance, lot of arguing, couple
of people really getting their tempers up. There is a lot of
positional back and forth, a lot of positioning. One person might
jump in and say, “Look, it seems as if there are a lot of strongly
different points of view here. I think it could be helpful for the
team if we slow down and try to understand the difference.” You
know, why do we see it so differently? You might say John you
tend to hate this idea take a couple of minutes and describe what
the team why you think it’s a problem. Jane, you love this idea.
Once he is done, I would love to hear your thoughts about why
this works. One person is trying to slow the conversation then
and deepen and pull people back to the sweet spot.
Joe: Now, when I read the back and went through it, I thought
the book would be a great instrument for a discussion group.
Could you see it being used that way? Do you have any
recommendations and how you would begin?
Craig: Yeah, in fact that’s kind of what I had in mind when I
wrote this. You know, if people can’t attend a workshop I
facilitate how can we help them develop these skills independent

of an outsider resource. I thought well, write the book in a way
where as a team can sit down, read it chapter by chapter and
discuss it. Where does it affect us, where do we find ourselves
drifting out of the sweet spot under pressure? What are practices
we can employ to get better at this overtime? In fact, I wrote a
chapter on developing disciplines some things a team and an
individual can do to get better with this overtime. How to apply it
to decision making, how to apply it to meetings and to problem
solving? How to manage conflict in a more effective way?
Joe: Was this book directed for any person? I mean really within
an organization or out of an organization but for really just about
for any group wanting to improve the conversational skills?
Craig: I think that’s exactly right. For anybody who wants to
make a difference when making a difference is difficult. I think
these skills should be helpful. I worked with people, I worked with
a number of CEOs around the world but I’ve also worked with
someone driving a forklift on the factory floor, and you know
when they see an idea for improvement out there, they feel like
no one is going to listen to me. I’m just a lonely guy on the totem
pole here. I want that person to be able to raise their hand and to
bring up and idea for how to improve a process or how to make
the organization more Lean and efficient.
Despite the fact that they are just driving a forklift. That doesn’t
matter. I like the idea that a good organization is meritocracy and
that good ideas are utilized no matter where they come from.
Joe: Craig, one problem I had with reading your book. I wanted
to have a conversation with someone about it. OK and it seemed
like the book was written as a two-way street. I mean it talked to
someone about it. What’s probably somewhat of a compliment,
but it seemed like I needed a partner.

Craig: I like the fact that it hit you that way. I think ideally again,
you know, sitting down with other people and having some
conversations about conversational capacities are better way to
learn these ideas and to explore them, and there are a couple of
reasons for that. One often times, someone else will pick up on
an aspect of the book you’re missing. I had that experience many
times. A friend and I read the same book, and he picks up on
something completely different than I did and I like that’s right,
wow even see that, when I read it but also when we’re talking
about this issues around conversational capacity colleagues,
friends, loved ones will often help us see our tendencies and how
they affect our behavior even more clearly than we can see them.
Other people are around the receiving end of our behavior. We
are always on the delivering end. As a result, they are often more
clear on how we react in meetings, how our body language comes
across. If we read the book with other people, we often get a lot
more crystal clear feedback and information about some of the
concepts. Precisely, because we are reading it and discussing it
with other people.
Joe: Where can someone get more information about the book?
Craig: You can go to my website, the weberconsultingroup.net
has a little information about the book and then of course there is
a bit of information on barnes and noble.com, amazon.com.
Joe: What’s the best way for someone to contact you?
Craig: Again through the website. Send me an email and if you
like to chat, find the time to get on the phone and talk.
Joe: Craig, I would like to thank you very much for the
conversation, and this podcast will be available on the
business901 website and the business901 iTunes store.

Joseph T. Dager
Business901
Phone: 260-918-0438
Skype: Biz901
Fax: 260-818-2022
Email: jtdager@business901.com
Website: http://www.business901.com
Twitter: @business901
Joe Dager is president of Business901, a firm specializing in
bringing the continuous improvement process to the sales and
marketing arena. He takes his process thinking of over thirty
years in marketing within a wide variety of industries and applies
it through Lean Marketing and Lean Service Design.
Visit the Lean Marketing Lab: Being part of this community will
allow you to interact with like-minded individuals and
organizations, purchase related tools, use some free ones and
receive feedback from your peers.

The Conversational Sweetspot

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (19)

Semelhante a The Conversational Sweetspot

Semelhante a The Conversational Sweetspot (20)

Mais de Business901

Mais de Business901 (20)

Último

Último (20)

The Conversational Sweetspot