All Posts By

Marco Bartolome

1166: Making Moments More Meaningful with Dr. Ian Bogost

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Ian Bogost shares why everyday moments are the foundation of a gratifying life–at work and beyond.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why small moments matter so much
  2. How dematerialization is hurting you–and what to do about it
  3. Tiny upgrades that enhance every day

About Ian

Dr. Ian Bogost is a writer, designer, and scholar of media and technology. He is a contributing writer at The Atlantic, the Barbara and David Thomas Distinguished Professor and Assistant Vice Provost at Washington University in St. Louis, and a founding partner at Persuasive Games LLC. His latest book is The Small Stuff: How to Lead a More Gratifying Life.

 

 

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Ian Bogost Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Ian, welcome!

Ian Bogost

Thank you so much.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to talk about having a more gratifying life and work and career experience. And you know, Ian, I don’t know if you would think of it this way, but when I think of gratification, I think of Cow Clicker. Can you tell us what this is about?

Ian Bogost
Yeah, this is one of my legacies. This is from, gosh, 15 or more years ago now I made this Facebook game called Cow Clicker. And this was in the day when Farmville was really popular and people were like, you know, sending you updates from their farm on your Facebook feed.

And I thought the whole thing was ridiculous. And I kind of thought Facebook was a little ridiculous, too. It was this, like, weird way of using your friendships and your connections when they were useful to you and not really engaging with those people as kind of full people.

So I made Cow Clicker, and the way that Cow Clicker worked is that you clicked on a cow, picture of a cow that I drew, and it would move. And then you could click it again six hours later, and you could invite your friends into your pasture. And it kind of ran away from me at that point. It got very complicated.

But you’re absolutely right, because I mistook my critique of Facebook for something different than it really was for the people who played and enjoyed Cow Clicker. And what they liked about it was that they got to click on a cow, and the cow mooed, and that was delightful. And then they got on with their day and they came back and did it again.

It took me many years to come to terms with what I had really made and why it was meaningful and valuable to people and how I’d sort of mistaken what I had in mind and my head for what really happened, which was a little bit of delight, delivered a little bit of delight to people.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s beautiful. And I’m thinking about, I’ve heard a legend that Daniel Kahneman once said, “I love being wrong. It’s the way I know I’ve really learned something,” which is a lovely frame.

Ian Bogost
Yeah, I mean, I think I’ve been wrong a lot in my career and I’ve tried to learn from it. Or maybe wrong isn’t exactly how I’d put it, that my thinking has evolved and I’ve tried really hard to shift my thinking as the world has shown me new things.

And so this new work on gratification is it comes from me being wrong many times, like layered wrong-nesses over the course of the last 30 years. And one of them is definitely how wrong I was about games. One of my jobs is being a game designer. And I used to think that games were important because they could show you how, like, complexity works.

And then I thought games were important because they were kind of like toys, like you could play with them. And now I realize they’re more just things that you have no reason to interact with and that don’t apologize for that fact.

And there’s tons of stuff like that in the world. All the time we’re surrounded by it, that it’s just there for us to encounter. All we have to do is accept it. So I love being wrong so I can learn in that way. And certainly the book and the work that I’ve been doing is born of many different layers of wrong headedness.

Pete Mockaitis
I love that a lot. And so let’s hear a little bit of the story. So you kind of created it as a critique and then you’re like, “Isn’t this kind of weird and silly and exploitative?” And what was your arc of discovery there?

Ian Bogost
Well, I mean, it took me so long to discover that it was more interesting than I thought. The fact that people got the critique right away. They understood that Farmville was ridiculous and that Facebook was exploitative.

And I was there making those arguments, like, in 2010. It was long before the whole kind of like tech lash came about and people started doubting whether big tech was doing them any favors. But back then, everybody loved Facebook. It let you connect with your friends, right? It was amazing. Like, what’s there not to like? Maybe they didn’t love Farmville so much. So some people got it.

But then others were enjoying themselves. And I guess at that time in my life, I couldn’t quite grasp that they were enjoying themselves with this ridiculous, unenjoyable object that I’d made, or that I thought was unenjoyable.

And I had game designer friends, and I think the chief among them was Raph Koster, who’s a well known game designer in the multiplayer online game space, and he was like, “Ian, you know, I think you’ve got this wrong. Like, you made something amazing and delightful and people are playing it, and you need to learn from it in that way.” And I was like, “Yeah, whatever F.”

And then the years went by. And, by the way, I blew up Cow Clicker in a Cowpocalypse in 2011. And there was like a cow rapture, all the cows went away. It had really become an obsession of mine, and I couldn’t handle it anymore.

And so I just kind of got rid of it by making the cows go away. Although you could still click the spot where the cow used to be, until Facebook changed their software and then it stopped working without my intervention, maybe five years later.

But I realized, I think it was maybe two or three years ago, I did a story for The Atlantic where I went to this cow therapy farm where you can hug a cow as, like, a therapeutic act. And I was like, “This is my opportunity to come to terms with my cow problem, you know?”

And the cows had been rescued from this, like, traumatic escape where they’d escaped a slaughterhouse in St. Louis where I lived, and there was a huge outpouring of sentiment in favor of the cows, and the cows were, you know, save the cows.

One of them they named Chico and everybody was in the streets with the cows running around. And they saved them and sent them to this, like, cow ashram where they help people feel better about their lives.

So I used that as a way of trying to understand the experience and, you know, like just the idea that these simple tiny things, like clicking on a cow, that that might be it. That might be enough, you know? That might be enough. And that took me, I mean, it took me 10 years. It took me 10 years.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, it might be enough for what exactly?

Ian Bogost
It might be enough to make your life meaningful. It might add a little bit more contentment, that you need to feel guilty about or weird about. And it’s not the same as, like, pursuing a career in order that you can achieve the next promotion or help your clients or, you know, finding your life partner and building an environment in which you want to live together. It’s not big stuff like that.

But those small encounters, like clicking a cow, that they can still deliver, not just meaningless meaning, but deep, rich meaning. And I would say that some of the other interests that I had at the same time as I was working on Cow Clicker, but I couldn’t quite recognize, like I was writing about toasters and slippers and other kind of seemingly unimportant elements of the build environment.

And they seem like oddities or curiosities, like how weird it is that someone will pay attention to, you know, the design of a toaster? But don’t you experience delight when you make bread in the morning, when you hear it pop up, and you see it and you smell it, and you feel the warmth and you see the brownness?

Those kinds of encounters started to get, they just really started to interest me. And I was like, “Hmm, I’ll put that in the back of my head.” And over the years since then, I’ve been trying to build a kind of theory, a way of understanding what little tiny experiences like clicking on a cow or making toast have to teach us about feeling larger scale contentment in our lives at work, at home and elsewhere.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s intriguing, and I know you love your cow puns, so I, too, am struck by the notion that clicking cow could really “moo-ve” the needle on mental health.

Ian Bogost
There you go. That’s it. You’re doing it.

Pete Mockaitis
So deep, rich moments. If anyone is scratching their head saying, “Huh? Click cow? Looking at a toaster? What do you mean, Ian?”

Ian Bogost

So here’s a different example, right? I recently re-watched “Mad Men,” the television show. And you know, it takes place in an office in the 1960s. And an office of the 1960s is totally different from an office in the contemporary world.

And one of the things that I noticed was the telephones, you know, the function of telephones in that era. A large part of their lives at work was making calls, taking calls, answering phones, pressing the buttons on those phones, dialing the phones.

That’s not, like, why you do the work. You don’t go to work at the start of the day in order to use telephones. You do it in order to get work done, to call your clients, to close deals, to, in their case, assemble the advertising campaigns that they’re selling.

But along the way, you spend a lot of time using the telephone. And that makes the telephone like a big part of your life in the 1960s, and it was designed in a way that made that experience delightful, tangible. It had heft.

You picked it up. There was an intimacy to the voice on the other end of the line. You held it very close to your mouth, in a way that also felt intimate, right? If you had multiple lines, you press the chunky buttons.

So I became, like, as I was watching this, you know, after having having written the book, I thought, “Wow, that’s a perfect example of the kind of phenomenon that gives you meaning, but that doesn’t feel like it should be meaningful.”

Because what you’re really after is like accomplishing goals normally, but along the way, you have the experience of doing, in the case of a workplace, you have the experience of doing the work, the moment-to-moment encounters that make up your daily life.

And those are much more meaningful than we give them credit for. Or maybe a different way to put it is that you better make them meaningful because so much of your life is comprised of them.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So they are meaningful. And I guess we got to go right for the core of that. It’s, like, what do we mean by meaningful? What makes something meaningful versus not meaningful?

Ian Bogost
So this concept which I call gratification, which is all about being connected to the physical world, this gives you a sense of grounding, it makes you feel purpose. And, also, we live in these physical human bodies that we carry with us everywhere we go, whether we like it or not.

We may think that a lot of our lives have been mediated or digitized, or we don’t really need our bodies anymore, or that they’re secondary to our computers and our smartphones, but they’re not. We still live in the world inside these bodies.

And so the sense of, like, sensory connection with the world, with your home life, with your work life, that adds this kind of base layer of contentment. It’s not the same as happiness or as satisfaction, which is more about like goals and the future and accomplishing things and having purpose. All that stuff is great. I’m not against any of that.

But along the way, you can derive much smaller but still equally meaningful encounters from being connected to the physical world around you. And so my advocacy here, whether it’s for cows on your screen or telephones in your office, or whatever else you might find, and we can talk about more examples that haven’t been outmoded by technology, like handsets have, is that by embracing that, by realizing it’s a huge part of your daily life, you can become more content than you would be if you didn’t.

It’s not trying to replace that purpose and that ambition that you might feel in your job, but rather to amend it. And also to give you a sense of maybe where some of that unhappiness or discontentment might come from, maybe you just feel disconnected from the moment-to-moment actions of your work rather than the purpose or goals of the job.

Pete Mockaitis

Disconnected. Well, I’m thinking about the mindfulness literature in terms of being present and in the moment, and many monks or everyday meditators find this kind of a concept. Like, their breath is meaningful and they’re unaware that it’s meaningful until they stop and attend to that and that alone.

Ian Bogost

Right. So I think, in the contemporary world in the West, we’ve leaned on mindfulness as a way of trying to give ourselves a break, you know? Like, that’s sort of been the interpretation, the Western interpretation of Buddhist-style mindful meditation, that, “I’m harried. I have all these goals and all these ambitions. I have all this stuff I have to do. I need a way of overcoming that sense of anxiety and being one with myself.”

But we don’t do it in order to really be one with ourselves or with our breath or with our telephony or with our cows or whatever. We do it in order to give ourselves pause. It’s, like, we have all these ambitions and all this stuff we’ve got to do, “Let me just take a break so I can get right back to doing all those ambitions that I have.”

And I think the difference between gratification, what I call gratification and mindfulness, is that it’s not in your head. Like, that idea that we can think our way through and out of any problem, I think that’s mistaken.

Some of the way that we live is through our bodies alone, and so you can’t think your way out of your bodily encounters. One reason you can’t do that, Pete, is that they happen to you in the moment in which they take place, right?

Like, when the phone rings and you hear it ring, you can’t sort of go, “Well, I’ll, like, process the sensation of the phone ringing later. I’ll save that up. I’ve got other things to do right now.” And so the sensory engagement, well, you could turn off your phone, of course, right?

When you go out on a walk and you feel the texture of the gravel under your feet, or you feel the heat in the air closing in on you, that happens right then, in the moment. And you can’t sort of put it away in order that you can make sense of it later.

When we’re at work, in particular, our time is kind of not our own. It’s structured by others. We’re often told what to do and where to do it. And so maybe you can take a break and kind of catch your breath, go to the break room. Some people work at home where they can, literally, go do a little bit of yoga or something like that. That can help.

But it shouldn’t and it cannot be a replacement for the moment-to-moment experience of doing your job. So either you figure out how to make that experience meaningful or more meaningful as you do it, not for the ends that it provides, but for the experience that it delivers in the moment, or you’re just going to be like less happy than you could with your lot.

Pete Mockaitis
Less happy than you could be. Well, that’s certainly valuable in and of itself. And it’s funny, sort of like the motivational purpose frame of the mindfulness as well, it’s like you have more meaning and gratification in the moment as is.

And I would also suggest that the show is called How to Be Awesome at Your Job, in so doing, all kinds of good additional result-oriented benefits could accrue to us if you’re more present in a conversation, for example. People just like that. That’s part of what makes a person charismatic or likable. you know, improves leadership, etc.

Or, you just not being stressed, harried, disconnected elsewhere is just going to aid your capacity to think and be creative and make decisions and all kinds of other things on top of just having a gratified, meaningful sensory experience in those moments as well.

Ian Bogost
Yeah, I hear what you’re saying. And here’s the way I’ve been thinking about this. Most of our lives, most of the things that we pursue because we think they’re valuable are kind of goal-oriented, outcome-oriented.

We’re very goal-oriented people and we live in a very goal-oriented and outcome-oriented culture. There’s probably pros and cons to that, but that’s the way it is. I think, all in all, it’s a good thing. Like, we want to accomplish stuff, right? And that’s one of those things that we want to accomplish is purpose, meaning, and, you know, like material success, maybe.

You want to be better at your job so you can get promoted, you get a better job. Maybe you could start your company, whatever it might be. All of that is fine. I think that we need to take a break from it from time to time.

And we need to, in order to experience those kind of moment-to-moment pleasures, you need them first not to have any purpose other than to deliver the experience because, otherwise, you’re just instrumentalizing them, turning them into kind of, like, efficiency gain, hacks, or whatever, before you’ve even made sense of what they’re for, right?

So the first exercise is, “What does it even mean just to experience the sensory world as I encounter it? And then, why is it that that’s so hard to do?” And one of the reasons is that we’ve been kind of trained not to do it, right, or we’ve been, what I call it, dematerialized. We’ve been disconnected from all sorts of aspects of the physical world at work, at home, in every aspect of our lives.

But that said, I also think that you’re right, that if you imagine your overall contentment your whole life, everything in your life that’s going on, how happy you are with your job, with your family, with the car you own, with all of it, then one component of that is your sort of day-to-day sense of, “How good do I feel just moving through the world?”

And if you can build like a foundation like a bedrock, a bedrock part of your overall contentment that comes in part from a sense of gratification, like, you know, you take your coffee in the morning at work, and you pour it out into the mug in the kitchen, and you feel the warmth of the mug in your hand, and you smell the coffee having been brewed, and then you taste it, and it energizes you.

And also you have a moment of time that you can share with your coworkers. That little thing does fuel you up, right? Like, it gives you some sense of, “Okay, this is a thing that I do. It’s a ritual. And I’m also just having and I’m aware that I’m having that sensory experience.”

Now, what if I told you that you have that, like, all the time, constantly? And so you can build a sort of sense of overall pleasure that comes from the things you’re already doing that you don’t need to change, that then will give you a little bit of a of like a boost, you know?

But I don’t think that we ought to start by thinking of the purpose of gratification as sort of fueling us up to be more effective or more productive, because then we almost can’t experience it. You have to, like, learn how to experience it before allowing it to serve some of those higher order purposes that you’re thinking of.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I hear you there in terms of your frame of reference, your intention, your mindset, perspective, attitude, beliefs, all that stuff with regard to how you approach it can alter the experience itself.

Ian Bogost
Yeah, totally. You know how, like, people feel, like sometimes people feel like their work is meaningless, like, they just don’t know why they’re doing it. And that’s one of the things that would make you uncomfortable, dissatisfied at work.

You brought up these games. Many years ago at my game studio, we made this game for a popular ice cream chain. It’s one of those where they, like, bash up the ice cream on a cold surface. You know what I mean? And it was this training game to help people figure out portioning because that’s where a lot of the profit was made or lost in the game.

And I learned a lot about this. This is just like a menial job, in a way, like a first job for 16-year-olds or like a minimum wage job. But it was really important to this company that the job be good. And one of the things we discovered was that the workers, the line workers, like one of their senses of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the job had to do with, like, why were they more or less successful? Why was their manager praising them or yelling at them?

And a lot of it had to do with the kind of mechanics of pulling ice cream, and the fact that they have different viscosities and, like, the mint was super thin, and the cake batter was super thick. So paying attention to those, like, small-scale physical differences.

In this case it’s ice cream, so it’s easier than if you do, like, knowledge work, but bear with me here. Knowing and, like, attending to the specifics of their physical acts, that had a lot to do with their overall sense of contentment or even just of clarity with the job, right?

Now, in the book, when I was researching the book, I talked to a lot of people in different professions, and one of the people I talked to does tile setting. So he works doing mostly residential construction, setting tile, and he was telling me all about, like, all the moment-to-moment attention and care and detail of the work of putting one tile next to the other, which, if you don’t know anything about it, you might think it’s easy, but it’s not.

And he told me how gratifying this was, and how much clarity he was able to achieve during the course of a day. He was able to think clearly, he was able to solve problems, not just over the course of the day or the project, but like moment to moment. He was really engaged with it.

And his name is Dan. And I said, “Dan, you know, a lot of people who work in knowledge work, work in office jobs, would love to have that kind of moment-to-moment clarity and contentment in what they do. But sometimes they just feel like they’re sending emails. You know what I mean?”

So the moment-to-moment experience really does matter not just because it might make you, like, more successful, but because it also gives that moment meaning. It allows you to understand what it’s for, why you’re doing it, especially why you’re doing it like many, many times a day or a week or a year, which is what our lives are. There’s a lot of repetition.

And so if we can find a way to make that repetition compelling, then it will feel less like boredom or like a slog, and more like something we want to do, not just to get through it, and not in order to achieve some greater further outcome from it.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, and I think that something feeling like less of a slog is, and I don’t want to go into this loop because like this is, like, “Yeah, it’s awesome to be meaningful in the moment and that’s also super helpful.” So I guess I’m thinking, like, if an activity feels aversive, unpleasant, we will just naturally choose to do less of it, and often to our detriment.

Ian Bogost
Yeah, for sure. Or you’ll try to, yeah. And sometimes you can’t do less of it because that’s where the job is, you know? And then you’re really faced with a huge puzzle. And people, they get into their heads about this, they’re like, “I hate my job, I think. Maybe I need a new job.” And they might, right?

But what if what they really hate, or at least in that moment dislike, is not the job itself, not the outcomes, not the colleagues, not the purpose, not the career, not even the sector, but something about the moment-to-moment experience that they’re engaged with.

I have a colleague at the magazine, at The Atlantic, who got this, like, mechanical keyboard. All we do as writers is type, right? Like, that’s what the job is, is typing and talking on the phone. And, you know, it’s not just typing, but it’s a lot of typing.

He got one of those mechanical keyboards, it’s clicky clicky keyboards. You know, some people might find that irritating when it’s in the next cubicle, but he knew that the moment-to-moment experience of pressing buttons on the computer is what his job was composed of at a sort of atomic level.

And that having an apparatus at his desk that would make that experience more gratifying, it wouldn’t make his relationship with his coworkers easier or better. It wouldn’t make the stories he was editing or writing easier or better. It wouldn’t make his overall sense of career progress easier or better, but it would add something to that moment-to-moment experience of doing it, right?

So, I mean, you know, maybe there’s not a simple solution like that for everything, but I think that we’ve massively underestimated the degree to which the physical connection and contact, the sensory experience of work is a massive part of our sense of contentment at work, not just what we’re doing the work for, not just the money we’re getting paid, not just the purpose or the career advancement, but literally, what’s happening to you one moment to the next.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that example a lot. And when you talk about we’ve become dematerialized and we’re sort of trained to be in that fashion, it’s kind of funny. I’ve noticed, in the world of emails, for example, I pay for the software Superhuman, which I absolutely love.

And in some ways it has some extra features which are nice, but for the most part, I’m just using it as a more beautiful, faster, more responsive skin atop of Gmail. And it’s like Gmail can, for some, be zero dollar cost. You pay out in other ways.

And so I guess my dematerialized trained brain has a number of times thought to myself, “It’s so silly to pay money for this thing that doesn’t do anything, really.” And I try to convince myself, like, “Well, Pete, I mean, because it’s faster, you’re actually able to get the job done.”

Ian Bogost
Yeah, you’re trying to optimize.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s like I have to resort to an economic productivity rationale to myself to feel okay with, “Yeah, I’m spending money because it makes email, which I don’t like doing, a more pleasant experience sensorially. And that is just fine and dandy.” I’m hearing loud and clear from you.

Ian Bogost
Yeah, no, I love the email example because it’s a huge part of all of our lives, right? I also paid for a Gmail client called Mimestream, and it’s not as fancy as yours. It’s really just an email client. But for some reason, my brain just rejects the Gmail client.

I load it up and I just cannot make sense of it. And Mimestream just looks a lot more like the email clients that I’m accustomed to. And it took me a minute to accept that all I was really buying was this sort of sense of visual similarity with, like, Apple Mail, which I use most of the time.

But once I accepted that, it was fine because that was real. Like, it’s real. Like, my sense of moment-to-moment visual contentment with email, which I also spend a lot of time with, that’s a huge part of my workday and my work life. And I will tell you, I literally feel better using my Gmail work account, like so noticeably so. I know that it’s improved my life because of this silly software program that I bought.

Here’s another gratification-oriented email work example that I’ll share with you. I’ve got one of these Logitech mouses, mice, whatever you call them.

And it’s got a button right where my thumb is. And I programmed this button in my mail client to delete emails so, like, a delete email button. Oh, I love pressing the delete email button. And I’ll just sit there and I’ll just delete, delete, delete, delete.

And that feeling of, like, email triage that all of us do, which it’s just a chore, “And don’t you have a delete button on your keyboard? Bogus!” I do. I do, indeed, have a delete button on my keyboard. But something about having, like, this dedicated email deletion button that I press many times a day, that gives me, like, enormous gratification.

It doesn’t really, like, solve the communication problems that generate the emails in the first place. Maybe I’m deleting some that I shouldn’t, but that’s a different problem, right? That’s a different problem than the one that I’m identifying. So you’re exactly onto it.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. Well, I’m thinking about a Guy Ross, How I Built This interview with Paul English who made Kayak. And they sort of established you’re basically just a skin on top of some fancy technology that someone else made. He’s like, “Well, yeah, but that’s what we needed,” and which became a huge company.

Well, now I’m thinking that’s intriguing in terms of how we might choose to integrate delight, sensorial delight into things because I’m thinking about I’ve got this app called Do Habits. And what’s so funny is I like that when I tap it, there’s a little bit of a haptic sensation. And the user experienced designers, you know, they obsess over this all the time.

There’s a little haptic sensation and also makes a little string note. Like, mmm, you know? And so as I tap it, like I did how many minutes of exercise, like, tap, tap, tap, tap, tap. And it just feels great. And I find myself wanting to exercise more so I can tap it.

Ian Bogost

So you can tap more. Right.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah.

Ian Bogost

Yeah, no, that’s totally real, though. I mean, think about, you know, and there are, like, kind of dark patterns to those sorts of designs. Like, you know, when you go into like a casino and you hear and see all of the sensations and sounds, it’s drawing you in and trying to capture your attention.

But the reason we like interacting with our smartphones or our smart watches or our devices is because they’re delightful to interact with. They have these smooth surfaces. They’re responsive. You can, like, have the little springy thing when you refresh a feed or something, and it bounces as though it’s a real physical object. Those things are designed to be delightful.

I mean, they’re not as delightful as they once were, I think. But they’re purposely designed in order they can give us some of that. You know, that’s simulated tactile feedback. I recently wrote a little software program for my smartwatch that is just a timer. It’s literally just a timer.

But I found that, like, most of what I do when I time things is I want, like, kind of multiple 30-second long time. Like, it’s 30 seconds, it’s five minutes to brew tea, or, you know, I’m going to do a minute of hard planks at when I’m exercising, or something. Like, I just don’t need an hour-long timer that much, which is the one that comes with the watch. And I made it work exactly like you’re describing. Tap, tap, tap to add 30 seconds.

Like, it’s silly, but the delight that I feel when I do that is real. Like, it’s not invented. You haven’t made it up. Have you ever gone, like, out of your way to go to, like, the coffee shop or the eatery that has, like, the nice cups or the takeaway plates that are, like, really thick, or those bamboo-like disposable or recyclable cutlery?

Like those sorts of experiences, you will even seek them out because they give you a richer sensory engagement than some alternative would. We’re kind of doing this all the time. We just sort of go, “Well, that’s obviously unimportant. Like, I don’t know why I’m doing that. There’s something wrong with me or something weird about it. I just need to keep that to myself and not share it.”

When, in fact, we all do share in all of that delight. It’s the same reason that, like, a noisy office or a quiet office, or one that’s too bright or not bright enough, or has the wrong color temperature bulbs, or where the carpet is, like, it used to be nice and plush and now it’s been worn down.

Those things have an impact on your day-to-day life. You may not want them to, or you may not take it as seriously as you should, but they absolutely do.

Pete Mockaitis
And then I’m also thinking about how when organizations or people give us sensorial delight or sensorial disgust, I have associations with that organization or that person. Like, if, for example, at one point, I rented an office, and in the bathroom they had the cheapest, thinnest commercial, industrial toilet paper that exists.

Ian Bogost

Totally. No, exactly.

Pete Mockaitis

And I know they did that just because it was cheaper, low cost. And yet, I felt a level of not being cared for?

Ian Bogost
Right. No, but, literally, I mean, you paused because it feels, I mean, I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I think you paused because it feels weird to admit that, to admit that, you know, like you take a business meeting and you go to the restroom, and the toilet paper is like surprisingly thin.

And you’re thinking in your head, you’re like, “What is this company’s values, right? What are they all about?” And you’re not wrong to think that it’s sort of like, you know, like there’s an old joke that if you’re like boarding a plane, and you’re in the jet wing and you see, like, a bolt on the ground.

And you suddenly feel like, “Well, am I safe here?” Even though there’s no evidence that there’s any relationship between, like, the loose bolt and anything that’s been done, but it’s just like that. There is a sense of care that goes into the design and operation of these environments that we live in all the time, including our offices.

And that sense of care, it doesn’t just send messages, it actually delivers experiences that matter to us. I mean, I talk to a lot of people about work, okay? And the bathroom comes up all the time. All the time. Like, if folks feel like the bathroom is, like, too public, like it’s kind of in the wrong place, or they have to pass by too many people to go there, or there aren’t enough stalls, or the stalls aren’t big enough.

In America, we have these, you know, bathroom stalls that you can sort of see under and see around. And in Europe, they tend to have these enclosures with full doors that make you feel. The ones that have, like, the locking door that has the red and the green, you know, vacant-occupied, that gives you the sense that, “Okay, now I’m having privacy because I’m signaling it to someone else, and they’re not going to, like, rattle the door to see if someone’s inside.”

I know it sounds ridiculous to say that your contentment in your job might have something substantially to do with the design of the locks on the restroom stalls, but, honestly and truly, it does. It really does.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. And then I’m thinking about the feedback that we choose to share with folks. And so I’m thinking about, I hired someone to paint my new office space, which I own and I’ve got co-working situation going on, which is pretty cool.

And so I got some bids for painters, and there was one who just seemed like he cared a lot. He’s very thoughtful and asking follow up questions and just kind of going through all the things in some detail and just sort of thinking, like, “Hmm, you know, I’d probably go with this sheen for this purpose, unless you were looking…”

Ian Bogost
That’s the stuff.

Pete Mockaitis

And so I just got the vibe, he really cares about the painting he’s doing. And so I hired him, and I didn’t hire someone else who cost a little bit less, and so they asked for some feedback on the form, and it’s, well, one, there’s some social pieces. It’s sort of, like, “I don’t really have a relationship with you. I’m not going to say, ‘Oh, I got the vibe you didn’t really care that much about my paint job because what I feel…’”

Ian Bogost

Yeah, I know exactly what you’re saying.

Pete Mockaitis
There was less sensorial delight and, yeah, I think that’s the case with a lot of things with regard to the feedback that we choose to give tends to be the one that feels most defensible, “Well, there’s a better price over here. Oh, they can better match my timeline.”

What they didn’t say is, “It felt like he didn’t really care about me and my job and my office the way the other guy did.” And so we won’t say that generally, and, thus, we won’t hear that. And we are devoid, we’re missing out on a huge important piece of feedback. And I think that that’s another reason why we feel silly about these sensorial little things we’re discussing is because other people won’t vocalize them to us unless they have to be our close friends or partners.

Ian Bogost

That’s exactly right. And, you know, one of the pieces of advice I give in the book is that if you can verbalize, just talking about these kinds of encounters, like we’re doing right now, it makes them feel less weird, less embarrassing, less, like, foolish.

And I have found, when I start talking to people about these kinds of experiences, you know, like, “Look, I really cared about the sheen of the paint,” or, “You know, have you noticed the wobbly knob? Like, the wobbly knobs really bothering me,” or whatever it might be, that people, they light up right away. They’re right there with you. They just have a hard time starting that kind of conversation.

And so verbalizing it, vocalizing it is one way of making it matter, of making it normal, of acknowledging that it’s a big part of life. And I think that the optimization, goal-oriented mentality that we have, not just as workers, but also as managers, sometimes makes us think that it’s, like, more noble not to care about these things.

That like, “Well, you should just be able to look past that and, like, get on with the important big stuff part of your job.” But that’s wrong, isn’t it? Because these little things eat at you, and they eat at you because they matter, because they’re happening multiple.

Like, you are seeing the walls of your office every moment of every day. And if the light reflects on them improperly because the wrong sheen was put on them, that colors every moment of every day of your work life. You better get it right, not just because it’s nice to get that kind of thing right, but because it actually really does impact your sensory experience of being at work and doing your job.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Ian, so we’ve had a lot of fun philosophically here. And if folks are thinking, “All right. Okay, I’m sold. All right, de-materialization has happened to our detriment. These sensorial things really do matter. And I don’t need to feel silly about it. I can talk about it. I can invest in making it swell,” do you have any top do’s or don’ts for us as we start living life with this new lens?

Ian Bogost

Yeah, I mean, I think the first one we’ve already talked about a little bit, which is just, if you accept these gifts as things that matter, I don’t want to say take it seriously because that puts too much of a burden on your brain.

But if you can be open to the idea that some of these small stuff encounters with the physical world are capable of delivering meaning, then the meaning will just kind of arrive. It’s happening to you all the time.

One way you can do that is just by, like, lingering a little bit longer in the experiences that you’re having wherever you are. And this will help you identify them to kind of feel the sensation of encountering them.

Like, sometimes, I just let my fingers sort of rub up against the keyboard. It just, like, grounds me, like, “Here I am with the keyboard.” And then I also sense the little nubs on the F and the J key that orient me for touch typing, which is like a tiny moment of gratification that I have.

So that’s one thing. Just, like, linger in these moments like a little bit longer. Talk about them, give them surface. But I think the big thing is that, if you are willing to accept that your life isn’t just made of big moments of accomplishment, and then nothing in between matters, but that your life is made of moments, then you can take those moments as they are given.

Even if they don’t do anything for you, even if it’s just, like, “Ah, you know, at this time of day, the way that the light shimmers off the sheen of the paint, huh, that’s beautiful.” That’s enough, right? So dividing your day up into moments every now and then, and just taking in the moment. Not being mindful about it, not trying to, like, bend your brain to accept them or what have you. Just allow yourself to have a moment. That’s another thing you can do.

And then, you know, I think this is a little bit harder, but in the workplace, I think that accepting and even communicating up the chain that some of the trappings of physical life, you know, whether you work from home or whether you work remotely, whether you are in a co-work situation, whether you work a normal job at a workplace, that the physical environment in which you work has an outsized impact on what you’re able to get done at that work, right?

Which means that maybe, like, little tiny changes would make your life a lot, “Oh, actually, if we just had this different kind of coffee cup, I think it would be a lot better.” Like, being willing to make those kinds of small asks where you find the opportunity for improvement is maybe also something that people can do right away, you know?

And then one last thing I’ll throw out there that’s more about your home life than your work life. Find things to do outside of work that are sensorily different from the ones that you do at work. I don’t mean, like, that have different goals. I mean that whatever your sensory life is in your job, find ways of exercising a diversity of sensory encounters outside of it.

So, you know, if you’re a knowledge worker and you’re spending all your time at your keyboard with your computer sitting down, then something that you do while you’re standing up and outside, that’s an interesting experience, not because you need to garden or because it’s better to knit than to move symbols around between SaaS systems, but just because it gives you a different sensory encounter.

It, like, rejuvenates you in order that you can come back and appreciate the world of work, of the moment-to-moment experience of work with kind of renewed attention. So there’s a few ideas.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. I like that a lot. And I think just pausing in order to do that. And I’m thinking about, I remember when I first got an iPhone that had the face ID unlock feature, I thought it was so cool. And I guess I’ve grown accustomed to it, as maybe we do sensory habituation stuff.

And I remember my wife asked me, because whenever I did it, I would flash a real big smile, and she’s like, “Do you have to smile for it to work?” I was like, “No, I just really like doing it.”

Ian Bogost
I mean, I think what you’re expressing is the sentiment of wonder. And if you believe, I really believe this, that there’s nothing whatsoever that isn’t worthy of wonder. And we do forget that. We forget it as we grow older, in general, but then we forget it as the things that were once wondrous become more familiar.

And they’re still wondrous, right? Every day, we’re surrounded by all these miracles. And then there are new ones, too. So being open to feeling that sense of wonder, and really thinking about sensation, about your presence in the world as a human body, as a series of gifts, I think that that’ll change your whole life.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, lovely. Well, now could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Ian Bogost

This is one from the Tibetan Buddhist master Chogyam Trungpa, he says, “When you ask how you should do things, it’s like trying to buy a pair of gloves so you don’t have to touch. One doesn’t have to think about how, one just does it.”

I love that. I love that idea that we’re stuck in our heads and we’re mistaking effort for something that requires none.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Ian Bogost
One of the things I’ve become really interested in over the past few years are a series of research experiments carried out by an Oxford University psychologist named Charles Spence and a group of colleagues that he works with.

And one of the things that he works on is what’s called multimodal perception, which is the idea that, like, seemingly unrelated things can change your experience of sensation. So one of my favorite versions of this study is, like, changing the color or shape of a spoon with which you eat yogurt actually changes people’s understanding of the taste of it, or how much they think they enjoy it.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. And a favorite book?

Ian Bogost
One of my favorite books ever is a novella by Nicholson Baker called the Mezzanine. It’s been around for many, many years. And it’s about a man who is riding an escalator from the ground floor of his office building to the mezzanine level of his office building, and that’s the whole book.

And it sounds ridiculous, I know, but over the course of the ride, he reflects on all of these ordinary experiences that he’s had, you know, having lunch, buying shoelaces, and it just is this vivid celebration of the depth and magic of ordinary life. It’s a really short little easy read that I love to come back to.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite tool?

Ian Bogost
One that I love that isn’t technological, or at least not in that way, is the Pigma Micron archival ink pens. You know what I mean? I use them in 0.1 millimeter thickness.

And I just find that the smallness and the precision of writing with them, they invite a kind of precision of thought or action. Even if what I’m doing doesn’t have it, it sort of inspires me to think better and more deliberately about what I’m writing down and why I’m writing it down.

Pete Mockaitis
Any favorite habit?

Ian Bogost
Lingering a little longer than needed in anything that I’m doing. And, especially, to the point of, like, if something feels like a little boring, if you’re like, “This is a little strange. Like, what am I doing?” a little awkward, a little weird, that’s something I try to notice.

It’s just a good sign that I’m about to find something new inside of something familiar. So seeking out that kind of sense of weirdness or embarrassment or boredom by letting something resonate a little longer, that’s something I try to do just when it occurs to me without pressure.

Pete Mockaitis
And speaking of resonating, is there any key thing you share with folks that really seems to resonate, they quote back to you often?

Ian Bogost
I think the idea that your life is made of moments, that you can divide it up a lot of ways, but one of them is in these tiny chunks of time that don’t feel like they mean very much individually, but that add up to a lot over time.

Pete Mockaitis
And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Ian Bogost
My website is Bogost.com, that’s B-O-G-O-S-T.com. And the book is SmallStuffBook.com.

Pete Mockaitis
And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Ian Bogost

I think it would be to realize that your work life is more than just your goals and your ambitions and the outcomes that those produce. It is those things, but it’s more than that. It’s also, and maybe when you think about it, it’s even kind of mostly the experience of doing the work, of being in the workplace and getting the work done with the people that you’re doing it with.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Ian, thank you.

Ian Bogost
Thank you so much for having me.

1165: How to Have Better Disagreements with Julia Minson

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Julia Minson reveals her strategies for making disagreements productive.

You’ll Learn

  1. The HEAR framework for productive disagreements
  2. The key to avoiding a stalemate in an argument
  3. Simple phrases that communicate curiosity instead of judgment

About Julia

Julia Minson, from the Harvard Kennedy School, studies the psychology of disagreement and conflict. Her work focuses on how people can communicate across differences without conversations becoming hostile or unproductive. She’s the author of How to Disagree Better and studies “conversational receptiveness” — the language patterns that make people more open, collaborative, and willing to engage.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Julia Minson Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Julia, welcome!

Julia Minson
Thank you. It’s great to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to chat about disagreeing better. Could you start us off with a key thing you’ve observed time and time again like the top thing you see that folks get wrong about disagreeing?

Julia Minson
I think there’s two things that sound like the opposite of each other, but they’re actually the same thing. On one hand, people avoid disagreement because they feel, like, intensely uncomfortable with it and sort of, like, really don’t want to get into it. And then on the other hand, you see people sort of flying off the handle and getting into very aggressive disagreements.

And you see both of these problems sort of all the time, and they’re actually related, right, because it’s usually when a person is avoiding something for a long time, eventually they sort of like blow a gasket, and then end up expressing their perspective in a very unstructured and unhelpful way.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, and this is a learnable thing to not do that and to disagree better.

Julia Minson
Yeah, absolutely. So I am a psychologist at the Harvard Kennedy School, and I have spent my career trying to figure out how to help people do this better. And there’s really some, like, very concrete things that we get wrong, that if we fix them, life can get easier, conversations can get more productive.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. Well, could you tell us a cool story of someone who saw a transformation in that regard?

Julia Minson
Sure. Well, I mean, honestly, I don’t know if you’ve heard this saying, “All research is me search,” right? So a lot of the time, academics study the type of thing that gives them the most difficulty, and I am absolutely the kind of person that used to be extraordinarily argumentative.

You know, I’m pretty smart and I used to love to show it to everybody who would listen. And I just learned over time that you get a lot more mileage by trying to understand where the other person is coming from because, so often, you start arguing and you don’t actually know what the argument is about, right?

You are sort of pushing a point and you don’t understand why the other person is resisting. But if you have some sense of where they’re coming from, it just really sort of transforms the conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, you’ve got a cool concept, a turn of a phrase, conversational receptiveness, and I just think that is a very handy thing to have tattooed into our brains, if you will. Tell us, what does that mean and how is it helpful?

Julia Minson
So receptiveness to opposing views is your sort of tendency to think hard about stuff you disagree with, right? So we normally, as humans, do a really good job thinking about ideas we agree with and we ignore or look for flaws in ideas we disagree with.

So, for a long time, I was sort of really interested in this thing of like, “Are some people better at putting as much thought and putting as much effort into ideas they disagree with as ideas they do agree with?” And you could think, like, “Look, that’s probably a good idea because I will end up being a smarter, more well-rounded person.”

But once we figured out how you can measure people’s receptiveness, we also realize that people are quite bad at expressing it, right? So I can be thinking really hard about your perspective, I can be like, you know, putting in all this intellectual effort, but you have no idea.

So as the person I’m speaking with, if you don’t know that I’m trying, we are just as likely to have sort of very negative conversation and experience, you know, a bunch of conflict escalation and bad feelings towards each other if you don’t know that I am trying to listen to you.

So conversational receptiveness is a way to express the fact that you’re being receptive using words, right, using language, so that it’s, like, totally obvious and totally transparent to other people.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, could you give us maybe a demonstration of some key phrases or indicators which share, “Hey, I’m receptive,” versus, “I’m not receptive”?

Julia Minson
So the best way to memorize kind of the basics of conversational receptiveness is using what we call the HEAR framework, so H-E-A-R as in, “I hear you.” And each letter stands for something, kind of a different idea.

So the H stands for hedging. So you might want to say, for example, “Look, COVID vaccines are safe and effective,” right? That’s a pretty sort of dogmatic statement, and a person who disagrees with you will start looking for holes in your argument and looking for counterexamples of, you know, they heard that somebody had some kind of vaccine side effect.

Instead, you could say, “Look, most physicians tend to believe that COVID vaccines are largely safe and effective,” right? So “most tend to” and “largely” are all ways of kind of hedging my claim. So it’s words like perhaps, maybe, occasionally, some people, right?

And what it does is it really kind of takes this wind out of your counterpart sides. It’s, like, you’ve demonstrated with your words that you understand that there is, in fact, another perspective, and you’re leaving a little bit of room for it. So that’s the H.

The E stands for emphasizing agreement. So the idea behind conversational receptiveness is not that we have to agree. It’s not that I have to, like, change my mind, I have to compromise, you know, I have to like meet you in the middle and give you a hug.

It’s that I recognize that any two humans agree on some stuff. It could be that we’re both concerned with something. It could be that we’re both upset about something. It could be that we just have some values that are in common.

So words like, “I also want to,” or, “I am also concerned with,” or, “We both would like to see, you know, XYZ happen,” just sort of puts us on the same side of the table for a second.

The A stands for acknowledgement. So taking a couple minutes to restate your counterpart’s perspective before you launch into your own argument, you know, “I hear that it’s really important to you that this project is delivered at a particular level of quality.”

Or, “I understand that you’re very concerned about the hours that the team has been working.” So it’s using my own words to demonstrate to you, like, unambiguously, that I was listening when you were talking.

And, finally, the R stands for reframing to the positive. So dropping negative and contradictory words like no, can’t, won’t, don’t, terrible, hate, kill, and replacing them with some more positively balanced words like, “It would be wonderful if,” or, “I appreciate it when,” or, “Great.”

So, “I hate it when people push me into stressful decisions.” Stop. It could be replaced with, “I really appreciate it when people give me more time to consider important choices. Thank you for understanding.” So kind of like same content, but a very different flavor. So H-E-A-R.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so then you said using words. I mean, those are all words. I guess I’m curious also if there’s a degree of nonverbal things that convey receptiveness or lack thereof.

Julia Minson
Yeah, certainly. I mean, you can imagine, right? Like, if a person is nodding, if they’re smiling, if they’re not interrupting you, all of those things seem more receptive than the opposite. It tends to be the case that words are easier to control than our bodies, and actually easier to interpret than our bodies, right?

So a lot of the time, when people are listening hard, they look very serious and they kind of look sullen and they look like they’re staring into space. And it’s not because they’re not listening, it’s actually because they’re working really hard.

And so it’s very easy to interpret, or it’s very easy to misinterpret body language to mean something different. And people, like, misinterpret language language all the time, but language is clearer. So it’s, like, when we’re choosing between two imperfect tools, words are clearer than body language.

Pete Mockaitis
And when it comes to acknowledging the other perspective, are there any tweaks you might put on the traditional notions of active listening, or is that just what this is?

Julia Minson
Yeah, so active listening is a really sort of interesting idea because it’s a mix of, like, stuff that happens in your head, the actual listening, and nonverbal stuff like nodding and smiling and eye contact, and some sounds, like uh-huh, and hmm, and huh, and then some restating.

And it’s really unclear from that whole kind of like menu of stuff what’s important, what really does the work for you. Like, if I’m nodding but not smiling, like, does that work? Or do I have to also be smiling? We focus on the language because you really can’t fake it.

Like, for me, to restate what you said in a way that’s accurate, I had to have listened to you. I can nod and smile all day long and have no idea what you’re actually saying. But for me to restate your words, that’s unfalsifiable proof that I was actually paying attention when you were talking. So that’s sort of why the focus on restating.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And when it comes to the nods and uh-huh’s and okay’s, am I hearing you say that it’s unknown in the research if that is getting it done or not?

Julia Minson
So it’s not that it’s unknown. So we actually ran a very fun study where we wanted to see, like, you know, people always talk about how important it is to be a good listener, right? We all kind of agree on the fact that good listening is important.

And what we wanted to see is how good are folks at judging whether the other person is being a good listener, right? So imagine the setup where there’s a small lab room, it’s a little, like, slightly larger than your bathroom probably. And people go in there and it’s two strangers.

And what we tell them is that, “You need to have a conversation with this other person and get to know them, for example, as if you wanted to have them be a roommate. Like, what are the things you would ask them about and learn from them if you were interviewing them as a potential roommate.”

And in the room there’s two chairs. And behind one of the chairs, there’s a screen on the wall. And this screen is playing this, like, ongoing loop of commercials that are on mute, okay? And so one person sits down and their back is to the screen, and they walked in and they noticed the screen, and we’re like, “Ah, just ignore the screen. It doesn’t matter.”

The other person sits down and they’re facing the screen, right? So they’re facing their conversation partner and this person also has the screen behind them. And that person got special instructions. And so their special instructions are, “Either ignore the screen, talk to your counterpart, get to know them, or pretend you’re listening, and we will pay you extra money if you can memorize all the products for which there are the commercials on this screen.”

So it’s like if you go on a date, and there’s, like, a football game playing above the bar, and you’re wondering if your date is listening to you or, like, watching football above your head, like this is the experience.

And so then the person who had their back to the screen, what they have to do is they have to guess which condition their partner was in. So afterwards, we tell them, we’re like, “Hey, some people were instructed to listen carefully and some people were instructed to memorize commercials behind your head. Which condition do you think your person was in?” It turns out that people are terrible at this task.

Pete Mockaitis
Terrible at guessing?

Julia Minson
They’re terrible at guessing because they all think that the person sitting across from them, who is nodding and smiling, is listening to them, even though they’re not actually listening because they’re trying to memorize this other thing because they’re getting paid extra money for memorizing this other thing.

And so you can imagine, like in a meeting, for example, at work, you see this all the time. There’s a room full of people that’s, like, nodding and smiling and maybe even, like, typing on their laptops, right, but what they’re actually typing is their grocery list, or, like, they’re writing whatever, an email to their family, right? You have no idea what information is actually getting through.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s fascinating in and of itself. So I guess one takeaway is, “Hey, if you fake that you’re listening, you’re going to fool the other person. So I guess, good to know, but that doesn’t seem like a great strategy to do.”

Julia Minson

Well, it depends, right? Like, it depends on whose perspective you are looking at, right? So if you are trapped in an awkward situation and you’re just killing time, people are, like, very good at faking, you know, listening, smiling, like enjoyment, all of those things. Like, we are good at sort of getting along with people.

If you’re the person who’s trying to make sure that something is getting done, if you’re running this meeting, if you’re trying to brief people on a new project plan, if you need to make sure that everybody’s ducks are in a row, then you need to look for more reliable signals of listening.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s super handy. Well, that HEAR framework, I like it and it seems to make great sense as you lay it out there for us. I’m curious if there are any finer points or distinctions or hiccups or little things that trip people up when they’re trying to execute this.

Julia Minson
The most common, I think, first experience is that it’s harder than people imagine it to be. So it seems super easy, you’re like, “Oh, H-E-A-R, I can memorize the words and I can say them.” But when you are in a disagreement, what you’re mostly thinking about is how to win. You’re thinking about how to come up with the best argument.

And so now, I’m asking you to do this extra thing that you have to do on top of thinking how to win, which might also feel like it’s going to prevent you from winning, because you now have to think about your counterpart’s argument and you have to take it seriously.

And so people just find that it takes some cognitive effort and it takes some practice. In the beginning, I always liken it to playing piano. Like, the first time you play piano, it does not sound like music. And so this feels awkward and effortful.

And then with some rounds of repetition, people start kind of getting into the groove of it, and becoming much more fluid at it. So I would say, the first thing to do is to not give up when it feels awkward the first time.

Pete Mockaitis
And I think that’s a really key point there. We have a lot of our attentional resources on how to win, generally. And it sounds like that may not be the ideal stance in order to really listen and hear and receive someone’s perspective in the first place.

Julia Minson
Yeah. Well, you know, I mean, it kind of brings up another really fascinating idea for me, which is that, how many times have you walked into a conversation and thought, “Okay, what is my goal here? What am I trying to accomplish? Do I have strategies that are going to help me achieve my goal? And are those the right strategies?”

Like, most people don’t think about their goals unless it’s sort of a very important conversation that you have been planning for a long time. And so when we enter a disagreement, it’s usually spontaneous, right? Like, you’re sitting there having a conversation, somebody says something and you’re like, “Oh, no, like you’re wrong. Let me fix you.”

So our first immediate goal sort of stems from this assumption that, “I’m right. You’re wrong. I’m going to tell you how it is,” right? And quite often, that doesn’t serve us well. So the question of, “What am I trying to do? And what’s the right strategy to do it?” I think, is a really, really important piece of all of this.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, that’s super. So it sounds like you may be saying, if we don’t take time in advance to thoughtfully consider our goals, the default goal is winning, fixing them, and being right.

Julia Minson
That’s right. That’s right. And then, of course, if you have two people who are both pursuing that goal with some gusto, what you end up with is a stalemate, right? Nobody gives in, nobody is listening, and eventually people get frustrated with each other and, either it escalates into a fight or you just walk away from it, and you’re sort of like, “Yeah, this person isn’t going to listen to reason.”

And that’s terrible, in the workplace because both people are frustrated, nothing got done, and you have sort of soured a potential relationship.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, if the default goal is how to win, can you suggest some alternative goals that may very well be worth focusing on and pursuing in a given conversation?

Julia Minson
Yeah, so what’s interesting is that there are so many that people don’t think about. Like, if I’m with my manager, right, I might just want to impress them with, like, how smart I am, right? Or I could want to be funny. Or I could want to just pass the time because we’re stuck at the airport together. Or I could want to show that I’m sort of really well versed in a particular topic.

My favorite goal, and I think the goal that serves disagreements the best is the goal of understanding what exactly your counterpart believes and why they believe it. So in order to make any kind of progress on the disagreement, I need to know sort of, like, what you’re all about.

And quite often, and I have this experience all the time. People come to me with a disagreement. Since my book has come out, I’ve had these totally wild conversations where I’m signing books and somebody sort of stops the line and says, you know, “Julia, can I ask you for advice on like this?”

And then they start telling me sort of, like, this long extended story about their friend or their life partner who doesn’t do this or does something else. And I always say to them, I’m like, “Have you asked them why they think that’s the right way to behave?”

And I often get one of two responses. Either a person is just completely baffled and they’re like, “No, I haven’t asked them. Thank you for pointing that out. I’m going to go ask them,” which, to me, just sort of boggles my mind that somebody’s been in the conflict for days or weeks or years and has never asked their counterpart why they believe what they believe.

Or, I think the more potentially risky one is people say, “No, I haven’t asked them, but I know they’re this kind of person and they were brought up in this kind of family and this is why they are like that.” And so there’s sort of, this set of assumptions about, you think the other person believes what they believe for some set of reasons that you have, essentially, made up in your head and haven’t tested by asking the question, like, “Tell me more about your beliefs.”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yes, a set of assumptions, and I have found my assumptions are often incorrect, and so it’s well worth asking. You said ask why they believe what they believe, and you used the phrase, “Tell me more.” I’ve heard that sometimes a why question can trigger defensiveness. Do you have any favorite approaches or questions you like to use in unearthing this stuff?

Julia Minson
Yeah, I think people, in general, struggle with asking questions or making statements that signal their willingness to understand, their desire to understand, and aren’t, like, gotcha phrases in sort of question form, right?

So you could say, “Why do you believe that?” That sounds like an attack. Or I could say, “Look, you know, I’m really curious to understand why you believe that.” That sounds more like curiosity, right?

And the why is there, but I think the real, you know, I have sort of this mental bar that I set for myself is, you know, if I asked a question that makes me feel superior in a disagreement, I shouldn’t have asked it.

Like, if I feel I just scored a point, then I’m actually losing, I’m losing at my own game of sounding curious and trying to gather information from the other person. Almost everything in disagreement that feels really good to ourselves is probably destructive to the relationship.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I hear you. So if you’re disagreeing on a science issue, you say, “Well, then why is it numerous systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials have showed, in fact, the exact opposite is what happens in experimental conditions? Suck on that,” you know?

Julia Minson
Right. Or, “Well, then how do you explain…?” blah, blah, blah, you know, right?

Pete Mockaitis
Sure. Okay. That’s a nice little internal emotional indicator there. All right. Well, I’d also love to hear, in the whole emotional game here, in terms of you want to win, there’s high stakes, you feel threatened or intimidated or disrespected, we can get hijacked in this emotional land. Any pro tips for dealing with all that?

Julia Minson
So emotional regulation, right, is something that people struggle with but is doable and it’s not just for conflict. It’s for all sorts of other things. A lot of the times, I mean, I’m going to say things that, after the fact, sound totally obvious but are profoundly true.

Our emotions come from our brains, right, which are, ultimately, physical organs that need rest and food and water. And so, quite often, if you are feeling yourself overtaken by emotions, what that means is it’s time to take a break. It’s time to take a break from this conversation or it’s time to take just, like, a break break, right?

And it goes back to this point of planning. Quite often, we end up in disagreements spontaneously with no forethought. And often, we fly off the handle because we are tired and because we’re stressed out and, you know, it’s Thanksgiving dinner, and, like, everybody has had a drink or two, and it’s in the evening and there’s all kinds of physiological and situational reasons why we are not at our best at that moment.

And so, one, if we have the ability to plan a conversation, prepare yourself to do it at a time when you’re at your best. And if you don’t have the ability to plan the conversation, you can always pause it and say, “Look, this sounds important. I’d like to talk to you about this thoughtfully. Can we schedule coffee for next week?”

So, like, when somebody comes after you over dinner about, like, “Well, why haven’t you guys gotten married yet?” or something incredibly sort of personal and triggering and random that can come up at a strange time, you don’t have to entertain it right then and there.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, that’s super. So just having it planned for a time when you’re at your best and you’re sort of mentally prepped for it, as opposed to, you know, surprised, shell-shocked, like, oof, getting disrupted. I’d love to hear if, for whatever reason that’s not so possible, “Oh, we got a meeting with the big account or the big executive, and I’m not going to be able to get back on that calendar for months,” do you have any pro tips for in the moment dealing with the stuff?

Julia Minson
Yeah, so, back to sort of this idea of question-asking and inquiry and showing curiosity, there’s two ways of thinking about this. There’s sort of like, “Are you trying to help your counterpart have a better experience? And are you trying to calm yourself down?”

And those things are intimately related, right, because when we are in a conversation, when we’re in a disagreement, the way you’re reacting to me is what’s causing my emotions. So if I can slow it down long enough to get you to calm down, it will also calm me down. I mean, I think one of the things that people really sort of forget about disagreement is that it is a dynamic interpersonal process. Like, you can’t disagree by yourself in a vacuum.

And so if I can stop myself from trying to make the argument and, instead say, “Hey, I’d like to understand where you’re coming from, I’d like to understand why this matters to you. Tell me why this is a big deal,” that very simple action tends to make the other person calmer, explain their perspective, kind of appreciate the fact that they were asked, and then that gives me a chance to calm down.

So the two things, really, like, reinforce each other. The contrast is I make a forceful argument, you make a forceful argument, I have to make my argument even more forceful. The next thing you know, we’re yelling at each other.

Pete Mockaitis
And I think that’s really quite brilliant because you get a moment to regroup and the spotlight is off of you. So maybe they do ask, and you can’t escape or reschedule. It’s, like, “Why haven’t you gotten married yet?” And you’re like, “Whoa! What the heck, man? Kind of none of your business. We’re going to live our life the way we see fit. Thank you very much.”

But instead of saying that with that question of, “Oh, this seems like this timeline is really important to you. Can you tell me more about that?” A question along those lines shifts the spotlight off of you and can make them feel appreciated, and lets you take a breath and recollect all at the same time.

Julia Minson
Right, exactly. And, I mean, honestly, you can keep going and going, like, “Oh, are you married? How long have you been married? How is it going? Do you have kids?” Like, you can ask many questions, which serves dual purposes, right? One is what you just mentioned, which is, you know, giving yourself a break.

But, two, part of the reason that the person asked the question is because they have an opinion about what you should be doing with your life, and they want to share something. They feel like they have wisdom or advice or insight to offer.

And so you’re asking them, and they’re going to tell you, right, and they will feel wonderful about it. And they’re going to feel like you’re a great listener. And then by the time all is said and done, hopefully, you have a way of talking about your perspective that sort of resonates with what they are concerned about.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot because many of the times, it’s not really about you at all. They have a belief about how things should be with marriages and timelines and, I don’t know, you name it – fertility, population, furthering the species, whatever.

They may have an opinion and they’re not even directly attacking you. They just, generally, have some kind of worldview, and so you can inquire about that. And in so doing, they like it, they can talk about it, and they might not even have to return to you at all.

Julia Minson
Right. And this is sort of like, great, we’re running with the marriage example because I just spontaneously brought it up. But you can imagine, you know, let’s say these are your parents or, like, your uncle or whoever it is who has some stake.

And maybe they want you to get married because they want you to have kids, which is, one conversation. It could be that they want you to get married because they think that it’s, like, financially more responsible to put all your pennies together and invest in the American dream. That’s a totally different conversation.

And so the way you sort of talk about it would be different depending on what it is they are concerned with. Or it could be sort of this entirely different thing you were suggesting, which is it’s not about you at all. It’s about their, like, world views about the institution of marriage, which is a third type of conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. And, Julia, could you share with us any of your most favorite and least favorite words, scripts, bit of verbiage when it comes to doing this conversational receptiveness thing well?

Julia Minson
So, the way I think about a whole conversation, right, is like having basically two big activities that you’re trying to pursue. You’re trying to understand where the other person is coming from. You’re trying to gather information. And then at the same time, or like in the same conversation, you’re also trying to convey your own set of beliefs and make your own argument.

And so, overall, people spend way too much time in the second part, the part where you’re trying to make your own argument. So the first thing I would advise folks to do is to re-balance your attention and your time to spend a lot more time in the place of sort of inquiry, and signaling curiosity.

So all those kinds of phrases around, you know, “I’d like to know more about how you came to hold this belief. I would love to understand why this is important to you. What would you like to see happen here? Have you seen this thing…” whatever it is, “…done very successfully? Would it be helpful if I did X, Y, and Z?” So they’re all questions that sort of are like getting around this person’s beliefs and values.

And then, at some point, you’re going to feel like, “You know, I think I get it,” right? And you might want to say, “Okay, so I think I get it. Let me tell you what I think I just heard, and you tell me if like I did get it or not, right?”

And so that’s sort of a transition because, once you restate what you heard, they might say, “Well, kind of, but not really, and there’s this other thing. And I forgot to mention…” blah blah blah blah blah, right? And so then you might have to spend a little more time there.

Or they might say, “Yeah, you know, that’s right. You got it. Thank you for listening to me. I think that’s exactly what I was trying to say.” And then you switch to the part where you are now making your own argument. And that’s where you use the HEAR framework, right?

So there, you can do your H-E-A-R to show that, “I have a point of view here, I have a set of beliefs, but I’m going to express it in a way that still, like, recognizes the fact that I just spent 20 minutes listening to you and I was actually paying attention.”

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. Well, Julia, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Julia Minson
I think that a lot of the time, people are hesitant to think about these topics, especially, like, if we are, for example, debating how to do a project at work, maybe I’ll say, “Well, you know, receptiveness is good. I need to understand where this person is coming from because I need to work with them.”

But sometimes we get into these topics that feel very moralized, like, if we talk about a company’s environmental policy, if we talk about affirmative action and hiring, if we talk about medical policies that support reproductive care. Like, there’s a lot of places, there’s a lot of topics even in the workplace that feel very, very moralized.

And I think people are afraid to approach those topics because it feels like, “Well, you know, how can I possibly condone that crazy perspective?” And that, to me, seems like a mistake because if you have a passion around a policy area and around a way that you would like to see the world changed, it’s very hard to wield influence if you keep walking away from people and walking away from conversations because you don’t think that they are sort of worthy of being engaged with.

So that’s something that I really like people to think about as, like, “How am I going to wield influence if I don’t engage?”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s very well said. And when you talk about the moral piece of it, perhaps there’s a dimension of us that feels, even hearing out and providing a respectful opportunity to air the alternative view, which we may even see as evil, is to, in some way, support, condone, approve, welcome, entertain, negotiate with, whatever, the evil.

And I think that, if we evaluate that, that’s really more of an emotional vibes thing as opposed to a logical thing.

Julia Minson
Well, you know, it’s back to assumptions, right? Like, how do you know they’re evil. Like, that’s a big word, like evil with a capital E, that’s like a big accusation, right? So how do you conclude that without really thoughtfully engaging with a person and their beliefs, you know?

And most of the time, when you really listen to people, they say things that kind of make sense, at least in some dimensions or from the perspective that they see the world from. And, frankly, even like the people who are evil, if you’re in a conversation with them, it is often because you need them to achieve a certain goal.

If you can sort of, relegate them to the eighth circle of hell and never have to deal with them again, that’s great. But most of the time, we don’t have that power. Most of the time, we actually need to get things done. And so, again, if you’re going to get things done, you have to understand the other side.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yes, we’ve had Chris Voss, and other folks who’ve done hostage negotiation, on the show. And, in fact, even folks who are committing evil actions, in terms of they have hostages, they’re threatening to take their lives, providing some of this understanding stuff is tremendously helpful in untangling that dangerous situation.

Julia Minson
Yeah, no, that’s exactly right. And I had a student last year who worked for an immigration non profit. And he said, “Well, how can I possibly have a conversation with these people that work for the government, and they’re hauling children away from their parents, and etc?”

And I said, “Well, if you want to help these children, do you think it would be effective to tell this person who is doing their government job, ‘You’re a horrible human being and I hate everything you stand for’? Like, do you think you’re going to get anything out of them after you say that?”

So there’s sort of the impulse to tell people what exactly we think of them. But, again, is it serving your goal?

Pete Mockaitis
Well said. All right. Well, now could you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Julia Minson
William Wrigley Jr., remember, like, Wrigley’s chewing gum, Wrigley’s Field? So a hundred years ago, he said, “When two men in business always agree, one of them is unnecessary.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Julia Minson
The famous Milgram experiments. The reason they’re so important to me, so, you know, in the Milgram studies, right, you had participants who gave other people, trained actors, but of course, they didn’t know that they were trained actors, gave them electric shocks, and they thought that they were participating in a study on learning.

And there was this experimenter in a white lab coat who kept telling them to give this other person electric shocks. And, in reality, it was a study of obedience to authority. And for Milgram, this was sort of this whole illustration of what happened in Nazi Germany and how easy it is to get people to obey authority through sort of very subtle changes to the situation.

Well, as a little girl, I grew up in Russia. And the reason I’m a psychologist is because my mom was a psychologist, and the reason she was a psychologist was because she read the Milgram studies. So, you know, she was a Jewish woman in the Soviet Union, and it, like, really resonated with her to the point where she learned English and got a PhD, and here I am, you know, a generation later.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. And a favorite book?

Julia Minson
I read a lot of fantasy. And I really like an author named Alix Harrow. She’s got a new novel called The Everlasting that I wish I could wipe from my brain and read all over again so I could have the experience again.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool?

Julia Minson
Espresso maker.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Julia Minson
Sitting on the couch after dinner, piled up with, like, my youngest child who’s ten, and our dog who’s 70 pounds, and we all watch an episode of “Modern Family.” And thank God, “Modern Family” is so long that, like, one episode at a time, we’ve been doing it for, I don’t know, two years.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks, they quote it back to you often?

Julia Minson
“Everything is negotiable.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Julia Minson
So my website is DisagreeingBetter.com.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Julia Minson
Yeah, next time you disagree with somebody, pause and think about whether you understand where they’re coming from. And if you don’t, ask.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Julia, thank you.

Julia Minson
Thank you very much. This was great.

1164: How to Pace Yourself for Success and Long-Term Thriving with Elizabeth Svoboda

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Elizabeth Svoboda shares expert tactics for finding the right pace to sustain your energy for the long haul.

You’ll Learn

  1. The subtle warning signs you’re overpacing
  2. How to structure your day for maximum energy
  3. How to streamline your day with selective mediocrity

About Elizabeth

Elizabeth Svoboda is an award-winning science writer and contributor to Scientific American, Discover, The Boston Globe, The New York Times, and other publications. Elizabeth is a winner of the Evert Clark/Seth Payne Award for Young Science Writers, and her work has been anthologized in the Best American Science and Nature Writing series. She lives in San Jose, California, with her husband and young sons.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Elizabeth Svoboda Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Elizabeth, welcome!

Elizabeth Svoboda
Thank you so much, Pete. It’s great to be here.

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. Well, I’m excited to be chatting about The Art of Pacing. And congratulations, release day is here, now, the day of our recording. I bet that feels good.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yes, it’s surreal, but it feels great. I’m kind of riding the wave here and hoping it lasts, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
Super. Well, so tell us, could you share, for starters, a super surprising or particularly fascinating discovery you’ve made about pacing as you’re doing your research and putting this all together here?

Elizabeth Svoboda
So the genesis of this book was I started having some interesting conversations with, like, high-level coaches, Olympic athletes. And the thing that surprised me the most at first was, well, number one, just how seriously they took the business of pacing, which meant taking much more rest and much longer periods of recovery than most of us actually allow ourselves on a day-to-day basis.

Like, we all kind of have this stereotype in our heads of, like, the Olympic athlete who’s toiling from the break of dawn until the sun goes down, but it is just not reality at all.

And so having these discussions, I started to think, “What if we could all start to pace ourselves as thoughtfully, as deliberately, as these athletes who, again, are amazing or doing world-level things? And what would that produce for us in our lives?”

And I think that initial element of surprise was really what helped propel the entire book forward.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that is striking to think about in an athletic context. And you could see it elsewhere. I’m thinking there was a podcast, I think it was Father Mike Schmitz. He’s a priest, and he was telling a story about even if you’re saving the world.

Like, let’s take a look at some nuns who are actually, like, saving the world, they’re right up in there in the midst of poverty and, like, doing the good-est of things, right, you could imagine. And their order of life, it’s locked in there. Rest, prayer, dinner.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Totally. And, especially, in the context of service or somebody like a nun, somebody who is really devoted to that, you have to be, like, healthily selfish in a way. Just like they say on the airplane, you got to put on your own oxygen mask before you serve others.

And when you see these nuns with these schedules that they take their rest time, maybe they take their naps, 45 minutes every single afternoon, that is them tending to what they need before they tend to other people.

And I think, from the outside, we kind of see it as the other way around, like they’re doing all these amazing unselfish things, but the fact is, in order to be able to do those unselfish things over a sustained period of time, they’ve got to keep pouring into themselves.

And I think I knew that intellectually before I started writing this book, but the research really does support that. And so I believe it even more strongly now.

Pete Mockaitis
And, well, in a totally different context, I’m thinking about parenting and how that can be so often brutally exhausting, in that, like, if there’s not thoughtful, plan-ful moments, it’s like these precious little ones will take every minute there is.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Exactly. And to be honest with you, like, my kids are a little older now, they’re 10 and 13, but I was very overwhelmed, especially when they were at that toddler stage, like when one was 18 months, the other was, like, four, and I was just going crazy at times.

And so one of my sort of impromptu pacing strategies that I devised at that time, and I worked it this out with my husband, but I was, like, “I need to take, like, a 24-hour retreat. Here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to get a hotel. I’m going to check in, like, early afternoon one day. And I am going to do two things.”

“I’m just going to sleep. And then I’m also going to work on, like, the writing passion projects that I haven’t had time for, that I’ve really been wanting to dive into and haven’t.” And so for that entire 24-hour period, that’s exactly what I did. Like, I alternated between the writing and the resting or just conking out.

And at the end of that, I was shocked how much of a difference it made for me, especially after being immersed in, like, kid world, kid universe constantly. I just felt so refreshed and so restored. And, honestly, I’ve been doing a few of these every year ever since.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, that’s fantastic. I recall a good friend and listener of the show, Lisa, they said, “What do you want for your birthday?” And she said, “I want 24 hours completely by myself.” And she did. She got a hotel and it was everything she hoped it would be.

So, well, those are cool perspectives. I think we can resonate naturally with the notion of, “Yeah, sometimes you feel overworked and tired and stressed, and rest is really great.” So I think it might be easy to overlook it, or overlook the importance of it.

Could you share with us a story of someone who figured out this pacing thing and kind of what the before-versus-after picture looked like for them?

Elizabeth Svoboda
Well, I learned so much about pacing when I spent a day with the Olympic middle distance runner Ajee Wilson, and I love her pacing philosophy. It’s something that she calls rigid flexibility. So, obviously, she has these very important, like these kind of non-negotiable things that she wants to accomplish each day. That’s the rigid part of it.

So every day, she does a pretty intense, two-, two-and-a-half-hour practice session, like all different lengths of runs, taking these little micro breaks in between, but really, really intense. But then what she does after that, and this is where the flexibility element comes in. You know, I kind of asked her, “Well, what do you do at the end of your long practice every day? Like, do you have a hobby? Do you go out with friends? Like what do you do?”

And she’s, like, “You know, this might sound kind of boring, but to be honest with you, I crash out. I will often take a really long afternoon nap.” And maybe we don’t all need, like, that two-, three-hour nap, but I think what was really striking to me is she was taking the amount of rest that was sort of commensurate with, or that matched, the intensive effort that she put in.

And so you had this rigidity, like you do have to do this thing, that this is a non-negotiable this practice, but you are putting way more padding and way more flexibility around that, and way more recovery than most of us typically do.

And I think that we can also adopt this approach at work. Like, obviously, not all of us are world-level, Olympic-level athletes, but, you know, let’s say you have a work project that you absolutely have to get done this week. Like, that’s the non-negotiable thing.

So, sure, like, you commit to putting in some time on it each day, but you give yourself a big cushion. Like, you give yourself a lot of recovery time between work blocks. And when you’re not working, you do something that’s as completely unrelated to what you’re doing at your desk as you can.

Because, you know, just scrolling your phone in between times, that’s not going to cut it, that’s not going to restore you, that’s not going to give you any energy. Like, actually get out into the world. Like, meet a friend, do something in “meatspace,” I guess, some video game players call it.

So I think that this rigid flexibility is something that, as I observed Ajee, I was determined to create my own version of that. And I think she learned that, too, through tough experience. Like, world-level athletes, they all, many of them, anyway, have this tendency to go above and beyond. They want to push, push, push. They want to do more.

But for her, she found that when she pushed too hard, and when she didn’t give herself enough time for recovery, she would come up with an overuse injury at the very worst minute, like right before the biggest competition of the year.

So I think, as an athlete, you sort of learn these things in a very visceral way. And that’s a very memorable lesson.

But, you know, those of us who aren’t athletes, maybe sometimes it takes us a little bit longer to learn that, because we can keep going through the motions of our day for a long time, even though we are still crashing out inside.

Pete Mockaitis
I think that’s well said, it takes us a while to learn that. I’m thinking about my sweet mother, and whenever I got really cranky about something disproportionately, and this was well through my teenage years, she would ask me if I was hungry. And, in a way, I kind of didn’t like it.

I was like, “I’m not hungry. I’m mad about this thing.” She’s like, “Yeah, I understand that. But, also, you know, when was the last time you ate?” I was like, “I don’t know, maybe like nine hours ago.” She’s like, “Okay, well, how about we have a little break and eat something?”

And so, I’m like a 17-year-old here, you know, I think I’m almost a man. And, yeah, I was slow to learn that. And, likewise, I think I was slow to learn, even as a young adult in the workplace, it’s like, “Hmm, I find that I’m substantially grouchier and less enthusiastic about all the ‘boring’ ‘BS’ I have to deal with if I’m properly rested.”

If I have enough sleep, I am able to appreciate, “Well, you know what? There’s something kind of interesting about this task. And it makes some sense that I’m being asked to do this, even though it’s not quite how I would do it. I kind of hear where they’re coming from.”

I was just much more understanding and cheerful and interested. And for me, again, it’s also subtle. It’s, like, “What is enough?” Like, the difference between 5.6 hours of sleep and 6.8 hours of sleep doesn’t seem all that substantial. Maybe an episode or two of Netflix at night. And yet, for me, I found that really will show up.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yeah, like, one thing that really was driven home to me so many times in researching this book is there are certain physical states that are not conducive to clear thinking or reasonable thinking at all.

And so, yeah, getting not enough sleep might be one of those things. But just like if your nervous system is in a super activated state, you’re going to be having all these squirrelly thoughts all the time, “Oh, I screwed this up. I screwed that up.”

And a lot of that, I mean, I think we tend to believe everything our brains are telling us, like, take that as the gospel truth. But what I have learned, I think, through direct experience as somebody who tends to get spun up in this particular way, is that when you get your body into a more settled state, your mind actually will follow.

And sometimes it’s hard to remember that at the precise moments when you’re feeling the most spun up. But that said, it is absolutely true, and if you just sort of persist. And, you know, there are sort of spin-down practices that work better for different people.

Like, I’m pretty much a terrible meditator. Like, I do not have that kind of focus. And so I do deeper breathing, like a specific breathing tactic that a psychiatrist taught me called modulation breathing. But, yeah, for you it might be meditation, it might be like walking meditation, you take a walk outdoors.

But the point is, whatever it is for you that gives you that feeling that, “Okay, I’m starting to spin down now. And let’s see, let’s give a more objective reading on this situation. Like, what is really true here?” And you’re going to be much more likely to come to terms with what’s happening. And it might not be great, but, like, you’re just coming to terms with what’s happening.

And then, “What can I realistically do about it?” And it is really, really hard to do that sort of essential assessment process if you were in that monkey-mind squirrelly state. So I would say, like, the first thing, tend to the physical spin-up before you try to get into the deeper thought and make the next best decision.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, absolutely. And I think it is shocking how much that state, the emotional weather or vibe, and the internal weather going on there, has a profound impact on our decision-making, and we’re often unaware of it.

I mean, I think we know. Okay, if I’m enraged and I want to fire that person, maybe now is not the time. I should probably think about that before I just lash out. That’s probably a smart move. So I think we’re aware of that.

But I think the subtler shades of emotion are also coloring our decision-making, what we think is true versus false, or a wise move, or an unwise move. And I think, for many of us, it can pass right by our awareness and we don’t even know how much that’s influencing us. That’s just a theory, a hypothesis, my own experience. Has your research revealed some of these things?

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yes, I was just thinking, that is exactly right. And so I’ve come to see these spin-down tactics, whether it’s the breathing or whatever gets you into that more centered state. Like, it’s not just a good short-term pacing tactic that allows you to get through the day. It’s a good long-term pacing tactic.

Because once you’re in that more centered state, you are going to make decisions that serve your present and future self long term.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. And, again, I think that we can forget about all kinds of little things in the, like, “Oops. oh, I haven’t had any water or beverage for six hours. Oopsie! And I’m a little thirsty, but that’s probably not causing me to be super irritable. Well, maybe it very well is, you know.”

So the squirrelly state, that’s a good turn of phrase. What are some of, perhaps, the subtle yet reliable signs we should be on the lookout for, like, “Oh, maybe I’m in the squirrelly state, and it would be better to do some of the spin-down stuff”?

Elizabeth Svoboda
For me, what it is, like, I won’t have any trouble getting to sleep at night, but I will just bolt upright in bed at 4:30 a.m. and my heart will be pounding, like, to beat the band.

And after that happens, as you can imagine, it’s really, really difficult for me to get back to sleep at all after that. And I’m just like, I’m just spun up. And I remember talking to a psychologist about how this happens to me.

And he’s, like, “Yeah, this is what happens. Like, if you are in a more chronic or a more elevated stress state, that burst of cortisol that normally would just wake you up more gently, it’s going to pile on top of all this cortisol you’ve already got going, and it is going to give you a jolt like you wouldn’t believe.”

“And you’re going to have, like, this fear signal. It’s, like, you’re not afraid of anything in particular, but it’s, like, you don’t even know where this fear signal is coming from. You just sit up and you feel terrified.” And so, for me, that is a major red flag. That is a warning sign.

But, you know, for you, it might be something a little bit different. It’s when you start skipping meals, or forgetting to drink, or just not feeling hungry or thirsty, that is often a sign that your system, for whatever reason, it’s trying to deal with whatever crisis it perceives is right in front of you, or on the horizon, instead of just tending to the boring daily things that you have to do to get yourself through the day.

So when you notice those signs, and if you’re listening, you probably have some idea what these signs might be for you, that is really a warning, like, “I need to pause here. I need to maybe do a little bit more spinning down. And then I need to ask myself, like, ‘Okay, what’s the next wise choice? Like, what do I need in this moment? And how can I fulfill that need?’”

And it might be something super mundane. It might be just like taking your water cup and just sticking it under the tap and making sure you get a couple swallows of water in your mouth. But I think a lot of us are not alert to those earlier warning signs until it’s kind of too late, and we get into a full-fledged bout of depression, full-fledged burnout, and that is just really, really dangerous territory.

There was one study that really shocked me when I came across it, and it was about, like, 200 people, and they were diagnosed with exhaustion, which is basically like a burnout state, and they received initial treatment for that.

But then they followed those people up for several years after the initial exhaustion, and they found that fully a third of them still qualified as exhausted, as basically burned out. And so the fact is once we sort of crash, we can kind of limp along in this languishing, in this burned out state for years on end.

Like, you kind of think it’s going to go away once it happens. Well, if you don’t tend to it, if you don’t make real steps to, like, refill your tank, it is going to persist. And I think a lot of us don’t like to admit that to ourselves but it’s true.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, so when it comes to refilling the tank, I think folks are perhaps quick to dismiss that, like, “Okay, yeah, I know that’s good, and maybe I’ll do that later after this project, after this move, after…” whatever. And so do you have any pro tip, research-backed suggestions for, “Ah, science suggests that this is a super rejuvenating spinning-down move, you know, per minute required of your life”?

Elizabeth Svoboda
Well, I mean, of course, if you can take a longer break from work, that is a great thing to do. But that said, I know a lot of us are in a position where that is just not available to us. Like, maybe we just started working at a particular company, we’re not quite senior yet, and we don’t feel like we can make a request to take a month off, right?

And in those situations, what has been really helpful, I think, for me, is a practice that I call energy management. And I’ve talked with a number of athletes, too, who use this. And as far as the biggest bang for your moment of effort, it’s hard to beat, and it’s very simple to start.

Like, what you do is you identify which times of day that you naturally tend to be most alert or most focused. So for some people, like, for me, it’s around mid morning, anywhere from like 10 until 12:30 or whenever I break for lunch.

But for other people, it might be afternoon, or for some creative types, sometimes it’s like late at night. And then what you do is you plan your most mentally demanding, like, work that matters the most that day to coincide with those natural energy peaks.

And so all it is is about aligning your toughest efforts with the moments when they’re naturally going to feel the least effortful. So it’s like your body is going to kind of give you these waves. Like, if you think about a surfer, the surfer waits for the wave before they try to ride it.

And so you are riding your energy peaks as you know they tend to come up. And then after lunch, like a lot of us have a huge energy slump, and that is totally normal. It’s to do with digestion and a bunch of other things.

And so if you can’t take a full traditional Siesta-style break at that time, you can still sort of downshift by doing something that’s a lot less demanding.

Pete Mockaitis
All right, yes. So identify those moments. And I’m thinking, for me, what’s more obvious is the moment I am the opposite of super alert, and it is almost exactly 1:45 p.m. Central Time, and regardless of how much I slept, what time I woke up, whether I had a delicious latte, even shortly before that, or whether I ate, whether I ate a lot, whether I ate a little, no matter what, right around then is, like, “Oh, I am sleepy.”

And it’s just great to know. And I actually try to get at least 10 minutes of straight up, literally, in a bed during that zone because it just feels so right in terms of, “It’s lined up, having a power nap would be great, generally, and this is the ideal time I might do that.” So I pull that off most days.

Elizabeth Svoboda
And that is amazing, and I would say, yeah, if you can get away with doing that, taking that 10-minute nap under your desk, or whatever you need to do, do it because that is going to give you a boost like you wouldn’t believe, and it can even help ease you into your next energy peak.

Like, for me, I tend to have not the highest energy peak, but, like, a smaller one starting around 4:30 in the afternoon. It’s funny, and sometimes I have, like, a little shot of espresso just to kick this off a little bit more.

But, like, at that time I know I can go writing, I can go deep into the creative stuff for about an hour before the hangry starts to sort of get the best of me. And I’m like, “Okay, I think that this is a good time to break now.” So look for those smaller peaks, too, in addition to those, to the lulls and the bigger peaks.

Pete Mockaitis
Very good. Okay. And we had Dr. Michael Breus on the show, he’s a sleep doctor, talking about your chronotype. You may naturally be an early-morning person or a late-night person. And his suggestion is, to the extent that’s possible, try not to fight it and see if your family, workplace can accommodate you as as much as you can, because it can be pretty tough being a night owl in an early-bird’s world.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yeah, exactly. And if you’re doing shift work and things like that, it’s just very, very difficult, too. It’s basically asking you to find a peak at a time when you normally would not find that. And the research shows that if you’re trying to do that, maybe like for a month you can get through it, but if it’s like years on end like that, where you’re forcing yourself past your natural chronotype, you are going to have more chronic disease burden, the health issues that are associated with that are just going to build up.

And so, yeah, as much as possible, like, ride those natural energy waves, catch them when they happen, and don’t beat yourself up when they’re not there because everybody is going to have sort of those fallow periods, those lie-flat periods in their day.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, you’ve got a fun term of a phrase, ludic loop. What is that?

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yeah, so this is something that actually happens to us, a lot of us anyway, when we get into this trance of scrolling our feeds or clicking for the next notification online. And the term ludic loop, it actually came from some research that an anthropologist did.

And what she was studying was actually slot machine gamblers. So these people who were sitting in front of their machines, like, over and over in this trance, just pushing the lever over and over again. And then what some other research shows is that when you are doing these repetitive things, you are often getting a little bit of a dopamine burst associated with that.

And it’s not just from doing the thing itself, it’s from the anticipation of what’s coming next. So you might be getting a dopamine burst when you click on your notifications, and that’s because you’re anticipating, “I’m going to get a new message. Somebody is going to like my post,” or whatever it is.

And that’s okay, like, as far as it goes, but it just tends to draw us into these endless loops of consumption. Like, we get the dopamine burst, and that kind of motivates us to keep scrolling until we get the next dopamine burst, and the next, and the next. And so it’s kind of a very shallow engagement.

What happens, just like at the slot machine, people get up from the seats after five hours and are like, “What just happened to the last five hours of my life?” I think a lot of us have had that experience, whether we’re scrolling Instagram, scrolling TikTok, like, “What just happened to that last 45 minutes? Like, what kind of went down the hole there that I’m never going to get back?”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, and I always wonder, “How can I use that for good?” It doesn’t seem to happen to me when I’m folding laundry or processing email, unfortunately.

Elizabeth Svoboda
I mean, if you’re familiar with the flow state, like deep creative engagement, I think of the online scrolling as a sort of shallow flow because it’s like a passive flow where you’re not engaging, you’re not making any progress, you’re really not contributing.

And so what I tell people is if you’re going to try and swap out some of that sort of shallow flow, that shallow scrolling time, find something that you know helps you get into a deeper flow. So if you’re a writer like me, it might be working on your latest story. If you play an instrument, even just getting into practice, a lot of people get into this deep flow.

And the great thing about flow is it’s, again, a state that makes you feel like you’re hanging onto a tow rope and you’re getting pulled along, like you are enjoying the process so much that it’s easier to keep going than it is to be allowed.

So, yeah, like, replacing that shallow flow with deeper flow, that’s going to be the best thing because then you’re not going to feel like you’re at loose ends, like, “Oh, well, now I’m not scrolling. What am I going to do instead?”

Once you’re in that flow, that question is going to be answered for you. You’re going to be so engaged that you’re just going to want to keep going.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. All right. Well, Elizabeth, tell us, what are some of your favorite tactics that are just fantastic for this?

Elizabeth Svoboda
One thing that has been really fun and really freeing for me is practicing selective mediocrity. And I, first, heard Whitney Casares, she’s a doctor, she’s on Instagram, she was talking about this.

And so basically what selective mediocrity is, is you are choosing, you’re deciding, like, “I’m going to do all these different things in my day, and I’m just going to do an adequate job at them. Like, I’m going to be just okay. Like, I’m going to send the one-line email if it answers the questions, and this five-paragraph thing that somebody sent to me.”

“I’m going to blitz through this project evaluation if I’m pretty sure that my manager is just going to skim it for five seconds and then put in the pile on his desk,” right? And so it’s about giving yourself permission to streamline in that way, to do just enough, like, just good enough, but don’t do more than good enough.

This is what one psychiatrist told me, like, he tells his clients, like, “Don’t do more than good enough unless you’re just totally passionate about the thing that you’re doing.” And when you do that streamlining, then you’re going to have more energy to put into the things that matter the most to you that you really absolutely care the most about doing your best at.

Pete Mockaitis
Can you give us some top examples of these are great candidates for being selectively mediocre at?

Elizabeth Svoboda
At work, it’s just kind of there is so much busy work that so many of us have to do, whether it’s, like, a survey, a progress report. And I’m not saying, like, blow it off entirely, but it really is okay to, like, set the timer for five minutes and just make a goal, like, “I’m going to get through this in five minutes. And if I’m done, I’m just going to be done and I’m going to turn this in. I’m not going to obsess over it for 20 minutes or half an hour,” not that I have ever done this kind of thing in my life.

But just like that kind of stuff, that kind of cruft that accumulates in the corners of your work life, your everyday life, that is the kind of stuff that just be selectively mediocre and embrace that. And it’s just so freeing and it gives you a feeling of power, I think, too.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s a very nice piece to highlight there because I would say, busy work, I mean, whenever there is a process in which you suspect your input is not all that mission critical, I think is a great place to be selectively mediocre.

Like, sometimes, this is me, I love human development and learning and growth and improvement, right? And so if I get a survey, it’s like, “Oh, you know what? I would relish the opportunity to serve you by sharing with you as much insightful, actionable feedback as possible. So let me really just…”

Yeah, I’ve done this before. I have gone deep. And then you wonder, it’s like, “Will anyone ever actually read and ponder this? Or is it just sort of like, ‘Yeah, it’s on the checklist. Send out the survey.’”

Elizabeth Svoboda
And to be honest with you, like, a human may not even be reading that. It’s probably going to get scanned through ChatGPT or whatever. So why do we do this to ourselves, yeah?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, tell me, Elizabeth, any final do’s and don’ts here with regard to pacing?

Elizabeth Svoboda
One of the things that I always sort of stress to people is pacing, it’s not just like a one-time thing, like, “Okay, here’s my pacing plan. Here’s what I’m going to do this week. Here’s what I’m going to do this month. Let’s have ChatGPT optimize that for me.”

It’s a lot more fluid than that. It’s sort of a process of ongoing noticing what’s going on and being responsive to that. Like, checking in maybe more often with yourself than most of us typically do, like, “Where am I now? Where am I actually headed? What direction am I heading in? And what adjustments or what pace changes can I make that are going to be most likely to get me there?”

And even that finish line, don’t be surprised if that starts to evolve as well. Like, you might have a certain goal right now, and for you in this moment, that’s a really meaningful finish line in what you’re pacing yourself toward.

But as you get more knowledge, as you get more experience, that may change, that may evolve in ways that are sort of a happy surprise to you. So I think just sort of being open to that and just knowing that fluidity and flexibility are really at the core of what it means to pace yourself in a smart way.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now could you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Elizabeth Svoboda

So I love, I don’t know if you’re familiar with Father Greg Boyle, who founded the Homeboy Industries. It’s like a gang rehabilitation program in LA. And he says, “Systems change when people change. They’re bite-sized moments to be able to reflect back to people the truth of who they are. Then you watch them become that truth and they extend that truth to other people.”

And so that resonates so much for me because part of what I outline as a good pacing strategy is becoming skilled at finding those bite-sized moments to remind people of what you see in them, the potential that you see in them, and where they’re headed.

And in the book, I call them brief candle moments, and creating those is so fulfilling. If you are the initiator, or if you’re the recipient, and it may not be a long time.

It may be like two or three minutes, but you learn something in those moments that you look back 30 years down the line, and you’re like, “If I hadn’t heard that in this moment, my life might look very different than it does right now.”

So just those trajectory shifting moments that you can create for other people, like, that is going to be enormously fulfilling to you, and that is certainly something that I try to put into play as part of a longer-term pacing strategy.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, boy, I remember that’s resonating. Back in episode 14 with Dr. Marcia Reynolds, she made me cry when she told a story when she turned 20 in jail, and someone there just said to her, “You have no idea who you are,” and talked about how she was so smart and courageous, and she had all these opportunities and advantages and strengths and things she could do. And she just felt really seen. And, bam! It really was transformational, sharing that piece in that moment.

Elizabeth Svoboda
That is incredible. And, yeah, people often do get emotional when they recall these moments. And so I was a volunteer in a mentoring program one time, and I knew this guy named Tom. And Tom was, like, a retired guy in his 60s, but he was the best person that I know at offering these moments to other people.

So the kids in this program, they were sort of in this category that, at the time, was called Youth at Risk. Maybe some of them had been in trouble with the law, they were having trouble at school, they were just struggling in different ways.

And Tom, he just had this way of offering these brief candles of really conveying to somebody in this capsule that packed a punch of, like, what he saw in them, the potential that he saw, all the things that he loved about who they were.

And I just watched it transform them, and I’m kind of getting emotional thinking about it because if we could all be a little bit more like Tom, I think the world would be a much better place.

Pete Mockaitis
This also reminds me of “The Lion King.” And no spoilers, anyone, it’s been out for a while. But when Simba sees his dad in the stars, “Remember who you are,” I mean, that’s powerful stuff. That’s powerful stuff.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yeah. And, like, people don’t realize. Like, you can really give this to somebody, and it’s like this infinite thing that you’re giving them, and it’s going to take two minutes of your time. And I think if that came home to more of us, we would all be looking for these opportunities on a daily or, like, an hourly basis because that’s the impact that they can have.

Pete Mockaitis 
A favorite habit?

Elizabeth Svoboda
It’s a practice that’s in the research, it’s called resonance frequency breathing, but I’ve come to call it modulation.

And so what it involves is actually breathing at a pace in which there’s the greatest variability between the way your heart rate speeds up as you breathe in, and then slows down as you breathe out. And so if you’re a fitness gadget person, you might’ve heard about heart rate variability.

And so breathing at this pace, which for most people is about five breaths a minute, that is going to get your heart rate variability in the highest possible place. And that is going to facilitate you getting into that calmer state faster.

And I had a really crazy experience when I first tried this type of breathing. It was in the office of a psychiatrist, Joe Arpaio, who teaches modulation to his patients. And so what he did, like, he clipped a little heart rate monitor on my finger, and he had me do my modulation breathing. For me, it was like 5.2 breaths per minute. Do that for about five minutes.

And I was watching, like on his laptop screen, there was like a little tracing, and where my heart tracing started out like real jaggedy and unpredictable, they were just slowly relaxing into these smooth, these more like S-shaped sine waves, showing that my heart rate variability was improving.

And at the end of those five minutes, Dr. Joe, he turned to me and he was, like, “You know what? You just calmed yourself down way faster than if I had taken an IV sedative and I pushed it into your arm right now.”

And it really struck me because I had gone into that day pretty, pretty skeptical. I mean, we all hear about, like, different breathing practices, and we try different things that we read about in magazines, and maybe it doesn’t really work for us. But for me, sustaining that about five, 5.2 breaths per minute for…you got to stick with it for more than 30 seconds. It’s got to be, like, three, four, five minutes.

But you can do it alongside everything else in your life. Like, I do it all the time when I’m waiting at red lights or when I’m chopping up the food for dinner. Like, it kind of weaves around just the daily practices that you’re already doing.

And so I can attest that this really does work, and it really is better than taking sedatives and hoping for the best.

Pete Mockaitis
No, that’s awesome stuff, yes. And there are apps, even the Calm app on the free, before you subscribe, will give you four seconds in, six seconds out, which approximates that, or as well as Elite HRV with a heart rate strap will give you that kind of a visual experience if you’re into it. So that’s real. That’s my experience.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Yeah, I love Elite HRV too. Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Elizabeth Svoboda
I’m kind of obsessed with An Interrupted Life by Etty Hillesum. Now not a lot of people have heard of this, but, basically, what it is, it’s a collection of diaries and letters that were written by a Dutch Jewish woman during World War II.

And over the course of these diaries and these letters, you see very clearly how she evolved over time from somebody who was pretty anxious, very self-focused, like always getting spun up, as we’ve been calling it. And she really evolved into somebody who was so dedicated to service. And it’s sort of, I mean, I feel like I’m nowhere near being there yet, but it still, it gives me hope that all of us might be able to evolve, at least in that direction, no matter what craziness is happening around us.

Pete Mockaitis
And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Elizabeth Svoboda
I have been spending a fair amount of time on Instagram these days. My username is svobodster, so that’s S-V-O-B-O-D-S-T-E-R. It was a nickname given to me in fifth grade by my best frenemy. So there you have it. Also, you can find me at my website, ElizabethSvoboda.com, and I do have a beehiiv newsletter as well called “The Art of Pacing.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Elizabeth Svoboda
If you find yourself during the day in mental overload or just in the midst of a crisis that really caught you off guard, first, just take a few minutes to do your spin-down.

And then once you reach that state where you’re feeling a little bit calmer, ask yourself, “What’s the wise choice here?”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Elizabeth, thank you.

Elizabeth Svoboda
Thank you so much, Pete. It’s been a blast.