Jonathan’s Big Problem

What do you do when your mission is evolving… but your brand, programs, and funding strategy haven’t caught up yet?

In this episode, Jonathan brings a live challenge to the table: a bold new vision for the Seymour Center that could reposition it as a hub for climate solutions and STEM leadership — but it comes with branding risks, potential backlash, and major funding implications.

Eric coaches him through the decision-making, exploring when to stay quiet, when to go big, and how to avoid mission creep without losing momentum. This is real-time strategy, storytelling, and nonprofit leadership — unfiltered.

Episode Highlights:

[00:00] Jonathan tees up a live strategy session — and asks Eric to coach him
[01:12] Why the Seymour Center is shifting toward climate resilience
[03:09] The dual problem: climate impact and STEM education gaps
[05:49] What other groups can’t do — and where Seymour fits in
[07:02] How anxiety around climate is shaping a new kind of science education
[09:59] Is this a pivot, an evolution, or mission creep?
[11:34] Program tweaks vs. a bigger vision shift — what's on the line
[13:26] Fundraising, capital campaigns, and messaging trade-offs
[15:44] The two-problem narrative — and how to avoid confusing funders
[17:21] High school students as solution-makers (and a current gap)
[18:25] Pilot vs. launch — the fear of going public too soon
[21:00] Pushback: are we abandoning the ocean?
[22:23] Dropping the term “climate change” — and why
[23:00] What would Jonathan need to say “no” to?
[24:25] The risk of staying the same — and the case for going bold
[29:23] Why this is about relevance — not reinvention
[30:14] Eric's honest advice: it’s time
[31:12] “You’re not shooting from the hip anymore.”

Notable Quotes:

•  “Eric, I want you to coach me on how to think about this opportunity.” - Jonathan Hicken [00:00]
• “Let’s not waste that opportunity from a brand and fundraising perspective.” - Eric Ressler [00:27]
• “Should we broadcast this shift… or wait until we’ve nailed it?” - Jonathan Hicken [18:09]
• “You're never going to be perfectly ready. At some point, you just have to make the leap.” - Eric Ressler [19:03]
• “This is really about relevance — not reinvention.” - Jonathan Hicken [29:23]

Resources:

• Seymour Marine Discovery Center
• Article - Test Your Niche to Develop Your Organization’s Superpower
• Article - 8 Key Ingredients to Defining Your Social Impact Niche
• Article - The #1 Mistake Social Impact Organizations Make in Their Digital Storytelling
• Article - 10 Tips for Building a Community Around Your Cause
• Article - Are You Bold Enough To Lead The Conversation?
• Article - How Your Purpose, Vision, and Mission Can Guide Better Brand Storytelling
• Podcast - How to Stop Planning and Start Doing - Discussion of MVS framework

Transcript

Jonathan Hicken [00:00]:

I was thinking for this week's podcast, we could do a deep dive at the Seymour Center and I could talk you through this opportunity that I see. And actually I want you to coach me on how to think about this opportunity. Awesome. So I get to use all of your own tools against you. This is

Eric Ressler [00:14]:

Amazing.

Jonathan Hicken [00:15]:

Let's go. And I've heard some of my colleagues say, Hey, it's really hard for us to do the storytelling, to do the educating because we're so focused on implementing these solutions. That's not our core competency.

Eric Ressler [00:27]:

Let's not waste that opportunity from a brand and marketing and fundraising perspective because I imagine this is going to increase overhead for you all a little bit, right? And you're going to need some support, some capital, potentially even new staff members or people to do that. I'm Eric Wrestler. I'm Jonathan Hicken, and this is Designing Tomorrow.

Jonathan Hicken [00:48]:

Eric, I was thinking for this week's podcast, we could do a deep dive at the Seymour Center and I could talk you through this opportunity that I see. And actually I want you to coach me on how to think about this opportunity.

Eric Ressler [01:00]:

Okay. But first you have to answer, was that an intentional dad pun or a mistake? You did completely mistaken. 

Jonathan Hicken:

I don't even know, what was the pun? 

Eric Ressler:

A deep dive on the Seymour Center. Come on. 

Jonathan Hicken:

It is a marine science center, everybody out there. Yes, I'm in.

Eric Ressler [01:12]:

Let's go.

Jonathan Hicken [01:12]:

All right. So here look. Fundamental starting point, right? We are a science center. We serve about 70,000 people a year. About 8,000 young people come through our field trip and summer camp program. Historically, we have focused on the Monterey Bay and marine mammals. And it's been incredible work for a long time. And we've created scientists out of young people for 25 years. We've got some great stories to prove it. And there is this shift underway at the Seymour Center at UC Santa Cruz, which is the university we're associated with within the Santa Cruz County community, the Monterey Bay region. And ultimately that has to do with the impacts of climate change on coastal communities and the solutions that communities like ours might need to advance in the near and midterm future. So I fundamentally believe that science centers, museums, zoos, parks, you name it, these gathering places, these community gathering places have to be more active in solving real problems in their community, not just passive places for their community to come visit. And so for me, I'm this opportunity that I'm actively in this moment thinking about is how do we continue to deliver outstanding science education? How do we advance solutions to the impacts of climate change in our community? And how do we do that in a way that sustains the business? And so that's what I want your help thinking about today.

Eric Ressler [02:55]:

Awesome. So I get to use all of your own tools against you. This is amazing. Let's go. All right, let's do the first one. So what is the problem that you're trying to solve and what piece of that problem are you fit to solve and how is that problem changing?

Jonathan Hicken [03:09]:

Yeah, so the problem that I think we have the opportunity to solve or at least play a role in solving the bigger problem is there's kind of two really frankly. And it has to do with the impacts of climate change on coastal communities, and it has to do with STEM education in California. So on the first Santa Cruz, the Monterey Bay region, we're in central California. We are being impacted by a changing ocean, by changing coastal conditions. And our community has spent a lot of time, a lot of money on solving these problems and has some big problems in front of it that it needs to solve in order to preserve this beautiful place that we all call home and are so grateful to live in. This is a problem that coastal communities around the world are trying to solve. It's not just us.

[04:00]:

And back to my original point, I think museums like our science centers should be proactive players in solving these kinds of problems for their communities. And I think we have a particular role to play in that problem. Boots on the ground, let's think the city, the county, nonprofits, citizen groups, you name it. There are a lot of people doing incredible work to advance some of these solutions in our community. And at the university, there are scientists and grad students who are doing incredible cutting edge science on why this is all happening, but also the solutions that might be feasible.

Eric Ressler [04:39]:

So an interesting part about the niche that I think we don't spend as much time talking about is what are the kind of unique strengths, the unique opportunities, the unique assets that you have to leverage that other people working on the same problem don't have.

Jonathan Hicken [04:57]:

And in this case, we have this beautiful building in this incredible location with a team whose entire jobs and of incredible people who are telling stories and educating families about this kind of thing. Our association with the university. Frankly, our parking lot is another big asset to be honest with you. Sure. So it really is true. And that brings me to the role. So we have these partners in the community who are doing great science and doing great conservation, and I've heard some of my colleagues say like, Hey, it's really hard for us to do the storytelling, to do the educating because we're so focused on implementing these solutions. That's not our core competency. And I see potentially Seymour Center as already having that core competency and some of the assets to do that storytelling and to do the community mobilizing.

Eric Ressler [05:49]:

I mean, I think that even though I'm out here as a big proponent for digital communications and brand building marketing, and I think that certainly is already and should continue to be part of the work that you do, there is something inherently special about a gathering space, a community space, a place to bring people together to build consensus, to foster collaboration. And I think that for listeners who've never been to the Seymour Center, it is a pretty special location. It's on the outskirts of Santa Cruz, it's on a coastal bluff. You have incredible views. The building is beautiful. There's an aquarium. And those things, you might think, well, that's all kind of surface level, but I don't think so. I think that is just a structure. It's a place that can help facilitate conversations that could be really important. And I think also the legacy that you have around, yes, the connection to the university, but you have a muscle and a proven track record creating scientists, of having strong educational programs for the youth. And so yeah, I'm curious to hear how you're thinking about where you might take things and then I can weigh in more.

Jonathan Hicken [06:58]:

Well, let's go to the other problem real quick, which has to do with science education.

[07:02]:

And so when we look at the heroic public school teachers in our community there, it can be a challenge to deliver the quality of science education that they want to deliver in their classrooms. Of course, based on funding, based on some of the requirements that they're beholden to in terms of their instruction. And a lot of the teachers that we work with come to us because we have that expertise and we have this out of the box solution where they can trust that their kids are going to get outstanding science education when they bring their classroom to the Seymour Center. Meanwhile, climate change is something, there's lots of studies that young people, teenagers are really anxious about climate change, and this is at a time where we need to be launching lots of young people into the field to be doing a lot of the solution making. I can envision a whole generation of young people who aren't anxious about climate change instead, excited, empowered to make solutions for their communities.

Eric Ressler [08:07]:

I've heard we do a lot of climate work and climate action work and conservation work. I've heard from a number of different organizations that we are still lacking enough people working on this issue, which seems kind of counterintuitive to me because it's such a pressing issue. It's getting so much coverage, it feels like a little less in the last couple of years than a few years before that. Even thinking about a lot of the conversation even among the progressive party around climate change has not been a top level message as of late. And I guess I'm just curious, genuinely, what's the data say about the lack of scientists and maybe even not just scientists, strictly research scientists, but new workforce that's needed to mobilize to meet the scale of this issue?

Jonathan Hicken [09:00]:

The data I've seen on this really has to do with the traditional green economy workforce. So solar energy and energy in general, and the data there does seem to suggest that there are enough graduates to fill the opportunities out there right now, but I'm not sure that climate solutions are necessarily congruent with the traditional green economy metrics. So there may be better data out there that I haven't seen yet, but nevertheless, the anecdotal conversations I'm having in a community that historically has actually invested quite a bit in these solutions is that there is a need for more and better talent to advance these solutions in our community. There does seem to be some constraint there.

Eric Ressler [09:59]:

So I have another, just kind of a general question about this. How are you thinking about this from a branding perspective, from a storytelling perspective in terms of how you might be, and even just how you're thinking about it more broadly? Are you thinking about this as an evolution? Are you thinking about this as a huge pivot? Are you thinking about this as a reinvention? Are you thinking about this as just kind of a natural progression of making sure that you're staying in touch with the problem as it evolves and the community and the needs of the community that you serve?

Jonathan Hicken [10:31]:

The last thing you said primarily right, it's meeting the moments of when the Seymour Center was established 25 years ago, the science that was being conducted on campus and the conservation work that was happening in our community looked very different than it does today. And so part of this is just simply meeting the moment of where science is and what conservation action looks like today, but also I do think this is a step forward for the organization to become more proactive solution makers in the community at large beyond just doing the educating part.

Eric Ressler [11:07]:

So of course my brain immediately starts to think about this from a branding and marketing and messaging perspective even internally. And I'm just curious how you're thinking about, it sounds to me like this might have implications and likely would have implications around your programming to some extent, your model, to some extent probably even fundraising to some extent. Maybe give me a little bit about some different scenarios you're penciling out around how or if those things might change.

Jonathan Hicken [11:34]:

We have two core educational programs right now, and that is the exhibit and aquarium experience. It's like a super high volume, very low touch educational experience. It's people who just walk through the door looking for something fun to do. Then there are the more formal youth programs, school field trips, summer camp, that sort of thing. And that is 25 years of demonstrable excellence, delivering great science experiences, primarily focused on what I would call traditional marine science. So we have the platform to evolve those programs already. We can switch our exhibits and we already have to talking about local climate solutions and the amazing educators on our team can pivot the kinds of educational experiences they're delivering in the classroom to be more solutions oriented. They're also doing that already. So there are some programmatic tweaks for these programs we don't want to break.

Eric Ressler [12:30]:

Sure.

Jonathan Hicken [12:31]:

But I do think that there is also an opportunity to expand the programmatic offering here to become more of that proactive solution maker and deliver quality STEM education.

Eric Ressler [12:44]:

To me, going back to thinking about this in terms of a brand and a message, it feels definitely like a pretty large evolution of the brand, even though there's a lot, you're not reinventing, you're not throwing everything away and starting from scratch, but you're wanting to make some pretty big shifts here. And my mind starts to go to let's not waste that opportunity from a brand and marketing and fundraising perspective because I imagine this is going to increase overhead for you all a little bit in terms of investing in new programs and you're going to need some support, some capital potentially even new staff members or people to do that. So are you thinking you're going to need to ramp up fundraising to help you make this change?

Jonathan Hicken [13:26]:

Absolutely. There's some capital investments we can make and we have already begun raising money to change and evolve the exhibit experience. We also have this big blue whale skeleton project, which I won't get into now, but that's another capital intensive project that also will demonstrate and celebrate the new vision for the center. But as far as overhead, I don't know. I mean that's part of the question is I have these ideas for impactful programs that solve these two problems that we outlined, but we would need some sort of seed funding to get those off the ground.

Eric Ressler [14:05]:

So I'm just kind of curious about how you're thinking about messaging this to your community. And there's a number of ways that come to mind. One would be a capital campaign that would be a really loud, kind of aggressive way to do it, even if a lot of that happens behind the scenes. And you could kind of frame this shift. This next chapter is a language I like to use a lot in the framework of a capital campaign, and that's largely based on fundraising of course, but I also think there's a version of this where this is just kind of a new vision story for the Seymour Center and even exactly what you just told me about educating your supporters, your community, your funders around the changing needs that you're seeing around climate action and the impacts of climate change and climate resilience on our community.

[14:55]:

And then also this interesting intersection between that and the challenges around STEM education and education in our community. To me, there's something really interesting about how you can solve two problems at once, which I think you have to be careful about, right? Because it can start to feel like, well, if I'm a potential supporter or funder, is that story becoming kind of complicated now? Wait, is this about stem or is it about climate or how is it both? So you have to be a little careful about, but I think you can thread that needle. Those kind of stories can be the most compelling and the most kind of organically viral where people are like, you got to hear about this organization. They're doing this really cool thing, they're working on climate, but they're doing it through STEM education and solving that problem at the same time. Those kind of stories can be super compelling.

Jonathan Hicken [15:44]:

I do have this idea of an in-depth high school educational experience where the students are learning the science behind what's happening in their own backyard, and they're connecting with real actors in our community who have real, say, research needs or real work needs. And we're kind of teaching these high school students how to do science and understand science, but also act on science. There are other programs that exist actually even on the UC Santa Cruz campus that worked more with master's students and graduate students. But this model exists elsewhere and has been successful. And I think there's a version of this for Seymour Center, and I'm not sure that's the program, but I wanted to bring that up to you as just as here's an example of where we can train these high school students and the product of their work actually can move the needle on something important for the community.

Eric Ressler [16:35]:

Yeah, I mean, we've worked with a number of different education focused nonprofits, and one of the things I've heard over and over and over again is how important that continuity of support and engagement and activation is, right? Because often what happens is a program is geared towards a certain age group and then there's a gap, and there might be resources for higher education, but if your program is focused only on elementary school and below or middle school and then there's a high school gap, you could lose people. There's a missing middle in the trajectory for a student. And now you don't need to solve that in its entirety. But I do think it sounds like you're thinking about how, what's that kind of age range that you guys are going to be able to serve? And maybe that gets rolled out over time.

Jonathan Hicken [17:21]:

I brought up high school very specifically because the gap that you just described exists at Seymour Center. We've got these programs that are great up until age 14, 15, and then the only opportunity from there is to volunteer and some high school students do, and that's great, and they've had a great experience with it, but we don't have that more structured educational experience for that gap,

Eric Ressler [17:45]:

Which seems like a really important time in a student's life. That's when I think a lot of students are really starting to, for the first time, get serious about thinking about their career path and their trajectory, starting to think about what college they might go to or what they might do if they're not going to college. And so to me, that seems like a really natural place to eventually build some programming out around. But yeah, I'm curious, where else are you stuck or murky on this?

Jonathan Hicken [18:09]:

Yeah, part of it actually is how hard we go on broadcasting this shift, right? Because in some sense, I'm still in this pilot testing mode I’m in this beta test, we are out there trying this stuff right now.

Eric Ressler [18:25]:

Using the MVS framework.

Jonathan Hicken [18:26]:

We're using the MVS framework, we're doing it, and we're learning a lot. Some of what we're trying is working, some is not, but we are learning a ton about how to share community scale climate resilience solutions. But it's not perfect yet. We have a long way to go to deliver that world-class experience that I strive for. And so part of it is a little bit of chicken or the egg. Do we blast this out now knowing that it could fail, or do we make sure we got it nailed and then broadcast?

Eric Ressler [19:03]:

That's a big question. So first for listeners, we'll link to the MVS framework, which was episode one of season three of Design Tomorrow. If you haven't listened to that episode, definitely worth going back to. This is a question though that I think about a lot. It's like timing. I think timing is really important, and how do you know when it's time to make a big announcement like that? And I think my sense is that you're never going to be perfectly ready. You're never going to be perfectly ready. You can also do it too soon. And if you haven't done due diligence, if you haven't tested this with your community to some degree, you could do kind of a big flop. And that's never good for pr, right? Or even just internal team morale beyond pr, right? You want to make sure that your team is clear about this. So my sense is that it sounds like you've been thinking about this deeply. Of course you've been testing this out, socializing it with advisors. I know we've talked about this before, but have you brought this to funders? Have you brought this to your internal team? Have you brought it to potential partners? How socialized is this idea? Right now?

Jonathan Hicken [20:10]:

It's pretty socialized within my circles. The Seymour Center team, some of the donors I interface with the most, our volunteers, our partners in the community understand that we're raising our hand and saying, Hey, this is the role we want to play in all of this work. And there's mixed reaction to this idea as I think that there should be, because we're talking about taking a new role in this community that is a bit of a shift. And so people who know the Seymour Center for a long time, that's a big move.

Eric Ressler [20:49]:

Yeah. I mean, I'm just curious, what's some of the pushback you've been getting?

Jonathan Hicken [20:54]:

Really it relates to are we kind of abandoning the ocean as our core focus?

Eric Ressler [20:59]:

Oh, that's interesting.

Jonathan Hicken [21:00]:

Yeah,

Eric Ressler [21:00]:

I expected that actually.

Jonathan Hicken [21:02]:

That's the biggest one I hear, and I get it right. I totally understand it. This organization is 25 years of awesome ocean and marine science education, and now we're talking about things that are happening on land, right? Wildfires and wetlands and these kinds of things. And so for some people it may feel like a mission creep or we're trying to go too big. We had our niche. Why abandon that?

Eric Ressler [21:26]:

Yeah. Well, I'm not a scientist, but even I know that the ocean does not exist in a void and that the ocean and land have a pretty integrated and reciprocal relationship that you can't really draw a hard line against.

Jonathan Hicken [21:38]:

Well, that's my position. Yeah, that's my position. And that's the story I often tell when I have the opportunity to.

Eric Ressler [21:43]:

Yeah. Okay. Anything else you've been getting pushed back on or is that really the main thing?

Jonathan Hicken [21:48]:

I mean, the other thing is really around even the term climate change. We've actually stopped using that, our exhibits and in our educational materials, and really we're just talking. We just go straight to solutions.

It's almost like we assume that our community at least understands that things are changing. So we just skip over that part and we're just like, Hey, this storm happened or this fire happened, and let's talk about solutions.

Eric Ressler [22:18]:

I'm curious about why did you make that choice

Jonathan Hicken [22:20]:

To drop using the word climate change?

Eric Ressler [22:22]:

Yeah,

Jonathan Hicken [22:23]:

Because it was bumming people out and it was like, do I really want to go spend an afternoon at a place where I'm just going to get bummed out all day? I mean, again, that makes sense too because the dominant discourse around climate change is the world's burning. We're all screwed. So I get that gut reaction.

Eric Ressler [22:50]:

So another question I have is in order to make this change or this big evolution, what would you have to say no to that you're currently saying yes to?

Jonathan Hicken [23:00]:

I have to think about this one a little bit because on one hand I'm like, I don't want to change the stuff that's working, right? I don't want to break the things that are working. So is there a version of this where we can spin up this new effort without disrupting what's working? So I want my cake and eat it too on this, but I also,

Eric Ressler [23:24]:

Which I think is doable, that can work. But then that to me, it starts to go to capacity building and raising more funds to be able to support that, which might be the right call because it does seem like you've got this legacy, this foundation, the muscle for doing this work. And now it's really just about how do you more skillfully do that and make sure that you're not just going through the motions, right? I think that can happen. You can say, well, we've done it this way forever and this is our place in the community. But I think that's also equally, if not more dangerous if the problem is changing, if the community needs are changing and you're just in your lane doing your thing the way you've always done it, and then all of a sudden you look up, you're like, whoa, we're behind now. This isn't relevant anymore and I've seen that happen. It could be bad.

Jonathan Hicken [24:11]:

I think that's to some degree and with absolutely no judgment at all. I think that to some degree that happened for Seymour Center, and part of this is sort of meeting the moment of 2024 and what it looks like today.

Eric Ressler [24:25]:

Yeah, so I think here's my general sense of this, and I'm a little bit biased around my approach. I don't really see a downside to going big on this if you think it's the right thing to do. And that's the hard part, right, is you're never going to know if it's the right thing to do. And something I think about a lot is you can't A/B test reality. You can ab test messaging, you can A/B test different marketing campaigns, but making big strategic moves like this, you can run pilots, but those are only going to get you so far. And at some point you just got to make the leap. And I think I've known you long enough to know that you're a strategic thinker, you're an analytical thinker. You make good choices and you're willing to be bold. And I think that's something that we talk about a lot and that I admire leaders who can do that.

[25:14]:

And of course, you want to do that responsibly. You want to do that, you want to de-risk it. But I do think that if you, at the end of the day, as the leader of the organization and with your executive team and advisors on board to the right degree, you don't need a hundred percent buy-in on this. And in fact, if you get a hundred percent, it might be a sign you're not really going bold enough. You got to just go big on it. In my opinion. And especially from a branding and marketing standpoint, I don't see a downside to that, especially if you're not having to say no to the things that people are already receiving and expecting from the Seymour Center. If this is just a like, Hey, here's our new vision, here's our new chapter. I think that kind of framing almost always works as long as it's grounded in authentic strategy and authentic service to the community, people are just excited to know you're up to something new and that you're thinking about this and that you're not getting stagnant. That's my experience. Helping organizations like yours launch campaigns and marketing campaigns like this,

Jonathan Hicken [26:12]:

Maybe that's exactly what I needed to hear, right? Because we are out there testing, we're piloting, and we're tweaking, and we are changing. And if you come in the Seymour Center now versus a year ago, it's going to look totally different. We are doing those moves, but maybe I have been a little bit too shy and really going big with the messaging because of some concern I have that it's not going to work

Eric Ressler [26:34]:

Well. I think also the other thing is the messaging is always going to feel bigger to you. This kind of change is always going to feel bigger to you than it will to the outside. It will outside the organization. So especially because you're not talking about shutting down the aquarium, you're not talking about building a bunch of new buildings, or this is really more of a strategic focus shift, is what I'm hearing. And you might spin up some new programs. You might, the outcomes and the impact sounds like there's potential for it to be deeper, more meaningful, more relevant to the needs of the community. But I don't see the real downside. Let's do a thought experiment. What might go wrong? What if this is a flop? What are the pieces you have to pick up after something like that?

Jonathan Hicken [27:20]:

Well, the first one that comes to mind is if we were to invest a ton of money in new exhibit experiences and did that capital campaign to uplevel the modernity of Seymour Center exhibits, and then we don't get the requisite foot traffic to sustain the business. That's a risk which we would need to do market research and make sure that we could sustain the experience as it is. But for example, that's one risk that comes to mind.

Eric Ressler [27:50]:

Okay. Any others?

Jonathan Hicken [27:53]:

I think we are situated within the University of California Santa Cruz, and that is a stakeholder in all of this that we haven't even begun to discuss yet. It's a big one. It's an important one. And I think another risk is should the university decide to put its emphasis on a different scientific discipline right now? And I think for the foreseeable future, the campus wants and is positioned to be a leader in this idea of coastal climate solutions. Should that shift change? Now we're out of sync with the university's priorities,

Eric Ressler [28:27]:

But I mean that would be true even if you didn't do this shift, right?

Jonathan Hicken [28:30]:

Yeah, fair enough.

Eric Ressler [28:31]:

And I mean, for listeners who aren't familiar with our area, Monterey Bay and Central California is something of a hub for research around marine science and climate science and climate action. And so to me, it feels aligned with the ethos of this area in a good way too.

Jonathan Hicken [28:50]:

I think look like the ocean is embedded in culture here, and it's relevant to all of us in some way. And so for me, really this is a play to make the ocean more clearly relevant to everybody's lives. If we're talking about flooding and then you come in and you're like, oh, that flood impacted me, you're going to see yourself reflected in the space. So for me, this is also a museum engagement play to be more relevant to the community. But yeah, you're absolutely right. I mean, this is a hotspot for this kind of work.

Eric Ressler [29:23]:

So you've been executive director for about three years?

Jonathan Hicken [29:26]:

Three years, yeah.

Eric Ressler [29:27]:

I mean, I got to be honest, man. I feel like your shelf life of a big move is starting to close.

Jonathan Hicken [29:31]:

Okay. Yeah,

Eric Ressler [29:32]:

That's something that I think about a lot. And of course there's no hard rules about this, but from our conversations and my outside perspective, you've come in and you're kind of in discovery mode in the early days, right? You're just trying to figure out what's working, what's not. And of course, you came in a very unique time for the Seymour Center right out of Covid after it'd been closed for a while. And so there was this kind of natural need to reassess, rethink how you might approach things. And you've been writing a bunch of experiments, right? You've been using the MVS framework even before I had called it that kind of intuitively, we are aligned in our thinking there. My sense is you have a pretty good amount of data that you're working off of. This is not you shooting from the hip at this point anymore.

[30:14]:

I'm here to say, I think you should go for it. I think it's really about what does that mean? What does go for it mean in terms of how do you roll it out from a branding standpoint, from a messaging standpoint, we've been workshopping a little bit of that in season three in certain ways. I'm of course happy to do this outside the podcast too, but I think that I don't see a huge downside or risk if you believe this is true, and if you believe that you've done enough de-risking to kind of come out with a big message around this, it feels right. It feels like it deserves it. This is not an iterative play. This is a big step. It's an evolutionary step, but it's a big one. And I think it kind of needs to be because of how much has changed for the organization, for the issue, the fact that there's these kind of congruent issues between stem and climate. And so I can see the vision, I can see how it needs to be pieced together, and I just think the potential benefits far outweigh any potential downsides.

Jonathan Hicken [31:12]:

Well, shoot. Maybe we're going to have to put together a little bid for cosmic to do some of this work. Alright, let's do it. No, honestly though, really thank you for listeners, this was a classic Jonathan Eric dinner conversation, and so your insights and your coaching on this is always super valuable. So thank you, Eric.

Eric Ressler [31:29]:

Happy to do it. Hopefully it's valuable to listeners going through similar situations as well. And if not, at least we help at Seymour Center.

Jonathan Hicken [31:36]:

Yeah, good luck out there. Alright, thanks Eric. 

Eric Ressler [31:38]:

Thanks Jonathan.