Justin Vanning

How I work

I ask a lot of questions. Then I get to work.

I’m not interested in just dropping a borrowed playbook on your team. I want to understand how the business works, where growth is getting stuck, and what the evidence actually says.

Then we make choices. We cut work that is not helping, put real effort behind the things that matter, and build a plan the team can run after I’m gone.

What you can expect from me

Five things I bring to every engagement.

Diagnose the problem, not the symptom.

I listen, study the numbers, and follow the handoffs until we can explain what is actually slowing growth. Another campaign will not fix a product, pricing, sales, onboarding, or measurement problem.

Protect the team’s focus.

Most teams have more work than clarity. I help stop low-impact work, create a short priority list, and give the important work enough time and attention to succeed.

Work as a player-coach.

I will shape the strategy and make the hard tradeoffs. I will also help design the experiment, fix the funnel, review the creative, and build the operating rhythm. I enjoy the work itself.

Tell the truth with respect.

I will ask the question nobody has answered and say when the data does not support the story. I also listen, change my mind, and keep disagreement useful. The point is a better decision, not winning the meeting.

Build with the people who will own it.

I involve the people closest to the work, give them context and room to lead, and build the growth engine with them instead of around them. The goal is to grow the business and leave it better than I found it. If and when I step away, the team should have a scalable engine they can run and keep improving without me.

The first 90 days

Understand the system. Test the biggest hypotheses. Turn evidence into a plan.

Every engagement is different, but the shape is usually similar.

Days 1-30

Diagnose

Mostly listening, learning, and a few quick wins. I get under the hood of the funnel, the numbers, and the assumptions, and separate what is really slowing growth from what people think is. Where there is an obvious early win, we take it.

The work

  • Interviews across leadership, sales, product, customer teams, and marketing. I’ll also speak with customers whenever I can (they’ll tell you things the dashboards won’t)
  • Full funnel, channel, and spend review
  • Data audit to see what is tracked, what is missing, and which numbers can be trusted
  • Inventory of everything marketing is working on now

You get

  • A full marketing audit, plus a root-cause readout for leadership
  • A stop list that frees budget and team time
  • A data fix list for the gaps that have to close before we trust the numbers

Days 31-60

Prove

We move from diagnosis to action. The team runs fast, focused tests against the biggest hypotheses to learn which levers can actually change the outcome.

The work

  • Test the two or three biggest root-cause hypotheses
  • Close the most important tracking gaps
  • Put the time and budget freed by the stop list behind the tests
  • Launch new experiments, channels, and tactics

You get

  • Early wins in market
  • A clear readout on what moved, what did not, and why
  • The biggest growth levers ranked by likely impact

Days 61-90

Scale

We double down on what worked and turn the learning into a plan the company can run for the next six to twelve months.

The work

  • Scale the levers that proved out
  • Make clear recommendations on team, budget, partners, and capabilities
  • Create a reporting cadence leadership can trust

You get

  • A six-to-twelve-month roadmap with targets and owners
  • A short priority list and a clear not-now list
  • A practical reporting rhythm for ongoing decisions

This is a starting shape, not a rigid methodology. If the business needs action on day three, we act on day three. The sequence should create clarity, not slow the work down.

See the results this approach has driven at four companies

Candid leadership

I’ll say the hard thing, kindly.

Smart teams do not need someone performing certainty. They need someone willing to ask the uncomfortable question, push back when it matters, show the work behind a recommendation, and change course when the evidence changes. I want disagreement in the room while the decision can still improve, not in the hallway (or on Slack) after it is made. And I will always do it with respect.

“I’m so glad you asked that.”
A line I hear a lot in meetings

AI and the work

AI makes the work faster. Judgment makes it count.

I use AI to speed up research, analysis, creative exploration, and execution. It helps a strong team cover more ground and learn faster. (It also helped me build this site.)

It does not replace customer understanding, taste, or marketing judgment. The tools can make the work move faster. People still have to decide what is worth doing, what good looks like, and what the business should say no to.

This is not new territory for me. I’ve been building propensity models and predictive targeting for over a decade, starting with some of the first models for Amazon Prime, then at WordPress.com, then in digital health using claims and eligibility data. The models tell us who’s ready and when. People still decide what to say and what to offer.

Generative AI is a different tool than predictive modeling, but I use it on the same principle: it should make the team faster and the decisions better, without outsourcing judgment.

“Justin combines strategic thinking with practical execution, asking the right questions that lead to breakthrough insights. His leadership creates an environment where intellectual curiosity thrives.”

Stephanie Carroll Shlissel · Former direct report

Let’s start with a conversation

Need a clearer read on what is slowing growth?

A few good reasons to reach out

Let’s talk