About
Revenue leader with general management background and an outstanding track record of…
Services
Articles by Dan
Activity
5K followers
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisThe Wall Street Journal published an article last week with the headline: "America’s Chief Financial Officers Say AI Is Coming for Admin Jobs". But that's NOT what the article is about. The asynchrony between the headline and the article itself speaks volumes about the public conversation around AI and jobs. The headline captures the zeitgeist. It captures the public conversation and it drives traffic. "AI is coming for our jobs", that's what all the smart people are saying. But that's not what the article says. The article talks about a survey of 750 CFOs. Less than half of CFOs are planning for any AI related job cuts and the job cuts related to AI that are being planned represent about 0.4% of the workforce. The title actually refers to the fact that CFOs are saying that AI is going to reshape admin jobs, not eliminate them. This should not be taken as some sweeping statement that AI won't eventually claim many jobs. However, we have been being told for two years that agentic AI is here and that means the end of work as we know it. Those statements are significantly premature and they are wrong, in many ways. AI is great at research, data analysis, admin, and some administrative tasks. However, AI cannot do jobs that require: 1. Executive function 2. Risk assumption 3. Responsibility assumption 4. Relationship building and maintaining The reality is that most jobs require some or all of those functions. Eventually, AI will get better, and we will get better at building organizations around AI. This will mean that we will carve out jobs for AI, and AI agents will live on our org. charts. However, the sweeping job losses that we are hearing about are not happening for a few reasons: 1. Uncertainty affects AI agents just as it affects humans so there are natural limits to it's progress. This was detailed out in a great article by Ryoma Sato titled "Why AI Progress Will Stall". 2. There are inherent limitations in the relationship between AI and human beings. AI thinks like a machine and produces machine like outputs that are not always suited for human use cases, and therefore, we need humans to work with AI. 3. There is a gap between AI outputs and AI technology. While the technology is revolutionary, the outputs and the tools we use to access the outputs need time to adapt to the way we use them. 4. As with all other technologies in the past, AI will create jobs, and reshape jobs, and it will create jobs we can't even conceive of yet. I published an article on this topic recently called "The AI Economy: Why Sam Altman Is Wrong". Bottom line: rumors of the demise of the workforce have been greatly exaggerated. https://lnkd.in/g7m6cW_AAmerica’s Chief Financial Officers Say AI Is Coming for Admin JobsAmerica’s Chief Financial Officers Say AI Is Coming for Admin Jobs
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisI have written extensively about the limitations to what AI can produce in terms of real business outputs. The technology IS revolutionary and every bit as incredible as it is hyped to be. The problem is that the product of the technology has limitations due to the types of outputs we, as humans, need and because of the way human brains interact with technological outputs. My writing has focused on the differences between machine outputs and human outputs and why AI has limitations in terms of how humans consume it. This article takes a more technical, and in my opinion, brilliant look at uncertainty in the real world and how different types of uncertainty in the natural world will limit AI's ability to progress in the future. It may or may not prove to be true, but it is well worth a read for those who are thinking about limits to AI and it's applications.
-
Dan Greenberg shared this✅ It's easy to find reasons not to cold call. "It's not effective anymore", "My clients don't want me to", "We are too consultative for that to work". There have always been reasons to avoid cold calls, but there is still a time and a place for cold calling because it still works, regardless of the fact that we don't like to do it. Cold calling must be part of a broader outreach plan that includes email and other types of messages. It must be thoughtful, and well researched so you are not wasting your time with those who are not likely to buy. Mostly, it is a skill that can be improved upon, and even thought people pick up the phone less often these days, if you are good, when you reach someone, you will have really good chance to be influential, if for no other reason than the fact that the person on the other end of the line is having fewer phone conversations, so the conversation with you can rise above the noise. ✅ 1. Rehearse: The words should be second nature to you. Rehearse so you can listen instead of thinking what to say next. 🔍 2. Research / Credibility: Know exactly what your prospect cares about, and what insights you can provide. 💬 3. Social Proof / Credibility: Know exactly how you want to leverage social proof for credibility. 🧏 4. Problem Statement: Describe their problem better, more clearly and sucinctly than they can. ⁉️ 5. Outcome: Describe what the desired outcome looks like. Don’t sell your product, just paint a picture of where happy clients end up. 🌈 6. Confidence and Assumptiveness: If you are perceived as lacking in confidence you will come across as not being worth their time. 💪 7. Don’t Pitch Slap: Don’t sell your product. You can’t make a sale on a cold call, so don’t try. 🖌️ 8. Don’t let objections deter you: Have clear, calm, and constructive responses lined up; if the prospect wants to reject you, they will have to do so explicitly. 📍
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisHelp your sellers by putting support in place to create a pipeline for them so that they don't show any neediness in dealing with clients and prospects. Neediness is a deal killer and a relationship killer.
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisThe Wall Street Journal just published an article about increased workloads due to AI. I have written about this and tangential topics quite a bit lately, so please check out my newsletter. WHAT THIS DOES NOT MEAN: This article does not mean that AI cannot eventually make us more productive or that there cannot be native AI companies that develop workflows based on AI that significantly reduce the amount of workers needed. It also does not mean that AI will not take a significant amount of jobs and change the way we work. WHAT THIS DOES MEAN: There is a gap between what the technology can do and the outputs of our current tools meaning that for many workers, outputs are only slightly and marginally better than before AI. It also shows us that new technology always creates more work because more can be expected of teams and individuals. It is highly likely that AI will replace many engineering / coding jobs as we have seen lately with Square and Atlassian cuts. However, jobs with human interaction and decision making are more insulated. These are jobs that include: 1. Relationship building and deal making 2. Assumption of risk 3. Assumption of responsibility 4. Executive function, prioritization, and decision making The big question is, will we use AI build more redundancy and mitigate risk thus adding work to workflows, or will we use it to become more productive? Here is an AI summary of the article for those who would like (courtesy of Claude): The gist: AI isn't freeing up time — it's just filling that time with more work. Two big studies back this up. Workforce analytics firm ActivTrak analyzed 164,000 workers and found that after adopting AI, time spent on email and messaging more than doubled, use of business software surged 94%, and time spent on focused, uninterrupted work actually fell by 9%. Futurism A separate UC Berkeley/HBR study identified three main drivers: task expansion (AI makes it easy to take on work outside your role, so people do), blurred boundaries (prompting AI feels casual, so people start working during breaks and evenings), and multitasking overload (running multiple AI processes in parallel). Medium The core dynamic: any time AI saves gets immediately repurposed into doing more work, raising both workers' and managers' expectations — sending employees right back into their AI tools. Average time spent using AI tools has risen eightfold. Futurism The warning: researchers say the pattern may be "unsustainable" — once the novelty wears off, workers face burnout, cognitive strain, and weakened decision-making, which could eat away at the productivity gains entirely. https://lnkd.in/gSqTdrzCAI Isn’t Lightening Workloads. It’s Making Them More Intense.AI Isn’t Lightening Workloads. It’s Making Them More Intense.
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisIt is a great learning experience, and an honor to be a part of such an excellent group of experts and advisors at Vector Growth LabsDan Greenberg shared thisVector Growth Labs’ senior leadership team consists of innovative and accomplished operating executives that have experience across many industries and all growth-related disciplines. Follow us to meet each of our elite team of growth engineers, transformation-minded operators, and revenue leaders. Meet Dan Greenberg, our Managing Director, Go To Market Excellence. Dan focuses on revenue strategy, planning, and talent development for scalable and predictable revenue growth. He has an outstanding track record of thought leadership and operational discipline, as well as developing partner ecosystems. Learn more about Dan here: https://lnkd.in/grjiGbPG
-
Dan Greenberg shared this✅ When used correctly there is still a place for email in our sales outreach and marketing cadences. Response rates and email to meeting rates are down, but so is the cost of sending emails in money and time. AI has allowed us to significantly decrease our research time and effort. The actual client relationship piece still has to be done by a human. If you try to outsource this to AI, your clients and prospects will be able to tell. Consciously or subconsciously, they will screen out your attempts. So, use tools to help you research, but use you brain and your human relationship capacity to interact with people. ✅ Most importantly, be smart when you do it: 1. Dispense with pleasantries: No one cares. Your prospect does not want to waste time listening to you try to convince them that you two are friends. 🐙 2. Dont write a book: Your client, and their FOMO don't not want to miss anything important but they also don't want to waste time with sales emails. They will only read short emails that look visually digestible. 📖 3. Hope is weak: don't waste your time telling your prospect how great you will make their life. Fear is more powerful, so find a way to inform them on what they are missing if they don't have a conversation with you. 😱 4. You can't make multiple points: There is only room for one point in your email and in your clients mind. Don't try to tell them more than that. Be simple; establish credibility, make a point, and then call them to action. 🫵 Read below for more detail.
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisNew technology is here and that means we need to rethink organizational structures so that we can leverage that technology in the most optimal ways.
-
Dan Greenberg shared thisI just finished The Ultimate Sales Managers' Guide by John Klymshyn. I didn't realize until I got near the end that the book was released 20 years ago; that said, it is highly relevant and a great guide for new and long time sales managers. It is direct, actionable, comprehensive, and even entertaining. I highly recommend it for managers and those who want to be managers. https://lnkd.in/gM9Ek_Ug
Dan Greenberg commented on a post
3h
This is the forerunner to modern adaptive learning platforms, but I bet it performs better.
-
Dan Greenberg liked thisDan Greenberg liked thisOne of the most underestimated costs in organizations isn't poor decisions. 𝗜𝘁'𝘀 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. In healthcare organizations managing multiple transformation initiatives, there's constant pressure to "move quickly." But here's what actually happens: → Decisions get delayed while teams gather "more data" → Priorities remain unclear across departments → Initiatives stay in motion but without real traction And over time, something subtle but expensive occurs: 𝗠𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗺 𝗲𝗿𝗼𝗱𝗲𝘀. Teams stay busy executing tasks... But high-impact work gets pushed out by lower-priority activities. Dependencies stack up across departments. Initiatives that should have driven EBITDA growth this quarter quietly shift to "next quarter." And that "next quarter" has a real cost. Not just operationally. Financially. The healthcare organizations that perform differently aren't necessarily making better strategic decisions. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆'𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 and aligning execution capacity behind them. Because in complex transformation environments: Delay is rarely neutral. It's almost always expensive. #StrategicExecution #Leadership #OperatingModel #HealthcareTransformation #ExecutionExcellence #EBITDA #PMO #DecisionMaking #OrganizationalEfficiency #TransformationStrategy #HealthcareLeadership #OperationalExcellence #BusinessStrategy #PerformanceManagement #HealthcareOperations
-
Dan Greenberg liked thisDan Greenberg liked thisDo you ever think about how long onboarding a new person takes? 4 months? 6 months? What would you say? I was thinking about this this week because I reconnected with someone I hadn't talked to in over 25 years and it reminded me of one of the very first times I was tackling this problem. GE was and is a strong believer in Six Sigma, so much so that everyone in their information services division needed to have completed at least a Green Belt project within their first year. When I was looking around for what I wanted to tackle, I realized I had already started on one. A few weeks before, I had shared with the director of the Application Integrator group that I thought we could improve the onboarding process for new developers, which was currently taking 4 to 6 months before the new person could handle projects on their own. The process at the time involved taking a new hire through an introductory training course and then they would start shadowing developers on their real work. Every developer ended up in the role of mentor as a result. The problem was, sometimes that work was too simple and the new person didn't learn anything. Sometimes it was too complex and they couldn't contribute, so the senior developer just did it themselves. Much of the time, the mentorship was in the hands of folks who weren't skilled at teaching either. All of these things together meant that the process took a couple of months before a new hire was reasonably proficient. Having recently left academia at the time, I thought about the problem the same way you'd design a curriculum. What if we took real work, classified it by complexity, and structured the new person's exposure to it in a deliberate progression? Couple that with a handful of mentors who actually knew the material and were good at teaching instead of whoever had the work, and you could provide a consistent experience every time. This revised process resulted in new programmers doing real work within a few weeks, and being fully up to speed in under six weeks. In addition, the bulk of the team got out of rotating mentor duty that had been pulling everyone away from their own projects. It worked so well that the director sent me down to Monterrey Mexico to help implement this system for a remote team we were building there. (Incidentally, that trip also started my lifelong obsession with finding authentic tamales wherever I've lived, but that's a story for another time.) The system had been producing variable outcomes because it was a variable system. Most companies accept slow onboarding as the cost of hiring. It's worth asking if that's simply the cost of not having a well-constructed process. For leaders who've watched months of productivity disappear every time a key role turns over, what does your onboarding actually look like? Is it a system, or is it just whatever happens? #ITStrategy #CIO #FractionalCIO #Leadership #CFO #TechnologyStrategy #Operations
-
Dan Greenberg liked thisDan Greenberg liked thisFractional Value-Based Pricing Quoting an hourly rate is usually a bad idea. It sounds helpful (“We’re about $200/hour if you break it down”), but what the prospect hears is: Oh cool, so I can price shop you like a gallon of milk. Next thing you know, you’re in a race to the bottom with three other fractionals and a guy on Fiverr. A better move is value-based pricing... talk outcomes, impact, and business results instead of hours and math. I put together a short video showing a simple example of how this works for a fractional.
-
Dan Greenberg liked thisDan Greenberg liked thisThe most efficient meetings I run don't have written agendas. They have dashboards. Here's what that's done for three teams I've worked with: → A payroll department drowning in a backlog of hundreds of unprocessed new hires now gets every employee into payroll and E-Verified 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻 𝟯 𝗱𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲. → A marketing team that scrambled to hit publish now consistently has content created, revised, and approved 𝘁𝘄𝗼 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘁 𝗴𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲. → A technical ops team 𝗰𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗯𝘆 𝟴𝟱%, down to less than 1% of jobs. Same people. Different operating system. A well-designed dashboard does three things: → It sets the expectation. → It shows progress against benchmarks. → It calls attention to what's slipping. When everyone walks in already looking at the same objective truth, there's no time wasted on status updates. No stories, no fluff. And once the meeting isn't about whether work is getting done, that's when you get to stop talking about last week and start talking about next quarter. Does this work for every meeting? No. External stakeholders, planning sessions, brainstorming — these deserve a written agenda. But for department meetings, recurring check-ins, and status reviews, a well-designed dashboard is the gold standard. Try this for 30 days. What's actually stopping you?
-
Dan Greenberg liked thisDan Greenberg liked thisTHIS. IS. ISRAEL. An American Air Force pilot. 25 years in the service. Flew in three wars. Posted the following message: ��I flew over Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. I thought I had seen it all. Then I saw what the Israeli Air Force is doing in Iran and I understood that I am a mere student. The precision. The logistics. 200 aircraft in one night. 500 targets. 1,500 kilometers away. No aerial refueling from USA bases. All fuel from Israel. All weapons from Israel. It’s like flying from Miami to New York, bombing targets, and to return with 200 planes flying at the same time, with zero collisions. To the Israeli pilots: You aren’t just the best in the Middle East. You are the best in the world. Period.” I agree with every word but would just add a heavy dose of divine intervention as well. Bottom line: Don’t mess with Israel!
-
Dan Greenberg liked thisDan Greenberg liked thisProud to see ElevenLabs recognized as part of the 2026 Enterprise Tech 30. It is a great reflection of what we are seeing firsthand: businesses are rethinking how they engage with their audiences, with conversational AI becoming a core interface. Across chat, phone, and email, more teams are turning to conversational agents to elevate the customer experience in support, sales, marketing - and we are excited to support that transformation through ElevenAgents. Happy to be among so many incredible companies, including many of our partners. Congratulations to everyone on the list!
Experience & Education
-
DG Strategy
View Dan’s full experience
See their title, tenure and more.
or
Licenses & Certifications
Courses
-
Major in Economics
-
-
Major in Political Science
-
-
Minor in Geographic Studies
-
Languages
-
Spanish
Limited working proficiency
-
Hebrew
Elementary proficiency
-
English
Native or bilingual proficiency
Organizations
-
Contra Costa Jewish Community Center
Board of Directors
- PresentMember of the Board
Recommendations received
14 people have recommended Dan
Join now to viewOther similar profiles
Explore more posts
Explore top content on LinkedIn
Find curated posts and insights for relevant topics all in one place.
View top contentOthers named Dan Greenberg
300 others named Dan Greenberg are on LinkedIn
See others named Dan Greenberg