Inside the $7.5B Panera Exit: Blaine Hurst's Unfiltered Playbook for $100M → $1B Founders

Focused on the mission, flexible on execution

Andrey: I'm so excited today because my CEO for today will be Blaine Hurst. Blaine is a former CEO and president of Panera Bread and Papa John's Pizza. At one point he had over 16,000 people reporting to him , and the company was sold for over $7 billion. I cannot wait to talk to him. Blaine, how are you?

Blaine: I'm doing well, I'm doing well. Can't wait to have a little talk about what your business is doing and what it means to be an entrepreneur. You're one of my favorite entrepreneurs I've ever worked with — I can't wait.

Andrey: Yeah, me too — let's go.

Blaine, it is absolutely an honor and a privilege to be here in this room and have this conversation. We've had a lot of conversations over the last three years, and today — where we are — we're at $100 million in revenue and we have 45 employees. We struggled recently because of interest rates, but now I think the time is right to grow and go forward and achieve the dream. The dream is to consolidate the market in a fix-and-flip business and grow the company 10x — from $100 million to a billion dollars. You've done it many times. You were CEO at Panera Bread when Panera was sold for $7.5 billion, so for you this should be a piece of cake.

Blaine: I was president then, but yes.

Andrey: Piece of cake. My company is a piece of cake for you to grow from $100 million to a billion — the only constraint is we're not a public company, we have limited resources, we don't have a lot of investors yet, and now we need to position the company to raise additional capital so we can execute the strategy.

Blaine: First of all, let me say it's such an honor to be here. I've worked with multiple young entrepreneurs — entrepreneurs of different ages — and you are my favorite. I just have so much fun working with you, and I think in large part it's because I learned so much listening to you and the work you've done to get here and how you've gone about it.

And when you talk about your business goals — if anybody tells you "you need to do this, this, and this," first of all, if they tell you that, they're trying to sell you something. I would never tell you that, because I believe you have to make the right decisions day to day and set up a system that allows you to make them. Because decisions — as you grow, as you hire people, as you do acquisitions — you will be making them fast and you will not have all the data.

So what enables you to grow is really starting with: what do you believe will get you to that 10x goal? What are the most important things to accomplish? Is it buying another payroll system? Probably not. Is it finding capital to fuel the strategy? Probably. What are those discrete elements you've got to get right?

Because here's what I'll tell you: there are a thousand of them. How do you select the five to seven most important? We'll talk about that in a minute. And by the way — when you select five to seven, do you think you'll have the right ones?

Andrey: Maybe not. We won't really know until we test.

Blaine: Exactly. You will not know. I think I shared with you my story about Boston — I lived there for a long time. The bay of Boston. I used to tell people: "How do you know what to do?" And I'd say, "I don't really know. I pick a point on the horizon, I get in my sailboat, and I sail across to the other side." Do you go in a straight line in a sailboat? No. That's not how sailboats work. You have to tack as the wind blows, as you hit waves — you tack your boat back and forth to get to that point on the horizon.

The one thing I know: don't lose sight of that point on the horizon, because the second you do, you are off course. Don't lose sight of the celestial — the stars — if you're crossing the ocean, because you'll never get to the end point.

So I think the most important thing is to say: what's the end point? Then: what are the things we've got to get right? And every day, ask yourself: am I following those right tactics?

I describe it as: focused on the mission, flexible in the execution. Don't lose sight of that mission. No matter what hits you — and you and I have talked personally and professionally, I've had a lot of stuff happen to me over the years — I don't lose sight of my personal mission and I will not lose sight of it. I haven't achieved it fully yet. Getting close. But nothing is going to stop me.

That's how much you have to focus on and care about your business mission.

Andrey: We have a very clear vision of where we want to go. And like any business, there are a lot of obstacles we need to go around — we change tactics, stay nimble, stay flexible. That's what we've been doing the last two years: leaning out, changing strategy, adapting to new environments. Whether that's new data, a new market signal, a new point of view — we know where we want to go, and there's always this ongoing conversation.

Blaine: Don't bring all of that back to your team, by the way. If you bring every new data point back to your team, they'll just start going back and forth — unfocused. What you want to do is know where you're going, communicate the goals clearly on an annual or semi-annual basis, make sure everybody is focused on achieving those. But when you get new data — when something isn't working — ask yourself: with this new knowledge, how do I adjust?

I find too many people say, "We know the answer." Well, no you don't. Nobody's done what you've done before, or you wouldn't be an entrepreneur. You wouldn't have any marketplace value if everyone had already done what you're doing.

So to me, that's the foundation: what are the three to five things that differentiate you with a consumer? Make sure the tactics along the way can be implemented, tested, and vetted. Make sure the economics are lined up. Those are the big things you ask at the end point: how do I get to a billion dollars of revenue? What along the journey do I need to get right? And then you start planning for it.

I call it — this is something I learned a long time ago; I'm an old IT guy — in the IT world there's this idea of architecting how all the pieces come together, how it all fits. I used to say: that's great, you've got to architect. But I say: architect a little, work like hell, and then correct — because your architecture is totally wrong. Nobody else figured it out before, so why should I be omniscient?

Stayed rifle-shot focused on the goal. Be very flexible with everything else.

PPT: people, process, technology

Andrey: Let's assume you are the CEO of my company — a company that doesn't have as many resources as you're used to, and we need to be very resourceful. What are the right priorities? We have people, strategy, technology — where should I, as a CEO, spend my attention and what should my top priorities be right now?

Blaine: It's got to be the things that make the biggest difference along the journey toward the goal. Let me give you an example. I use this framework: a three-legged stool for infrastructure. Infrastructure is really three components — people, process, and technology. I've always called it the three-legged stool of infrastructure: PPT.

And I think you are always looking for the bare minimum you need. You're an entrepreneur; you don't have as much cash. You've got a good, solid business, but you don't want to overinvest in one leg — because that means you underinvest somewhere else. There's only so much.

Even as a big company, by the way, I would spend a week in budget meetings every day deciding: am I going to invest $30 million in additional tech this year, or am I going to hire more people, or am I going to build better training initiatives, or build more online capabilities and data-mining capabilities? Those are the same questions. Just at different scale. The principles are identical.

You're always trying to make that call. All of the options are valid — but they're not all equally valid in the context of the mission.

So I would look at it this way: if I want to double my growth, what do I first have to believe? What are the critical success factors — your key metrics — and what are the critical assumptions? What do I have to have in place to be a billion-dollar company? What does that actually look like?

Do I need stronger, better systems? Do I need higher security? Do I need better user interface? Do I need more resources in the field for doing conversions? I don't even know all the questions, much less all the answers. But identifying the top 20–25 items — the things I've got to believe are in place when I'm operating at a billion dollars — and then asking: how do I get there for each one?

You say: that's a lot of work. Yes. And it's going to be a lot more work as you go along the journey. So where do I need to start that investment? Where should it end? I build a timeline roadmap — what do those components need to look like and what's their state of completion? Because none of them are ever done.

It doesn't matter how much you spend on technology this year; you're going to want to spend more next year. Same with people. Same with advertising. So: what are the performance criteria of those key elements at the time you hit a billion dollars? What do they look like then? And then: how long will it take me to get there, what are the steps, how do I step into it without overinvesting right now?

I have a rule of thumb: if you tell me you're going to hire a bunch of people, they're going to continue to cost you. Raises, bonuses — costs don't go down. Are you going to lay them all off next year even though the business is fine? No. So what is that ongoing maintenance investment you've got to keep making?

Making those trade-offs is a tough call. But it starts with understanding what you have to have in place at that billion-dollar mark. You won't get it right — that's why I say: architect a little, work like hell, and then constantly evaluate. Am I even going in the right direction? It's that selection process.

Strategy is about saying no

Blaine: Most people talk about strategy and say, "Let's write all these documents." But I forget who said it — strategy is about saying no. It's not about saying yes. There's always more ideas, better ideas, places to spend your money. But strategy is about saying: I don't need to spend on that right now — I need to spend on that. Practice saying no.

Start with the end in mind — yes, Stephen Covey, one of his seven habits — that's a good one. Start thinking: it will probably take three to four years to grow 10x, and that's manageable growth. Let's say you'll go from 300 homes to 2,000 or 3,000 homes. What infrastructure do you need to have in place?

Andrey: You mentioned building the org chart. That's a dilemma for me — I'm still a small company. How can I afford to bring in experts? For example, we want to invest heavily in technology, and we have a couple of people right now, but to go to the next level we probably need a Chief Technology Officer who can put it all together. At what point should I start bringing those people in? Do I need enough revenue to support them, or should I hire in advance?

Blaine: That's a great question, and I obviously won't have the precise answer without looking more at what you have in place. But I think first of all: understand what that future organization chart needs to look like.

The first thing I always do with a new company or startup: what does that future org chart look like? I don't know what people are doing. They may not have those titles right now — they may be filling multiple roles and doing it well enough for what you need today. But start saying: when I hit that billion-dollar mark, what does the org look like? Just like you ask: what does the process look like? What does the technology platform look like? Everything I do is in the context of where I want to go.

So you build a business model for year five or year eight — whatever year it is — and say: this is what it will look like then. Then you go back to today and ask: what do I need to double down on? I'm going to spend more money because I'm investing in new markets.

Designing the org chart you'll need at $1B

Blaine: When you invest in new markets, that means marketing spend. Maybe not heavy brand development, but you still have to get the message out. How do I even know where to spend? Digital? Outdoor — works, but it's not cheap. Radio? Social events? Some of the ideas you were talking about are phenomenal because they're less expensive and still have a big impact.

So: what will it look like at 3,000 locations? Build a budget around it. I know you don't know how to do that exactly — and that's okay. But it helps you begin to think about the steps along the journey.

You will never get those right completely — you're not going to find the right people immediately, and so on. But in many areas, especially technology, you'll have to begin to build what I would call a bench. You're going to grow people into higher levels of leadership — invest in their training, whatever else they need to get there. But as a leader you always have to assess: do I believe this person can grow into the role?

In baseball you have a farm league: Single A, Double A, Triple A before the majors. They watch you develop through all those stages. In a business you can do something similar. Consulting people in is a great way to get to know them — see if they're both a cultural fit and have the skills necessary to take you forward.

I cannot tell you how many people I've hired who were junior and the next thing I knew they were not junior at all — they were senior and extraordinarily competent because they study, they spend time, they learn. And I've hired a bunch of very senior experienced team members who were pretty poor at the job because they didn't know how to get into the details. As a startup, you've got to roll up your sleeves and get into the nitty-gritty — because you're still inventing things as a company.

So: it's less about tenure and more about capacity to grow. There will be points where you need a specific skill set — I suggest you either consult that in or bring someone fractional. I don't like hiring senior people with lots of experience if I don't feel like they're going to be with me for a meaningful stretch, because they're so expensive to hire and so expensive to fire.

So: what does that future org look like? Do I need to fill those roles right now? Can I temp that in? Can I consult it in — use somebody from the outside just to give me advice on what to look for?

For technology specifically, you might consider hiring someone who comes in and says: "I think you've made some real amazing choices here — it looks solid for three to 5,000 locations a year, I don't see any limitation on that right now. Check back in two years when you're looking out five years and need to add features." You make those decisions based on where you are in that journey.

Andrey: Right now — like you said — senior people are very expensive for a smaller business. So we decided to bring in really high-level specialists as fractional positions.

Blaine: I completely support that. It's a game-changer. And you hired a senior chief marketing officer with extensive experience — that sounds like it was a tremendous help to the company.

Andrey: It was. And now we're planning to go through an acquisition process, because when we entered our second market it took us three to four years just to figure things out. Very time-consuming. We can still grow organically about 20 to 40%, and right now the real estate cycle is right — so now's the time.

Blaine: Obviously right now is the time. You've got to go for it. And the thing I want to emphasize: you've got to generate the pathway for capital to be deployed in a way that generates good returns — whether you're borrowing money, bringing in future investors, or putting in more of your own. You've got to find a way to get there.

You can't work on it for five years and then just magically light it up. And by the way — you'll be wrong anyway, so don't be afraid to make mistakes. Make sure you've limited your capital exposure and risk. But if you try a $100,000 ad campaign and it doesn't work — okay, good. Next.

Zero-based budgeting & a contingency budget for mistakes

Andrey: Can you share some of the mistakes you've made in your career? Because I tell my employees: "Hey, we want to try this new initiative. We estimate how much we could lose." It's my money, so it's a little easier for me to stomach. But if I raise outside capital, investors might not be so delighted when things go wrong.

Blaine: Yeah — and that's part of it. When you're working with investors, one of the keys is to be very open and transparent about your investment level. The idea of stepping into the investment rather than just writing a big check is essential until you have experience. When you have experience, it's a different story.

Let me give you an example. I was asked a long time ago — we spent a significant amount of money at one of the companies I worked with on technology. A serious investment. I was standing on stage and someone asked: "Did you waste any money out of that big fund?" And I said, yeah, this didn't work, that didn't work... probably about $20 million. And of course I had them edit that out because we were a public company at the time, and I just didn't want that out there. But — yeah, we probably did waste around that. We made a bunch of mistakes.

I mean, we were the very first company to debug the Transformer protocol — the protocol that allows a card swiper to integrate with an iPad. By the time we worked it out, we handed it back to Apple and a couple of other financial companies and they were using it. If I did it again I'd say: just fix this thing so our team doesn't have to do it, because the rest of the world catches up.

But did I waste money? Of course. And then when we went back private, an analyst attributed billions of dollars in company value to the work we had done. So we spent this much, we wasted that much, and we created that much shareholder value. Sign me up.

Andrey: Right — like if the $20 million off led to all that value created...

Blaine: It was probably more like 10–15%. I don't know exactly. But I do think: if you're doing something for the first time, assume there's going to be a degree of waste. I always build in — just like a contractor, you know that story — I always build in 20–25%, because you don't know what you don't know.

Whether it's a business process, a marketing campaign, or something you've never done before — you want to try it, minimize the risk, do enough to test it. We tested new products in stores all the time. We rolled products out into some stores and they just didn't work. But I knew that if I didn't keep testing, I would never find a home-run product. And if I always thought I had to have it perfect before testing it, I would never add any new products.

What you've got to build in is a contingency budget — a percentage of any new initiative that you assume will go wrong. I'm going to hire 20 new people this year. Okay: build in a contingency that some percentage of those people won't work out and you'll have to release them. That's going to cost you money. Did you waste any? Yes. But here's my point: after all that, how come we still had a huge impact on the marketplace? Because whenever we made a mistake, we deep-dived on what caused it. What were the assumptions we made that turned out to be incorrect? How do we not make that mistake again?

We do a debrief on every project, big and small. Break it down and find out what went wrong. "We didn't do a deep review with consumers on this one." "We thought this was a market trend — it wasn't." "The cost of this ingredient forced us to jack up the menu price, and consumers were responding negatively to the price point." Focus groups tell you that kind of thing.

So: always be trying. Don't just say "we screwed it up, next." Ask yourself why. I used to say: it's okay to make mistakes — small mistakes, not big ones — as long as you don't repeat them. And even then, you're always going to repeat some of them because you're not that smart. The point is: eliminate the same mistakes.

But also: don't throw away what you did right. It's not just what did you do wrong — what did you do well? "My focus group sessions worked really well this time because we did X." "When I launched this ad campaign, the story wasn't coherent between outdoor and digital, and the consumer didn't get it." Wrong. But outdoor really worked — 40% of the people came in because they saw it there. So: what does the data tell me I did right?

Andrey: So from any failure or mistake: figure out what worked, and what you can apply in a future experiment. I'm a big proponent of trying new things, failing, and learning. And my point is: do it on smaller things first so you learn your way into it.

Let's talk about focus. We have so many ideas — we even have an idea box for employees. What can we do to improve culture, or improve revenue? And we have a few initiatives — but thinking about focus: we have opportunities to improve our internal processes and potentially save millions, or we could add listing services, or construction services. But that's not core. So how do I...

Blaine: It goes back to what we were saying: it's not time management, it's priorities.

Andrey: As CEO and president, you had at one point over 52,000 people across all the stores — how did you prioritize when you had so many ideas coming in from all directions?

Blaine: Yes — of course. The various things that needed to get done — what I'd call minor improvements to the system — those things were managed and prioritized. If they required additional capital, or even just significant focus...

Blaine: Yeah, I love zero-based budgeting. It's just hard to implement in a big company. Do you know what it is?

Andrey: Yeah.

Blaine: I love zero-based budgeting — each year you justify the spend, right? You do it every year. The challenge for a big company is that it's nearly impossible to execute at scale. So we would eventually fall back to a more conventional budgeting strategy, but we'd question every position: "Do you really need that? Why? Instead of increasing staff like you've asked, let's cut five positions — now tell me how your business looks different."

Andrey: That's probably devastating for the culture when people hear it —

Blaine: Well, generally our teams were big enough and deep enough that for most of those people we had other positions open and many of the times they could fit into those. So we didn't terminate that many people. We would work to find a fit. I almost say square pegs and round holes — but I've got oval people I need to stick in a round hole. I can't put a square peg in a round hole, but I can put an oval person in there if they're flexible. If you're a great employee, I'm willing to invest in you to help you fit in that round hole. It wasn't as devastating as you might think — it wasn't a hardcore "perform or out" culture. It was literally about alignment around what matters most.

So we had KPIs — gold, silver, and red — and we prioritized just like most companies do, with metrics around each one. We actually set up a standing schedule: some things were reviewed monthly, some quarterly. Not only the operating reviews — we also had separate reviews on all the key initiatives that go beyond the operating model. Sales are one thing — that's a different kind of meeting than reporting on what's happening on the projects.

We'd say: "We're going to spend $3 million on this project, $5 million on that one. What's the progress?" Those meetings covered investments back into the system — new features, hardening security, building new capabilities. Then there's a separate meeting: "Manager-level turnover in this market just went from 15–20% to 40%. What is going on?"

We used those meetings as deep dives on whatever the topic was. And specifically, the gold KPIs — the top five to ten big hairy audacious goals, if you will — were reviewed at least monthly with the CEO in the room. The full leadership team was there. Why? Because we wanted alignment around what was most important.

I would say: "Here's how much money we've got to spend. Maybe we'll do better, maybe we'll have more, maybe we'll have to cut back — where do I take it from?" And I just let the team discuss it.

What I found is: if everybody has agreed on the big priorities and internalized them, guess what — they were willing to make the trade-offs. I didn't have to force it, most of the time. Because the better informed my senior team was, the easier the budgets and annual plans were — and they were willing to sign up for things they wouldn't have signed up for if I'd simply told them to.

"Architect a little, work like hell, then correct"

Andrey: Let's talk a little bit about how you allocate your time — percentage-wise — running such a big organization. And how the organization should think about how each individual spends their time.

Blaine: I am a huge believer that we often try to make people fit into roles that got defined in some management book. I don't believe humans are like that.

I have a son who has special needs — David. He is not good at some things but really good at others. If you put David in certain parts of a grocery store job, he'd be horrible at it. Put him in other places and he's extraordinary — the best employee in the department. I think that's true for all of us.

So: if I have a CFO and I'm looking for a marketing person, I don't normally want to put the CFO into marketing. She may have a great personality, but that's not her gift. And conversely — do I really want to take a great CMO, a creative out-of-the-box thinker, and put them in charge of my accounting function? What would my books look like? Very cool-looking, exactly.

My point is: we each have different gifts. Just because I have a title doesn't mean I have every gift — I don't, and very few people do. So I want to maximize your ability to contribute to the company, and I want to maximize my own ability as CEO. That meant I had to say: I'm not very good at that — I need to hire somebody who is.

I love looking at all the numbers, but I get bored with the drudgery of spreadsheet after spreadsheet. Just tell me where we're off. If I can creatively solve a problem — I'm really good at that. So me personally: I focus on the things I can add value on. And I have people talking to me all the time, saying "you need to pay attention over here" — because sometimes I just don't see it. I get focused on something and I'm blind to what's around it.

As a company it's almost the same. Here are the five things we've got to do. Those are the things I've got to be good at — I've got to deliver those five things. It's not optional.

So if you said to me: "Blaine, to achieve that, we're going to have to cut 20% of the staff" — I would certainly ask why, because I don't want to do that. But if that's the right answer, of course I'm going to do it, because we've got to succeed as a team. And if some people can't come along the journey with us, I'm going to treat them with dignity and respect and love them — but it doesn't mean they need to be on the team.

So: whatever the business needs — those five things the CEO can't compromise on. Now, you may hire people to do some of those things. If your team is really good at running day-to-day operations and continuing to grow organically, turn them loose. Figure out what you need to do to keep them, hold them accountable, and add the value where you can.

But when I look at something like an acquisition? Dude, you're the entrepreneur in the room. Be the entrepreneur. You're figuring out a new business model — an acquisition. That's a place where you can add value. It's one of your top five — something you personally need to be in charge of. And once you've figured it out and it becomes routine, you can hand it to the next person.

So I don't think the CEO is sitting in a room figuring out all of God's answers. A leader is a person who leverages their personal gifts in the most effective way to get to the mission.

Andrey: Let's say we look at your week and put your time spent into different buckets — 30% strategy, maybe 30% professional development, 30% recruiting — how would you think about it?

Blaine: It's hard to answer specifically because it varies. Let me give you an example: I once needed to hire a CMO. I had a strong candidate in LA. I took a plane from Boston to LA, met with her for breakfast, then caught her for lunch, spent quite a bit of time together, bought a ticket back, and flew home. That was basically my Saturday — spent mostly in an airplane. My point: whatever is most important, I'm on the plane.

I think it just depends. I had a standard routine that got scheduled every week — otherwise I wouldn't do it. The performance accountability check-ins and the key initiative reviews were always on the calendar. Some of those meetings were grouped by area, and the gold-level ones — the big ones — we spent two to four hours on, typically every two weeks.

I also scheduled my field visits — both franchise and company-owned — so I knew which weeks I'd be in the field. Sometimes surprise drop-ins, sometimes well-planned. But I spent time in the field talking to employees and customers. High priority. Why? Because I can't trust everything people tell me in the conference room — I need to hear it from a consumer. I learned so much from customers.

Those things were scheduled and sacrosanct. And then my other time was: what's the highest priority to advance the gold KPIs? Can I add value here right now? Is this off the rails? Do we have a problem?

We had a problem in a market once — I won't go into the details. I took a team, we went to that market, we sat down with the market leadership on a Saturday, mapped out a plan and a strategy, came back, and added it to our standing review. That market became one of our top performers. I'd attribute that to the fact that we just jumped on it.

Let me give you one small story I can actually tell. I was working for Papa John's in the early years. We were the first restaurant company to roll out online ordering — period — using dial-up modems because broadband wasn't available at most locations. We had a problem with the printers. We'd gone through a bunch of them and thought we'd finally found a solution. We actually had to cut a hole in the stainless steel table to feed the paper from below — going up through the bottom feeder.

Got a phone call from a franchise. "This printer's not working." Okay. I called a buddy who had a twin-engine Bonanza, we jumped in and flew to Logansport, Indiana, picked up the printer, flew back to Louisville. Along the way the electronics went out — we were flying blind, not even squawking for radar — and I was scared to death. Near-death experience. But we got back.

I called the team in — this was a Friday. "Nobody's leaving here until we figure out what's going on." It took seven to eight days of basically the entire technology team working through it. We figured it out. You say: "Blaine, why would you do that?" Because it was essential to achieving the mission. That was a roadblock we had to solve.

As the CEO, as a senior leader, as somebody implementing a strategy: it's not always the big ideas. It's figuring out what's in the way and eliminating it — obliterating it. Don't let it stay in your way.

Don't be afraid to take on obstacles you don't know the answer to. Take it on with such gusto and fire that nobody on the team is going to walk away until it's solved. We too easily bump into a wall and say "oh well." Knock that damn wall down. Don't be afraid to kick it.

Building "Blaine 2.0" — feedback as a leadership skill

Andrey: Okay, let's talk a little bit about mentorship and coaching. We had an interview with Jeff Tennyson and he said he's been using a coach for the last several years. Did you have a coach?

Blaine: I did not.

Andrey: How come? Who kept you accountable — besides the board?

Blaine: I sort of kept myself accountable. I'm actually a big believer in coaches now that I look back on my career — I wish I had had a coach. But who I am is: I'm constantly learning. I get up in the morning asking what did I screw up yesterday, what am I going to change today to make it better.

I actually believe that if you get into this place of self-correction — what happened yesterday that I wish I'd handled differently? If I got angry — and I have a heck of a temper — who did I offend, and how do I fix that? People say: "Well, we all kind of do that." I said: "No — I actually take the action."

I was reading some quote in a book: don't let the grass grow — move fast and take action. Screw something up, fix it. The board's going to be pissed at you? I don't care. It is what it is. I'm not going to cover it up. Just knock it down and keep going.

I think I spent so much time doing that — which has been part of my success — but there are probably smarter ways to deal with it that a coach would have helped with. Because I am not patient. Within the context of the mission, if I think this is a better strategy, I'm doing it today. No waiting until tomorrow. I'm not going to overthink it — we're just going to do it. It's wrong? It's wrong. Next.

Goes back to our earlier discussion: why did you waste that money? Because we got there before anybody else in the market. We were the fastest. We beat everybody because I didn't overthink every little step — and I knew I could fix it.

Andrey: You know who did a really good job of self-coaching? Ben Franklin. I read a couple of books about him and actually implemented something from his approach for myself. He carried a little black book where he listed all the virtues he wanted to cultivate — wisdom, prudence, and so on. He also used to make sarcastic jokes that people didn't like, and he decided to eliminate that habit. Every day he would review his day and mark where he fell short. Over time he eliminated those patterns.

We talk about the importance of giving employees timely feedback. You can do the same for yourself.

Blaine: And you can empower your team to do it. I said I had this horrible temper — horrible. I've talked about some of my old bosses who had horrible tempers, and I put myself right in that category.

What I found, though, is that one day I said: "This has got to stop. It's not who I am as a human — it's me responding in the moment of the event versus who I want to be as a human."

So I had a discussion with the team — the key leaders. I said: "Look, we invented Panera 2.0. Let's invent Blaine 2.0. And I need your help."

I described the behaviors I wanted to have — the ones we all knew I didn't always live up to. And it became almost a fun thing. It kept it top of mind. Because sometimes I'd do something and think: "How could you do that?" And in the journey to Blaine 2.0, I said: "Don't do anything while I'm still steaming, but when we're done — feel free to bring it up."

And on multiple occasions, people would look at me and say: "I think that was a Blaine 1.0 event. That may have been a Blaine 1.5 — but it sure as hell wasn't 2.0." And then we would laugh. Nothing breaks tension in the worst of times like the ability to look at yourself and say: "What was I thinking? I made a mistake. I apologize."

I got to a point where I didn't even have to apologize anymore — they'd just remind me, and I'd just do it. And I think — whether it's my personal relationships, my wife, or work — being both vulnerable and open to constant feedback makes everything easier. You know how much easier it was for me to give feedback to people when they knew they had a straight line to me and could say whatever they thought? We wouldn't always agree. But you know what? Feedback is very, very important. You cannot become better without it.

So in our company we have a core value around excellence — and part of the definition of excellence is constantly asking for brutal, honest feedback. We train people: we're asking for feedback because we need to know. But they've got to feel safe. And that is the hard part for most people — my boss, who controls my paycheck and makes decisions about whether I'm still employed tomorrow, wants me to tell them the brutal truth?

Andrey: How did you overcome that?

Blaine: What I found is: there were a handful of people who had sufficient confidence — just ingrained confidence — that it felt safe. Not everybody would give me that kind of feedback, but I had a handful: three or four.

Some — I look back on these life lessons — are like: I learned so much, thank you. One of mine was an HR person who was a minority. I said something we were discussing programmatically — I honestly don't remember exactly what — but essentially something like: "I see people's work and their capability; I don't really pay attention to color or race or sexual orientation. If you're good, you're good."

She said: "Blaine, you're wrong." And I thought that was going to be something most people would view as enlightened. She said: "I'm a Black woman. I have been my entire life. My kids are Black, my husband is Black. You don't understand my world."

And I went — I get choked up, because that was so meaningful to me. What she pointed out was: even though I thought I was being fair, I had never taken the time to understand. I did not take the time to listen.

And I think with employees, with everybody we deal with — learning how to listen. Because beyond the words — everybody is guarded with their words — but learning how to truly listen, and to ask, and to ask more questions... it was like kaboom.

Her name is Pam. And I said: "Pam, you have handed me one of the greatest gifts of my life." To this day we're still friends.

My point is: as the CEO of a company, you're also dealing with people. You're looking for formal feedback, yes. But you're also looking for people who can say harsh things without fear of reprisal — and there are very few people in the world who will do that natively. You've got to encourage it.

If you want to build a culture: don't just do tasks on the list. Nobody gives a — the team wants to be part of something. But the leader has to listen. Completely open to feedback. And at the end of the day — I want to win. I don't want to just keep my job while we lose. So I'm okay with feedback that tells me how to win better. I'm okay with making harsh decisions. Just be yourself — and listen, listen, listen, listen.

Everything you hear won't be true. But I've learned from every human I've ever interacted with in my entire life. Did I have a formal coach? No. But from everyone I interacted with — and then of course from myself.

I appreciate the opportunity to have such a meaningful conversation. Looking forward to our next meeting.

Andrey: I will see you soon, brother. Thank you so much.

All right — we just had a really phenomenal coaching session with Blaine Hurst, former CEO of Panera Bread and Papa John's. I learned so much. I have maybe five to seven pages written down, but I came up with five action steps and my biggest takeaways.

Number one: start with the end in mind. If I want to build a billion-dollar company, I have to start building my org chart right now.

Number two: I need to think about and focus on PPT — people, processes, technology. I need to build the right infrastructure.

Number three: we have to succeed as a team. That means I need to keep my people accountable. If we don't reach the goals we set, we need to sit down, analyze the root cause of the problem, and eliminate or eradicate any roadblocks that prevent us from achieving the goal.

Number four: watch your expenses. Apply zero-based budgeting. It's harder to do in a large organization, but as an entrepreneur without deep pockets, we have to constantly question every expense — subscriptions, initiatives, and yes, people too, because we need to stay in budget.

Number five: don't be afraid to make mistakes. All innovation happens when you make mistakes. If you don't make mistakes, you're not going to grow. But from mistakes you can learn a lot — what worked well, and what wrong assumptions you made.

And as a bonus: something I learned from Blaine's personal story about his son. You need to run with joy. There are so many people we can support and cheer up who need that support. Please pay attention to those people — and help them out.