This Podcast Will Help You Flourish At Work

Each week, I grill thought-leaders and results-getters to discover specific, actionable insights that boost work performance.

1158: The Science Behind Why People Quit with Dr. Anthony Klotz

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Dr. Anthony Klotz discusses how to manage the big and small moments that make us question our next career moves.

You’ll Learn

  1. How the pandemic fundamentally altered our relationship with work
  2. Why doing nothing is often your best solution
  3. How to find more satisfaction in a job you’re stuck in

About Anthony

Dr. Anthony Klotz is a professor of organizational behavior at the UCL School of Management in London. Known for predicting a global labor shift and dubbing it the Great Resignation, Klotz writes for Harvard Business Review and The Wall Street Journal, and his research is regularly published in leading management journals. He has discussed the current and future state of work with media outlets, including The New York Times, BBC, and CNN, and with executive teams at Fortune 100 firms.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Anthony Klotz Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Anthony, welcome!

Anthony Klotz
Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to chat with you. You are undercover famous. Is that maybe the term we can use?

Anthony Klotz

Yeah, it’s definitely undercover, low key, yeah, whatever synonym you want to use.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, you are the man who coined the term, “The Great Resignation,” which is kind of wild.

Anthony Klotz

Yeah, I mean, it still strikes me as wild and we’re coming up on almost exactly five years since that initial article came out and went viral, and it still strikes me as strange and surreal.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I understand there’s really some misconceptions as to what the heck that phrase even means. So let’s hear it straight from the horse’s mouth. What do we mean by that term and what is its relevance for career folk?

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, so the Great Resignation was a prediction back in May of 2021 that there would be a spike in resignations in the US workforce, really the global workforce, but mainly centered on the US. And in the months following May, pretty quickly starting in June, we saw this wave of resignations, fairly historically high.

But it’s important, there’s a caveat there, that, really, we only started tracking resignation numbers closely in the US in 2000, so we don’t have the whole history there. But, yeah, turnover, quitting, resignations, whatever you want to call it, spiked and stayed elevated at historically high levels for almost two years into 2023.

And then it tailed back down, and it continued to tail down to where we are today, which is a rate of quitting in the economy that’s lower than it was before the pandemic, but not by too much. And so even though it feels like we’re in a pretty sluggish job market right now, it’s more active than a lot of people think.

Pete Mockaitis

Intriguing. Okay, so we’ve got 25-ish years of data here, and so we’ve seen some ups and downs. And so does that mean, now we’re kind of in a normal-ish band of resignation levels?

Anthony Klotz
We’re on the low side of normal, but we’re in that range of normal, for sure, on the lower end of it. I was going to mention, you asked about some of the misconceptions around the Great Resignation, and I think the biggest one that maybe continues to this day is that the prediction was that people would leave the workforce entirely.

And my prediction was largely that people would quit. And when people quit, the vast majority of the time it’s to find another job in the same industry or something related. We did see higher levels of people taking career breaks, of people starting entrepreneurial ventures, of people doing early retirement.

Yeah, but, in general, it’s when people leave jobs, they’re, of course, switching to another role somewhere else.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And you’ve done some real deep research into this phenomenon. Your book’s called Jolted: Why We Quit, When to Stay, and Why It Matters. So tell us, what’s a particularly surprising and fascinating discovery you’ve made as you dug into this stuff?

Anthony Klotz

It’s just how close all of us are to quitting our job. And that doesn’t mean we’re always thinking about it or we’re always wanting to quit or anything negative like that. But we tend to, both as academics, as leaders, as workers, tend to think that quitting is a fairly rational process that slowly accumulates over time and slowly.

Maybe your discontentment with your current role increases or the appeal of these alternatives that you have to your current job increase over time, and you make this rational decision to move on. And that’s true about half the time.

But what we found is about the other half of the time, the decision to quit can be traced back to a single event. And these events, these jolts, can be big or small, they can come from our personal lives, they can happen in our professional lives, but they move the quitting process along sometimes fairly quickly.

Sometimes they move us along to where we’d like to quit, but we can’t. And sometimes they should be nudging us to leave and we completely miss them. But going back to your question, it’s that, and I think this is part of why I predicted the Great Resignation was this understanding of how these events work.

And, of course, the pandemic was several of these jolts wrapped up into one. And that’s somewhat surprising to me when I first learned it and to a lot of individuals, just this one event, how it can change our relationship with work and shape the arc of our career.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, could you expand on that? How is this event that…? It’s funny, I think many of us would like to forget entirely, so apologies to resurface this. But how has the pandemic shifted our overall perspective on work?

Anthony Klotz

Yeah, so, like I mentioned, the pandemic had several different types of jolts wrapped up all into one, and I’ll mention a few of them. One of them was, of course, that for many people, work became different and more difficult in a short period of time.

So if you were a frontline worker or a healthcare worker, all of a sudden, your job maybe became more dangerous or completely changed. And when our job tasks change, for some of us, that comes at a point where we’re already not sure about our job and then, all of a sudden, it changes and that pushes us over into wanting to change what our job is.

For others, like healthcare workers, it also increased the level of burnout, so, “All of a sudden, this event changed my work in a way that it’s more difficult, led to higher levels of burnout.” Many of us experienced switching from working in person to working remotely, and we all reacted to it a little bit differently.

Some people, really enjoying it, some people not so much. And then, finally, there’s the pandemic being a health threat. And so for many individuals, or probably most individuals, at some point, it caused us to take a step back and think, “Is this the end of the world? Am I going to make it out of this?”

And when we think those big existential thoughts, we think about the way that we’re spending our time. And how we spend a lot of our time is at our jobs. And so these changes to how we work, these increases in burnout, this switch in the place that we were working, and then finally these big existential thoughts are different types of jolts that lead us to stop and rethink our relationship with work.

Now, hopefully, the pandemic, this is a once in a very long time event that we don’t have to go through again. But getting back to your question, there is some evidence that it has permanently changed many people’s relationship with work.

And this goes back to a question that’s asked in the United States on this general social survey every two years. And it’s been asked every two years since 1972. And the question is, “If you came into all of the money that you needed to live as comfortably as you want for the rest of your life, would you keep working?”

And this is called the lottery question. And it’s been asked every two years, and pretty consistently, about 70% of Americans say, “Yes, I would keep working,” which is somewhat impressive, and it shows that most of us see the value that work could have in our lives.

But what’s interesting is when you look at that 70% has been sort of flat as a board with a little bit of fluctuation from 1972 to 2018 before the pandemic. And so a little bit of a side note to this is this thought that nobody wants to work anymore or that less and less people want to work. The data don’t really support that, with one exception.

Coming out of the pandemic, it dropped from just over 70% to 62%. And so that equates to 10 to 20 million Americans who are, if you extrapolate that out to the country, who are answering that question differently.

And, keep in mind, they were answering this question during the Great Resignation, which was one of the best labor markets for employees, for workers that we’ll ever see. And yet, more people than ever were indicating that, “If I struck it rich, I’d be done with work.” And that number has stayed in this sort of 65% range, five points lower, you know, millions of Americans lower than the 70%.

And so what that suggests is the pandemic years and the tumultuousness that it caused in the world of work, and the thinking, and the jolts that it caused, there’s some percentage of the population now who have permanently changed the way they view work. And I think that’s going to be part of the lasting legacy of that period of time.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m intrigued about that question. They would continue working if they won the lottery, but do we have the clarity on would they continue working with their current employer or role or doing…? Because, I guess, this is what researchers do. We get definitional in terms of, I imagine, I wouldn’t sit on the beach continuously, but I would probably make some changes in what I was doing. I’d keep this podcast going because it’s fun and awesome, talking to peeps like you. So do you have some detail on that?

Anthony Klotz
So that’s a fantastic follow-up question. And it’s a question that I didn’t think of at first, and then somebody suggested it to me, and it really changed the way I thought about this question. So after I had learned about this lottery question, I would ask my student audiences, executive audiences, professional audiences this question and see how many hands go in the air. And it’s always around 70%.

You’re asking Gen Z, Baby Boomers, it’s always around that 70% mark. And that’s usually an eye-opener for people. And then I was asking that question during a masterclass that I was giving once up in Idaho, at Idaho State University a few years back after the Great Resignation.

And one person gave the follow-up question that you gave, they said, “Okay, okay, that’s great. Ask it again, but ask how many people would keep working at their current job if they struck it rich, if they won the lottery.”

So I’d asked the first question and seen the 70% response rate. So I asked again, “How many of you, if you won the lottery, would keep working at your current job?” It dropped below 10%. So I haven’t collected big data on this, but every time I present this now, I ask the two questions.

And it’s a little less consistent on that second question depending on the audience, but it always drops from this like 70%-ish down to 10 to 20% of people who would keep working. And, to me, there’s this really powerful lesson there that the majority of people see the positive side of what work can do for their lives.

Like, in general, want to work and see a positive version of work out there that they would really enjoy doing. That is not the version that most people are getting in their current job. So there’s this gap there between what we think work could be for us and our wellbeing and our happiness and our sense of meaning in life, and then what we’re actually getting.

And you mentioned you would keep doing this awesome podcast. So I asked people who say they would keep working even if they won the lottery at their current job, “What are you doing? What’s your profession?”

And it’s almost always something in the entrepreneurial realm or something that they’ve clearly chosen that really is their passion. And so, you know, “I always knew I wanted to be a chef and that’s what I pursued,” or “I always wanted to be a chef, but then I went and I was an accountant for 30 years, but then I circled back and went back to being a chef.”

So it’s these really deliberate choices people have made that align with their interests or that give them a great deal of autonomy, which is like entrepreneurship, having a fantastic podcast, being able to have the kind of impact that you want on the world.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, you know, that’s heavy. It’s almost kind of sad that it’s so low. I mean, we all got bills to pay, sure, but… So, this is funny, my wife, she gave me a hat, a hat out of nowhere, and it said, “Ever since I was little, I’ve always wanted to turn unstructured data into actionable business insights.”

Anthony Klotz
Perfect hat for you.

Pete Mockaitis 

It’s a lot of words on a hat. and it’s sort of funny, like, “Ha, ha, ha, that’s the joke. No one wants that when they’re little. They want to be an astronaut or a firefighter or something.” And yet, sure enough, when I was in high school, I did want to be a strategy consultant. And then I did that, and it was fun, you know? I wanted to make some adjustments to that career path, which I did, entrepreneurially.

And it really hits home for me that I’m a bit of an anomaly here, like, to actually go after it with this kind of purpose, and then for it to work out.

Because you might think you want to be a lawyer, and be like, “Oh, shoot, this isn’t what I wanted. Oopsies!”

Anthony Klotz

That happened to me.

Pete Mockaitis 
So I guess it’s not only that you’re autonomously pursuing the thing, but the thing ends up being the match that you hoped it would be.

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, that’s exactly right. When I started out of university, I had grown up in a family business in logistics. I got my degree in logistics. I thought, “I’m made to do this. I’m good at it,” got good grades, and then went to work for General Mills in their manufacturing plants in logistics, and was terrible at it and didn’t enjoy it.

So it was like, in theory, this is what I was put on this earth to do. In practice, not so much. So I switched over into management, into operations, and that was a somewhat better fit. But, yeah, I mean, I think there is this experimentation that goes on.

And, yeah, probably for a number of people who are saying, “If I won the lottery, this is what I would do.” Some percentage of them would find, if they made that switch, it’s actually not what they want to do.

I mean, this is part of the rough thing about being humans. We’re terrible at forecasting, you know, what’s going to make us happy. And it’s not until we actually experience it, that we see if our affective forecast lines up with how we’re actually feeling when we do it.

Pete Mockaitis

Understood. Okay. Well, so you’ve painted a stark picture for us. So I would love for you to unpack a little bit of the big idea associated with Jolted. You say we don’t so much super rationally and gradually come to the conclusion that, “Ah, yes, it would, in fact, be optimal for me to exit now.” What is going on?

Anthony Klotz
Most of us in our day-to-day work lives are on a bit of autopilot where we’re trying to be successful in our jobs, have a nice life outside of work, pay the bills, enjoy time with friends and family, and so forth. And these jolts come along and disturb that.

And so jolts are these moments where we question what’s going on with our relationship with work, “Am I on the right path or am I not?” And these can be really confusing. And you’re not really sure what to make of it.

In the book, I talk about, you know, that jolts are sort of everywhere in the modern work world, and there’s six different types of jolts that we’ll experience over our career. And so the problem is these can be really useful signposts to tell us maybe we do need to make some changes to the arc of our career.

But often, when they appear and sort of snap us out of this autopilot, we’re not sure how to respond to them. We get stuck in a bit of a rumination loop. Maybe we give them too much credence and we end up moving towards the exit door too soon. We just don’t really have a system to process them when they happen.

And so what I advocate for in the book is being more deliberate about realizing that, “Hey, look, these events, we don’t know what they are, we don’t know when they’re going to strike, but they’re coming, and they’re going to make us question our relationship with work. And that can sort of lead us down a path to make a suboptimal decision about our career and our happiness.”

Or, if we’re a little bit more prepared for them and we have a bit of a system, not a super strict system, but a system for dealing with them, we can treat them sort of appropriately when they arrive and make a much clearer and better decision about what we should do with them.

You know, part of the punchline here is that a lot of these events that cause us to rethink work should really be dismissed. And if you just walk away from them for a little while, they’ll go away naturally. And I think part of the challenge of the modern work world is we are able to take action pretty quickly when we have a moment where we think, “I don’t know if I want to work here anymore.”

Well, you know what? Almost right away, you could mass apply for hundreds of jobs in that moment right then. You can go on social media and burn bridges really, really easily. This wasn’t the case, I’ll just say, 50 years ago.

When something really terrible happened on a Tuesday, you’d think, “You know what? I don’t know if I want to work here anymore. Maybe this weekend I’ll get out. I’ll get out my resume and freshen it up, or I’ll go look for a new job. But by the time the weekend gets there, you realize, “Oh, that was just a bad Tuesday. No big deal.”

Here, you know, nowadays, we’re in a position to take action right away and make career changes that we may end up regretting. And, let’s face it, the research is clear that almost the majority of career moves end in some form of regret, not complete regret, but some form of regret.

And so understanding these jolts and how to respond to them at an appropriate level, I think, is critical for staying level-headed in our day-to-day work lives and to also be really intentional about crafting a career that brings us what we want.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I think that’s one tremendous takeaway that could really alter a life trajectory right there, Anthony, in terms of, like, “When some bull crap goes down and you’re thinking, ‘I’m out of here,’ hold on for a moment.” Duly noted.

Anthony Klotz
Well, in terms of being really powerful advice, doing nothing, it’s kind of a hard piece of advice to sell. But, again, these these jolts, these moments are fairly common, and I think the more that we have the news coming to us while we’re at work, the more that we have social media in our lives, the more we have these moments where we think, somebody else is getting a better deal, there’s better options out there, and so all the more reason why doing nothing as a first option is a good option.

Now a lot of these problems that you experience or that a jolt signifies some sort of real problem with your relationship with work, some of them don’t go away with time. And if you get to the weekend or you’ve decided, you know, for me, like about every six months at the start of the year, and then midway through the year, I sort of sit down and think through the past six months and what have I experienced at work and how am I feeling.

In that way, over the course of time, as I experience problems with work, instead of having to deal with them right away in the course of my working week, working day, I can sort of tell myself, “Come June, I’ll sit down and I’ll think through these.” And I might even write on Post-It notes and set them aside to think about then.

In that way, when it comes to that time when I’ve batched those jolts together and I can think through them, I can realize a lot of these don’t matter anymore. This was just something that mattered in the moment, but didn’t really matter.

But there’s probably a few of them that maybe I’ve written down a few times that signal, “Something is off here and I need to address it.” Now that doesn’t mean quitting. That means addressing it. And there’s a number of ways that you can address problems at work without quitting.

And so that’s sort of the next step. You experience a jolt, it reveals a problem with your relationship with work that time isn’t healing, then you have to take some more action. Doing nothing won’t cut it.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, you mentioned six types of jolts. Could you maybe give us the two-sentence-ish definition of your six types of jolts with maybe an example so we can get our arms around, precisely, “What is Anthony thinking when he says the word jolt?”

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, so six types of jolts, and I’ll give you a warning. The first five are negative, and that’s because of this positive-negative asymmetry effect we have, where, as human beings, we’re hardwired to pay much more attention to negative events than positive events.

And that’s for good reason. Negative events signal something is wrong, and we need to attend to it. Whereas, positive events are more like, “Keep going. Things are going well.”

So the first type of jolts is direct jolts, and these are negative events that happen directly to us at work. So the most common ones are, of course, failure, or experiencing mistreatment, or interpersonal strife. But these jolts can also be really subtle as well.

So we’re increasingly seeing that small acts of incivility, like being treated rudely or being ostracized, like, you find out that your office has a group chat that you’re not on. That has a pretty strong effect, a pretty strong signal that you’re not part of this group. So direct jolts, negative events that happen directly to us at work.

The next type are collateral jolts. These are events, often negative, that happen to those around us at work and reverberate and have effects on us. A simple one would be witnessing mistreatment. Even though you’re not the victim, it can have an effect on you that makes you think, “I don’t know if I want to be in a workplace like this.”

But the most common type is turnover contagion. So when we have a friend who quits, it’s sort of a triple whammy for us. Our workday becomes less bright because our friend is gone. We probably have to pick up some of their work in the interim, and we wonder where they’re going. Like, “Are they getting a better deal?” So those are collateral jolts.

Maybe my favorite kind of jolts, and they were the ones when I learned about them, I was the most surprised, are honeymoon jolts. So there’s this statistic that surprised me that the most common year for quitting across all years of your employment is year one.

And we tend to think, “Year one? That’s when people are the most committed and the most excited about their jobs.” But honeymoon jolts, you know, during the recruitment and selection process, we form this idea of what that job is going to be like.

And honeymoon jolts happen when we’re in the first year and we realize, “Wait a second, the way I thought this job was going to be in terms of the schedule or the pay or whatever it may be, is not lining up with reality. And I took this job under maybe false pretenses,” or we perceive that we do. So those are honeymoon jolts.

You know, moving outside the workplace, there’s crossover jolts, which are negative events that happen in our personal life that make us rethink, “What am I doing at work?” And anybody who’s had a health scare or a family member or friend who’s had a health scare has experienced those.

And then, finally, for negative jolts, there’s remote jolts. And we’re increasingly seeing that negative events that happen on the other side of the world that you hear about can have this sort of effect on you because they often call to mind the preciousness and the scarcity of life and make us think, again, these big existential thoughts, like the pandemic did of, “How am I spending my time?”

There’s a little bit of research that shows that this is especially likely to happen if the event on the other side of the world happened to a group of individuals who you identify with in whatever way that could be.

And then last, but not least, are happy positive jolts. So, sort of counterintuitively, the good things that happen in life can also lead to us quitting. Not as often, but this is because when positive events happen to us, they open our minds.

We tend to start to think, “I can achieve more than I thought I could. I’m on a roll here. This is great. I could take on more things.” And you have this open-minded positivity at the same time that your resume has just gotten more impressive than ever, perhaps, because you just had a promotion or some accomplishment at work. Of course, they can come from wonderful events in our personal lives as well.

So, like I said, jolts are everywhere. They’re common. We’re going to experience many of them in our careers. And the key is to be ready for them, and then manage them appropriately when they happen.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So what is the ideal or optimal or appropriate way to deal with a jolt beyond doing nothing?

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, well, we already talked about the first one, right? Do nothing and wait and see if it goes away on its own. Now, obviously, and it goes without saying, for egregious jolts, that might not suffice. In my dissertation research, I talked to one worker who said they had a toxic boss, but the worker themselves, they had thick skin.

And so the boss could insult them, you know, whatever, it didn’t bother the worker. They were happy to do their job. But the boss noticed this, “I’m not getting under that person’s skin.” And so one day they went one step deeper. They didn’t insult the person. They insulted the person’s daughter to really get…

Pete Mockaitis
My goodness.

Anthony Klotz
And it worked. The worker said, “I took my keys off my belt, set them on the desk, and walked out the door,” which we call impulsively quitting. So that’s an example of where this do-nothing strategy is not a good one. There are times where, if you can, perhaps impulsive quitting is the right thing to do if you’re in a really bad situation.

But most of the time, the next step is to say something, to speak up. And this sounds again pretty simple, but it’s amazing how many exit interviews that I’ve been in or that I’ve talked to leaders and they say in exit interviews, one of the most common things that happens is the person says they’re leaving because of this reason, that they really can’t stand their work schedule, or they need a little bit of pay bump.

And so they’ve gone out and got another job because they’re not getting it here, and they didn’t ask for it first, or the leader didn’t hear it when they did ask. And so it’s pretty critical… Often as workers, we don’t have the power in the work relationship. The leader has the power, or the organization has the power.

So it’s easy for us to think, “Why would they give me a raise? Why would they change my schedule in this way?” And so we don’t speak up. But if you’re going to move down the path of, “I want to solve problems, or else this may make me leave the organization,” it’s really important that you, at least, give the organization a chance to fix it.

Not only because they may surprise you, but what’s also useful is, if you do continue to move down the path and you do end up quitting, you’ll do so in the knowledge that you tried to fix this problem. You gave them a chance to do it. And that will actually lower the odds of regret down the road, “Maybe I shouldn’t have quit. Maybe they would have fixed that.” No, no, no, you know, because you asked.

I talked to one worker who was in a really bad situation, and I guess this is similar to the prior story, but they were working closely with a coworker interdependently, and the coworker was really abusive. And one day, the abuse got to a point where the worker said, “I can’t take this anymore.” And this person worked in a hospital, and they said, “This is harming my wellbeing. I’m going to quit even though I like this job because I can’t work with this person anymore.”

And they walked around the hospital, and on their walk, they found a random empty office. And they had this thought and they went to their boss and said, “I just walked by this empty office. Can I just move out of where I am near this person and move into this random empty office?”

And I think there’s a lot of bosses who would say, “No, you can’t have some special office in the corner.” But this person’s boss said, “Yeah, you know what? Sure, that’s fine.” And this person was completely surprised, moved their stuff over into this new office, and is now like, that was like three years ago, and they’re now happier than ever in their job.

And so it’s just an example of, like, even if you think it’s wild, ask, especially for medium performers and high performers, the companies do not want to lose you.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. Well, I am vibing with that and I’m thinking back to, boy, I think of him often, it’s my buddy, Muhammed Mekki, back in Episode 346 in 2018, he said, “All the time, you don’t get what you don’t ask for.”

And that was his observation, is that in almost any context, you do not suffer reprisal, like it rarely hurts to ask. I’m sure there’s counter examples out there and maybe some of these toxic bosses that you’re mentioning here.

But, yes, it rarely hurts to ask. And at worst, I think you’ll get just a little bit of a, “Oh, man, this guy, huh? Can you believe it?” And then you move on and that’s over. So you may well be surprised. You get a cool office space. Any number of things can be opened up to you if you just ask.

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, and the research does show that, yeah, a lot of the time these positive outcomes can happen just by asking. There’s also some research that shows, in organizational settings, when you ask for something, you’re much more likely to get it if you frame it in a way that it doesn’t just benefit you, but it, of course, benefits other people or benefits the organization.

So, like, “I need Saturdays off,” “I need a $10,000 raise,” “I need,” “I need.” You’re better to take 10 minutes and say, “How do I frame this such that it doesn’t just benefit me, but here’s why it benefits the company, here’s why it benefits my colleagues, here’s why it benefits, it makes my boss’s life easier?” Something like that, like a little bit of sweetener that really increases the odds of the medicine going down successfully.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I like that a lot. And I’m thinking about, I think there was a famous book about fundraising called Asking. Well, you’re going to know the answer now, it was like, “You know, the number one reason prospective donors do not give to a nonprofit organization…?” Can you guess, Anthony?

Anthony Klotz

Because they’re asking what’s in it for them?

Pete Mockaitis

Well, yeah, they weren’t asked at all. No one asked them, it’s like, “Hey, could you support this cool work we’re doing?” It’s like, “Oh, that was not on my radar. But now that you asked, that does sound pretty cool.” So you got a real crack at it.

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, that’s spot on.

Pete Mockaitis
Awesome. Okay. So ask. So maybe do nothing, maybe ask. What are some other top tips?

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, so after you ask and you find out what is, and let’s say it doesn’t go well. Let’s say that you’ve identified this problem with your relationship with work. It’s draining your well-being. It’s draining your positive energy, and you ask and try to make some changes proactively or reactively. It doesn’t work.

Then it’s time to think about, “Okay, is this a sustainable situation?” And maybe it’s sustainable and you think this is just a bad part of my job, but it’s okay because the good parts outweigh it. And so part of, I think, as you start into this process, it’s important to weigh up the positive sides of your job.

And there’s the obvious positives like, “Hey, I’ve got a nice office. I’ve got this amount of pay. I work with friendly people.” But also thinking about the goodwill that you’ve built up over the years, because that won’t carry with you if you move into a new organization.

So as we work in an organization for a while, things tend to get easier for us because we’ve built this sort of goodwill with the people around us when we can get things done. So really being honest about the positives and the negatives of your situation.

Now if you find that you’re in a situation where, “I can’t leave this job,” for whatever reason it may be, then I think that takes you down a different path than, “I can leave this job.” So for much of our working careers, most of us are in a situation where we can’t just up and leave right away.

And it could be this term is called embeddedness, like how embedded are you in your job and your community. And it could be like, “Look, this is the only engineering firm in this town that I’m in, and my family is never going to leave this town. So this is it for me, so I can’t leave,” versus, “Yeah, I’m in this metropolis with all sorts of engineering jobs and I can go remote and whatever it may be,” then you have a much lower level of embeddedness and you’ve got options.

But if you’re in this situation where you’re in huge problem with your relationship with work that can’t be fixed and you can’t quit, which I think many people are in this situation right now, then it makes sense to think about, “How do I reduce the size of work in my life in a way that doesn’t cause negative repercussions back on me?”

And so this is why the term quiet quitting, I think, went viral, right, three years ago, is thinking about, “How do I lean back a little bit from work such that I can dedicate my time and energy to pursuits outside of work?” and that could be anything from just well-being to a side gig or whatever it may be, or dedicate more time to try and find an alternative.

And I talk about, when you want to shrink the size of work in your life, when you want to lean back a little bit, it doesn’t make sense to do that in the core of your job, your core job tasks, because that’s going to lead down a negative path.

But I think most of us, if we’ve been in a job for a little while, we find this phenomenon called job creep happens, where we slowly take on more tasks, we slowly do a little bit of extra here and there. And not through anybody’s fault, our job becomes sort of bigger than we meant it to be.

And so then it’s time to do a little bit of landscaping and say, “What are the parts of my job that I’ve taken on, that I’m doing, that really don’t add much to me, to the organization, that nobody would notice if I quit doing, that I could delegate these tasks to someone else?”

And so it’s really about job crafting, about rightsizing your job to say, “How can I make this sustainable because I’m stuck in this situation for now?” So I think that’s the next move after speaking up, is maybe saying, “I need to lean back and see if maybe this job is actually fine if it’s just a nine-to-five job and not with all of this extra attached to it.”

Pete Mockaitis

And I guess I’m curious about the other side of all this in terms of we’re not jolted and we are on autopilot, and yet, we would totally stop working if we won the lottery. Do you have any prompts or questions or approaches where perhaps we need a jolt to cause us to evaluate what’s up and see if we’re, in fact, where we ought to be?

Anthony Klotz

Yeah, that’s interesting. There’s some old research where some researchers studied, “How do people and why do people become entrepreneurs?” And there’s this narrative of entrepreneurship as sort of a very proactive, positive career move that people make, that breaking free from the corporate overlords and becoming an entrepreneur.

But when they looked into it, they found that most people end up as entrepreneurs as a result of some negative event, some failure or something like that. And when they talked to the entrepreneurs, they were like, the entrepreneurs were like, “Look, I was stuck in inertia. I was stuck on autopilot, and I needed these layoffs to shake me out of it.”

And they’re, essentially, saying, “I needed these jolts in order to live the life I wanted to live.” So I think you can self-jolt perhaps in a couple of ways. And one I already mentioned, which is saying, “Every year or twice a year, I’m really going to sit down and take a hard look at my relationship with work, the trajectory of my life. Is it moving toward my version of the good life as much as I want it to?”

The other thing I would say is having some sort of partner who really challenges you, to have that meeting with them every six months. And the two of you, and who knows, it could be your romantic partner, it could be a friend, it could be a therapist, you know, sit down and say, “Let’s really question, take a critical look at my relationship with work. And do I need to make a change or not?”

And so I think you asked a great question, there are certainly times that entrepreneurship research would suggest that there are life pivots out there that we should take. And if we can self-jolt into them, for some of us that would make sense.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Anthony, tell me, any final things you want to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Anthony Klotz
The only final thing I would say is after this sort of leaning back or shrinking the size of work in your life, I mean, if that doesn’t work, or if you have the option to quit, then I think it is time to quit. This is why jolts do lead to a lot of quitting.

And I would just say, you know, especially for people early in your career, which was me at one point, like, nobody really teaches you how to quit or gives you advice on how to quit. More and more today, we’re seeing employees boomerang back to their former employers. And that only works if you resign in a way that’s largely positive.

And so there’s a lot of, I would say, online content showing the upsides of burning bridges as you leave organizations, and I think that’s probably quite overstated.

Pete Mockaitis
Upside?

Anthony Klotz
I think a lot of people are saying that it’s somewhat… there’s a lot of videos that make it seem like it’s really cathartic to have a marching band play as you quit your job, bake your boss a cake that says, “This is the worst job I’ve ever had.”

And these are hugely entertaining, as your laughter is suggesting, but as you might imagine, I’ve done a lot of research on how people quit their jobs, and there’s several different ways that people do quit their jobs.

And you can imagine that from a career standpoint, the positive styles of resigning make the most sense. And there are a few rare instances in which I would say it’s okay to burn bridges, but those would be very, very rare.

My research shows that about 10% of people engage in some form of dysfunctional behavior on the way out, some form of bridge-burning. That sort of behavior is probably only warranted in like 0.1% of quitting.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I guess, if anyone needed to hear that now, you’ve heard it from the expert on the matter. Don’t get a marching band and a dramatic exit. Maybe, like, if your career move is into a viral video creator and you’re getting a kickstart with the marching band, but almost never.

I think, yeah, I mean, that was my impression is that, yes, this video is entertaining, but it is not a optimal life approach. That’s what I think the imagination is for. Enjoy imagining doing that, but don’t actually do it.

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, go ahead and type up that email and then delete it, what you really want to say when you quit, yeah, but don’t actually say it.

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

Anthony Klotz
There’s a quote by George Mallory when he was trying to hike up Everest, and people wanted to know why he was doing it. And I won’t get this quote exactly right, but he essentially said, “There is no reason. We just do it for the sheer joy.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And can you share a favorite study, or experiment, or bit of research?

Anthony Klotz
Yeah, there’s a study, Greenberg 1990, where somehow this researcher talked a manufacturing company that was doing pay cuts into letting him manipulate the way that they deliver those pay cuts, which we wouldn’t even be allowed to do anymore for ethical purposes.

But it showed that just in very small ways, the way that leaders deliver negative messages have huge implications for whether employees steal and quit after a negative announcement, like a pay cut or a layoff.

Just doing it with compassion and care versus doing it in a very perfunctory style makes a huge difference for how negative news is received and reacted to by workers. It’s just a really powerful design.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Anthony Klotz
I like dreaming and reading about travel. So probably The Log from the Sea of Cortez by Steinbeck, where he’s tooling around Baja Mexico, the Sea of Cortez, and making all kinds of fun discoveries with his buddies. That sounds pretty good.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Anthony Klotz
In the evenings, usually about an hour before I go to sleep, I put away the screens and go for a walk, usually with my partner. But being away from screens, going for a walk, definitely contributes to a good night’s sleep, which then kind of has a more positive effect, a nice little cyclical positive effect.

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

Anthony Klotz

I would point them to email, for one. Anybody can reach out to me at my UCL email, which is easy to find, or I’m at AnthonyKlotz.com or LinkedIn, of course.

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

Anthony Klotz
If you’re looking to be awesome at your job, I would recommend challenging yourself to say, “When these jolts come, I’m going to set them to the side for the moment. I’m not going to ruminate on them, give them more energy than they need. And I’ll revisit them every three months or every six months.” So that would be the challenge.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Anthony, thank you.

Anthony Klotz
Oh, it’s been a pleasure, Pete.

1157: How to Improve Processes, Remove Friction, and Accelerate Innovation with Jon McNeill

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Tesla’s former President Jon McNeill reveals the five-step framework behind one of the world’s fastest-growing companies.

You’ll Learn

  1. What most miss when designing processes
  2. How to identify outdated requirements that slow things down
  3. Why automation should be your LAST step

About Jon

Jon McNeill is the CEO and Co-Founder of DVx Ventures. With a track record of founding and scaling companies, Jon has led teams that generated tens of thousands of jobs and delivered multi-billion dollar returns for investors.

Previously, Jon served as President at Tesla, where revenue grew from $2B to $20B in under 30 months, and later as COO at Lyft, helping double revenue and take the company public. He currently sits on the boards of General Motors, Lululemon, Asurion, CrossFit, and Stash.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Jon McNeill Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Jon, welcome!

Jon McNeill
Thanks. Nice to be here, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to discuss The Algorithm and I’d love it if you could kick us off with a story you shared, which I found riveting, in which when you were just getting started at Tesla, even actually before you had the job, you took it on yourself to tackle a project. Could you tell us the story?

Jon McNeill

Yeah, I was talking with Elon about joining Tesla and I kept saying to him, “I think you need a big company guy to come in.” And he said, “No, that’s exactly what I don’t need. I need a fellow entrepreneur.” And I said, “Well, I want to make sure I can be helpful to you. So, like, what’s your biggest problem right now?”

And he said, “We have a demand problem.” And I said, “Okay, like frame that for me. They’re public companies. So what’s your commitment to the street this quarter?” He said, “Roughly 12,000 cars.” And I said, “How are you doing so far?”

It was about a month into the quarter. He says, “It’s a month into the quarter. We’ve sold like 2,500 cars, short of 3,000 cars.” I’m like, “Oh, now I understand your demand problem. You’re going to miss your quarter. Let me go to work on that and see if I can help.”

So I went to, just in the travels with my own business at the time, I went to eight different cities over the course of about 10 days. And I went into eight different Tesla stores and did what I was told was the pinnacle of the sales process and sales funnel, which was taking a test drive.

And the whole idea was that people would come in, they would get in an electric car for the first time, hit the accelerator. And the accelerator in an electric car is way different than a gas car. It’s instant torque to the wheels, and so you take off like a rocket. And so a lot of people experience that. And then they can’t stop thinking about it until they’ve got a car.

So I went in eight stores, I did a test drive. And then, oddly, like a few days later, I hadn’t heard from any of them. So Elon had put me in touch with his head of sales ops. And I called him and said, “Like, am I blacklisted in the system or something? I used eight different email addresses so people wouldn’t know who I was. And people don’t know who I am anyway. And I’m not getting any callbacks. Why?”

And he looked in the system, he’s like, “No, you’re not flagged or anything.” I said, “Can you do me a favor? Can you tell me how many test drives you’ve given in the last 30 days that haven’t been followed up?” And he’s like, “Sure, give me, like, an hour. I can go run that.”

So he calls me back in an hour, and he said, “Nine thousand, 9,000 test drives, no callbacks.” I said, “Well, congratulations. You’re going to miss your quarter because you haven’t called anybody back. And no wonder you’re so far short of orders.”

So then I said, “Can you shut off a store rep’s ability to take any new leads until they’ve called all of their previous test drives back?” He said, “Yeah, I could do that.” I said, “How fast?” He said, “Globally? I could do that in a few hours.” I said, “Awesome. Do it, because we got to force-change, like, super fast or, otherwise, you’re missing your quarter.”

So he does it. Calls me back the next day, he’s like, “You won’t believe the orders are flowing in like crazy.” And I said, “Yeah, because you’re just calling people back. It’s the easiest thing ever. You’re asking for the order.” And then it dawned on me that I didn’t work for Tesla yet. And so I kind of gulped, and I said, “Hey, I got to call you back, because I got to call Elon and beg for forgiveness.”

So I called Elon and said, “Hey, look. Here’s the situation. You’re demand-challenged. Here’s what I found out. You’ve done 9,000 test drives with no callback. And so here’s what I did about it. I was on the phone with your head of sales ops and we shut down any new leads into the system until everybody called their previous test drives back.”

And I said, “But I got to ask your forgiveness. I was acting like this was my company because I’m a CEO in my day job. But this is not the company I’m the CEO of. You are. This is your company. And I did something and I didn’t even ask your permission. And I’m really sorry. I got to apologize.”

And I didn’t know it because we were just getting to know each other. But I had this long period of silence on the other end of the phone line, and I thought, “Oh, my God, what have I done?” And it seemed like forever. It was probably 60 or 90 seconds of just dead silence.

What I’ve learned since is that’s how Elon processes. He, like, shuts off all other sensory input and just thinks. And so I was about to ask him if he was still there, and he hopped on and he said, “You know what? That’s exactly a rational decision, and I’m so glad you made it. I think you’re going to fit in here just fine.”

And that was the last hurdle. I said, “Well, I think I’ve proven myself I can be useful. So I think I’m ready to sign on, too.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s a lovely story on many dimensions. But when I reflect on it, what I’m stuck with is, “All right, Tesla, great, great brand, tremendous company, tremendous leaders, lot of smarts there.” How is it that we find ourselves in a situation where one of the most fundamental things one can do in a sales operation – call people back – isn’t happening?

Jon McNeill

I think I see this over and over again. People look at a lot of data and miss the obvious. And when you just go and see a process with your eyes – this is going to sound completely old-fashioned – but it’s actually the case.

Like, I believe that the strongest analytical instrument you have as a leader are your eyes and ears. And if you go to the front line and eat your own dog food and experience the product or the process for yourself, you’ll often see exactly what’s wrong. But unless you know the exact piece of data to look for that would give you the clue, you don’t know that.

And so this is a complete hack I’ve found in leadership is just go to the front line, go experience the process yourself. You’ll understand really rapidly exactly what’s wrong. And it doesn’t always work, but it works a lot of the time. And this was an example of that.

So a bunch of really smart people looking at data missed it because they didn’t leave their offices. And my encouragement to people, and those people, as I then became their leader was, “You’re going to leave your office at least one day a week, and you’re going to go to the front lines because you’re going to see stuff way faster than the data will show you. And, hopefully, we’ll miss a lot of these potential big divots in our plan if you do.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s tremendous. We had Marina Nitze on the show, who was the CTO for the United States VA, and that was one of her core recommendations, is follow the thing all the way through the process and then you’ll say, “Oh, that’s why it’s taking forever because so-and-so is waiting for something to be faxed. Well, let’s stop that. All right, now we know. Understood.”

All right. Well, so then zooming out a bit, your book, The Algorithm, any particularly surprising or fascinating discoveries you’ve made in your career or while putting together the book that you’re putting forward here?

Jon McNeill

I think this is, like, I had gone into Tesla having been a student of the Toyota Production System and Lean, and what I found was those frameworks were awesome for incremental improvement and optimization, but not awesome for quantum growth.

And so what we tried to distill in The Algorithm, this was the whole team at Tesla and, really, the leadership team that came up with this framework, was to distill a framework for quantum growth into some digestible steps that we could push to the edge of the organization.

And the edge could start to innovate super fast, because that’s what doubling a business every eight months at scale requires. And that’s exactly what the team was pulling off. They were doubling a business every eight months.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So the classic Toyota manufacturing, Lean, Kaizen, Kanbans, etc., is great for your small incremental growth and you’ve got a whole another thing for hyper growth. And can you unpack sort of basically what is the algorithm?

Jon McNeill

It’s a five-step process that we used on a weekly basis to drive innovation. And this is used at Tesla. It’s used at SpaceX. And I think, as leadership experts or academics go to study Elon 20 or 30 years from now, and ask the question, like, “What made this guy such a successful entrepreneur and industrialist? Like, what was it?” I think they’ll come down to this, like, weekly cadence of deploying this framework, because that’s exactly what he does.

He determines the one or two issues that are existential to the business. In other words, the two things that could kill you if they don’t come true. And then he just devotes his time to that. He delegates everything else to the team. And so you have great agencies as a leader because you’re running the business and he’s really working on two existential issues, but he’s doing it on a weekly basis.

And what that does is that keeps the organization innovating on a weekly basis. So if you’re doing that every week, you’ve got 52 opportunities to build advantage versus your competition. And that’s exactly what that delivers.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, so could you maybe walk us through a couple examples of, all right, grab existential issue and then work through the steps?

Jon McNeill
So I’ll take you through one to make this super simple. So the first step is question every requirement. Second step is you delete every step and you simplify. The third is you optimize. The fourth is you speed it up because no process can get faster and have high quality with speed unless it is like optimized, so that’s a test. And then you automate last, which sounds kind of nuts especially coming from a technical company or Silicon Valley company to say automate last, but I’ll kind of illustrate that.

So let me start with the first, the negative example. So we started to prepare for Model 3 production. And the idea of the teams was, “We’re going to have a fully automated line, the most automated manufacturing line ever in the history of automobiles.”

And so you might remember this phrase, “We’re going to build the alien dreadnought,” or, “the machine that makes the machine.” That was this whole era. And so teams went to design the Model 3 production line in digital simulation. Today they would call it a digital twin. And they designed all the machines, the flow, the conveyors, the people, everything. They didn’t lay it out manually and do it manually first.

And so when we were down to the wire in terms of, “We got to produce Model 3s because we’re going to be out of cash if we don’t,” they went to start that line, and the line wouldn’t work for a thousand reasons. There were major, major mistakes that were made in that digital SIM.

And digital SIMs usually don’t work because they can’t think of everything. And cars were falling off the conveyors, falling off the line. And that then led to a radical step, which was one of the leaders, Jerome Guillen, said, “I’m actually going to scrap this whole process and build a tent outside. And we’re going to do what we should have done from the start. We’re going to build cars by hand.”

And so we started, over the weekend, building Model 3s by hand. And we simplified the entire process because we didn’t have conveyors, we didn’t have a lot of the machines that were necessary, and we did the bare essentials to produce that Model 3.

So we simplified the process, we deleted all the unnecessary steps, we didn’t have the luxury, really, of having many steps. And then we started to optimize the process, and we started, we produced 50 cars a week, and then we produced 100, and then we produced 500. And the goal was to get to 5,000. And we kept creeping up, creeping up, creeping up by optimizing the process and applying speed to it.

Once we finally had the process nailed, then we automated at the very last step and moved from the tent back into the factory. We had rebuilt the factory production line by this time so that it could actually produce cars.

And when we went to do the postmortem, we said, “How would we have avoided this? Number one, we automated first, not last, and it almost killed us. We did not run the process manually first. We did not delete a bunch of steps. We did not optimize the process. We automated before we had done any of that work, and we almost killed the company.”

So it was, really, at the end of Model 3 production, that the algorithm came together, and we said, “Here are the steps we’re going to follow from here on out. When we go to launch a new product, when you go to invent a new product, we’re going to follow these steps.”

And so that’s an end-to-end example of how not to do it, but then it led us to a framework of how to do it.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So maybe digging into each of these in some detail, with “question every requirement.” I have a feeling many of us, it doesn’t even occur to us to question the requirements because the requirements, they’re just like the air we breathe or the water we swim in. It’s like, “Well, this is just how it is.”

So could you maybe surface for us some prompts, or some examples, or some perturbations so that we can identify some requirements that maybe need to get questioned?

Jon McNeill
So when we started to sell cars online, we figured out it took 64 clicks to sell a car, but 44 of those clicks were in the financing process. And that’s because a loan doc or a lease doc for a car has 12 pages of paragraph after paragraph after paragraph. You’ve got an initial sign, all this stuff.

And so a question on requirement step that we did was I took that loan doc to our general counsel at the time, his name’s Todd Maron. I said, “Todd, out of these 12 pages, I need to get rid of some clicks. Can you tell me how many of these paragraphs are a requirement of law or regulation?” He came back about 24 hours later and he said, “None.”

I said, “Well, how does a 12-page document exist then?” He said, “It’s the result of a bunch of well-meaning corporate lawyers at banks trying to protect their client. And so they insert paragraphs for all these uncertainties or these edge cases that could come up to protect the bank.”

But he said, “None of these are required by law or regulation. And, actually, the bank has case law on its side. Like, they don’t need all this stuff because if somebody cheats in a certain way, that’s already been decided by case law. So it’s not like you need to make somebody acknowledge something that the courts have already acknowledged as being out of bounds.”

So I said, “Todd, you’re telling me we could have a one-paragraph loan or lease that says, ‘Here’s the price of the car, here’s the interest rate, here’s the term, and here’s the monthly payment?’” He’s like, “I’m telling you, you can do that.”

Nobody in the industry had questioned whether or not the loan doc or the lease doc should exist. We were just crazy, silly enough to make that, to raise that question. We discovered something that none of our competitors had discovered, which is you didn’t need to put customers through a 44-click process. And as you know, if you had to buy anything on Amazon, and it took 44 clicks, you’d probably opt out a lot. And that’s true in e-comm, and it’s certainly true when people are buying a $100,000-car online.

So we went to talk to banks to see if we could get anybody to go along with us on this one-click loan release, and we got the door slammed in our face by everybody, even though they would intellectually acknowledge that they didn’t need all these paragraphs.

They said, “I would never take the risk of doing this. I would never take the career risk of going to my CEO and suggesting we do this.” Finally, we found a very enterprising CEO at US Bank, and he said, “We’ll do it. In fact, we’ll talk to a CrossTown digital bank called Ally. They’ll probably do it too. We’ll take your loans, they’ll probably take your leases, and we’re off to the races.”

All that started because we questioned why a 12-page loan doc had to exist. And that’s probably the clearest example or the best prompt I can give you on questioning requirements. There’s a lot of stuff that nobody ever questions and takes as a given. If you question that stuff and it turns out it’s not a given, now you’ve got an advantage.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like that a lot. And I’m thinking about, well, the phrase that comes to mind is checkbox marketing, or really checkbox anything. If your mindset is, “Well, that’s just what’s done. It’s just what needs to happen.” And I’m thinking about, well, I have a one-page guest release form.

And I think lawyers tend to want to put a lot of intense, you know, things in there. It’s like, “I own all of these forever, no matter what.” And I think, “Well, actually that’s not the vibe I’m trying to put out there when I’m just meeting somebody. I’m just sort of like, ‘Hey, you and I are both cool to do what we want to do with this thing, okay? So no pressure, it’s all good.’” And that’s kind of what I’m trying to convey.

So it was not the default. We had to shift and adjust and then it is, well, it’s much smoother because then I don’t have a lot of people say, “Whoa, whoa, hold on, buddy. What, what is this? I don’t know. Wait. Time out. I got to talk to my lawyer. I got to talk to my agent. I don’t know if we can do this, you know?”

No, that just about never happens because it’s very quick and it’s simple and it’s handy. And I liked that example because the law, in particular, feels like something that’s immovable, like, “Oh, ‘legal’ said, we just have to have that. And end of discussion. It was like, “Oh, well, maybe legal would be willing to have a follow-up conversation and see what can be done here.”

Jon McNeill

Totally. And it takes a certain mindset. So, like, Todd, as a leader of the legal teams was willing to come along on that journey with me and question requirements, and that’s pretty rare in that kind of a leader in that function, but he was super commercial and business-oriented.

And so he would start that journey without having a bunch of hesitation. Like, he’d say, “Yeah, let’s go, like, look into this and see if this is really true and if we really need this.” I don’t experience many general counsels like Todd because they largely go into that career to mitigate risk. And so that’s where their position starts.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, and as a point of curiosity, I mean, I understand frictions and clicks are, you know, undesirable. They slow down the behavior you want, and this is cool and convenient and nice and pleasant to have fewer clicks.

But, you know, Jon, really, lay it on me, is a few dozen clicks for signing an initialing a hundred thousand dollar vehicle enough to move the needle so that folks are like, “You know what? I wanted that Tesla, but this is too much effort. I’m done with this document. I’m abandoning my cart”?

Jon McNeill

It happened a lot, and when we eliminated it, the opposite happened. People started to buy like crazy online, and our digital sales went through the roof, which is because it’s just science. In e-comm, clicks equal anti-conversion. So you get rid of clicks and your conversion rate goes up. It’s just math.

So this is why when you get to the cart in Amazon, the search bar disappears. They want to take away any potential click that you’re going to do other than hit order, because they know how hard it was to get to that point and how hard it is to get you to actually click the order button.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, and I believe they’ve litigated the one-click ordering.

Jon McNeill

Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s like, “No, this is ours, we own it, no one touch it.” And it’s like, “Very touchy,” and because the stakes are huge.

Jon McNeill

Because of that, because it’s powerful. Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, can you chat with us about deleting the steps in the process?

Jon McNeill
Yeah, so here’s another example, and Elon actually cut a little video in this early on, but he had taken on this challenge in manufacturing where there was this separator between the battery and the car. And so it’s basically along the floor of the car.

And we could not produce this separator, big piece of plastic. We couldn’t produce it to save our lives. It was warping and it wouldn’t fit right, etc. And so this is one of the chapters where he’s literally sleeping in the factory trying to solve this problem.

And, eventually, he asked the team, “I got to talk to the engineer who spec’d this part. Who spec’d the part?” And the closest people around are the battery people, and they said, “Oh, it’s the auto dynamics team. They wanted a noise dampener in between the battery and the passenger compartment.”

So he grabs the guy that’s the head of the auto dynamics team, and said, “Why did you spec this part?” He said, “I didn’t spec the part. It was the battery team. The battery team told us they needed a heat shield between the battery and the passenger compartment.”

He’s like, “I was just with the battery team and they said it was you, not them.” He said, “Give me the name of the person who spec’d this part.” So they go look for the name. And it turns out the name of the person that spec’d the part was a summer intern that didn’t even work at Tesla anymore.

Elon had spent weeks in the factory trying to solve this problem, all for a part that didn’t need to exist. And so, at that point in time, “We said, nobody claims ownership of this ‘requirement.’ So we’re going to delete it out of the car. And, therefore, we’re solving a whole production problem that was holding us up.”

And you will find, over and over again, that there are steps you can delete from your sales process, from your delivery process. And the hack to finding those is, essentially, map your process on a wall with a bunch of sticky notes. Then have your team go circle those steps that the customer pays you for. It turns out there’s very few of those.

They don’t pay you for the order sheet. They don’t pay you for the PO. They don’t pay you for, in our case, the bill of lading. They don’t pay you for all this stuff. And the things they don’t pay you for are immediate candidates for deletion, because you’re doing those for internal reasons, and you’re creating cost for internal reasons.

Now some of the stuff is necessary to track dollars and cents. I totally get it. They don’t pay you for accounting. They don’t pay you for tax. I get that. But there are a bunch of steps you can cut out when you start to say, “Hey, the customer really doesn’t pay us for this. And we don’t really get anything out of it. So why are we doing this?” And those are good candidates to delete.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. Well, I was curious, did Elon get on the phone with the intern? Like, “Hey.”

Jon McNeill
The intern didn’t even work there anymore. Like, didn’t even work there.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, mean, hunt him down wherever he is.

Jon McNeill
He was like, “I don’t need to waste time talking to the intern, like, it’s gone.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So then simplify and optimize.

Jon McNeill
Yeah, so once you delete steps, now you’ve got way fewer steps. So you’ve got a simplified process and now you can start to optimize that process and make it go faster and faster and faster and faster. It’s a little bit like starting any skill, whether that is playing a musical instrument or a sport, where you start and you’re like, “Man, I can’t go very fast.”

And then you practice and practice and practice, and it turns out you get faster and faster and faster because you get more and more efficient and optimized. And that’s the idea here is you keep speeding the process up and speeding it up.

Now you’re still in manual mode. So you’re learning a bunch about what’s causing, what’s getting in the way of speed, and the stuff getting in the way of speed is usually a quality issue. And so you eliminate these quality issues. And then once you’ve got the target speed achieved, now you know you’re optimized and you can then start on automation.

Pete Mockaitis
A quality issue in terms of something needs rework or is outside of the spec we’re looking for?

Jon McNeill
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And then with the acceleration, so there’s practice. What are the other drivers of accelerating?

Jon McNeill
Mainly, it’s putting speed goals that are double the current speed. So you say, “I want to either double the output at current speed or I want to double the speed at current output,” either one of those works in my book, just try to double.

And it starts to reveal, “Oh, here’s all the things that are in the way of doubling. So maybe we can delete more steps. Maybe there are more requirements that we should question. Or, maybe there’s a better method.”

And as you do those, then you start to identify, “Ah, there are a bunch of things that we didn’t see at first that we now see now, that we can either delete or simplify to help us speed this process up.”

Pete Mockaitis
So the doubling of the speed is not so much a, “Hey, it turns out we can just double the speed, it’s all good.” But rather, it’s sort of like a magnifying glass to identify, “Oh, that’s what’s holding down the speed doubling.”

Jon McNeill
Totally. There’s this great series of scenes in the Hulu series, “The Bear,” which is about this super high-end restaurant in Chicago. And it’s turned from a roast beef cafe with the same team in the back that is now trying to earn its Michelin star.

And there’s a woman that’s at the pasta station, and she has two minutes once an order comes in to cook pasta. And she starts at five minutes. And then she does things like she portions each serving of pasta in a little plastic container. So she’s pre-portioned.

And she starts to do multiple boiling water pots to drop the pasta into so she can do more than one at a time. And then she’s got a saucier step that she realizes, if she preheats the sauce, it meets the pasta at the right time, she can speed it up. And she gets the process down from five to two and a half minutes by just eliminating all these steps, but she’s still not at her two minute target.

And then the sous chef, who really runs the kitchen, comes over and is just helping her. They have a busy night. And so the sous chef comes over and does a few things that experienced chefs know to do. Bam! Bam! Bam! Order comes out in a minute and a half.

And the woman who is at the pasta station says, “I’ve been working this problem for like 90 days and I got it from five minutes to two and a half. And you walk over and you do it in a minute and a half.” And she’s like, “Yeah, I’ve done this before. So just watch me and you can see the extra steps you can take out of your process to make yourself faster.”

That’s what we’re talking about is just optimize, optimize, optimize until you get to a really different output than you’ve had before.

Pete Mockaitis
And then the final step is automation.

Jon McNeill
Yeah, and then you can automate it. Because automation is like wet cement. When you put it around a process, it sets up really hard and you got to get jackhammers to get rid of it. So you don’t want to automate until you’ve really got the process nailed. Otherwise, you’ll be suffering with the cement that’s already solidified the current process where it is.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So now, as we were talking about this with the restaurant example and manufacturing examples, I’d love to change gears a little bit and hear about, let’s say there’s someone who’s in the middle of an organization and their output is not physical, but, nonetheless, there is a process that’s cranking out something on the other end. Could you give us an example in that domain of working through those steps?

Jon McNeill
Yeah, so, like, whether you’re producing software or whether you’re producing marketing or you’re producing financials, I think the same steps apply. If you step back and say like, “Hey, look, I produce financial statements for the business,” or, “I produce a budget for the business.”

If you step back and say, “Okay, let me just map the process that we use today to do that. And maybe I should question some base assumptions here. And do we have to do all these steps? Like, are all these things really required?”

And so an example of that is Tesla, when I joined, was doing standard annual budgets. And the senior management team and the CEO would set the target for sales, and the target for gross margin, the target for cash flow. And so these annual budgets were being done in the way they’re done at almost every company.

The challenge was we were doubling the business every eight months. And so, like, if you’re trying to project out a budget for a year, it was horribly inaccurate by, like, month three, because things were changing so fast. So all that was essentially wasted effort, all that planning and budgeting.

So we asked ourselves a question, like, “Time is super, super valuable in this company. How could we improve this process? And rather than going through a big planning cycle every year, what actually needs to get done?”

And where we ended up was, we questioned the requirement of having a year budget. It turned out what we did was we had quarterly budgets because the business was moving on a quarter basis, not a year basis, and we would have these rolling four quarter budgets.

We would spend less than two days setting targets in the budget because it was only going be good for a quarter. So you didn’t want to spend a week of the quarter, a huge chunk of the quarter doing it. And that finance team evolved a whole different way to do financial planning and budgeting.

And they did it, not on an annual basis, but a quarterly basis. They did it on a rolling basis, and they just used the key inputs that everybody was looking at in the business anyway, “What’s the sales rate? What’s the production rate? What’s the margin?”

And we can build a budget off of that, and rather than taking the whole company’s time planning, we’re just going to keep rolling this and rolling this, and we’re absorbing everything that we’re learning from the market as we double.

And so you can apply this whether you’re sitting in a finance department or a marketing department or a sales department. You can apply these principles to your advantage, too.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Jon, tell me, any final top tips, do’s or don’ts, for folks looking to implement this stuff?

Jon McNeill
As we talked about, like one of the principles that is a complete hack is eat your own dog food. I learned this from Sam Walton in his book, Made in America, where he would tour stores on a weekly basis to find out what the customer wanted that they didn’t have, what they had too much of that the customer didn’t want, and what were the things that store managers were doing that were super good that he could spread across the company.

And I learned from that and started to see that, “Oh, he’s onto a complete hack.” Like, if you use your own product, if you experience the customer experience, you’re going to see all kinds of areas of improvement. And if you teach your people to see it before you, they’re going to move even faster than you can.

And so I would say, like, the secret hack is go experience your own product and use it. We even went so far at Tesla to have a rule that you couldn’t present product in a PowerPoint. We didn’t want to see, like, some rendering or rendition. We wanted to see the real thing. So if you’re presenting product, you had to do a live screencast onto the screen so we could see the product, we could play with the product, and we could see how it actually worked.

I was with a group of bank executives a few months ago. I asked them to raise their hand if they actually use their own bank’s consumer app. No hands went up. And I said, “I could have guessed that because I’m a consumer of two of your banks, and your app sucks.”

“It’s so bad that if you used it, you wouldn’t live with yourself for another day without fixing it. You would call up the head of engineering and you say, ‘We got to fix this, this, and this.’ But you don’t use it.” So the organization gets the sense that nobody cares. And if you can live with it, they can live with it.

And eating your own dog food changes all that. It creates an immediate feedback loop to the top and it allows you to set the bar of acceptability with your organization.

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

Jon McNeill
I think this whole approach is about simplicity, and so I love the Mark Twain quote, “I would have written you a shorter letter if I would have taken the time.” It speaks to how hard it is to simplify. Humans, I think, we are naturally complicators. We’re not natural simplifiers, and it actually takes work to simplify.

And I love that quote, because it reminds me, each time I read it, of the fact that simplification is work. It’s super valuable and rewarding work, but it’s work.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And can you point to a favorite study or experimental or bit of research?

Jon McNeill
I think, if you want to understand AI and the current version of AI that we have with LLMs, the best piece to read is the original DeepMind paper.

Pete Mockaitis
“Attention Is All You Need”?

Jon McNeill
Yup.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Jon McNeill
Favorite book would be, I’ve got two right now, one is The Goal, which taught me a completely different way of looking at business, by Eliyahu Goldratt. And the second is Unreasonable Hospitality by Will Guidara. I think it applies to every business. It’s so good.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Jon McNeill
Reading. Like, if I could answer the question that way, I’d start every day reading for an hour and a half, and I read variety of things. I read books, I read, obviously, the news. I read Twitter, I read Reddit, Hacker News sometimes. Reading for me is a tool.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And is there a key nugget you share with teammates, audiences, that they quote back to you often, a Jon original?

Jon McNeill
We had the standard for service at Tesla that gets quoted back to me, it got quoted back to me today actually, and that is, “Make them talk about you at dinner tonight.” Do something that is so awesome that they’re going to talk about you at dinner tonight.

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

Jon McNeill
I’d point them, you can find me at DVX.ventures.

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

Jon McNeill
Become a simplifier and you’ll stand out.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Okay, Jon, thank you.

Jon McNeill
You bet. Thanks, Pete.

1156: How to Make Great Meetings that Stop Wasting Time with Rebecca Hinds

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Rebecca Hinds discusses the simple shifts that turn meetings from time-wasters into value-generators.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why most meetings don’t feel like “real work”
  2. Why every organization needs a “meeting doomsday”
  3. The easy agenda fixes that save so much time

About Rebecca

Rebecca Hinds is a leading expert on organizational behavior and the future of work. She holds a BS, MS, and PhD from Stanford University. Rebecca founded the Work Innovation Lab at Asana and the Work AI Institute at Glean, first-of-their-kind corporate think tanks dedicated to conducting cutting-edge research on the future of work.

She is a trusted advisor to companies navigating the challenges of modern work—from meeting overload and hybrid dysfunction to the messy realities of AI adoption and organizational change.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Rebecca Hinds Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Rebecca, welcome!

Rebecca Hinds
Thank you so much for having me, Pete. I’m looking forward to chatting.

Pete Mockaitis
Me, too. Me, too. And I am excited about making meetings fantastic. Could you share with us perhaps one of your most surprising, fascinating, counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made while you’re putting together Your Best Meeting Ever?

Rebecca Hinds
I’ve long been fascinated by this phenomenon that’s called the Babble Hypothesis. Research shows that, when people talk more, talk more in a meeting, outside of a meeting as well, we perceive them to be a leader more than they are regardless of what they’re saying.

And I think, you know, so much of our meetings are performative, they’re skewed by status dynamics and power dynamics within the organization, and I think this Babble Hypothesis really speaks to the fact that we need to be much more intentional about how we show up to meetings because talking, hogging the airtime isn’t just annoying. It isn’t just frustrating. It actually skews our perception of the people in the room.

Pete Mockaitis
That is so fascinating and, boy, you’re bringing back memories of high school. I remember Robbie Klaver – shoutout to Robbie, wherever he is – told me, I was starting up a Model United Nations chapter at my high school.

And he said, “If you want to win awards, all you have to do is talk a lot.” It was like, “That’s it. It doesn’t have to be good, it doesn’t have to be insightful, it doesn’t have to be helpful. Just get in front of that microphone a lot, and that’s how you get awards.”

And it’s like, “Robbie, surely not.” But, no, it really was exactly what I witnessed. And, whatever that had implications for, I guess, people’s college applications and all that. But this high school Model UN principle rings true decades later in workplaces all over the world.

Rebecca Hinds
As does so many other things, so many aspects of high school, you know, the homogeneous people coming together and sticking together, birds of a feather and, you know, jargon, too. We’re often told to use fancy words.

I talk in the book about how that’s often counterproductive because using jargon, using big words, using technical words, as I often see in meetings, it alienates other people, and we actually trust them less because they’re not speaking our language and they’re less relatable.

And I think that the science behind all of this is incredibly fascinating, in part, because it’s incredibly human. And probably what happened in high school is still showing up in some way, shape, or form in our meetings as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, thinking about high school jargon, if I may attempt, as I’m 41 years old, jargon-maxing is not good, but talk-maxing is good from your perception as being a leader, and wise, and all those things, but it’s not great from the meeting experience or the outcomes.

Rebecca Hinds
And I think maxing is such an interesting word. We’re seeing it everywhere now, certainly with token-maxing and more is better. My colleague and mentor at Stanford, Bob Sutton, will call this addition sickness, right?

We are hardwired as humans to solve problems through addition. We have a problem, we throw more money at it, we throw more people at it, we throw more meetings at it, we throw more people in the meetings, more meeting minutes, and it’s very dangerous because, often, we don’t take time to subtract.

And there’s also a great research from my colleague, Leidy Klotz at University of Virginia that shows, “If you do prime people to subtract, it dislodges that addition sickness and they start to adopt a subtraction mindset.”

It’s often not that we dislike subtraction. It’s often, it doesn’t even occur to us as an option. It doesn’t even occur to us that, as we add another person to the meeting, what we should probably think about, “Is there someone we can remove where the meeting is no longer relevant to them or as relevant as it once was?”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’d love to get your take for this notion of the person who speaks more is perceived as the leader more. Are there any compelling studies or experiments or data points to highlight just how substantial an effect this is?

Rebecca Hinds
Interesting. So I think that the study that I anchor, and in the book, I believe it was for every 34 seconds of talk time on that order, people gained an extra point as a leader.

Now this was done in a context where there was no natural leader in the meeting in terms of having a bigger title than anyone else. But it skewed the perception in the room. And what’s also fascinating is, in this particular study, and there have been other studies where they didn’t find this effect, but in this study in particular, men automatically earned an extra point for being a leader, just for being male.

And I think that’s also a key part of the power dynamics is, you know, the gender, the diversity in the room, how quickly you speak as well. If you speak more quickly, in general, you’re perceived to be more competent.

And a lot of these cues, and we’re seeing it with AI as well right now, you know, depending on the way an AI tool is framing the output, how sycophantic it is, we also know that if people agree with us, we tend to view them as more intelligent and more capable. And all of these biases, you know, they are front and center in meetings and something that we need to pay very close attention to.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, these are tantalizing tidbits. But maybe we should zoom out and say, what’s your big idea, main message, key thesis of Your Best Meeting Ever?

Rebecca Hinds
So the big idea is meetings are a product. Meetings are the most important product in our entire organization. They’re where decisions get made, culture gets built, alignment gets set, and yet they’re also the least optimized. They’re the least optimized product in our entire organization.

And when we think about great products, great everyday products, well, they have certain product design principles. We should be applying those same product design principles to meetings. So the seven chapters of the book each walk through a product design principle applied to our meetings.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so when you say product, I can read that word in multiple ways. Like, a product might be a physical item that I can purchase at a store. Or, in the tech world, products are not so much physical. They’re software things with features and experiences and a user interface. So how are you using the word product here?

Rebecca Hinds
In a few different ways and with a few different dimensions. Meetings are a communication tool. They’re a communication and coordination and collaboration mechanism within our organization. So they’re intangible in that way.

But what I’m getting at with the idea of product is intentionality. Just as we would think very carefully about how we build products and services for our customers, well, we need to approach meetings with the same discipline.

We would never launch a product to our customers without design, feedback, refinement, iteration. We do that with meetings every single day. We throw them on the calendar and they’re often our default reaction to any sort of uncertainty or ambiguity within the organization.

We don’t treat them like a product we would sell or give to our customers, which, in the context of meetings, those are the attendees in the room. They are not ourselves as organizers of the meeting.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So the product is something that needs to be thoughtfully, carefully considered and not just knee-jerk default, “Here’s meeting,” and to put some upfront effort into crafting how that’s going to be effective. Can you share with us some additional implications of the product mindset toward meetings?

Rebecca Hinds
Countless. You know, countless implications in terms of employee engagement. We know that meeting effectiveness is a strong predictor of employee engagement within the organization, even controlling for the factors that you would think to be important, your manager, your role within the organization.

Real business results, right? I think I often work with organizations where you’ll go in and you’ll start to hear people talk about meetings as if they’re not the real work, you know, “Oh, I have to get through all these meetings and then I can finally get to my work,” right?

If we design meetings correctly, they should be the real work, right? They should move work forward. So often, it’s not the case because they’re used performatively. They’re used as a box-checking exercise and not a mechanism, not a product that moves our work forward.

And so key business results, you know, moving work forward, better engagement, better cooperation, better relationships between the manager and the direct report, you know, meetings are the most common form of collaboration within our organizations.

As knowledge workers, as desk workers, we spend 90% of our time collaborating. There is nothing that we can do as leaders within organizations that is more impactful in boosting collaboration, improving that 90% of time than meetings because they’re so ubiquitous, they’re so common, and they’re so dysfunctional.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, well said. So I like that notion of box-checking versus moving the work forward. And, boy, that’s a really good, bright line of distinction associated with, “Is the meeting real work or is it not?” You’re thinking about effectiveness on these dimensions over the relationship, as well as moving work forward.

Can you give us some more clarity on how I can assess, “Is this meeting amazing, terrible, okay, pretty good?” How do I get a gauge on how effective or ineffective a meeting is?

Rebecca Hinds

It’s such a great question, it’s a hard question. And the reason why it’s a hard question is we have what I call a meeting-suck reflex. Meaning we are conditioned to dislike meetings, and we are conditioned to believe that that’s how we should behave, right?

There are a few things that bond coworkers more than lamenting over that meeting that could have been a two-line email. And because of that, you can’t just go into an organization, your own organization, and ask people, “Are your meetings effective?” because you’re going to trigger that reflex and not the reality. And that’s why we need to be very careful about meeting measurement.

One of my top recommendations is, if you want to gut check into how effective your meetings are, the ones you run, after about 10% of those meetings, ask attendees, “On a scale of zero to five, was this meeting worth the time you invested?”

My colleague Elise Keith calls this ROTI, return on time investment, and it does a couple things. One, it’s usually, in almost all cases, anonymous, so it avoids that temptation to either inflate or deflate the ratings.

Two, unlike meetings, which are socially loaded, everyone has some intuitive sense of the value of their time, and they know more or less whether this has been a good investment of the time. So you avoid that sort of meeting-suck reflex and it’s simple, you know, it’s not after every meeting. Survey overload is real with an organization.

Finally, it’s coming from the attendees and not you as the organizer. My colleague, Steven Rogelberg has done fantastic research to show there are two people that tend to leave the meeting most satisfied, two types of people. One is the organizer and, two, as we’ve talked about, is the person who has spoken the most in the meeting.

And so we can’t ask those two people whether the meeting has been effective. Their ratings will be inflated. We need to ask the users, the attendees of the meeting, whether this meeting has been worth the time.

Often you see split ratings. Often you see a cohort rating the meetings five and four versus zero and one. And that can also be very helpful information to understand, “Okay, this meeting was worthwhile for some cohort of folks, but not for the entire attendee population. Well, now we can redesign the meeting and design it to be much more effective.”

Pete Mockaitis

Worthwhile. And I hear what you’re saying that it’s tricky because meetings have different objectives and that’s a handy gauge. I imagine every potential measure of meaning effectiveness could have some limitations.

This one is like, “Well, hey, you didn’t think it was effective, but, by golly, you needed to know that. And now you do. And it was essential that that occurred,” and emails get ignored. So I suppose there’s a big gray zone, too.

Rebecca Hinds
There is, and that’s why the agenda is also very important. I recommend framing every agenda item as a combination of a verb and a noun. So it’s not just budget discussion, it’s “align” or “decide” on the Q2 budget.

You’re being very clear about, “What is the verb we need to accomplish?” because then you can assess or you can now use AI to assess, “Have we done the thing?” because that is now a measure of effectiveness within the meeting. If you’re unclear on what you’re trying to achieve, well, it’s impossible to determine what it even means to be effective in terms of the meeting.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’m curious, if your verb is “inform,” what do we think? Some schools of thought would say, “Well, if all you’re doing is informing and it’s not a collaborative back and forth, then you should just do an email or some alternative medium.” What’s your take on that?

Rebecca Hinds

Exactly that. Information exchange is not a good purpose for a meeting. In the book, I talk about the 4D CEO rule, a two-part test to determine whether that meeting deserves to exist. First test, a meeting should only happen if the purpose is to debate, discuss, decide, or develop yourself or your team.

Information exchange, status updates, boss briefings, often these meetings are designed for the organizer, often for the powerful person in the room who either needs to consume information or disseminate information. In those settings, it is far more effective to communicate asynchronously through email, through Slack, and let attendees self-serve the information.

Pete Mockaitis

I think that’s very handy and sensible and that feels true. I’m wondering about this tricky challenge of, when folks have overwhelming inboxes and too much just flood of information coming at them, but it is essential that something gets to them, I think that’s one of the top reasons folks are tempted to do meetings, like these town hall meetings.

It’s like, “No, everyone really needs to know this. So we’re going to, by golly, put it on the calendar to make sure it gets there.” I’m curious, what’s your thought on making sure, in a world where that is not communicated via meeting, how do we make sure that the memo is sent and received?

Rebecca Hinds

It’s a great point and, you know, there’s the ideal case in organizations, there’s always the ideal case, and then there’s the reality. And the reality in many organizations is workers are overwhelmed. They’re overwhelmed with information and, often, the meeting feels like the most reliable way to get people’s attention to share the information.

There are certainly cases where that makes sense and that’s the unfortunate reality of our organizations, but in the best cases, we’re designing a communication system so that employees get the information they need and are able to distinguish between what’s important and what’s urgent.

And that requires being very clear in terms of, “What is the purpose of a meeting? What is the purpose of an email?” Ideally, you’re designing the asynchronous channels to be consumable and digestible, right? It’s not a memo that’s 20 pages that employees are needing to sift through.

You make it engaging. You make the asynchronous update a video. You make it a video where the CEO or executive team is in a location that has some personal relevance and it’s engaging to people.

Pete Mockaitis

There’s TikTok dancing.

Rebecca Hinds
There’s TikTok dancing, there’s family. One of my favorite all-time sales leaders would record videos after a run, dripping in sweat.

And that’s so important right now, that connection to leaders, not feeling like they’re on a different pedestal than the rest of the organization, which is often what happens in town halls or all hands or all staff meetings is you get this very rosy picture of reality in a way that does very little to strengthen the relationships between individual contributors and the people at the top of the organizational totem pole.

And even in the context of town halls, it’s usually significantly more effective to do those in smaller group settings. We know that as soon as a meeting or any team size gets above seven, eight, nine, 10 people, people start to check out.

Social loafing kicks in, people feel less supported. And so even if you’re doing far fewer town halls, but you’re doing them very intentionally in a way that can encourage back-and-forth dialogue between the individual contributors and the managers, well, that’s going to do so much more to boost the relationship.

Pete Mockaitis
When you say designing a communication system, that sounds very sophisticated, could you give us some examples that maybe we’re not thinking of, like, “Sure, I could say an email, maybe a loom video”? Are there other elements of a communication system that are super effective but underutilized in your view?

Rebecca Hinds

So there’s a really important delineation between synchronous ways of communication and asynchronous ways of communication. And a common misconception is inherently technologies are either asynchronous or synchronous.

We often think of Slack as an asynchronous communication channel, right, because it doesn’t require real-time communication – similar, email. But the reality is any technology can either be used asynchronously or synchronously, right?

We can, and we often do, operate in a world where Slack is treated like a synchronous communication. We get the ping and we’re immediately either drawn to it or respond to it. There is an implicit expectation that you are always available and responding. It’s far more important for organizations to think not so much about the technologies but around the cultures and practices and norms associated with asynchronous communication.

In order for asynchronous communication to work, in order for you to be able to transmit, convey information through asynchronous channels, there needs to be strong, strong documentation culture, right? There needs to be single sources of truth for this information, for the meeting transcripts, for the memos. There needs to be very strong written communication cultures.

And this is something that remote-first organizations tend to do really well. They even train their employees on, “How do you communicate in an effective way asynchronous?” That often requires significantly more context than in face-to-face interactions when you can ask the follow-up question.

I worked with an organization a couple years ago where they had a norm, a company-wide norm, that employees were evaluated on around “No lazy asks.” If you’re going to ask someone for something, it can’t be a lazy ask. You can’t remove context, fail to include context, include the deadline, include the why, include the what, right?

All of these things ensure that we can communicate more efficiently asynchronous, because if there’s ambiguity, if there’s uncertainty, well, people are going to schedule that meeting to get the information they need to move the work forward.

Pete Mockaitis

You know, I can’t help but think of the episode of “The Office” where the new boss asked Jim Halpert for a rundown, and he’s like, “Okay,” and so he spends the whole day worrying, “What does that even mean? What is a rundown?”

Rebecca Hinds

Yeah. And that’s the jargon, those are the acronyms, right? And we’re alienating people, in addition to adding ambiguity within the organization. And we see this all the time, you know, with the office jargon, the synergies, the circle backs.

Now with AI, people are, you know, it’s AI everything, “What are you talking about? And do you even need to include AI in what you’re saying?” It’s very important. I think written communication has never been more important, as well as verbal communication, right now.

Pete Mockaitis

And are there certain key things you’re looking at to ensure you have clarity and comprehensiveness or completion when you’re making an ask or trying to communicate a thing?

Rebecca Hinds

Deadlines are very important and, especially, I work with lot of global organizations being clear on what time zone. It sounds simple, but end of day Friday means something completely different in Japan versus San Francisco, as well as depending on your culture.

The why is very important, and we continue to see the why is significantly impactful in helping employees feel bought in to the ask. I see this especially, too, with policy, any sort of policy within an organization. We saw it with remote work, with remote and hybrid policies. We’re seeing it with AI right now.

One of the biggest predictors of whether people get on board with a policy is whether they understand the rationale behind it, even more so than whether they agree with it. And that helps them understand, “Is this worth my time? Is it worth my time to invest in this ask?”

If they can understand the why, the rationale behind it, and it’s something bigger than themselves, that’s going to motivate them to complete it, complete it well, and complete it on time.

Pete Mockaitis

And you’ve got a couple interesting concepts in your book I’d love to hear about. What is your meeting doomsday?

Rebecca Hinds

Meeting doomsday is my favorite meeting strategy to improve our meeting culture. It’s a 48-hour calendar cleanse. Employees delete their recurring meetings for 48 hours and then they re-add meetings back to their calendar in a way they think is going to be most effective.

So many meetings never make it back on the calendar. They’ve outlived their purpose. Perhaps they never had a purpose. For the meetings that have some value, they are redesigned. So thinking about the length, the cadence, the attendees, the agenda items, every meeting on our calendar can be redesigned to be most effective.

And we see significant benefit of this doomsday activity as opposed to a traditional meeting audit. We talked about addition sickness at the beginning and strategic subtraction. Well, what the doomsday does is it jolts you out of the status quo and makes subtraction the default.

When people are doing a meeting audit, they tend to justify the meetings because the meetings are still on their calendar. Whereas, the doomsday, it forces you out of the status quo and it gives employees social permission to delete the meetings in a way that removes that social guilt we all feel when we think about canceling meetings or think about not showing up to meetings.

Meetings are so personal that we often think people will take it personally, and they often do, if we cancel or don’t show up to the meeting. And so I recommend every organization do a meeting doomsday at least once a year. And, again, not just to save time, and we do see big time savings, but to reset our assumptions about what actually deserves to be a meeting.

Pete Mockaitis

So, okay, can you walk us through step-by-step in practice, if we’re saying, “Ooh, we like meeting doomsday. We’re going to do it”? How do I execute that step-by-step?

Rebecca Hinds

Lots of planning. It’s a radical effort. It requires lots of planning. It requires understanding, “Are you going to do it at an organizational level?” That’s ideal. Or, “Are you going to do it on a team level, department level?” I’ve done both. I’ve done as small as a nine-person team.

And then it’s about preparation, making sure there’s leadership buy in. The leadership is communicating the why behind this. There are clear instructions in terms of, “When are we going to do this? We’re not going to do this at the busiest time of the year. We’re going to do it in a lull period.”

How are people going to assess whether the meetings should be brought back? What dimensions are they going to use? Increasingly, I’m working with organizations to use AI to identify, flag those dysfunctional meetings. That becomes very exciting.

And then how are we going to celebrate? How are we going to celebrate along the way the success stories? This needs to be something that is fun. There’s a reason I call it meeting doomsday, right? There needs to be a rallying movement around it.

Meetings need to be the enemy. It’s not the person who scheduled the bad meeting. And we need to create a sense of energy around it. Get people bought in. And you start to see this becomes a big culture-building movement when done right.

And people become very excited about not only doing the doomsday, but also sticking to it. And meetings never are set in stone in terms of being effective. This is something we need ongoing maintenance to do. And, again, doing it at a consistent cadence every year is a way we continue to instill this practice of meeting hygiene.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So then, when they are executing this, “It’s on this day,” I guess that’s the doomsday, “On this day, all recurring meetings, organization wide are deleted.” And then the hope, and with your prep and your communication and your pre-work, is that the new meetings that are established will be good and better ones, as opposed to just, “Oh, hey, I need that meeting. Let’s put it back on the calendar.”

Rebecca Hinds
Exactly. And there’s a big difference. I’ve studied two types of organizations. One, they’ll do this doomsday top-down. They’ll write a script, the IT team will come in and do a massive wipe of the calendar. I’ve seen that. You know, Dropbox did that. Shopify did that. Slack did that.

The meeting doomsday is explicitly designed to put that determination in the hands of employees because we know that, when employees do something themselves, they feel significantly more valuable. It feels significantly more valuable to them, and they’re more likely to stick to it.

Sometimes this is called the IKEA effect, right? When we build something ourselves, whether it’s an IKEA desk, a newly built idea, a newly built calendar, we’re much more likely to stick to it and value it even if it’s a little bit wobbly.

Pete Mockaitis
And what is your rule of halves?

Rebecca Hinds
The rule of halves, inspired by two folks I’ve talked about, Bob Sutton and Leidy Klotz, it’s essentially look at the four dimensions of your meeting – the length, the cadence, the attendees, and the agenda items – and decide one, two, three, or four dimensions you can cut in half.

And often this is a valuable practice as you’re doing the doomsday, but you can take any dysfunctional meeting or any meeting that you know isn’t fully optimized, and pick one dimension, cut it in half, take that 30 minute meeting, try to run it for just 15 minutes, take that six person meeting, “What if it’s three people?”

And what you often find is you didn’t need all that time, you didn’t need those attendees. You might cut too deep, but it’s also often in those moments where you go one step too far, do you realize what was actually essential and what was dead weight.

And so I think that’s, you know, whether you’re doing it one, two, three or four dimensions, the rule of halves can be another effective way to jolt us out of the status quo. I think we often, in organizations, suffer from what’s called Parkinson’s Law, too, meaning work expands to fill the time allotted.

If we give a meeting 30 minutes, if we give a meeting 60 minutes, which is what our calendar tells us should be a meeting, well, it’s probably going to take that 30 minutes, 60 minutes because of this Parkinson’s Law. Whereas, if we cut it to 15 minutes or 30 minutes, it’s more diligent in terms of encouraging us to stick to that time. We’re more diligent because we only have that time available.

Pete Mockaitis
And what are those four dimensions again?

Rebecca Hinds
The length, so the duration of the meeting; the cadence, so thinking about weekly versus monthly, quarterly meetings; the attendees, only inviting stakeholders, not spectators or meeting tourists; and the agenda items. So thinking about, very carefully, “What are the agenda items we want to include on the agenda?”

We also know that agendas suffer from what’s called the law of triviality, meaning, we will disproportionately spend more time on the agenda items that are the least important, the most trivial. And so it’s very dangerous to add agenda items that are trivial, much less important than the higher stakes one, in part because they feel safer.

They feel safer for people to weigh in on. In general, most people want to hear their voice in the meeting, as we’ve talked about, and everyone feels more safe to weigh in on the trivial topics as opposed to the higher stakes one.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I’m thinking about this a lot when it comes to, like, color choices or names of something. And it’s kind of, like, “You know, if people like it, they’re going to buy it no matter what colors on the website or what we call it within reason.” And so, yeah, that is a great observation.

Rebecca Hinds
Naming, font sizes, what do we do over the weekend, what are we eating at the offsite, you know, all of these things. And we see it all the time in meetings, and it’s a reflection of the law of triviality. The other bias is the primacy effect, meaning we will also spend disproportionately more time on the first agenda item. And so agenda design is very, very important as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And you also talk about injecting delight into meetings. What are your favorite approaches for this?

Rebecca Hinds
Yes, delight. Now, delight is interesting because delight is a combination of two things. It’s a combination of joy and it’s a combination of surprise. So, delight needs to have an element of surprise. Employees, attendees can’t be expecting it for it to work.

And so, this is something that I recommend it be 10 seconds, a minute in the meeting, an unexpected shoutout for an employee that has done something well. You’re bringing some, you know, food item. Food is a great engagement booster in the meeting that has some personal connection.

Something that is going to leave employees remembering the meeting and wanting to show up the next time. It sounds trivial, but so much of our meeting dysfunction is driven by the fact that employees dread meetings and they’re largely rinse and repeat.

Delight ensures that there’s that moment of surprise that’s positive and joyful that employees will keep coming back to and keep wanting more of.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Rebecca, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Rebecca Hinds
No, I think that the common thread through all of this is intentionality and intentional design and how do we ensure that we are treating meetings as that important product.

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

Rebecca Hinds
I’ve always loved the quote, “The harder you work, the luckier you get.” And I really believe that.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And could you share a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Rebecca Hinds
So we’ve done some research over the past few years looking at the mental models through which employees approach AI.

And what we’re starting to see, we’ve seen it for years, we’re still seeing, is depending on whether people are approaching AI from the mental model of a tool versus teammate, they interact with the technology differently and they’re significantly more likely to be productive when they approach AI with the mental model of the teammate because they’re not just asking, “What can the technology do for me in a really transactional way?”

They’re asking, “What can I do with the technology?” They’re also recognizing that AI is not perfect. They’re not giving up after the first prompt. They’re pushing the technology to think and act deeper. And I think that’s at the core of a lot of the failures of AI transformation right now, is not recognizing how important the psychology is and how important that relationship between humans and AI is.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Rebecca Hinds
So I’m a massive fan of both Bob Sutton and Adam Grant’s books, so Give and Take is a key one that has influenced so much of my life, as well as Bob Sutton’s book, Scaling Up Excellence, The Friction Project.

I think “The Friction Project,” in particular, is so relevant right now in terms of, “How do we ensure that we are injecting good friction into our organization through the use of AI,” for example, “and removing the bad friction from our organization’s dysfunctional meaning?” are one great example of negative friction.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite tool?

Rebecca Hinds

So I work at Glean. Glean is my new favorite tool. I use it for all things AI. It’s my first pane of glass into my work in the morning, and it’s a highly intelligent teammate that helps me do my work.

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

Rebecca Hinds

You know, I think I work with a lot of organizations on change management, and I think my mantra is always “Change doesn’t fail because of the technology, it fails because of the humans.” And as we think about AI, in particular, but also meetings and everything in between, making sure that we’re designing for the humans involved is super important.

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

Rebecca Hinds
I’m on LinkedIn. My book, Your Best Meeting Ever is at all your favorite bookstores. And my website is RebeccaHinds.com.

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

Rebecca Hinds
Do that meeting doomsday. I think it’s the single most effective way to jolt you out of the status quo and get a small team and do it together.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Rebecca, thank you.

Rebecca Hinds
Thanks so much, Pete.

1155: How to Escape the Procrastination Trap and Achieve Your Goals with Jon Acuff

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Jon Acuff talks about the hidden fears, assumptions, and overwhelm that are keeping you stuck in the procrastination trap.

You’ll Learn

  1. 
What it really means to have “more executive presence”
  2. How to “make tomorrow easy today” with simple preparation
  3. How to go from stuck to unstuck in 4 steps

About Jon

Jon Acuff is a New York Times bestselling author of 11 books. His titles, including Soundtracks, Finish and All It Takes Is A Goal, have sold more than one million copies. Named one of Inc.’s Top 100 Leadership Speakers, he’s delivered keynotes to companies such as Microsoft, Walmart, and Comedy Central. Host of the popular podcast All It Takes Is a Goal, Jon has inspired hundreds of thousands of people to overcome overthinking and finish what matters most. Jon lives outside of Nashville with his wife and two daughters.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Jon Acuff Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Jon, welcome back!

Jon Acuff
It’s good to see you again, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about procrastination. You got a whole book about this. Tell us, what do you know or have discovered about procrastination that’s new and fresh and surprising and interesting that we should know?

Jon Acuff
Well, I think the really interesting thing to me is that it’s not necessarily a problem. People use it as a solution. It’s just not a good solution. Meaning, if they don’t want to tell their mom they’re not coming home for Thanksgiving, procrastination goes, “No problem. We don’t have to do that for, like, seven months. We can wait until the last second.”

Or, I’m afraid of getting negative reviews of my book. Procrastination says, “No problem. I’ll solve that. You’ll never get a negative review. I mean, you won’t get to write a book, but you’ll never get that.” So it’s not a laziness problem, which is why so many of the willpower discipline things we do don’t ultimately work.

It’s really more of a figuring out how to give yourself permission to do those things that you really want to do or really need to do.

Pete Mockaitis
Permission to do the things you really want to do or need to do. I’m also curious about the things we don’t want to do. I guess we need to do them, but we don’t want to do them. I think that’s where it gets me. It’s not so much…

Jon Acuff
Like what? What do you procrastinate on?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, boy. Well, I think there’s tax things. It’s a joke, every year, my accountant is like, “Yeah, we’re deferring, right? Yeah. Didn’t need to ask.”

Jon Acuff
Yeah, that’s funny.

Pete Mockaitis
So, yeah.  there’s plenty of things in terms of, “Oh, it would be good to have…” I think that’s for me, like, “It’d be nice to have the result of that thing, but, ugh, doing the work seems exhausting and overwhelming, and I just don’t want to right now.”

Jon Acuff

Yeah, I think that’s 100% fair. I love that you admitted having the result would be great. I think a lot of people won’t admit, “You know, I’d really just like to have done the thing, but I don’t want to do all this.” For me, entitlement is when I go, “I wish my LinkedIn profile, and I had a better LinkedIn presence.” And you’re like, “Yeah, you haven’t used LinkedIn for, like, five years.” Like, “Yeah, it’s really suffering somehow with my complete lack of effort.”

Pete Mockaitis
“Yeah, go figure.”

Jon Acuff

And to me, that’s entitlement is when I go, “I want blank, but I haven’t done any of the work.” I just think, as far as doing stuff you need to do, but don’t want to do, it’s about selling yourself into doing it. Like, in the book, one of the ideas is, like, you’re the greatest, Pete, salesman in the world because, before every decision you’ve ever made, whether it was good or bad, first, you sold yourself into it.

So I think a lot of goals comes down to your ability to sell yourself into doing something you want to do or need to do, but you don’t feel like doing.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, we’re going to need to talk about that at length, but I want to zoom out a smidge and get the big picture. What’s your overall message about procrastination and the latest insights from your in-depth research here?

Jon Acuff
Yeah, so the overall is there’s four permissions you need, and if you do these permissions in this order, it’s almost impossible to not be successful. And I want to say very clearly, I couldn’t have written this book as book two.

If, at 36, Jon Acuff wrote a book called Procrastination Proof: Never Gets Stuck, I’m an arrogant guesser. I’m going, “Maybe, I don’t know. I’ve written one book before. Clearly, I’m great at not procrastinating.”

But by book 11 at 50, I’m like, “Yeah, for someone as distracted as I am, for somebody who has such a hard time focusing to have written 11 books, I figured out how to kind of do some difficult things that maybe you shouldn’t put off.”

So the ultimate idea behind the book is permission, and the four types of permission are permission to dream, permission to plan, do, and review. So those four actions – dream, plan, do, review. And if you do those in that order consistently, everything gets really easy and often really fun.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, yeah, I want to hear about these permissions. And can you tell us a bit about the research process by which you landed there? So you did some substantial surveying, right? And talking to folks and identifying some real themes and patterns that appeared at high frequency.

Jon Acuff
Well, the benefit to my job, Pete, is that the way I write a book is I find a problem in my own life and I figure out if there’s a solution for it, and I spent a few years doing that. And then I ask, “Do other people have it?”

And if a lot of other people have it, then I go research to figure out, “Okay, how does it apply to other people, not just me?” It’s not a helpful book if it’s, essentially, how Jon Acuff beat Jon Acuff’s procrastination. That’s not a good book. That’s a manual for me.

So what happened with this book, I worked with this PhD named Mike Peasley, he’s a professor at MTSU. And so it started with, we did a study on, “How many people think they’re living up to their full potential?” meaning there’s something they really want, but they’re not doing it.

And we asked 3000 people and 96% of them said they were not living up to their full potential. So then I go, “Okay, there’s this huge audience.” And then the research kind of goes from there into testing it in a community online, testing it with real live audiences. Like, it’s one idea.

It’s one thing to have an idea in this office, it’s another thing to take it to a Fortune 500 company and go, “Hey, here’s how this permission works.” And you can tell instantly, “Oh, no, that’s not their world at all,” or, “Oh, no, the permission to dream is not helping the cattle ranchers,” or, “Permission to plan is not helping the engineers.”

So a lot of what I do is then go test it on the road and then, eventually, it ends up in a book. So it’s a longer process than my other books used to be, but I think it turns out a better product.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So then could you speak to us about these permissions?

Jon Acuff
They’re really, really simple. I mean, the first one, permission to dream, you have to have a reason to change. No one ever changes just because. I’ve helped a million people with their goals. I still haven’t met somebody that said, “I woke up today and decided to have grit. I just woke up today and decided to sacrifice.”

No one willingly leaves their comfort zone, and they shouldn’t. It’s comfortable. The only reason people leave their comfort zones is there’s something outside it worth being uncomfortable for. And it’s usually one of two things – desire or disappointment.

Desire, meaning they bumped into something they really want. Disappointment, they woke up at 42 and their career wasn’t where they wanted it to be. They lost their job to AI and they don’t have much of a choice. The disappointment finally got loud enough to go, “I got to change some stuff or this isn’t going to work.”

So that’s the dream. You got to have a sense of why you want to do something and what you want to do before you even move it into planning. And planning is you answer the question, “How will I do it?” Doing is, “Are you doing it?” And review is, “Did it work? Are we headed in the direction we want to go?”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, now let’s talk about the word permission in terms of it’s just me. I don’t have to appeal to some authority as the principal or a government official for the permission, the access to do any of these things. So can you unpack this word here?

Jon Acuff
Yeah, so I’ll give you an example. Somebody the other day told me they had a weight loss goal, but if they lost weight, they’d be breaking family norms. Because in their family, they grew up in their family of origin, food was comfort. Food was security. Food was family. Food was tradition.

Big Southern family, like you had big Southern plates of food, and to be health conscious felt like divorcing the family you were from. And so he needed permission to go, “No, I have permission to love my parents where they are, but I don’t have to repeat my childhood. I don’t have to. I get to lose weight. I have permission to have a healthy lifestyle. I have permission to care about what I eat and how I look and how I exercise.”

So a lot of times, even if you’re an individual, that doesn’t mean you’re free of kind of hangups that are getting in the way. So a lot of times it is that sense of like, “What are some of the broken soundtracks I believe?”

Take money for instance. Money is the last taboo we have in our country. Like, I know men that’ll tell me the worst things they’re dealing with. But if you go, “Hey, what’s the financial number you’re thinking about retiring with?” “Whoa, whoa, whoa, no, we don’t talk about that. That’s super sensitive.”

And some of them have hangups about money because they grew up in a family where money was considered evil or must be nice or, “They’re rich, we’re not.” And if you get to a certain level of success, you therefore, become greedy.

So they need a permission to go, “No, I have permission to do. I have permission to go as hard as I want at this business on this job.” So there’s so many different areas where the lack of permission holds you back.

Pete Mockaitis
I hear that. And talking about money, I guess, I’m thinking in terms of you hear so much, at least I do, in terms of scams, and scandals, and swindles, and crypto rug pulls, and extractive private equity yuckiness that feels gross to me, such that I think I’m vibing with what you’re saying is I do feel a little bit of resistance internally in terms of really going after some money-making opportunities, because it’s like, “You know what? I’m doing fine. And I don’t want to be like those mean private equity dudes. Hmm.”

Jon Acuff
Yeah, “I don’t want to step on next. The only way to get ahead is you have to take advantage of people.” Or, the one that I saw somebody asked the other day, it was like, “Why is it binary where I can either have a really great business or I can be a great dad? Why does our culture present it as like…?”

Because I’ve had friends, and I’ll go, “I think you should really start that business.” They go, “Ooh, I don’t want to, like, forget my kids names. I’ll never see them.” As if there’s only two options – not pursue your dream or get a divorce and not attend your daughter’s first communion.

And it’s like, “Whoa, there’s a lot of options. It’s just you’ve made it very binary.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So how do we grant ourselves or acquire this permission if we’re feeling some of this conflictedness?

Jon Acuff

Well, part of it is identifying it. Some of it’s just labeling it. Like, there’s a really great exercise that we talk about a lot where it’s like you write down a goal and then you write down your reaction to the goal. So you write down, “Okay, I want to retire with $5 million.”

And you write down like, “Oh, that would be impossible,” or, “Oh, I don’t have enough time for that,” or, “Oh, I’ve already made too many bad decisions,” or, “Oh, somebody who has that amount of money is always like this.”

And you start to identify, “Oh, these things are going to hold me back.” Most of the things we wrestle with in life are mindset issues. They’re not physical problems. Where we live, like at least in the Western world, I never have to fear a tiger.

I never leave my house and I’m like, “Just, hey, be careful. There’s a lot of physical predators out there.” It’s only things like procrastination, imposter syndrome, inner critic, overthinking, you know, perfectionism.

And so a lot of times, it’s identifying those things so that you can actually start to work with them. That’s a great first step to go, “Oh, this is holding me back. I’m overreacting in this situation because I have something that’s holding me back. Let me identify that so I can actually deal with it.”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, let’s talk about that weight and big Southern cooking plates situation. Let’s say someone has identified that, “Okay, I would like to be slimmer, but, ooh, that feels hard, that feels risky because of these beliefs, these associations, this history,” what do I do with that?

Jon Acuff

Well, I mean, I guess it would depend on, like, if it’s an event you’re talking about, meaning, “I’m trying to be in shape, and I’m going home for Thanksgiving,” or, “I’m going home for Christmas, and I know that there’s going to be a lot of food, and a lot of food discussion.” Like, having a game plan and going, “Okay, what do I want to do with that?”

My favorite definition of discipline, which I put in the book, is “Make tomorrow easy today.” Make tomorrow easy today. What can I do today that makes tomorrow easy? That’s constantly how I’m thinking, “What can night me do to hook up morning me?” “What can Monday me do to hook up Friday me?”

So in a situation like that, if somebody said to me, “Okay, I’m trying to break these family norms,” I’d go, “Okay. Well, is it, like, related to a specific thing? And if it was, then we’d come up with a plan for that thing.”

If it was related to the decisions you were making of like, “Oh, man, every time I feel stressed, I do this and I know it’s a short-term solution.” Well, let’s change that. You know, like, let’s change the rhythm of that. Let’s find a different way to deal with stress than that. Like, if you know that’s where you tend to go, you have permission to make different choices.

And then maybe it’d be, let’s get some community. So now you have a communal sense of it. Like, for me, I worked out alone a long time, and I joined a community called F3 where it’s a free men’s workout in the morning.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, yeah, that’s fun.

Jon Acuff

And I love it. And that changed my approach to working out. Like, that gave me new norms. Now I’m with a bunch of other dudes at 5:30 in the morning. That’s a new norm for me. What’s fun is if you do this long enough, not doing it becomes weird.

Meaning, when you first work out, when you first write, when you first build a business, whatever, it’s hard and it’s uncomfortable. But then you get into such a rhythm that, if you miss a week or two, you’re like, “Oh, this isn’t right.” There’s this really sweet spot where the good habits, when you miss them become weird and it flip flops.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, I totally feel that, experientially. And I think about it almost, like, a dirt road when you got the groove established. It’s easier to be in the groove than out of the groove. Like, today, I had an odd early meeting. And I knew, and actually set multiple alarms because it deviated from my regular schedule so often.

And so I dropped the kids off, and I knew I got to get right to the office for my early meeting. And, mindlessly, I’m driving to the church for, because that’s usually what I do is I hang out in the chapel for some prayer, post-kid drop off.

And I was like, “Wait, no, no, not today. That’s not…We do that almost every day, but today, I have an early meeting. So I got to get to the office right away.” And so it’s so funny how the autopilot move is just, “Oh, I turn here toward the church.”

And I think that is the case with, well, almost everything in terms of, “Oh, I’m working out in the morning, so that’s what I do.” And then it’s like, “Oh, no, no, today is a different day. We don’t do that.” And so it really tracks that, like, the first one or two or three times it’s like a force of will, effortful, intense. And then it’s easier and easier.

And I guess different people put different numbers on it. But, Jon, if I may, when do you think the groove has more momentum than the new groove?

Jon Acuff

Yeah, like, I love if you Google “How long does it take to start a new habit?” there were nine million answers, and it’s like 30 days, 90 days. I mean, for me, I think, at least, it takes a season, meaning like it takes a fall, it takes a summer.

Like, it takes a, you know, for me, three to four months chunk of time of like now F3 for me, like getting up at 4:55 is crazy. For, like, the first eight weeks, I was like, “This is the dumbest thing ever.” Now, I’m like, “Oh, yeah, I’m looking forward to it. Now I’m into it.” So, for me, it usually takes at least a season.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Got you.

Jon Acuff

How does it take you? I mean, what’s your number?

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, you know, well, it’s not binary, you know? It’s hard for me to, like, establish the cutoff because I’d say the second day is easier than the first, and third’s easier than the second, and the fourth, and so on and so forth. So I don’t know where I would draw the line. But, I don’t know, maybe 40-ish.

Jon Acuff

Yeah, that feels good. I’ll hold you to that, 40-ish.

Pete Mockaitis

At this point, it feels harder to not do the thing that I started doing 40 days ago.

Jon Acuff

Yeah, yeah, I can see that.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, so permission to dream. And let’s talk about planning.

Jon Acuff

Yeah, so where people get stuck there is dreaming runs on optimism, planning runs on realism. So dreaming, “Anything is possible. This is going to be amazing. It’s going to be huge.” And then you have to transition kind of into the real world, into reality.

And one of the simplest tools you can do is really just be honest about your calendar. I meet people all the time that’ll go, “I have these 30 different goals. I have 10 different dreams.” And I’d go, “Well, let’s put a number associated with them.”

And then they put an hour or timeframe with them, and I’ll go, “Well, how many hours of free time do you have in your week?” And they go, “Free time? What are talking about? I’m very busy. I’m slammed right now.”

And you go, “Well, you have a 12-hour goal chunk and a week that has zero hours, like that’s why you’re going to keep procrastinating. It’s not because you’re just delaying. It’s because you don’t have the time to pay that bill. Let’s figure that out.”

So that’s a big part of it for people with planning is, “Okay, how do you actually pay the price of the thing you want?” And maybe you don’t want the thing. Like, I would argue, if you won’t spend half an hour with Claude or ChatGPT having it interview you about the thing, you probably don’t really want the thing.

And maybe you’ve just carried that goal along for a long time of, “I think I need to write a book,” “Someday I want to start a business,” “I’ve always wanted to run a marathon,” but if you won’t even spend, like, half an hour kind of just investigating what would that take, maybe it’s not a goal you care about. And that’s fine. Like, I love getting rid of fake goals.

Pete Mockaitis

Tell us about this half-hour AI interview protocol. How does this go down?

Jon Acuff

Yeah, so, for me, if I have something I want to do that’s new, that I don’t know how to do, I often will say, “Okay, one, I love the whole, like, tell me how to write the best prompt to get the thing I want.” So then I’m not even really writing the prompt.

But if I might say, okay, like, an example for me is I’m doing something called Stage & Page, where it’s a one-day intensive for speakers and a one-day intensive for writers. So I might say, “Hey, you know, I’ve been doing this for 18 years. I want to be able to help people that have just started. Interview me about my first year of public speaking because I know these things, but it’s been a while.”

“You’re the best journalist in the world. You write for a magazine called Stage & Page, and I want you to ask me 10 really insightful questions about my early experience as a speaker.” And then it interviews me, and then it’ll summarize that, it’ll create content out of that. But it’s a really easy way versus just a blank piece of paper.

So if I was going to run a marathon, start a business, you know, figure out how to lose 10 pounds, I would say, “Interview me,” so that I really have a sense of why I want to do it, what I want to do, what are my limitations, “Oh, you’ve got a couple injuries. Let’s figure that out.” Like, the interview format is so much easier than just trying to willpower your way into a blank piece of paper.

Pete Mockaitis

I hear you. So you are engaging in that conversation to get the beginnings of some kind of plan going. Is it fair to say, you don’t expect the AI to spit out the perfect plan, but rather it gets you going so that the planning has begun and the ideas are multiplying?

Jon Acuff

Well, and, no, the problem with AI, the fatal flaws, I still have to do it. Like, I keep working with people and they’ll like give me like, there’s like this AI document arms race that happens in small businesses where I go, “Hey, I think we should try blank.”

And then somebody comes back with a 30-page document that they haven’t even read. Like, AI just created it and now we’re going back and forth on documents. So, yeah, I don’t expect AI to come up with the plan because it’s never really been a lack of information.

Like, if you don’t do the thing, you have a great library in your town. Every town has a great library. So I still have to do it, but it gets me from stuck. The book is designed deliberately to move people through it quickly, meaning it’s 71 short chapters.

And I did that deliberately, and they’re short and they’re punchy and they’re all connected. I did it deliberately because nobody wants to read a thousand-page book about procrastination. Like, if your procrastination book has 90 pages of notes, you’re not a procrastinator. You’re a monster.

Like, that’s Jane Goodall writing about monkeys. I’m a monkey writing for other monkeys. So I just want the person to get started. And if they go, “I have to figure out the perfect plan for this goal,” they’re never going to do it.

But if they say, “Can I be interviewed for a half an hour?” even a podcast, they could take you and go, “I really like Pete’s show, and here’s an episode. I like his style of asking questions. Interview me about a book that I want to write as if you’re Pete.”

And then, like, that’s the easiest, most casual way to go, “Oh, okay. Now I’m feeling a little bit.” It’s not that intimidation of like, “I got to figure this out.”

Pete Mockaitis
And then, so that gets you started. How far do you go with the plan before you do?

Jon Acuff

Yeah, so, for me, I like to do what I call audition a goal. I think a lot of goals fail because people try to commit to something for a year they’ve never done for a day. That’s like marrying somebody you just met at speed dating.

So if you told me, “Hey, I have this thing I’ve been putting off that I want to do,” and it was sizable. Like, we’re not talking about, like, you got to clean out one closet. Like, we don’t need to roadmap that. It’s like one closet. Like, I don’t want you to interview yourself. Like, “You run California closets and are asking me about how I store my socks.”

But if you had a goal that was at least a month’s worth of time, I would say, “Hey, let’s do a one-month audition. Like, what if we just tried this thing for 15 minutes a day for 25 for the next 30 days?” Because I don’t want to trigger perfectionism.

But if we tried that and it was like, “Let’s just see.” And then at the end of the 30 days, you can double down and do half an hour. And at the end of that next 30 days, you can add more time, more time, more time.

I would try to ease you into it. I wouldn’t try to get you to plan an annual thing, like, right out of the gate. Or, “From start to finish, here’s how I’m going to write and publish and market my book.” Like, no way. No way. I’d try to get you to write for 15 minutes a day for 30 days in a row, and see if you even like writing, and see if you even like this exercise at all. So, yeah, that’s the next thing I would do.

Pete Mockaitis

Audition a goal. So, like, the goal is auditioning before you, the director, who will determine if it gets the role.

Jon Acuff

“You’ve made it through. You now get to be part of my summer. Like, I gave you May and, congratulations, I just picked you up for the summer. You’ve now made it for the next summer. And not only have you made it, resources will be dedicated to you. I’m going to give you time and maybe even money. Like, oh, that’s exciting.” You’ve won the audition.”

Pete Mockaitis

Do I need to have a director’s chair and beret when I’m auditioning a goal?

Jon Acuff
I don’t think a beret ever makes a situation worse. Like, maybe a funeral. Like, if you don’t own a beret and then, all of sudden, at your mom’s funeral, you show up in a beret, lot of questions, lot of questions.

Pete Mockaitis
These are the key insights, Jon, that we count on you for. Thank you.

Jon Acuff
Yeah, I hope people are taking notes right now. I hope they pulled over. Probably pulled over on that one, like, “Wait a second. We’re going into berets now, Pete.” And you probably didn’t even put that in the description, if I know you. It’s just a surprise.

Pete Mockaitis
No, not yet. And let’s hit the permission to do now.

Jon Acuff
Yeah, so the first two are great, but if you don’t actually do it, it ultimately doesn’t matter. So the thing that I like about doing that I think people have a hard time with is maintaining motivation. We tend to think motivation will grow as we work on a goal. That’s just not how it works. Motivation is often the first thing to leave.

So I spend a lot of time helping people make it through the middle, or what I call the montage. Like, we love a montage in a movie. We don’t like being in one in our own life. Meaning, we love to watch Rocky IV, and there’s an eight-and-a-half-minute scene where he trains against Drago.

A prize fight training camp takes eight to 12 weeks. So we saw 1% of the experience, but when we try to write a book, start a business, you know, parent teenagers, whatever this big goal is, there’s a lot of middle.

And so a lot of what I do is teach people how to build a motivation portfolio. Meaning, collect enough motivation so that when you’re discouraged, which you’re going to be, you have a long robust list, not just one thing.

If you only have one why, like that why won’t show up most of the days, and you’ll go, “Ugh, I’m not even going to do the thing.” But I’d much rather you have a whole list where you can go, “Oh, it took me till number nine.”

And here’s a silly example, because you said, it seemed like you were familiar with F3. Like, one of my motivations for doing it is, the night before I text three friends and say, “I’ll give you a ride tomorrow,” because I’ve just put myself into a corner.

And I know in the morning I’m not going to text three guys and go, “Hey, it turns out I’m a wimp. Never mind.” Like, I now have some accountability there. I now have that motivation to fulfill what I promised to those three guys.

So that’s what I try to help people when it comes to doing. I’m never, like, anybody who listens to this show or reads the kind of books I write, it’s not a question of whether they’ll do it. It’s a question of whether they’ll keep doing it. And that’s where you really have to lean in.

Pete Mockaitis
So I like that. A motivational portfolio, we’ve got multiple sources of support pulling upon you. One was some of that accountability. People are expecting you to show up and give them a ride there. You said nine. Give us a quick rundown of maybe a bundle of things that might go in a portfolio.

Jon Acuff
A couple others? Yeah. I mean, for me, like, I wrote this book, Soundtracks, and we ended up turning it into a Soundtracks card deck, so it’s 52 cards. So sometimes I’ll have these in my pocket, and one will say “Hills pay the bills.”

And it’s a reminder to me of, like, when I have to do the hard things, if I do them and if I climb the hills, other people don’t, I get to see vistas other people won’t. And that could be something like a canceled flight in Chicago in January, where I had to spend the night, like, at the worst airport next to O’Hare. Like, nobody wants that. Nobody.

But, it’s like, “Oh, yeah, hills pay the bills.” So sometimes it’s a soundtrack. Sometimes it’s a literal song where I know when I hear this type of music, I always feel this type of way. Sometimes it’s a movie clip. Sometimes it is a friend that I go, “This is my most uplifting friend. And anytime I’m stuck, if I call so-and-so, 30 seconds of conversation, I feel like I can conquer the world.”

Sometimes it’s 10 minutes of walking around the neighborhood because I need some endorphins and some sunshine. Sometimes it’s caffeine. Sometimes it’s like, yeah, an espresso would really help at two o’clock when I’m struggling.

So I think everyone should be a great note taker about themselves. I think you should be the best documentary filmmaker about your life because, then, you figure out how you work best, and then you can repeat that. And so that’s what I mean by a motivation portfolio.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, I like this a lot. We had Dr. Ethan Kross on the show, who wrote a book, Shift, about your mood, and so this is kind of reminding me of that because he mentions music specifically as a tool. So when you say portfolio, you just have a big old list of options in terms of, “This is the thing I could remember or do to take the action.”

Jon Acuff

Well, because I know I’m not going to want to. Like, why pretend I’m always going to feel motivated to write a book? I’m not going to. Someday, the financial motivation will motivate me, I’ll go, “Oh, it’s how I pay the bills. It’s how I put my kids through college. Great.”

Some days, I won’t care about that. Some days, showing my kids an example of hard work will motivate me. Someday, it won’t. Like, sometimes I’ll be like, “They’re not even really watching. Like, I can take it easy on this,” you know?

So, yeah, collecting those and that’s, to me, part of that is just self-awareness. Like, if you have self-awareness, it’s a lot easier to accomplish your goals, because then again, you figure out, “This works. This doesn’t work. I should repeat this thing that does work. I should stop doing this thing that doesn’t work.”

Like, a simple example. Pete, if my phone is in my bedroom, I stay up later. I don’t need another test of that. I’ve checked that box. I know that. So a simple hack for me is I leave my phone downstairs when I go to bed.

Like, imagine me going, “Man, I found a sleep hack. It’s unbelievable. Here’s how to like…” It’s the simplest thing. I just realized over and over and over again, if I have my phone near me, I’m going to look at my phone, and I’m going to stay up later than I really want to.

So I found a workaround, which was leave the phone downstairs. Like, it’s not complicated. That motivates me to go to bed earlier. Like, “Eureka!”

Pete Mockaitis

You know, Jon, I love that specific example. I was once, true story, in Vanderbilt’s Sleep laboratory, having all sorts of things attached to my body. And I said, “So what are the top sleep tips?” And she’s like, “Oh, yeah, it’s don’t bring your phone in your bedroom, but no one wants to hear that,” as she continues strapping electrodes to me.

Jon Acuff

Yeah, yeah, exactly.

Pete Mockaitis

Simple as that, “Okay, that was that.”

Jon Acuff

Yeah, jeez, that’s so funny. Were you doing it for money or to fix your own sleep? Like was this a…?

Pete Mockaitis

Well, we were curious if I had sleep apnea. It turns out I had mild sleep apnea. I’ve since overcome that. That was fun.

Jon Acuff

Survivor. Survivor.

Pete Mockaitis

I am. So that’s really cool. The motivational portfolio, it’s like layers upon layers upon layers of backup systems.

Jon Acuff

Yeah, I want it to be easy. I want, like, again, make tomorrow easy today. So I know, like, because nobody’s job is easy. Like, writing a book has a lot of, like, identity and emotion around it.

I’m right now in the marathon part of the book release, meaning I’ve already released the book. I sprinted to the finish line and now I’m in the marathon part, and I need to talk about it constantly and I need to promote it.

And every author loves writing a book. Most hate selling a book. But guess what? If you don’t sell it, you don’t get to write other books. And so now I’m like, “Okay, for me, in the next six months, how do I motivate myself to do 500 different types of promotion around Procrastination Proof versus I hide from it. I hope Oprah discovers it in her dentist office, whatever.”

And I was like, “No. For me to do that thing will be difficult, how do I make it easy? How do I motivate myself to stay on top of this book?”

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I think this is so good, if I may. Could you give me three more things that can go in a portfolio to get motivation cooking?

Jon Acuff

Oh, yeah, 100%. I mean, an item you want to buy can go in a portfolio. There’s a woman I know that grew up in Indiana, kind of small town, and she always wanted to buy a Louis Vuitton purse. That was her thing, like, “When I make it, when I become an executive…”

Like, that was her symbol to the point that when she went to Paris, France with her husband, he tried to buy her one, and she said, “No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.” She was like, “I don’t want you to buy this for me. I need to do this. This is something I’ve thought about.”

So sometimes it’s okay, “I want to buy this thing,” or, “I want to be able to give this person this thing.” That’s a great one. Another one can be, “By this date, I want to accomplish blank.” Everybody has had the vacation moment where you get a lot of work done right before vacation.

Because you’re going, “How do I make tomorrow easy today? I want to have a really peaceful vacation. So if I clear these things off my plate, I will.” So you get a boost of energy. You could just say, “Where are some deadlines like that that I want to say before I go to this, I’ve done these three things before I go to this. I’ve done these three things?” To me, that’s another one.

And then the third one, I’d say, is like this principle of do difficult things in beautiful places. Meaning, if there’s something you’re putting off, go do it somewhere beautiful. Like, don’t try to crank on something in your office. If you’re stuck, go to a coffee shop.

Don’t run somewhere ugly. Like, make that part of the reward, like, “Oh, I’m going to go to, you know,” I don’t know, “Pinkerton Park, because I love that park,” versus, “I’m just going to run around this treadmill.” You’re already doing a difficult thing. Why add more difficulty?

And so, again, you just get creative and curious about yourself, and you’ll start to notice. Like, last one I’ll give you, I bought a Timex watch. I don’t mean to brag, but, obviously I’ve achieved some success. I bought a Timex watch that has Snoopy on it jumping into a pile of leaves.

So on the days when I feel tempted to write a boring, serious book devoid of humor, I can wear that watch and be like, “Oh, that’s charming. That’s delightful. Like, look at Snoopy having so much fun. He’s with Linus. They’re jumping in the leaves.” Very silly trigger for me. Wouldn’t work for most people. No problem.

One year, I wanted to write a book faster, so I bought carbon fiber Nike running shoes. Bright green. Obnoxious. The most expensive shoes I’d ever owned from a running perspective. Wore them every time I wrote that book. Ridiculous? Totally. Totally ridiculous. But it was another one of those things.

And the more you study high performers like you do, the more you find they’re playing games like this all the time. They’re playing little games behind the scenes to do the things that most people don’t do.

Pete Mockaitis

So if I perceive that I have many lucrative opportunities and I just need to go to work, I should put a large pickaxe in my office because there’s a gold mine that just needs me to go to work on it.

Jon Acuff

Gold, you could do that. Yeah, or get rid of your chair and do a little cart, like one of those carts they carry the gold in. Maybe you just sit in that. Maybe you, overalls, like Yosemite Sam or something. I don’t know, we’re just spitballing, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s good. That’s good. Well, I want to hear the one-minute version of permission to review and then how procrastination is the most well-funded fear in human history.

Jon Acuff

Yeah, so the one minute is, I’ll give you the soundtrack for it, “Data kills denial, which prevents disaster.” Data kills denial, which prevents disaster. All the review is telling you is what’s really going on. And we hate a review, dude. We hate it.

The first time I saw this, I was at a restaurant in New York, everybody was going to get a crazy meal. They opened the menu and they had put the calories next to the menu. And everybody’s order changed. Everybody changed their order to sad grilled chicken salads with dressing on the side, not the side of the plate, the side of the restaurant.

So all that to say, if you want to go the direction you really want to go, become friends with data, become friends with a review.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, understood. Now this well-funded fear, what’s the scoop?

Jon Acuff

Well, yeah, so Netflix doesn’t fund perfectionism, Hulu doesn’t fund inner critic, but every single one of those modern-day services funds procrastination. In 2017, the CEO of Netflix said, “Our number one competitor is sleep.”

They are actively funding procrastination, meaning they don’t want you to go to sleep. They don’t want you to get in shape. They don’t want you to write your book. They don’t want you to publish your podcast. They want to turn your time and attention into ad revenue.

And I like those services. That’s not a criticism of them. Just know the score. Like, it’s easier now to procrastinate than it ever has before because you have a pocket casino. Like, that’s a real thing. And in the same way that Dr. Vanderbilt told you, “Yeah, the trick to sleeping is to leave your phone in another room.”

If you said to me, “What’s the trick to writing a book?” I’d go, “Well, why don’t you open your screen time and take an hour back from your greediest, hungriest app, and apply that to writing.” Like, that’s not, even the busiest people, if you ask them to open their screen time will go, “Oh, my gosh, I had no idea I spent six hours on Facebook last week. I would have said, I would have guessed an hour.” Like, that’s what I mean by it’s the most well-funded.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Got you. Well, Jon, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Jon Acuff
Yeah, so we have a quiz. If you go to JonAcuff.com/quiz, that’ll show you where you might be tempted to get stuck and what to do about that. So it’ll put you into one of the four categories. You’re a dreamer, you’re a perfectionist, you’re a hustler, you’re an analyst. So JonAcuff.com/quiz will be a whole lot of fun.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Now, could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Jon Acuff
I love Jim Rohn’s quote, “Don’t wish it was easier. Wish you were better. Don’t wish you had less problems. Wish you had more skills.” Like, that’s one of those, that’s in my motivation portfolio. Like, when I go like, “It’s so hard.” Like, “No, I wish I had more skills to deal with this challenge. Am I being invited into a skill?” That’s one of my favorite quotes.

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

Jon Acuff
Daniel Kahneman wrote about it in Thinking, Fast and Slow, where they had college kids make sentences out of words. And one group of college kids had words related to being old in their collection: slow, retired, bald, Florida, etc.

And when they tested how fast they walked later, the students who had read the words about being old physically acted old. They, unknowingly, acted like old people just from reading the words. My favorite study because it speaks to the power of your mindset.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And a favorite book?

Jon Acuff
I always say War of Art, Stephen Pressfield. That book, for me, really kicked off my own writing journey.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite nugget, something that Jon Acuff shares that gets quoted and tweeted a lot?

Jon Acuff
I often say, “Starting is fun but the future belongs to finishers.” So starting is fun but the future belongs to finishers is one of the things. And then the other one that gets tweeted a lot is, “Be brave enough to be bad at something new.”

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

Jon Acuff
JonAcuff.com is my site. I have a podcast called All It Takes Is A Goal. And I’m big on LinkedIn now. If you listened to the whole episode and just didn’t skip to this, I’m big on LinkedIn. Hit me up.

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

Jon Acuff
Yeah, so I would find somebody 10 years ahead of you and 10 years behind. The 10 years ahead, we know. It’s a mentor. It’s a time machine. Somebody who’s been to the future you want to get to, and will tell you how to do it.

Person 10 years to 20 years behind, they grew up in the new way and can teach you the new way very quickly. I grew up in the old way. I’m 50. For me to do the new way, I have to unlearn the old way first. When I connect with a 27-year-old and they show me something about AI, like, it speeds me up.

So I would just encourage you, know somebody 10 years ahead of you, somebody 10 years behind you.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Jon, thank you.

Jon Acuff
Yeah, thanks for having me.

1154: The Fundamentals of Great Executive Presence with Elisia Keown

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Elisia Keown breaks down what it really means to develop your executive presence.

You’ll Learn

  1. 
What it really means to have “more executive presence”
  2. The sentences hindering your executive presence
  3. How to show up more confident for your next meeting

About Elisia

Elisia Keown is an Executive Coach and Founder of Keown Coaching, with 26 years of experience in Coaching, Leadership, Talent Acquisition, and Human Resources. Direct, honest, and kind, she helps executive leaders strengthen their executive presence, elevate their impact, and achieve measurable results through strategic planning. Elisia is also the host of The Executive Coaching Podcast, where she shares practical insights for today’s leaders. Known for her no-nonsense yet fun approach, she brings energy and real-world experience to every coaching conversation. She lives in Wesley Chapel, FL, with her husband and their blended family of five children.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Elisia Keown Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Elisia, welcome!

Elisia Keown
Pete, thank you. I’m so excited to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk executive presence, and I think your own clients have teed this up perfectly when they’ve actually said to you, “I’m told I should have more executive presence, but WTF does that even mean?”

Elisia Keown
Exactly. Maybe they leave out the WTF part, but they’re definitely thinking it. No, you’re totally right. Like, my audience is like that C-suite, VP-leader level, and that is one of the most common things I hear. And you and I were talking about it a few weeks ago that this theme of executive presence is so common, and it’s this blanket, I call it the atomic bomb of feedback of, like, we’re going to drop this big atomic bomb of, like, “You need to have better, stronger executive presence.”

And the atomic bomb part of it is it gets dropped and there’s no further explanation. It’s super vague. The executive kind of walks away from the conversation feeling super confused, like, “What does that mean?” And it’s one of the most vague pieces of feedback in corporate America, I’d venture to say.

And so I have made it a mission. How do we demystify it? How do we help define it? Because once you have that clarity, then you can actually work on developing that skill because it is an absolute skill, you can develop it. I do not believe you’re born with it. And then that changes everything in that leader’s trajectory.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that sounds excellent, and that really does ring true in terms of vagueness. And we could talk all day about vague words, like, “Have more executive presence,” or, “Be more strategic,” or, “Be more proactive,” I mean, that could encompass dozens, hundreds of potential behaviors.

Can you tell us how have you grappled with attempting a definition or a decomposition or segmentation of this fuzzy term?

Elisia Keown
Yeah, totally, you’re right. It gets handed down like zero instruction, and people can feel that absence.

And when even pressed, leaders try to articulate it. I find they struggle with it, too. So I don’t think it’s the leader’s intention to be vague. I truly don’t think they go out there trying to confuse the human. But without direction, it’s useless, right? It’s incomplete.

So what I try to do is break it into concrete components. And I usually work with the executive. If they’re unclear and they don’t have the direction, we’ll try to get clues and get little breadcrumbs based on the feedback and what they’re hearing and seeing so that they can have some of those moments of clarity.

And so what I found, it usually falls into these four kind of main buckets that I’ve seen. So the first one is thinking about emotional regulation. Emotional regulation under these high pressure, high stakes environments. We all know it. The big important meeting, speaking in front of the board, having to make a big decision.

So how do you show up and how do you have executive presence when things go sideways or there’s a lot of stakes in the meeting or risk involved? How do you show up and have that emotional regulation within yourself? So that’s a big one.

The ability to be decisive and making decisions quickly even when you have very limited amount of information, that’s very common as an executive, and remaining humble at the same time. So you can make a clear decision, you can still listen to the team, your colleagues, your drug reports, your boss, you can listen to everybody, but you can have that confidence to make a decision without arrogance. Very tricky.

The third, and this is the one I think that gets kind of lumped into executive presence, but how to have intentional communication. How do you speak with clarity, not with that emotional impulse? How do you know, just as important when to speak, but when not to speak, and when to stay silent and listen? And that’s tricky, and I think that’s a lot of the times we do lump it just into blanket communication as executive presence, but I think it’s intentional, clear communication.

And then the last is just being consistent with all of this. So executive presence isn’t always just about what you do in the big meeting. It’s more about what you do every day, how you show up every day, how you lead in the moments where people observing you and when they’re not observing you.

So I think, in summary, it’s not about being the loudest, biggest personality in the room, the smartest person in the room. It’s about being, like, the most grounded in your own leadership, in yourself, and having that self-confidence and helping people understand which of those levers they need to pull.

And because, again, sometimes it isn’t all four of these things that people need to work on. It might be one more than the other but it’s believing in yourself and then moving forward.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, that does paint a picture. Thank you. And, I guess, I’m also thinking about what’s not in there in terms of it’s not, you know, dressed like an executive with a cool suit or an expensive haircut. So I guess looking the part matters somewhat, but perhaps folks would probably just be able to say and articulate that more directly instead of executive presence, like, “Clean up. Get a suit that fits you right.”

Elisia Keown
And you’re right. I think there’s a lot of factors and a lot of things that people say will encompass executive presence. And just like you mentioned, it doesn’t mean those things aren’t important. It doesn’t mean, yes, if you work in an environment where a suit and a clean haircut and being well-groomed is important, and you don’t show up that way, of course it’s important. It’s just not everything.

And I think that’s the hard part because people think if I just solve this one piece that it’s going to encompass everything, and that’s not everything. I think it really, truly, when we say it, we typically mean one of those other four levers to pull. It’s typically not just what you’re wearing. You’re right.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, we can dig into each of these, but, I guess, maybe I’d love to get your take on. So this is a set of skills, and we talk about all kinds of skills here on How to be Awesome at Your Job. How important, in the relative pecking order of career skills development to propel you forward and advance and progress in your career, would you rank these sets of skills? Like, what’s the difference between being amazing at these things versus, “Okay, good enough, but you also have really sharp strategic thinking and prioritization skills going on”?

Elisia Keown

I think executive presence is probably one of, at least, top three because of this reason.

Executive presence, it’s not just this, again, visual effect of how you show up or a lot of people say charisma. It’s not just the personality. It really is, if you go deeper, like into it, it’s not just these behaviors or physical traits. It’s an identity shift.

And I think that’s one of the biggest things when you think about moving and shifting, you know, especially when you come out of some of those individual contributor roles or manager roles where you’re just managing a smaller team. Nothing wrong with that.

But when you leap into the executive level and you start managing leaders of leaders, it requires this identity shift from the leader.

And a lot of high performers, they’ve outgrown this version of themselves that got them to where they are. They’ve been very successful moving up through the organization. And now what’s required to go to that next level is, like, it’s almost like a death of their previous self. And you’re building that back up.

The hard part about that identity shift, though, is all of those behaviors have made you successful to this point. So because of that ego, it’s very hard to say, “I’ve got to let all that go and build upon what I have, and break into a new identity and see myself in a completely different way to level up into that executive presence.”

And so I really think it’s definitely top three when you say that. I don’t know if I can give it an exact number, but you can’t perform your way to executive presence. And I think that’s so often, as an individual contributor, you’re used to putting your head down, executing very tactical skills, all very important. By no means, definitely not disparaging that work, right?

So when I say the death or you’ve got to let go of it, it’s what got you there. But then you have to become this entire new type of leader, and the skills that are put before you, you’ve got to believe in yourself and you’ve got to have a mindset shift and look at yourself in a different way before you talk about those things you talked about like the strategic vision and the planning and the prioritization.

I think that all comes with it. But if you don’t believe that you are operating and believe in the level that you need to perform at, none of that other tactical stuff is really going to matter. So it’s this bridge into that leadership level.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, I love what you said there, it’s like, you cannot execute your way into executive presence. It’s sort of a fundamentally different thing. And the picture that’s coming to mind for me is just, in TV, when we have the dork with the lab or the computers helping the crime fighters or the Jack Bauer catch the terrorists, they’ll say, “Well, I ran an analysis using matrix multiplication and we deduced that…”

They’re like, “In English!” you know, like, they get impatient, and it paints a picture like, “Oh, that person is clearly executing amazingly. Like, they know their stuff inside and out.” And yet the leaders are annoyed and frustrated. They don’t imagine that guy or gal has high potential executive future in store for them.

Because of their vibe of the ‘executive presence is lacking.’” So those are TV examples. But, Elisia, give us a real example, a story, a tale of a client who maybe got this fuzzy feedback and then did something about it and saw some results.

Elisia Keown
Yeah, you’re dead on. I love that analogy. It’s so funny, right? Because I think that’s what happens, is a lot of times clients come in thinking they need like a few tips, and what we really discover so much deeper, and it’s not just about what they’re doing, right?

So I had this client VP level, high performer. And, again, I always say this, I work with people that are already high performing. There’s nothing going wrong with their leadership, right? And some people think that it’s a remedy for something going wrong when, really, this is an accelerator.

So this person was already getting good results, already performing, but she’d get passed over for that next level, for that C-suite, the higher-level role. And what was happening was, when we started digging in and peeling back the layers, she was an over-explainer.

So the person that’s saying too many words, right, just like you said, or overly complex words, over-explaining every decision. She had a lot of hedging, and hedging is you’re saying things like, “I mean,” “I feel like,” or very passive kind of language rather than very decisive language.

And so it wasn’t about the skills problem. She had a lot of skills that have gotten her to this VP level. It was more being deferential when she was leading rather than being decisive and forward-thinking. And so a lot of what was happening though, again, as we peeled it back, it wasn’t about saying different words. It was showing up differently in terms of her identity.

She had a deep executive presence problem that was rooted in how she saw herself. And so she was still seeing herself as needing to prove herself. And we were way past that. So we really worked through thought process and identity.

And once we worked in that, within months, she was showing up completely differently in the room and then being groomed for that next level. Like, actually having conversations versus it not being on the table for her at all to move to that next level.

Pete Mockaitis
So when you say thought process and identity, what might that look like in terms of, if I’m saying, “I’m going to go work on my thought process and identity”? What does that consist of? What am I doing there?

Elisia Keown
Well, in the simplest terms, it’s the sum of the sentences that are running through your head and how you’re thinking about yourself. And so a really easy way to do this would be to, when you think about the situation, again, she was in a lot of board meetings, she was in a lot of meetings with her C-suite level leaders.

It was, “What was she thinking and how was she thinking when she was in the room, hedging, explaining herself, like, what was her thought process?” And trying to narrow it down to some of those sentences that kind of run through your brain like a stock ticker, right, and again, part of it could be as simple as, “I need to prove myself,” or, “I still need to level up, and I’m not at the level of an C-suite executive.”

So whatever that kind of sentence is that’s holding them back, that’s really what you’re trying to investigate. And if you’re doing this for yourself, it would be when you’re in some of those critical moments where, if you can identify when you’ve been told you need stronger executive presence, so if there was a specific meeting, what was some of those sentences that are running through your brain as you were getting told some of that feedback?

And, again, that’s a little bit harder to back into to undo, but I’d say the easiest way would be thinking of the specific example where you need to hold executive presence. And maybe if you were told you had weak executive presence, what was the sentence? What was the thing you were telling yourself in that moment? Because, truly, philosophically, it’s just how you’re thinking is really how you’re going to show up.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. Well, Elisia, it’s so fun that we’re talking because you have unique vantage points into many people’s intimate thoughts, which most of us never get to hear. So lay it on us, what are some of the recurring thoughts people have that undermine their executive presence? And how do we deal with them?

Elisia Keown
I think the big one that I hear a lot of, and it’s the exact opposite of executive presence, it’s like saying that they have impostor syndrome.

And so some of the thoughts that sound like, some people will just straight up be like, “I feel like an impostor,” as simple as that. But some people will have the sentence of, “What am I doing here? How did I get here?” I’ve heard that one.

So looking around the room, seeing executives that are highly accomplished, highly tenured, multiple degrees from Ivy League universities, etc., and just saying to themselves, “How did I get into this room? I don’t belong here.” Essentially, the underlying thought could just be like, “I’m not good enough to be here.”

And so it will sound like that, it’ll sound subtle. And those thoughts could be very innocent-sounding, right, like, “Hey, let’s make sure we can perform up to the level of this room, right?” But in the essence, if we’re thinking we’re not good enough to be in that room, that can show up and start to show up in our actions.

So if we’re thinking, “I’m not good enough to show up,” or, “How did I get here?” and your feeling would, potentially, be like insecurity, lack of confidence, then you’re going to show the actions that you’ll take will be from that defensive position.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes. And so what’s interesting, though, is that thought in the moment is you say thoughts and identity, that thought is naturally bubbling up from a belief. So I want to hear how you go after that.

We had Dr. Valerie Young, who may have coined the phrase impostor syndrome, on the podcast. And she had some cool perspectives along the lines of, like, “Well, so is everybody just an idiot if they made the decision to hire you and promote you?”

And so just to kind of, like, reminded me of some cognitive behavioral therapy-type stuff in terms of , “Let’s evaluate the evidence. Let’s really take a look at this belief. And is it kind of bogus or so?” So that was kind of some helpful practical stuff. But I’d love to hear you in the trenches, when you’re working with folks on these thoughts and identities, how do you attack them?

Elisia Keown
What a great conversation. I’m jealous you got to have that conversation with her, but I think that’s a great tip, and I think it’s the same thought process of looking at that thought. And, again, we get real granular, right?

We get in the moment, in the room, in the thought process, and really start to question it. Basically, you look at it and you say, “Is this true? Do you belong here? Do you not belong here, right?” And, generally, where we go with it is, “Why are we telling ourselves this thought?” and understanding that as well. Like, “Why would that be coming up for us?”

And, again, it can be so different for every individual, but, typically, what happens is, when we get in some of these tough situations, leading is difficult. Speaking in front of a group is difficult. It can be challenging.

Again, you can get better at it, it can feel easier at times, but it always, there’s that challenge of that fear of rejection. Leadership, a lot of times, is we’re separating ourselves from the group, from the pack, from the herd, right? And we’re standing out and we’re separating ourselves from the group. So in its very primal essence, it can feel like survival, it can feel life or death.

And so what happens is we go through some of that fight or flight, and the brain is telling you, like, “Hey, it’s scary, Pete. It’s scary to speak out in front of thousands of people or tens of thousands of people on a podcast.” And your brain is like, “Stay safe.”

And so some of the stay-safe thoughts can be like, “Hey, we might not be good enough to do this. What are we doing here? Let’s go stay back into the cave and stay safe and get quiet and really, like, pull ourselves back from this. Let’s go cuddle on the couch with a blanket and some snacks and watch Netflix. It sounds like a much better idea, right?”

And so it’s the brain’s protective mechanism to give you some of these sometimes snarky, sometimes nice-sounding thoughts. They sound really helpful, like, “Let’s stay comfortable,” because it’s just based on survival.

And so, sometimes when you know that, when you’re like, “Oh, this is just my sweet brain trying to protect me. Is it really true that I don’t belong here?” No. You can just say, “Thanks. Thanks for that thought. We’re going to go ahead and proceed with doing this podcast, speaking up in this boardroom, doing the thing anyway, even if we feel a little bit nervous about it.”

We can carry the nervousness, knowing that it’s normal and natural, and it doesn’t mean stop. I think a lot of people think that that feeling means stop, turn around, don’t take action. When really we can just carry it with us.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s super helpful in terms of just understanding, reframing, “What is this thought, this feeling, this vibe? And what does it mean?” So that’s super handy. I’m curious about maybe some of the deeper work with regard to, it was like, “No, I really do think that I kind of got lucky to be in this role, and I don’t think that I belong and I really do think I’m faking it.” If we’re there, what do we do with that?

Elisia Keown
Yeah, totally. Well, and I think there’s two separate approaches. You know, I think if you’re thinking we really go down the path of someone has deep beliefs that they cannot overcome and they can’t see any other upside. I think, sometimes that’s where the difference between therapy and coaching comes in.

Like, if there’s some sort of hurdle that’s coming from their past or their internal beliefs from trauma or some other thing, that’s where a coach is not a therapist. That’s where, I think, sometimes you separate the application of support there.

On the flip side, another way to look at it, if we’re just thinking that’s not the situation and we’re thinking more forward thinking, it’s to say like, “Okay, where do we have evidence that that’s not true?” And I worked with a leader to say, “How do we look at the entirety in your body of work?” to say, “Okay, where can we show that that is not the case?”

And having the human come up with those things to say, “Okay, let’s start to look at our internal beliefs and be, like, really challenge them, right?” Because I think digging deeper, like you said, I think taking that, “Is this true?” a couple clicks further to be, like, “Okay, give me all the evidence that you really don’t belong here then.”

It’s funny, when they ask me that, like, “Tell me all the reasons why you don’t belong,” they’re usually like, “Well, actually, no, I’ve done this and this…” and they actually start to answer or asking questions of why they do.

And so I found that to be effective, like, “Tell me all the reasons. No, let’s stick on it.” And sometimes they really can’t. They can’t find beyond that just, like, triggering thought, like, why that’s actually true. So that can be really helpful kind of that path.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I really liked that notion of collecting the evidence, thinking about your experience. And just recently, I guess I coached myself in terms of, I was having some stuff going on. I was just like, “Oh, I kind of feel like a loser, you know?”

And so I was like, “Well, what’s the evidence?” I was like, “Well, you know, it seems like someone was upset about this, and I disappointed someone there, and I didn’t kind of get the things I wanted done on these days.”

And then I said, “Okay, so we’ve got that.” And then I was like, “Well, then what’s the evidence on the other side?” And just for funsies, I did all this research, and I was like, “Well, I mean, hey, I did that. And that was kind of cool. And really how many people really have done that?” And so I went ahead and assembled the spreadsheet.

And so what’s kind of fun, and this is true for every human. This is my latest kind of revelation I’ve been having fun with is that, if we take a look at the things that you have done, have accomplished, are good at, and how kind of rare that is, and then string together maybe 10 of those.

It’s fair to say for just about everybody that, by some measures that you’ve selected, you are the winningest human being who has ever lived, more than all 120 billion humans who have ever walked this earth. On those dimensions, collectively, if it were like a decathlon, you are the winningest person ever.

And so what was fun for that exercise with me, it’s like, I just sort of move on, it’s like, “Okay, the word loser is just like a nonsensical term that is ill-defined and not helpful. And if a loser is defined as one who never disappoints anybody and never fails, well, then there’s no such…everybody’s a loser.

Elisia Keown
Then I will own it. Yeah, right. Then just, “Okay, I’m fine, right? I’ll own that, Yeah, totally. What a great exercise. You did, you coached yourself. Good job, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, thank you. So I was collecting evidence via spreadsheets, I guess it’s a language that speaks to me. But I’d love to hear your prompts or your approach by which you facilitate this evidence collection.

Elisia Keown
Yeah, totally. Well, first off, you get a gold star. Great job. Great way to do it. And that’s exactly it. Exactly it, Pete. And I think, too, like, you said something that’s really interesting, too.

And so I want to really emphasize it, in the sense that looking back at what you accomplished and only what you could have done, if somebody else followed the playbook, they probably wouldn’t have the same results as you did, and just because all those things are making up uniquely you.

Can somebody do some of those things? Of course, they can, but they won’t be in the same magic and the way that you did it. And another way to look at this, too, is, if you’re not having failure, if you’re not feeling a little bit of the discomfort, if you’re not feeling a little bit queasy about some of things, your goals probably aren’t stretching you.

They’re probably not big in the sense of big in your own world. That can mean something different for everyone. So I’m not being presumptuous, and you have to do this, but a lot of times, as high-performing leaders or people that are entrepreneurial or accomplishing big things and setting big goals, you’re setting bigger goals for yourself and going after them.

So to expect that everything would go according to plan, that you would never feel insecure about them, or you would never fail at them, or you wouldn’t feel good enough for them, or you would feel like, “I don’t know how to do what I’m doing,” that is actually a false expectation, that we somehow believe that it’s like we do believe that everything is going to go according to plan.

We’re very optimistic, typically, as humans, a lot of those things. And when things don’t go, when we think that there’s something terribly wrong. But in your example, it’s like, “Well, yeah, I have a big fat goal and I might stumble but I’m going to still going to get it, right? I’m still going to go after it.”

“And if I’m not setting big-enough goals, like if it’s really easy, I’m probably not stretching and growing in the same way.” So a lot of it, like the coaching, I will do is to say, “Hey, some of this discomfort, some of this brain, we’re not going to solve the brain telling us that like, ‘Hey, in some instances, we don’t feel good enough.’” It’s a normal human condition. It’s part of the human condition, knowing that we can go after these big things and move through that discomfort.

That’s more what we’re trying to work towards is recognizing that in the moment. So it’s not trying to eliminate, it’s more so saying, “Oh, I see it. I can know what’s happening here. And now I know how to handle it, right?”

“Maybe I go back to my spreadsheet, or maybe I have my own method, I have my own things that I can do to work through it, knowing this is actually part of my currency. This is my currency towards success, and this is part of the game that I’ve decided to play.”

And it’s optional, right? In leadership or entrepreneurial ventures, it’s optional. So, “Do I want to put my chips in knowing this is the table stakes that I need to play or not?” Most people say, “Yeah.” They’re aspirational, they’re driven, they want to go after these things. So lot of times they say, “Yes, I’m willing to feel all of this and move through it.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s cool. Well, Elisia, this has been fun. I’ve been sort of just deep-diving into anything I found intriguing. But I want you to take the floor and tell us, what have you found to be beyond what we’ve already discussed, really just the most game-changing, powerful interventions, or exercises that upgrade executive presence in a hurry?

Elisia Keown

Yeah, totally. I’ll give you some practical tips. You know, I think the first one, definitely what we talked about, we’ll call it just like a download of your thoughts, right, a blank piece of paper, kind of like just dumping out your brain, looking at it.

So we can get it out of this, sometimes our internal spin, like just writing out what you’re thinking before you go into some high-stakes meetings or high-stakes environments to kind of look at the thoughts so you can decide, “Do I like this? Do I believe this? Do I want to keep thinking this?” And knowing that’s all optional, great exercise.

But beyond that, some takeaways that I can give the audience, just to really use in a really simplistic way without having over complex environments needed, is just going into a meeting and doing a pre-meeting reset of your brain.

So just a few minutes before the meeting, before any high-stakes situation, just getting quiet and clear on what your intention is. So thinking, “How do I want to show up in this meeting? What do I need to contribute? Who do I want to be in this room and any outcomes that I want to try to influence?”

And just being super clear, because that, again, that gets your brain focused on a problem to solve, “How do I want to show up? What do want to say? How do I want to influence? What do want to do?”

And having that for yourself, so that some of those other thoughts, again, that we’ve maybe dumped out, but they’re not going to sneak in, we have a focus, we’re clear, we can focus on how we want others to experience and receive us, rather than getting in our head about not being good enough. So, pre-meeting reset, quick, clean exercise just to go in with great intentions.

The second tip I would say, in looking at emotional responsiveness, how do you respond under pressure? So if you think about some of the highest-stakes environments you may be in, maybe it’s a really difficult conversation, like I said, a big presentation or a meeting, sometimes those moments reveal what your executive presence gaps are.

So you’re just doing your own reflection after some of those moments. Did you get reactive? Did you react in a way that you felt good about? What was your thoughts on the conversation? What went well? What didn’t? What would you do differently next time? Nothing more complex than that, but auditing yourself and your emotional regulation and executive presence.

And then the third is just watching your own language and how you’re coming across in meetings. So are you hedging? Are you over-explaining? Are you qualifying everything through the conversation, or are you being really, really clear? So how are you signaling your executive presence? And how can you practice being clear, saying less, but with more conviction in those meetings?

Again, simple audit, but why that’s important is, if you do those reflections, it will also reveal your thinking. So it’ll ladder back to, “What was I thinking when I was going into those meetings? And how was I showing up?” So simple exercises that anybody can do.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, and, Elisia, you got me thinking here. Nowadays, since the AI meeting assistants are ubiquitous, Fathom and a dozen others up in there, so you’ve got the recording and the transcript, and then you could even review it yourself or you could ask AI to zero in on some things like, “Hey, I’m working on executive presence such as A, B, C, and D. Could you highlight some things in this meeting in which I said that could use some improvement?”

And, again, my take with AI is, I never trust anything it says, but it can bring something to the surface for me to reflect upon, and that is useful in and of itself.

Elisia Keown
I love that idea. And I will say, the best feedback that you can ever get is, if you’re in an environment where you can have a recorded meeting and watch it back, it’s one of the most painful pieces of feedback, but it’s the best feedback that you can ever get, is just watching yourself speak. You’ll see it right away.

Pete Mockaitis

Certainly. I remember, I’ve had times where I was videotaping a buddy who was doing a speech and he asked me for feedback. I said, “Well, you do this thing where you kind of kept caressing your tie and it was a little distracting.”

He was like, “What? What are you talking about? No, I wasn’t.” I was like, “Well, I mean, I saw it like 10 times. You can look at the video.” And he said, “Oh, my gosh, Pete. I had no idea.” And so, yes, it really can be quite eyeopening and surprising.

Elisia Keown
Absolutely. You uncover the habits. I hope it was a nice tie. I bet it was worth it, right?

Pete Mockaitis
It was a great-looking tie, but no matter the tie, we don’t want to see you caressing it. It’s like, “What are you doing, dude? What is going on?”

Elisia Keown
Showing that tie off. It’s so funny. Subconsciously, you don’t even notice those things, right? Yeah, it’s such a great piece of feedback. I love that.

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

Elisia Keown
You know, I think that the number one mistake that leaders try… when they try to develop executive presence, they try to outperform it. They try to get more tactical. They work on the tactics versus the mindset.

And so, again, I know we said at the top, but I say, trying to do it through actions versus thoughts first, wrong way to go about it. And, especially, if you’re trying to copy somebody else’s style. A lot of times people will be like, “Well, speak like so-and-so,” or, “Model after so-and-so.”

Nothing wrong with taking elements of people that we see speaking and emulating that. But if you’re trying to duplicate it rather than do the work from within, I would say that would be my number one tip to walk away with.

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

Elisia Keown
Yes. Right now, I’ve been loving just choose your hard. I think it might be Codie Sanchez, it’s one of hers.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And could you share with us a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Elisia Keown

I have been digging into recently a lot of work on the ROI of coaching. So PWC and ICF did a study that talks a lot about the ROI of coaching to include that coaching has a five-to-seven X average ROI on executive coaching for leaders.

Eighty-six percent of companies, they report that they’ve recouped the coaching investment when they invest in those type of leaders, and they see 70% of improvement in work performance, which is wild.

Pete Mockaitis
Seventy percent, okay.

Elisia Keown
And then 70%, that’s a lot. And then a 50% reduction in leadership-related turnover, meaning, “I left because I was not loving who I was working with or for.” And we all know that boss is such a difference maker in how you experience work. And so people leaving, cutting 50% of that turnover, that’s incredible.

Pete Mockaitis

So it’s the coachee that did not turn over or the leader whose underlings did not turn over.

Elisia Keown
The leader whose underlings did not turn over because of their improved leadership capabilities. So that’s huge. That’s huge. And so, to me, I’m like thinking, like, that’s real even impact. So if you think about executive presence, it’s not a soft skill. It’s absolutely, it’s a lever to pull, and there’s a direct correlation to that financial impact.

Pete Mockaitis

Very good. And a favorite book?

Elisia Keown

I just read and finished Start With Yourself by Emma Grede. She is a British entrepreneur. And so she has this chapter in the book on money. I’ve read it a few times now and I’ve been talking about it with other executives, and it’s powerful. So if you haven’t read it, it’s a good one.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Elisia Keown
I’m a big fan of the thought framework of The Model by Brooke Castillo. So we kind of talked about it, right? Her belief is you have thoughts that create your feelings. Your feelings will create those actions. Your actions create results. It’s a simple model, but it’s basically what we were talking about. It all starts with your thoughts. And if you can change your thought process, you can impact your results.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And a favorite habit?

Elisia Keown
So I’m a big fan of time blocking, planning, time boxing. And I don’t do it in the way of you just go through a to-do list and even time blocking on your calendar. I’ll take time blocking and I say, “This is the time that I have allocated to this, and there’s going to be an outcome.” So it’s not just like, “Just research the thing,” or, “Time to brainstorm.” It’s like, “This is the output and the deliverable that will be done at the end of this timeframe.”

Pete Mockaitis
You know, I like that a lot. I probably have ADHD, but I can relate to that notion, when you have a specific outcome, it makes it kind of exciting. It’s more like a game with risk and stakes and uncertainty. It’s like, “Am I going to be able to finish it? Well, I hope so, but in order to do so, I’m really going to have to stay on point.” And it just infuses a little more zip and interest into the thing.

Elisia Keown
Absolutely. I never thought about that way, zip. A little zip and interest.

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

Elisia Keown
Yeah, easy. ElisiaKeownCoaching.com. So it’s a tricky, tricky the way it sounds versus it’s spelled. So it’s E-L-I-S-I-A-K-E-O-W-N Coaching.com. And I love all the socials. I’m on LinkedIn. I have a podcast on all the major platforms, and to include YouTube. It’s the Executive Coaching Podcast. And we talk a lot about tips like this on there. So happy to give you some free support.

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

Elisia Keown
If you want to be a leader and you want to set these big goals for yourself, you want to move forward, get comfortable with the discomfort of leading. It’s not easy. If everybody was able to do it, they would, right?

And so growing, leading, it’s challenging. And so when that discomfort bubbles up, remember, it doesn’t mean stop. It doesn’t mean we’re doing something wrong, we need to turn around.

It is a signal worth listening to, but I would say, getting comfortable with the discomfort and keep going. You’re not alone out there feeling that way. And the world needs great courageous leaders that can move through that discomfort and go after the big goal, anyway.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Elisia, thank you.

Elisia Keown
Thanks, Pete. I love talking to you as always.