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.

1179: Dr. Martin Seligman on How Agency Propels Flourishing

By | Podcasts | No Comments

The father of positive psychology, Dr. Martin Seligman, discusses how to harness the hidden engine of human progress: agency.

You’ll Learn

  1. The key concept that determines whether we give up
  2. The building blocks of human agency
  3. How to find your human edge in the age of AI

About Martin

Martin Seligman is the most influential psychologist in the world and a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where he directs the Positive Psychology Center. A former president of the American Psychological Association, he earned his BA in philosophy from Princeton and his PhD in psychology from Penn, and holds ten honorary doctorates. His research—from learned helplessness to learned optimism to prospection—has reshaped how science understands human well-being. He is the author of more than thirty books, including Flourish, Authentic Happiness, The Hope Circuit, and Tomorrowmind.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Shopify. Start your free trial at Shopify.com/awesomepod
  • Vinted. Download the Vinted app for free to start selling with no seller fees!
  • Fitnexa. Get $10 off the SomniPods3 with the link and code AWESOME

Martin Seligman Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Marty, welcome!

Martin Seligman
Good to be here, Pete. Thank you for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about agency and just to talk with you. You’re kind of a big deal, a legend, if you will. And I’d love it if you could kick us off, as the so-called father of positive psychology, is there a particularly fascinating and surprising discovery you’ve made about us humans in all your research and writing and speaking and work that just really sticks with you time and time again?

Martin Seligman
Yes, and it’s the basic theme of my new book. And the discovery is about, “When do we give up, not try? And when do we innovate?

I started out 60 years ago working on helplessness, and I asked, “When do people give up? And when are they resilient?” And what I found to start with is when people believe that nothing they do matters, that’s when they give up. The psychological state is the key to it.

And then I asked the question, “Well, when do we innovate? When do we not give up?” And what I found was that, when we believed we were agents, when we believed that we could do it, that was the key to success and to not giving up.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, so that’s the big differentiator is the belief. If the belief is, “Yeah, there’s nothing we can do. You know, it is what it is. I’m kind of stuck,” then, we’re not going to do anything, versus, if we believe we’re agents, we have the capability to change the trajectory of things.

Martin Seligman
Yes, so the beliefs you have at work and at home are crucial to whether or not you give up and become depressed, or whether or not you succeed and innovate. So it’s those beliefs and how to change them that are the key to success and failure.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, I’m always intrigued when we discuss beliefs because there’s mountains of research, and you’ve done a lot of it, in showing that, “Hey, beliefs, they make a big impact in terms of how we perceive things, how we feel about things, what decisions we make, what behaviors we engage in or abstain from.”

And I guess I’d like to think and hope that my beliefs are accurate, real, true reflections of the world reality as it is. And yet, I’m sure I don’t have it perfect. So I guess I want to start there is how do you think about belief and truth?

Martin Seligman
Crucial question, Pete, and I’ve worked on it all my life and I’ve got a whole bunch of things to say about it. First, before modern psychology came across, people believed that it was the external circumstances that caused you either to give up or to innovate and succeed.

But let’s look at external circumstances and their relationship to belief. So take your 11-year-old son. He strikes out at the end of the little league game and the team loses. Well, the objective facts, the truth is that he struck out. Now what caused him to strike out? Was it a bad call by the umpire? Was it that he is not a good hitter and gave up? Was it because it started to rain that inning?

So reality is very often dissectable into what really is the cause, and that’s very hard to know. But it turns out, if you’re a depressive or a pessimist, someone who’s inclined to fail a lot, you will choose the most pessimistic possible causes.

On the other hand, if you’re an optimist, and we’ll talk about that at some length, you’re going to pick out the causes of that reality that are most likely to cause you to try and to innovate. So so-called reality leaves us a lot of room for what’s true behind it.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, understood. There are immovable facts in terms of what transpired, and yet the cause of them, we can point to all sorts of things, and whether we’re optimistic or pessimistic, we’ll reach different things. Well, now when you say cause, now I’m starting to think about this Robert Sapolsky determined biological stuff.

And not to go deep into that whole philosophical perspective, but I do want your hot take. In some ways, the view that our behavior is biologically predetermined feels like the opposite of agency. Is that how you see it?

Martin Seligman
Not at all. And let me give you an example at work that’ll help us think this through. Friday, noon, you open up your email and there is a message from your boss which says, “Come see me at 4:00 o’clock.” Okay, that’s the reality. Now, what is your reaction to it and how do you spend the next four hours? Now that’s not predetermined.

So let’s work this through. And this is a very important exercise for your viewers, by the way. It’s called, put it in perspective. And it’s how thought intervenes between the so-called reality, the 4:00 o’clock meeting you’re going to have with your boss, and what’s going to happen in the next four hours.

So the first thing we do, and what’s going to happen to you first, is you are going to make the most catastrophic interpretation possible, “Four o’clock, oh, my God, I’m going to be fired.” And, in fact, when we do this with people at work, we have people tell us at some length about the most catastrophic explanation, “I’m going to be fired.”

Okay, what’s the best thing that this meeting could be about? Well, we have people go into that and they’ll say, “The boss loved my memo and I’m going to get a raise.” Okay, tell me at length about that. Okay, now what’s the most realistic, likely outcome at 4:00 o’clock? “Well, it’s probably that the boss read my memo and she’s got some reservations about it but she wants to see what the economics of it are going to be.”

Now, the reason that’s important is it illustrates the reality here, what seems to be determined is you get this frightening memo, but how you spend the next four hours and how up for this meeting you are with your boss depends on your ability to make the most likely explanation and plan for it.

So it’s not helpful for people at work to say everything is determined, particularly because you’ve got a lot of choice in how you see so-called reality.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, understood. And so then, if we are latching onto the most likely scenario, then I suppose our natural behaviors would be, “I’m going to get those numbers together so I will be prepared to answer those questions effectively.”

“And, in turn, the boss thinks I’m great and prepared and smart and a capable contributor, all kinds of good things,” as opposed to, “I was just worrying about things for four hours, in which case I am not so prepared for an economic discussion.”

Martin Seligman
Yeah, if, indeed, you spend the next four hours under the influence of the most catastrophic interpretation, you’re going to be depressed, defensive, and passive. To the extent you spend those four hours thinking about, “Ah, well, the boss probably has some reservations about my memo and is going to want to know its economic implications,” you’re going to plan for it. You’re going to be agentic.

So it’s absolutely crucial that you make the realistic interpretation. But, in fact, we’re bad weather animals, and the most catastrophic interpretation of bad events is built into us by the ice ages. And, indeed, a lot of my book is about the long history from the ice ages to AI and how it impacts agency and our belief that we can do it or our belief that we are helpless and we should just give up and let the world take over.

Pete Mockaitis
Intriguing. So take us a bit on this historical journey and unpack it for us, please.

Martin Seligman
Well, it’s the most fun I’ve ever had in my 60 years of writing and research. So what I’ve done most of my life is actually take people in the here and now, people at work, look at the way their optimism and pessimism functions and move from pessimism to optimism.

And what I had found, Pete, over many years, and the whole field of cognitive psychology found, is when we believe we’re not agentic, when we believe we can’t achieve what we want, that’s when we give up and that’s when we’re depressed.

But, most importantly, if you look at people who succeed at work, people who beat depression, people who are resilient, these are the people who believe, “I can accomplish my goals now, I can accomplish them in the future, and I’ve got a wide range of goals.”

And so where I was before I started to look at history, Pete, psychology had become pretty convinced that there was this important notion of agency in modern times, and that it had three components.

The first was efficacy, and that meant, “I can get my goal here and now.” The second component was optimism, which is, “I can achieve my goals far into the future.” And the third component was imagination. So that’s what was established as something you should have.

And so I began to ask the question seven years ago, “Is this true throughout all of human history? What is its basis? And what is the implications in the far future with AI and human agency?”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, it’s intriguing in many ways, just like that 4:00 o’clock scenario you presented us with. I suppose we could take AI or anything throughout history and have a very unpleasant or pleasant view of each of those dimensions.

Like with AI, it’s like, “Oh, it’s so cool. I’m empowered to do things that could be new and powerful and tremendous. And I could invent new things. I could automate things. I could explore domains I never could. I could have custom software. I can save money, make money, have boring things automated.”

Or, it’s like, “Oh, the robots are going to take all our jobs. We’re all screwed. We’re just going to have to crawl into a hole and try not to die.” I mean, I suppose I can have high or low efficacy, optimism, imagination with regard to about any environment or development in the world.

Martin Seligman
Well, before we do AI and ask the question, “Is AI doom or is it the best thing for human agency that we ever came across?” I want to do ancient history with you, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis

All right.

Martin Seligman
It’s what really informs who we are. So let’s go back to 3,000 years ago. I looked at four different civilizations – the Greeks, the Hebrews, the Chinese, and the Persians. And if you look 3,000 years ago, there is no progress going on in any of those civilizations, 3,000 years ago.

And, very importantly, they don’t have the words for agency. They don’t have words that mean, “I can do it.” And, in fact, when they use those words, it’s the gods who are doing it. All four of them. Something miraculous happens in all four of those civilizations over the next 500 years. It’s called the Axial Age.

This is the age that the Buddha and the prophets and Confucius all come around, four different civilizations. And 500 years later, they’ve suddenly got the words for agency, they invent words that weren’t there before, which mean that human beings can do it.

And so, for example, if you take the Greeks, 2,500 years ago, they have no words for human beings achieving things. And then 500 years later, they’ve got words like akrasia, which means weakness of the will. So they can now distinguish between a person knowing what’s right and still failing to act. So they have notions about human action.

So what occurs in all four of these civilizations is we finally get the words for human agency. And when we get new words, that’s when we can act on those words. So, historically, going back as far as writing goes, when it starts, humans don’t have agency. The gods do it.

Five hundred years later, they’ve invented a vocabulary in four different civilizations, which says, “I can do it,” a vocabulary that’s optimistic about the future, in which it’s not the world crushing you, but it’s your will that makes a difference. So that’s the historical background.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s fascinating. And, well, Marty, my immediate question is, do we have all the words that we need in terms of your average professional? Are we missing a couple words? And can you give them to us?

Martin Seligman
Well, very important, in modern life, when we get new words, we create new realities. So let’s just take an example, Pete. In my own work, before about 1980, there was no word for burnout. So whenever a patient came to me with what I would now call burnout, I said, “Oh, you’re depressed.” Well, it turns out burnout is not the same thing as depression.

And once we get the word, once we get a new category, we invent new targeted therapy for the newly named condition. So, in modern life, when we get new words, and AI is providing us with not only a whole vocabulary of new words, but a search and accomplishment technology that takes us to places we’ve never been before.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. So we’ve got the words and we have a whole word generating machine that does a lot. I guess what I’m curious about is are there, in your experience and research, some key words that most of us don’t know, but would be very much enriched and benefited by knowing?

Martin Seligman
That is really a good question, and the answer is I don’t know. Well, we have a new technology which is enabling us in many ways. You began 20 minutes ago with AI as doom. And having done ancient history with you, Pete, I now want to do the future and the present about AI.

And as you rehearsed, there are the doom-scrollers and the doomsayers have the day about AI. And I’m not one of them. As a positive psychologist, as the founder of positive psychology, when something comes along, I look for the very best it can do. So I’m someone who spends all day with AI looking for what it can do.

So let me go through a couple of things that have been enabled in my life that could not have happened without AI. So it’s very common among the doomsayers to say, “AI is dehumanizing us. It’s undermining how we write. It’s undermining our skills. And, worst of all, it’s undermining our emotional life.” Hmm, well.

Pete Mockaitis
Bummer!

Martin Seligman
I have more love in my life now because of AI. And let me tell you what happened. I have two four-year-old grandsons. I’m crazy about them. But I’m 80 years older than they are. They walk faster than I can run. And I can’t throw a football around with them.

I noticed, by the time they were about two, I was becoming invisible to them. And that hurt. So I went to Anthropic’s Claude, and I said, “Claude, help me write stories in which Max and Denny are the heroes.” So I started chapter one, “Max and Denny visit the haunted lighthouse at Stone Harbor.”

Well, I’m 150 chapters later, I’ve been doing this every day, and I’ve become visible to my grandchildren. They can’t wait to see me and to read to them. And so that’s an instance in which AI, and without it and without the illustrations that OpenAI, ChatGPT provides, I couldn’t have done this. So a lot more love in my life because of AI.

Creativity. Okay, this is the thing I work on all the time, innovation and creativity. And the question is, “Is AI creative?” Well, there are two views of creativity. It’s really, “Who is creative? And what’s the right number?”

So the usual view is the Michelangelo view, that creativity, Pete, resides in your head. And out of your brow, if you’re creative, comes Michelangelo’s David. The unit here is one genius. I actually think that’s pretty rare.

The usual form of creativity that I know is the Wright brothers, or McCartney and Lennon, in which you go back and forth between two people. And that’s the sense in which AI is hugely creative. And it’s actually what I do every day is going back and forth with AI about the edge of science where I am in psychology. So let me give you an example from my new book, Agency.

Chapter eight is about the Chinese. It’s about Chinese agency. Chapter nine is about the Hebrews. It’s about the difference between the Torah, the prophets and writings and the New Testament.

I send this off to my editor, and she says, “Hey, Marty, there’s no transition between chapter eight and chapter nine.” Now I’ve been staring at those two chapters for five years and I don’t see a transition. So I go to Claude, and I say, “Claude, write me a one paragraph transition between chapter eight and chapter nine.”

And what Claude then says is, for the transition, “At the very same time that the Chinese were worrying about the relationship of agency in the individual human being to the state, the Hebrews were concerned and wrestling with a much deeper question – the relationship of individual agency to God.” Holy cow!

Pete Mockaitis
Pretty good. Pretty good, Claude.

Martin Seligman
I’ve been staring at this for five years and it got it just right. So, actually, almost every day going back and forth with Claude Code and ChatGPT and working at the cutting edge of agency and trying to quantify this for black people and white people, women and men, modern China, there’s a new insight almost every day.

So the first thing I said, Pete, about AI is there’s more love in my life. The second is, in what I’ve been doing for 60 years, the cutting edge of psychological science, I have a collaborator that’s more creative than any collaborator I’ve ever had.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, right, with the back and forth process as opposed to expecting it to just be the oracle that shoots out, you know, perfection.

Martin Seligman
Absolutely. So being a pilot with AI, unlike being a passenger, is to be able to prompt back and forth as opposed to expect AI to tell you things. You have to ask the right questions.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, I’m intrigued, and maybe AI is a tool for this end as well, if these associated beliefs are so transformational, it seems we would do well to hold the optimistic beliefs. What are your top suggestions if folks would like to nudge their beliefs, from more of a pessimistic zone to more of an optimistic zone, in doing that successfully?

Martin Seligman
Actually, the answer to that’s pretty well known, and I’ve spent much of the last 20 years answering that. And it’s basically to learn how to argue against your most pessimistic thoughts. So I’ll give you an example.

By the way, Pete, I’m a depressive and a pessimist, and so when I talk about tools that modify pessimism and depression, I not only try these things on myself when they work, but I do large scale studies of them. And I think it takes a pessimist to do serious work on optimism.

So let me tell you what happened at 4:00 in the morning, Pete. It’s about you. I wake up at 4:00 in the morning, six hours ago or eight hours ago, and I say, “Oh, my God, I’ve got my first interview about the Agency book in eight hours. I got nothing to say about this. I’m past my prime. Maybe I should just cancel the interview.” Okay?

Four in the morning, the most catastrophic thought. And, indeed, most people, when they wake up at 4:00 in the morning will be inundated with the most depressing, catastrophic, and pessimistic thoughts. So what did I do?

I opened my eyes and I started to argue against it. I said, “Well, wait a minute. I had a discussion with the New York Times yesterday right at the cutting edge. And I didn’t fail at that. And she really lit up and laughed at my jokes. And last week, I gave a 45-minute speech to 50 of my graduate students and 150 of their parents and kids, and I got a standing ovation.”

So I basically argued against my most catastrophic thoughts. And I argued realistically. So the most crucial tool we have for agency is, first, to recognize the most catastrophic thoughts we’re saying, and then to marshal realistic evidence against them, to treat our paralyzing, catastrophic thoughts as if they were said by an outside person whose mission in life was to make you miserable.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, that’s good. Thank you. Oh, Marty, there’s so much good stuff we could cover. Tell me, any critical takeaways you want to make sure people hear about agency before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Martin Seligman
Well, this is a show about succeeding at work, and that’s been one of my main concerns over my lifetime.

And the main takeaway here is something brand new I’m going to tell you and your listeners about. So I’ve been interested in, “What is it not only that people who succeed at work have? But what do human beings have that the machines don’t have and are unlikely to ever have?”

And that’s a really important question because that’s where our cutting edge is going to be at work. So let me tell you what we have and the machines don’t have, and how I got there. So two years ago, the Chinese created a virtual Seligman.

They fed it all my books, my speeches, and you can go to it and ask for advice. And I’ve looked at a thousand of the transcripts now, it gives very good advice. But I was concerned with hallucinating, “When does AI hallucinate?” And I found one hallucination in the thousand transcripts.

Some woman had written in to me, and I gave it to the machine. She had broken her back and she wanted advice, psychological advice about what she could do. So AI, “Ask Martin,” you can do it in Mandarin or in English, by the way, gave her a very good advice.

And in the middle of it, it hallucinated. It said that I had been a consultant to the Reeve Foundation. I’d never heard of the Reeve Foundation. Have you?

Pete Mockaitis
No.

Martin Seligman
Christopher Reeves, Superman, broke his back and founded a foundation to teach optimism to people who broke their back. So notice, the hallucination here was right on track. It’s completely false.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, the kind of thing you might do, sure.

Martin Seligman
Very coherent with what I might have done. So I said to Claude, and then to Chad GPT, “Hey, what kind of a machine are you? Are you a coherence machine or a correspondence machine?” That is, when you say something, is it because it coheres with what you already believe or because what you’re saying corresponds to reality?

And Claude said, “Marty, that’s just the right question. I am strictly a coherence machine. I don’t have eyes or ears or hands. When I tell you something, it’s the next most logical, coherent thought I have.” Great Claude. And now I’m getting to what the machines can’t do.

I said, “Tell me the 20 most important discoveries in the history of human science, a good list of 20. How many of those, Claude, could you have done?” It said, “Marty, I could have done seven of them.” I said, “Really?” “Yeah. I could have done tectonic plates. I would have fitted Africa to South America. I could have done Mendelian genetics. That’s just algebra. I could have done Big Bang, which is just a fancy mathematics of explosion.”

I said, “Great, Claude. I’m going to give you eyes and ears and hands. Now, how many of the 20 could you have done?” “Hmm, I could have done 18.” “Eighteen?” “Yeah, I would have discovered the neuron that required microscopes. I have eyes now and staining. I have hands.” “Okay, what couldn’t you have done?”

And now we get to the punchline, “I couldn’t have done Darwin or Einstein because they leapt well beyond the data. Einstein didn’t tinker with Newtonian mechanics. He leapt beyond it.” It’s called abduction, the leap beyond the data. If you’re a coherence machine, what you can’t do is be creative in the sense of leaping beyond the data.

And that’s what human beings have. That’s what you need at work. This is what separates the machines from Pete and me. We can leap to the best explanation. And so the takeaway that I would most want your viewers to have is, when I think about my home life, when I think about work, it’s not the next logical step I want to think about. It’s the leap beyond it, “What’s really going on here? And what can I do that doesn’t become apparent?”

So I think our leap, Pete, what we’ve got is creativity. The technical term is abduction. And I think what we most need at work and in our home lives is better abduction.

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

Martin Seligman
I’m going back seven centuries to my favorite quote. It’s 1365 in Norwich, England, and there’s this woman, a female monk, she calls herself Julian. You have to be a male. Her real name is Juliana of Norwich. It’s the middle of the black plague.

And here’s what she says. She says, “He said not, ‘Thou shalt not be travaileth.’ He said not, ‘Thou shalt not be tempesteth.’ He said not, ‘Thou shalt not be diseased.’ He said, ‘Thou shalt not be overcome, and all shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well.’”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Martin Seligman

My favorite book of the last decade is Cloud Atlas, David Mitchell, and even the movie that was made out of it. But the book itself, Cloud Atlas, I strongly recommend.

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

Martin Seligman
I want you to challenge your most catastrophic beliefs. You’re going to get into trouble when you believe the most catastrophic things you’re saying to yourself. They are being said to you by an unconscious whose mission in life is to make you miserable. Challenge those catastrophic beliefs with realistic arguments against them.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Marty, thank you.

Martin Seligman
Pete, pleasure.

1178: How to Stand Out and Get Hired in the AI-Powered Job Market with Emily Durham

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Emily Durham reveals the smarter approach to job-hunting.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why “medium is more” when it comes to networking
  2. The keys to opening the door for opportunities
  3. Why AI-generated resumes work against you

About Emily

Emily Durham, better known as Emily the Recruiter, is a recruiter turned career coach and content creator. On her popular social media platform and her podcast, Clock In, she gives real-world advice to help people thrive in their careers. Her work has been featured on Good Morning America, BBC News, in the Globe and Mail, and more. She lives in Toronto.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Shopify. Start your free trial at Shopify.com/awesomepod
  • Vinted. Download the Vinted app for free to start selling with no seller fees!
  • Fitnexa. Get $10 off the SomniPods3 with the link and code AWESOME

Emily Durham Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Emily, welcome!

Emily Durham
Thank you so much for having me. I’m so jazzed to talk all things work.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I am jazzed to talk as well about how we clock in, which is a clever little twist.

Emily Durham

Why thank you.

Pete Mockaitis
I guess, you know, clocking in and locking in. Okay, nice. So, boy, the universe of job hunting is full of myths, BS advice. I’d love it if you could give us, right at the top, any counterintuitive goodness that you think we all just need to know, set the record straight up front.

Emily Durham
Oh, I love that. We’re doing no BS right away. I think we need to dismantle the idea that more is more. So applying to more jobs does not necessarily yield more interviews. Reaching out to more people doesn’t necessarily yield really high-value mentoring relationships.

And I think in a world where the economy is rough, friends, we know this, we’re preaching to the choir. It’s easy for us to take advice online that tells us just to double our output, to double our results. And that really isn’t the most strategic way to go about these things.

So we definitely can get those better results and more interviews and get further ahead at work, but the idea that you got to do six times more isn’t always the best. Sometimes we just need to re-strategize, not double down on what’s not working.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So the more is more is false.

Emily Durham
False.

Pete Mockaitis
And that is not the right move. Well, then if more is not more, then what what is more?

Emily Durham
Yes, I wouldn’t say less is more, but let’s say medium is more. I’m fine with that. The idea that, for example, when you’re job-hunting, and you’ll hear this from people all the time, you scroll on TikTok, there it is, they’re telling you just to apply to more jobs.

But the reality is the challenge today isn’t that you need to apply to more jobs. And it’s not that you’re not applying to enough. It’s also not usually that your resume needs a total facelift. It’s often that our resumes aren’t getting opened at the same rate or in the same ways that they previously were.

So, for me, when I’m thinking about the right strategy to get noticed, yes, have a strong resume, yes, apply for great jobs, and use most of the time that you would have spent applying to those next two, three, four hundred jobs, and really over-index on strategic networking.

I’m talking, not reaching out to recruiters on LinkedIn, reach out to the people who are currently in the position that you want, people who are likely to have less inbound messages for those networking chats, going to small scale, like teeny tiny industry local events.

I’m, you know, a Toronto resident. We’ve got organizations like TechTO, Women in Tech Sales Toronto, where you’re able to network on a really small scale and build those meaningful relationships to get you those referrals.

And I know this sounds like a lot more work. It is, but if we just shift, you know, the four hours we’re going to spend a week job-hunting to it being three hours networking, one hour applying, usually that’s going to get you a little bit further ahead.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly, that makes sense to me. And I’ve even heard that more might not even be not more, but it could be, in fact, less. How’s that for a clear sentence? What I mean is if you apply to more places, you could actually, in the automated applicant tracking systems world, be doing yourself a disservice because they’re like, “Oh, they already applied here at Facebook or Amazon or whatever. So we’re just going to not pay attention to this one.”

Emily Durham
I do think there’s a lot of fear-mongering with how AI does and doesn’t influence the application process. Like, the reality is – how do I say this nicely? – and maybe I don’t have to.

People can profit off of, you know, making us very scared of how AI is influencing the applicant process. You’ll see people offering sketchy courses who’ve maybe never worked in careers or AI. So I think it’s always important to consider the source to an extent, of course, the more you apply for high-volume jobs, even if a person, you know.

When I was an active recruiter in tech, if I saw a candidate applying to five different jobs with different job descriptions, to me that reads, “You don’t know what you want, or you don’t know what your aligned skill set is.”

But from an AI perspective, it drives me crazy when I hear people say, “I need to AI-optimize my resume and apply to the right jobs on the right AI.”

Like, there is no way to know in a concrete manner how much a company is or isn’t leveraging AI in the top part of your funnel, so when you’ve just applied for a job. Every company is at a different stage, which is why I’m so big on the networking. The one thing we know for certain right now is people’s opinions still matter.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. Well said. Okay. Well, so your book, Clock In, can you tell us what’s the main idea, the big picture message here?

Emily Durham
Definitely. Clock In is an incredibly practical book. So think of it as a step-by-step guide to doing everything from figuring out why you want the job that you want, if you want that job, and most importantly, how to actually get there through the practical stuff like the resume writing, the LinkedIns, the networking, but also those more social skills, “How do you communicate and advocate for yourself while at times dealing with difficult people?” So it really takes you that full journey.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. That sounds handy. Well, tell us, this job market, some would have you believe there are no jobs, we are in dire straits. You can apply to hundreds and you will hear nothing back. Others, I’ve seen get jobs real quick. What’s going on?

Emily Durham
Like, I’m not going to sit here and tell you that things are peachy. Like, I’m not going to be your uncle at the Thanksgiving table asking you why you’re still job-hunting.

The reality is the market is very hard. Job creation is not booming at the pace that has been projected. In fact, in many states and in many countries, it is flat or on a decline. But I think the messaging here is we need to control what we can control.

I, fundamentally, disagree with the fact that there are no jobs. There are less jobs. There are jobs that are not paying adequately, but there are some jobs available. Where I really like to kind of push people to think through is, number one, “Would a portfolio career be something that could be valuable for you?” Meaning, is balancing contract work, is being self employed, having side gigs, side hustles?

We’re seeing Gen Z pick up a lot of this. Something that can be beneficial, like, to your career overall. but there are jobs available. And I think it has to be a shift less of the what, like, “What jobs are there?” into the, “How do I get recognized for, yes, the more limited jobs, but jobs that do exist?”

And the people getting hired quickly are, oftentimes, especially right now, like, “Take a shot every time I say this,” or like, you know, “Go sip your coffee.” They’re the people who know someone who works at the company. Those are the people who are getting ahead quickly or have a built-in brand presence.

Maybe they post very actively on LinkedIn. They’re active in their community and they’re able to phone a friend and say, “Hey, I’m looking for a gig,” or, “Hey, I saw this job posting.” So that’s really the differentiator.

But I might underline is there are less opportunities that are as exciting and as sexy, and perks of some of these jobs have not been as appealing as they were in years prior, but things always level out because they always do, and we have to focus on what we can control, which is getting what we’re able to get.

Pete Mockaitis
That makes good sense, if I may, when you say it’ll level out, it always does. And I’m wondering, the AI tech bro hype masters would say, “No, no, this time, it’s completely different because the AI is fundamentally reshaping blah, blah, everything.” What’s your read on that in the recruiting world?

Emily Durham

So I think of this often because a lot of the headlines about a year ago were telling us that 98% of jobs are going to disappear with AI.

First thing I have to say is these are all predictions. I think sometimes we hear these predictions and we think that they are like Bible, that it is the truth and it’s 100% going to pan out that way. There’s no way to confirm or deny how much change and what that change is going to look like.

We know AI is reshaping work. It already is. We know that many roles are being eliminated, but we also know that, as many experts are predicting mass job loss are predicting even larger job creation.

And the relationship to AI is a complex and loaded one. I’m not saying that we need to be, “Rah! Rah! AI” in any capacity. But I do think we have seen in history so many waves of the workforce being revolutionized and many industries dying, but ultimately to give birth to other ones.

So I try to lean on the side of optimism until we have all of the information that we know new jobs will, in fact, be created. But we also know that a lot of organizations who’ve reported mass layoffs attributed to AI have not truly replaced full human jobs with AI.

What they’ve done is tried to cut costs to up AI investment, but they’re not truly replacing the roles. And I think that nuance can help us understand where we’re currently at in the cycle. We are not in a space right now where Susie’s job is gone because a robot is fully doing Susie’s job. Like, that is not the headline, I think, people need to be taking away.

Pete Mockaitis

Certainly. And many folks who have done layoffs because of AI have hired them right back, it’s like, “Oopsies!” And well said with regard to we can’t take any prediction to the bank because, fundamentally, no human being knows what’s going to happen, even if they have a very compelling YouTube thumbnail and graphic and strong words with capital letters sometimes.

Emily Durham

Oh, with an underline and then it’s, “Do you want to save your job? Buy my AI-powered course.” And you know what? God bless them.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. We got it. Okay. Well, so let’s get into some of the particulars of your approach, but could you first maybe give us a fun success story of someone who did just what you recommended and what happened for them?

Emily Durham
Oh, my gosh, can I give you the best success story ever, because it’s literally my mom. I share this all the time. I think this is, like, the coolest thing in the world. So my mom had worked at the same organization for 20 years. Like, she did the old-school, “I’m staying at this company forever.”

Ultimately, that company ended up selling, and her role got dissolved and she wasn’t ready to retire. So she truly was like, “Well, AI is here. I’m screwed. I’m just learning how to, like, canoodle with this. I’m not going to be able to bring this into the workforce. And who’s going to want to hire a woman in her late 50s?” To which I said, “A smart person is definitely going to want to hire someone with incredible experience.”

So we spent the time doing the table stakes stuff, you know, uploading the resume and making sure the LinkedIn was up to date. But, really, what we focused on was leveraging her previous connections. And I think that was like a mental unlock moment where my mom was like, “Well, I don’t know anyone. It was only the people I worked with.”

And I was like, “Yeah, girl, people who know you’re incredible.” So reaching out to those former connections, reaching out to people who were still with the company, happy clients she had were, contractually, that was a comfortable thing that she could do.

And really just having an honest and vulnerable conversation about where she was at, within seven days, which I will say is kind of bananas quick, she landed an incredible role, work from home, fully remote, doing the stuff that she loves in account management. So leaning into that network, even if you’re not proactively networking necessarily is game-changing.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. And the vulnerability piece, I think, is pretty key. Because I’m imagining all kinds of folks that I’ve been a client of, and I just, like, generally, have positive thoughts about. I think about SERVPRO, the restored situation after some water damage and they were great.

And some of the specific folks there, if they called me out of the blue in six years, I’d say, “Oh, hey, Chandler, what’s up? Oh, okay, you need a job situation? Huh. All right. Well, I don’t know a ton about construction matters, but, yeah, let’s chat about it and see what I got in my LinkedIn, etc., you know?”

And I think I would be quite willing to do that and, in fact, I would feel a bit honored and flattered to be asked.

Emily Durham
One hundred percent. And I think this is where networking, like old-school networking tells us, which, in many ways, is still efficient and helpful, that you need to be having a chitchat with someone once a month and it’s formal and it’s structured. And that works at times.

But networking is also like running into someone at a housewarming party, hitting it off, and it’s just adding each other on LinkedIn for a rainy day. This is a bit of an aside, but there’s a wonderful gal who works in the main lobby of a gym that I go to.

She is incredible at what she does. She deals with very difficult people. I’ve walked by her dealing with big personalities. And a couple weeks ago, she reached out to me and was like, “I got to get out of here. Do you know anyone hiring in customer service?” And I was like, “Girl, for you, the freaking world.”

And I think there’s just a power in leading with that vulnerability, having an honest conversation. And we live in a world where more people than not have been impacted by layoffs. So if that is the situation you’re in or you’re worried about layoffs, you have the space to have that conversation with infinitely less stigma than maybe 10 years ago.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, I like that a lot. And I guess there’s a silver lining here with all the uncertainty and the spookiness that I would imagine, and maybe you’ve got hard numbers of outreach results to prove it.

But I would imagine there is a general generous receptivity upgrade amongst folks on the receiving end of such messages, like, “Yeah, I hear it’s rough and I’d like to help, but I don’t know how or where or whom. And here, this lands in my world. Cool. It looks like I can do something to make this spooky world brighter.”

Emily Durham
Yeah, I think there’s an uptick, and this is totally anecdotal, in the receptiveness of a warm lead or a warm connection. So a friend of a friend, or the barista you know at the coffee shop, or the mechanic that helps you with your car.

I really find, in a world where AI and technology has become so paramount and is the headline of almost everything that we’re reading, ultimately, people will always crave connection. And a personal recommendation means so much more in a world where everyone’s cold outreach on LinkedIn sounds the same because ChatGPT wrote it.

So I do think the cold outreach, we’re in a place where it is much more difficult to get a response, but that’s why that warm outreach, whether it’s local events, asking a friend of a friend.

I feel like I keep dropping these random antidotes of just people in my life, but it is that season. My little cousin had texted me and she’s like, “Do you know anyone who works in ‘Insert her industry here’?”

And I, at first was going to go through my LinkedIn and thought, “Why don’t I text my group chat with my girlfriends? Like, surely, someone knows someone.” And they did. So sometimes it’s just enough to reach out to a couple of pals and say, like, “Do any of your cousins work in aerospace engineering?” Like, quick question.

And sometimes the answer is yes. And it’s just finding these low-lift ways to network that don’t feel as structured and formal can help us get a little bit further.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, certainly. So that seems to be a huge theme is network, network, relationships, warm intros, make all the difference. So you said there was a bit of an unlock or a shift for your mom. Can you maybe speak directly to folks who, if they have some resistance here, what’s their resistance and how do you respond?

Emily Durham
Yeah, I find the resistance with networking often comes from us feeling like we’re burdening other people. And when you resist reaching out or asking for help, first of all, you are robbing yourself of an opportunity for your own career, which you already know as you’re listening to this.

But I think, sometimes, we forget how much it means to someone to be able to help. Because, especially if you’re reaching out to someone who’s, you know, at least mid-career or above, they, at some point, have ran into layoffs, career hardships, the need for support. They have been the person asking for help.

And you had even mentioned, like you’d be honored to get a phone call from Chandler. And I think we often see ourselves as bigger burdens than we are. People, by nature, I believe, want to help. And when you hold yourself back from that, you hold yourself back from opportunity.

And if the altruistic emotional side does not make you feel inclined to reach out and ask for these conversations, let me ask you this. When you cash that check at the bank, are you going to care that you had to reach out to 10 people on LinkedIn or are you just going to be happy that you got the referral?

My guess is you’re just going to be happy you got the referral. So we don’t need to like the things that we do. We don’t need to like the networking. We just need to do it. And sometimes that’s what it takes to get paid.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that is a nice reminder that, and in other ways, you kind of have to pick your flavor of unpleasantness.

Emily Durham
Choose your hard.

Pete Mockaitis
Because you could not do that. Would you like more months unemployed? And maybe you would. Yeah, you’re having the time of your life and you got the savings to support it. Okay. Maybe you’re not in a rush. Okay. Well, rock and roll then.

Emily Durham
Definitely. And I think, too, is that’s why I recommend starting with the people you know, whether that’s in-person, friends, family, friends of friends, just to get that ball rolling and you’ll realize how you’re not a burden. You’re not going to be received like you’re inconveniencing people.

People also have the opportunity to say no or to ghost you if they don’t have the capacity. So people have autonomy to handle how much they do or don’t help. But I really believe, by default, especially people you already know, they want to help.

And, a little friendly reminder, if you’re reaching out to folks who are working at a company you want to work at, y’all do know there are referral bonuses, right?

Pete Mockaitis
All right. We do forget those.

Emily Durham

Yeah, like, you know, for some companies, especially if you’re in, like, the tech banking consulting space, and mid senior role is between $2,000 to $6,000 for the referrer. You’re literally saying, “You can get paid if I get hired.”

So I also think, like you need to remember there are websites like Fishbowl where there are entire job platforms where people are auctioning off referrals, where you can literally purchase someone to refer you to a company. It is financially in the benefit of the person working at the organization for you to get hired.

So just try to remember these little things. And if that doesn’t help, you need to act more than you think. Just do the damn thing.

Pete Mockaitis
Wait, I was unaware that you could purchase referrals into a company until this very minute. Thank you for that tidbit.

Emily Durham
We’ll write that one down.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, I suppose, and I guess refer means something different in every context. Sometimes I think that there is an implied, you know, endorsement or vouching for a person.

And I guess different companies probably have their own things set up differently with regard to what they’re asking their employees to do when they provide a referral. It might be just literally just mean contact information, or it might be a strong kind of a endorsement. Is that accurate? I’m just speculating here.

Emily Durham
You are 100% spot on. So there’s really two kinds of referrals. One is a systems-based referral, which is where the company has a website or an internal form where you would simply say, “Hey, I know Susie. This is her LinkedIn. This is her contact information,” and maybe they’ll prompt for a couple of examples of times you’ve worked with Susie.

After that gets submitted, often Susie’s profile has a nice little star next to it that indicates it’s a referral. Now that’s great because, oftentimes, people run additional data and reports to make sure that referrers, or the referrals rather, get contacted quickly. They don’t sit in that black hole quite as much.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean that your profile is getting reviewed first or really getting reviewed at all. It just guarantees that when they look at your profile, there’s this nice little bonus. But a warm interpersonal endorsement, to your point, is that other end. And that’s what I want us shooting for.

This is where someone, yes, refers you in the system, but then sends a message over Slack, that says, “God, I worked with Susie. She was awesome. Met her at this event. You know, here’s bibbity bobbity boo. Absolutely adored her.” That’s where someone makes a personal connection and goes out of their way to find you in said system.

So although both are great, that real personal connection that really can be established quickly, it doesn’t need to be like a months’ long relationship, that’s the moneymaker.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’m thinking about I had a buddy who went deep into, like, an interview process. I don’t know, maybe like interview seven or eight, and it sounded like, you know, he was going to get this thing, and it was exciting.

And then he did not, and it was disappointing and surprising. And they said, “Oh, hey, sorry. You know what? A referral came in kind of at the last minute.” And I was scratching my head a little bit, it was like, “Okay, I know referrals are useful, but, like, at this point, you’re seven, eight interviews in.”

Emily Durham
That’s an executive referral. That was someone’s SVP saying, “You need to hire my nephew.” A hundred percent.

Pete Mockaitis
Right. Okay, so the word referral in this context is not a heads up, “But I think this person’s great,” but rather a, “This person from on high has been decreed to be very special.”

Emily Durham
Yes. And most companies, it really depends on your company culture. Most companies a referral is a suggestion. It’s just saying, “I endorse them. You do what you got to do. I’m not influencing your hiring decision.”

But I’ve worked at and worked with companies where a referral from a certain level and above, especially once you start touching C-suite, is like, “All right, well, someone better cook up a job because Billy is getting hired. So we got to find him a home.”

Pete Mockaitis
Which I find fascinating. As a naive idealist who would like organizations to be meritocratic and have people who are awesome at their jobs doing necessary work, it’s kind of a sad comment that this happens unnecessarily.

Emily Durham
Yep, and more than we think.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. But, all right, that’s reality. All right. Okay, so network, network, network, referrals make all the difference. Any top do’s or don’ts you recommend when we’re doing the outreach game?

Emily Durham
Okay, I’ll start with the don’ts because I love to lead with negative and then we’ll be nice and fluffy and positive. Please don’t have AI write all of your outreach. It is so painfully obvious, it comes off very cold, very insincere, and by virtue, you’re going to sound exactly like everyone else, which is the opposite of what we’re trying to go for.

Please don’t place high expectations of response rates, meaning for every 10 to 11 messages that you send, especially on a platform like LinkedIn, expect maybe one response.

And the more senior you get, the less likely you’re getting that response, which is why I’m a big believer in shoot directly for the level you’re looking for or the manager of what you’re looking for versus going to HR or an SVP or someone on that more senior chain of command, depending on where you’re at in your career.

You also don’t want to immediately ask for a favor. Like, please, oh, my goodness, do not reach out and say, “Hey, I need a referral,” or, “Hey, I need this.” No matter what your true intention is, your message needs to say, “Hey, I’ve been really interested in careers at…” insert their company.

“I saw…” insert a few things they listed on their profile, maybe how long they’ve been at said company, their academic background, “I’d love to hop on the phone with you for 20 minutes to learn more about your career if you have time. If not, I’m more than happy to message online whatever is best for you.”

The goal isn’t to ask for the favor. The goal is to get into contact with them. Ideally, in a 15- or 20-minute phone call where you have that honest conversation, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. It’s not too honest.

You’re going to be asking two or three questions to them specific to their career, asking, like, “You know, what skills do you wish you had before you moved into this role? Any advice for someone looking to get into this company?” Really use this as a chance to learn from them. And then at the end you have a strong call to action.

And that’s where you say, “I saw this role posted. Do you know who’s running the hiring process?” You’re not asking for a referral, but you’re asking for a referral. They’re going to say, “Oh, yeah, it’s Susie from this team. I’ll connect you.”

Or, if they don’t know the person or perhaps they’re not hiring, you can plug in a different call to action. Maybe it’s, “Is there anyone in your network that you think would be worthwhile connecting me with? Is there anyone you’d be comfortable on your team that I chat with to learn more about this position?”

So you ask these questions that sound soft but get you the same result so you don’t come off as pushy. That’s my, like, big do. That’s the big flow I would follow.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like that a lot. Don’t come across as pushy and I’m thinking about some of the research our guests have done with regard to people not wanting to say no when directly asked, specifically in sort of a live phone call context. So they might just say yes and then do nothing for you because that’s less socially uncomfortable for them.

But I’ve been in that position where, you know, I’ve let them know, it’s, like, “They will not interview anybody who has less than 3.5 GPA. So I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but, you know, you can close this door and go elsewhere and good luck.”

Emily Durham
Well, the honesty goes a long way, but I do think, if you’re getting the sense there’s apprehension on this phone call, send that follow-up email. All it is is a thank you. You reiterate the ask, and that’s really all you can do.

And, again, that’s why like the conversion of how many people you speak to, to how many referrals you get, is ultimately a small number. And that is unfortunate. And I wish there was a better way. There kind of isn’t, right? There isn’t necessarily a better way.

So just getting in the flow of, especially if you’re actively job-hunting, maybe it’s one call a week. Like, that might be enough for you to get in at the right company sooner than later.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, super. All right. So we’ve talked relationships, relationships, relationships a lot. Outside of that, what are the top things you recommend folks do and don’t, again?

Emily Durham
On your resume, please, for the love of goodness gracious, you need more data than you probably have. I can’t tell you how many resumes I see that are, like, either AI slop or so long-winded in their messaging that there is no data to actually communicate the outcome.

And with a lot of the organizations who are using AI to screen these resumes, they’re often pulling AI summaries of your resume in the system. So it’s a quick paragraph that lives next to your name that’s summarizing what you’re working on. And data, oftentimes, makes it in there. So it’s so important to have that data. From a human lens, you’re also able to scan that and see that quite easily on a resume.

I would also say, when it comes to the interview, in an age of everyone reading off of scripts that were written by little teeny weenie LLMs, I want you to be a person. I want you to bring a personality to the interview.

Small talk at the top of the interview. When they ask how you are, give them a little something-something, “I’m great. I just made this new baked beans recipe. I’m awesome. I just did…” insert a neutral thing you can chit-chat about to break the ice. That is something that so many people are missing right now. And it’s feedback I hear from companies I work with all the time.

And when it comes to actually being on the job, this might be like corny old-school advice, first couple months is dedicated to being a sponge. Learn as much as you can. The next couple of months is dedicated to fixing as much as you can.

And, really, the theme of being great in your career is going out of your way to be a kind person, set those boundaries so that you don’t burn out and operate with a lot of humility. Because I will say the companies that I work with, there is a concerning lack of humility, both on the job and in interviews.

Because we’re so supercharged by AI and having the answers, it’s really hard for us to admit when we need more training or when we don’t understand. And I think that is such a valuable superpower. It’s really about that human element. That was so much.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Now you said scripts. Maybe I just need to stop being so surprised, but are you telling me candidates show up with an LLM-written script in their interview and proceed to read it from the paper verbatim?

Emily Durham
What if I said yes and, and the kids have taken it further? Okay, so you’ve got that. That’s like a thing that’s 100% happening.

Pete Mockaitis

This happens, like, semi often?

Emily Durham
Oh, I would argue, and this is data I’m making up, I would probably say depending on your industry, 40% of the time. This is like standard where they’ve got like their pre-prepped bullet points, they’re chatting with you on Zoom, eyes float to the right, we’re now reading a script.

What’s also happening is there are now tools available that plug into your Zoom or whatever platform you’re using, and it is using AI to transcribe the question the interviewer is asking while automatically generating the correct answer in front of you in a teleprompter. And that is happening at an astronomical rate as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, then on the flip side though, you’ll have interviewers who are AI avatar robots saying…

Emily Durham
Gives me the heebie jeebies.

Pete Mockaitis
It’s like, “Tell me about a time that you worked on a team in collab.” What? And so it really is like a dystopian “Black Mirror” like situation. Part of me thinks that the world will figure out, any week now that that’s way dumb and to stop doing it. But part of me thinks, “No, the short-sighted efficiency hounds might really double down on this.”

Emily Durham
There was a really interesting thought piece that came out on this, talking about how experts, and they cited no experts, so Lord knows who’s they’re referring to.

But basically how the hiring system is so broken because companies are over-indexing on the use of AI. In response, candidates are, too. Got to fight fire with fire. I’m never going to blame the candidates. But it has basically made first-round virtual interviews meaningless because it’s, essentially, like AI versus AI.

So what some companies have started to do is increase the amount of in-person interviews, because obviously that blocks out some of this. But they’ve also bumped up the amount of live case study or hackathon-style interviews, like circa Silicon Valley 2011.

So I do think we’re going to start to see a rise of like the live case study need to be in-person watch-you work interview, which is crazy because that’s so much more labor for free.

But I do think that bubble has got to pop at some point because it is, when people say an interview is a conversation between two liars, it’s now yes and they’re both like WALL-E the eye robot.

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

Emily Durham
I think that’s all the big stuff. The only thing I like to leave people with is the market is tough, but so are you. So please try to be mindful of what your for-you page looks like. Do not allow yourself to doom scroll into the belief that you are not capable of growing in your career today. You can. We just need to adjust the strategy.

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

Emily Durham
My go-to favorite quote all the time, it’s a bit of a cheesy one, which is, “Be scared and do it anyways.” I’m a big believer in doing before you think. And sometimes you make mistakes and you learn quickly, and other times you stumble into great people or career paths that you didn’t expect.

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

Emily Durham
Another one that I actually just posted about a couple of days ago was specifically a study around how women, the curvier or less thin or “standard-size bodied” they are, the more time they spend at work trying to find outfits to conceal their bodies, and it actually occupies brain space at work.

So women will get up and get dressed and automatically have to think about how they can conceal a body to not be perceived as showing said body part or somehow being sexualized in the context of wearing something like a button-down top, as simple as that may be.

So I find that absolutely fascinating, how bodies, especially, you know, bodies that can be racialized or looked at through the lens of gender, are already things that are conditioned into people getting ready for work. It’s like labor that starts before the clock starts.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Emily Durham
I haven’t finished it, but I’m quite excited by it, is Strangers. It’s going viral right now, which is a sign that Strangers: A Memoir of Marriage. It’s by Belle Burden. I’m only like a third of the way through, but it is a memoir about her relationship, and it’s fascinating.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool?

Emily Durham
I’m a Copilot girl. As much as I talk about AI, I do think that the reality is we need to learn how to leverage it to stay competitive with what we do. So I’m big on my Note-Taker function in Copilot so that I don’t have to draft any meeting summaries. I’m really anti-meeting summary right now.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Emily Durham
I would say doing my makeup. And as silly as that sounds, that is my, like, me time. And I wake up, make my coffee and do my makeup, and I feel like it resets my nervous system before I even check my phone. Like, those are the first two things I do. It’s coffee, makeup, and then I deal with the real world.

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

Emily Durham
I think it’s that all of our jobs, ultimately, are made up and we float on a rock. And all the career advice in the world is fabulous. But, at the end of the day, when all of our lives flash before our eyes, I surely hope 80% of it isn’t you at a cubicle. I hope it’s you with the people you love. So act accordingly.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Emily Durham
You can find me on Instagram and TikTok, as well as YouTube at Emily The Recruiter. And you can check out my book and my podcast, which are both titled “Clock In.” If you miss me, everything’s going to be hot pink, so surely I’ll be easy to find.

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

Emily Durham
I think this is the week where you talk to a stranger and ask a stranger for a favor. It could be as small as feedback on how you performed in a meeting or a question about their career. Let’s get used to building community again. And when you ask people for favors, you open up the door for them to do the same.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Emily, thank you.

Emily Durham
Thank you. 

1177: The Seven Shifts Needed to Drive Results and Create Connection with Dr. Michelle Johnston

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Dr. Michelle Johnston reveals the powerful shifts that help leaders reengage their teams.

You’ll Learn

  1. How to become the leader people want to follow
  2. The two words to cut from your vocabulary
  3. Three simple steps to reenergize any meeting

About Michelle

Dr. Michelle K. Johnston is a globally recognized executive coach, bestselling author, podcast host, and speaker who is challenging outdated leadership methods and championing connection-driven leadership. Her work has earned her recognition as an ABC News Remarkable Woman, a Top Ten Executive Coach, and a frequent contributor on NBC News. 

Michelle is also a distinguished professor at Loyola University New Orleans where she combines decades of research with real-world experience to challenge outdated leadership methods. Her message is timely in today’s AI-driven world: leaders that prioritize human connection will be the ones that attract, engage, and retain top talent while driving bottom-line results.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Shopify. Start your free trial at Shopify.com/awesomepod
  • Vinted. Download the Vinted app for free to start selling with no seller fees!
  • Fitnexa. Get $10 off the SomniPods3 with the link and code AWESOME

Dr. Michelle Johnson Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Michelle, welcome!

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Oh, thank you, Pete. Thank you so much for having me on this awesome podcast.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. Well, I’m excited to be chatting about some seismic shifts. Can you tell us, perhaps, an extra surprising and fascinating discovery you’ve made while putting this stuff together?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Oh, wow. Okay. So I was just on a virtual call with an organization and their leadership team, and I told them that when I first started writing this book, The Seismic Shift in You of how to be a more connected leader, I thought that it was going to be all about connecting with everybody else.

And what I learned, at the end of the day, is you’re not good at connecting with anybody unless you first connect with yourself. And the most important who is you. So to be a connected leader, you really have to have strict boundaries and to be good to yourself. So that was the biggest seismic shift.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s intriguing. Could you share with us a cool story of a client who experienced such a seismic shift?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
So, a perfect example, I’d been working with this executive for a technology company for years, and he would talk about how, out in Silicon Valley, which is where he lives, they would wear, as a badge of honor, the nine-nine-six. And I said, “What is nine-nine-six?” And he said, “We work from 9:00 until 9:00, six days a week, West Coast time.” I said, “Okay.” I said, “How is that working for you?” He goes, “Well, that’s just what you do.”

And so in our coaching sessions, we’d look at his calendar because he was exhausted and totally, totally burned out, and he wouldn’t have time for lunch, or at least he didn’t think he had time. He wouldn’t take lunch. He rarely made time to have dinner with his family. He didn’t get up and exercise or stretch.

And so he was connecting with everybody who wanted to connect with him, but he wasn’t connecting with himself and safeguarding his time. So it took him going to the doctor and the doctor saying, “You are going to die within 10 years. I’m looking at your lab results, unless you get up and you’re good to yourself and you start exercising, you start having meals with actual people,” because his whole job was remote.

He said, “You’re giving away everything, your health, your energy, your relationships, everything that matters to you for what?” So that’s a huge seismic shift. The Seismic Shift in You is about this big mindset shift that if we continue down this long path, this wrong path, of addiction to our phone, addiction to just dopamine hits, addiction to saying, “Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes!” it’s going to come at such a great cost.

So we have to shift from the “What?” the “What?” the “What?” “Next,” “Next,” “Next,” “Next,” and we have to shift to the “Who?” And the most important who is you.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Yeah, well, that is a powerful story. And not this is a health or biology podcast, but my curiosity wondered, “Hmm, if one works a lot and has bad labs, and the doctor says, ‘You’re going to die within a decade if you keep doing that,’ what is the mechanism by which that happens? Is it just cholesterol and heart disease or heart attack?” Or, how does that go down?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
So he did not share his lab results with me. I guess, as I’m his executive coach, we, instead, then looked at his calendar and we talked about, “What changes can you make?” And so the first exercise I did with him is, I said, “Write down the most important people in your life, both personally and professionally.” And so he wrote down.

I said, “Okay, now take out your phone and look at your calendar. Are those people on your calendar?” And he said, “No.” I said, “Well, then we have to start there, because everyone else is getting a piece of you except for the most important people in your life.”

So after the first shift from “What?” to “What?” to “What?” and making sure that you’re shifting to “Who are the most important people in your life? Making sure that you prioritize them. They’re on your calendar.”

So, for example, professionally, your direct reports. So a lot of leaders say, “Oh, my direct reports, I love them. They’re so important to me. “Oh, they’ll pick up the telephone and call. I don’t have a regular meeting with them.”

Well, that’s not connection. And that’s assuming that they’re going to pick up the telephone and call. So direct reports, your team are some of the most important people in your life, professionally, so make sure you have a rhythm for them on the calendar.

Your children, right? Your family members. I know when I launched this book last November, I had a big connection launch here in New Orleans. And so about 100, no, 220 leaders showed up and it was a party, it was really fantastic.

So my family was was there as well. My dad, my brother. And after I talked about how, “If your family is one of the most important people, one of the most important things in your life on your list, and your family is not on your calendar, then make sure it’s on your calendar.”

So we went to dinner afterwards, and my 81-year-old dad is like, “Oh, my gosh, Michelle, we need to take a family beach trip together.” We realized we weren’t even on each other’s calendars. We didn’t have a regular cadence.

So what I do when I work with organizations, I work with teams, I work with leaders is, besides having them write down the most important people and looking at their calendar and seeing if those most important people are on the calendar, we create what I call a connection cadence.

So we take the most important people and making sure that you are at the top of the list because the most important who is you. So you and then your most important relationships, making sure that they’re embedded on your calendar and you have a rhythm so that you see your direct reports once a month in a face-to-face meeting.

You go on a family beach trip once a year and it’s on the calendar. And so it’s figuring out who your priorities are, embedding them on your calendar, and making sure you have a cadence or a rhythm so that you have these recurring interactions. And that, to me, is the definition of true connection.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so that seems like a fabulous practice, well worth doing. Okay. And you’ve actually outlined seven necessary shifts. Could you give us the rundown in terms of, “So this is the shift and here’s the one-to-two-sentence definition of what that means?”

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Yes, so I’ll begin with why in the world did I even write this book, right? So The Seismic Shift in You, We had talked about before we started recording, Marshall Goldsmith. And Marshall Goldsmith is my co-author.

And so he and I were in London at the Top Thinkers 50 Award. And Marshall was getting the Lifetime Achievement Award, and we’re listening to all the speakers talk about, “How in the world do we compete with AI? How is AI going to redefine us as leaders? What do we need to do differently? How do we show up differently?”

And every single one of these top speakers in the world said, “We have to lean in with our humanity. And we’re going to have to focus more on relationships when it comes to how technology is taking over the world.”

And so Marshall and I looked at each other, I said, “Well, if that’s not a seismic shift,” because that’s what I do for a living, right? I write about seismic shifts. I said, “This is the biggest seismic shift we’re going to see in our lifetime.” I said, “We need to write a book about it.”

So I ran, I’m a professor at Loyola, and so I ran back to New Orleans, I ran over the Atlantic Ocean, right, back to New Orleans, asked for a year sabbatical to write this book. And when I visited Marshall, and we really started thinking, “What are the seven seismic shifts that are necessary?” here’s what they are.

So number one, I just talked about, shift number one is shift your mindset. It’s shift your perspective so that you’re not waking up every day looking at your phone thinking, “What, what? What? What? What? What?”

Because what Marshall and I found is a lot of those leaders who just focus on transaction, transaction, the next job, the next title, more this, more that, if they just focus on that, they get to the very top of their organizations and then they tell us they’re empty. And they look around and they say, “Why did I do all of that? I don’t feel fulfilled.”

And so when they feel empty, it’s typically because they haven’t focused on what really is meaningful, which are the relationships. So that first shift is from what to who, focus on relationships.

The second shift is in your priorities. Show me your calendar and I’ll show you your priorities. And it might make you really uncomfortable because the most important people in your life are not on your calendar. And you’re not on your calendar.

So that shift three is making sure that you embed those relationships in your calendar. So that when you show me your calendar, you’re like, “Look, the most important relationships, my team, my direct reports, my boss, my family, my friends, all of the people professionally and personally are on my calendar in a rhythm,” then you know that you’ve shifted your calendar.

And then that brings us to the fourth shift, which is shift your meetings. The way that we’re running meetings now, even when we’re in an actual physical office, most likely you’re on a virtual meeting and we’re finding that you end up a Zoom zombie at the end of the day. You’re totally empty.

You’re like, “Wait, but I had eight meetings today with people, why do I feel like a zombie? Why do I feel so empty?” because we are conducting these meetings like we’re in person, but we’re not in person. We’re just talking at people and we’re not creating intentional ways to connect.

So that fourth shift in meetings is I give you advice in the book of what you can do when you’re running your meetings, your virtual meetings, to build more connection so that people walk away and say, “I not only want to put my camera on, but I want to participate. I not only want to participate, but I really feel good about this team I’m working with,” and then you’re going to do a better job.

And so then the fifth shift is shift your conversations. What we’re finding is people are just, they’re tired of being talked at. They’re being talked at, talked at, talked at. We need to figure out how to lean in and have delicate conversations, have real conversations. “To be clear is to be kind.” That’s one of my favorite quotes from Brene Brown.

And one of the guys, you probably know him, Pete, Michael Bungay Stainier. And he wrote a book called How to Work with Almost Anybody. And I’m asking him, “So what’s the key? How do you work with almost anybody?” He said, “You need to begin every relationship you have, every project you have, with a keystone conversation.” I said, “What’s a keystone conversation?”

He said, “Well, you got to talk about, ‘What are you good at? What does success look like for us on this project or in this relationship? What are we going to do when conflict arises? How will I make sure that I don’t show up as my worst?’” He said, “That’s a keystone conversation.” So we talk about it in the book. We’re not leaning in as much as we need to as humans, having substantial or delicate keystone conversations.

The sixth shift is shift your language. Because each human is different, we tend to use words that erode connection, like, “He’s on the kill list. Put him on the kill list,” or, “You did a really great job, Pete, moderating this podcast, but…” So words like “but,” words like “kill,” words like “stupid,” words like, “I just need five minutes of your time,” or, “Don’t do that. That’s never going to work.”

These sorts of words that we choose, they create this reality that does not promote connection. So I talk about the words to use, rather than saying, “Pete, you did such a great hosting this podcast, but…” Say, “Pete, you did such a great job hosting this podcast. And I’m going to make recommendations of some of my other colleagues who would love to be on. They would be wonderful guests.”

So no “but” use an “and.” Rather than, “That’s never going to work,” or, “No,” say, “Next time, why don’t we look at other possibilities?” So it’s being really intentional with your language.

And then the final seventh shift is shift your energy because, as you know, hosting a podcast, you see people come on all the time, and the best guests have the best energy. So it’s being really aware of your energy and what you bring into each conversation, because even if we’re 5,000 miles apart virtually, energy is contagious.

And so people will turn off their camera and they’ll start multitasking and bring out their phone if the energy is not there and they think it’s a waste of time. So those are the seven seismic shifts to create better connection for better results.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, kudos. Yeah, nice little marathon there, done succinctly. And I hear the flow in terms of, piece by piece, it feels pretty sequential or chronological because, like, you can’t bring the language, the energy, the language, the conversations, the meetings until we’ve got the right people on the calendar in the meetings, you know, in terms of like I’m seeing how that unfolds.

And so, as you lay it out there, it feels very tidy and sensible, and I go, “Yes, that does seem like an optimal means by which we could have some good things flowing in terms of life and purpose and meaning and the humans in it.” What gets in the way?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
What gets in the way is when we just are reacting. When we wake up every day and we’re not intentional. We’re not intentional with making sure that our most important relationships are on our calendar, when we’re not intentional with our health, when we’re not intentional with our energies, with the energy that we bring.

When we’re not intentional with how we run meetings, when you just show up and you react and you’re like an ape, you know, what is it called? You’re in a pinball machine and you’re just bouncing all over the place. That’s what’s not effective.

And so we can’t keep doing what we’ve already done because it’s not going to be effective in this new work. So work is no longer a noun. It’s not necessarily a place we go. It actually is a verb. It’s how we show up, how we interact, how we connect. And we, as leaders, must be much more intentional about how we show up.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, I’d be curious to go a little bit deeper into language and energy. I saw Sam Horn was one of your endorsers on your book, and I believe she had some fun turns of phrase, “words to use” or “words to choose” and “words to lose.” In your experience, what are some of the key words you love to choose and the key words you’d love to lose?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Yes, Sam was on my podcast as well, and I highlight her in the book.

I love how she talks about how important our language is and how our language creates our reality. And the words that we use sometimes, really, it kills our connection with somebody else.

If we’re a “no person,” right, if we’re a “never,” if we’re a “don’t,” that’s all so negative. And leaders, we need to establish and set a tone of possibility and inspire and set a vision. And so we really have to be a bit more positive in the words that we use.

So one of the things that she says is when you use the word just. So if I were to say, “Pete, I just need five minutes of your time,” which is what I would say before I worked with Sam. I thought “just” was fine, “I just need a minute.” “I’m just this,” “I’m just that.” She said that diminishes and that minimizes.

Another thing that you don’t want to do, and you’re going to love this. So I’m a professor at Loyola, and during our last election, I ran over, I had two hours, and I ran down to the Superdome to vote.

And I teach at 6:20 every Monday night, my MBA class. And I was like, “Well, I’ll play. I have two hours.” Well, I didn’t realize, I didn’t expect that it would take two hours. And so I was late to class.

And so class started at 6:20. At 6:40, I’m running into the classroom and I said, “I am so sorry. I’m so sorry I’m late. I’m sorry to keep you all waiting,” thinking that was the right thing to do because I did keep them waiting, and I was late.

And one of my MBA students, a female, actually got up, it was presentation night, and she made a presentation, and she was talking about language that gives away our power. And she said, “Dr. Johnston, you didn’t have to say, ‘I’m so sorry. I’m so sorry.’ Instead, say, ‘Thank you so much for waiting for me. Thank you for your patience. Thank you for understanding. The line was wrapped around twice around the Superdome. Thank you.’”

She said, “Rather than diminishing your power,” she said, “that sets you up for success.” So rather than saying “just,” rather than saying “but,” rather than saying “no,” “never,” and “I’m sorry,” you want to choose language that escalates and that elevates connection.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, I hear that. And the “just,” it doesn’t seem to provide any benefits.

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Correct. It’s a filler word and it diminishes, it minimizes. You’re like, “Well, why do you just need five minutes of my time, Michelle? Am I not worth more of your time?”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah. Or, I’m thinking, “You just need five minutes of my time?” It’s like, “Do you believe that five minutes of my time is not something valuable?” So it’s diminished with a “just.”

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Right, exactly. Exactly. Totally. That’s exactly right. And I never thought of it like that. I never thought that saying “I’m sorry” was a negative. I never thought using “just”… Do you know who really taught me about “but” and not to use the word “but” is Marshall Goldsmith.

So when I was being vetted for the 100 Coaches, I flew out to La Jolla, which is where he lived before moving to Nashville. And it was in the middle of various strains of COVID. And so we walked along the Pacific Ocean, and he just wanted to get to know me. And I just said the word “just.” He wanted to get to know me.

And so he first asked, “Well, tell me about yourself.” So I began with my professional accomplishments. I’ve been at Loyola for over 25 years. I’m a full professor. At that point, I had just finished my first book. And so I was talking about my professional accomplishments.

And he said, “Oh, well done.” He said, “Personally?” I said, “Personally,” I said, “But, personally, God, I didn’t think that I would be a single mom.” And he stopped me in his tracks, in my tracks, and he did this thing that he does to all of his clients. And he goes, “Nah, nah, nah.” And he actually charges his clients $10 anytime they use the word “no” or “but.”

He did not charge me. Instead, he stopped me in my tracks, and he went, “Nah, nah, nah.” I said, “I thought I was just being honest.” Again, I just said “just,” “I thought I was being honest. That’s why I shared that.” He goes, “Try again. And there’s no reason for you to use the word ‘but.’ You’ve had all of these accomplishments and you’re a single mom. And you’re doing the best you can. So let’s try that again.”

So I had to go through it again, “Professionally I’ve done all these things and I’m a single mom. I’ve got this 20-year-old. She was about to go to the University of Georgia, and I’m so proud of her.”

He said the language you use shapes your reality and it affects how others feel about you. Don’t play the victim, “Oh, you know, I never thought I’d be a single mom.” He’s like, “Look, you’re raising a great kid.” So changing that word from “but” to “and” is something that is so important.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m right with you there. I’m also quite the advocate for losing the word “obviously.”

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Oh, that’s a good one.

Pete Mockaitis
It doesn’t give you anything good. It might be neutral and it might be quite negative. And I read “obviously” as, “If you didn’t know this, you’re an idiot.” So it’s like, “Oh, it’s only hostile,” or people just disregard it entirely.

And so you might come away with a zero, you might come away with a negative, but you’re not going to come away with a positive, like, “Ooh, that person is so smart. This is obvious to them. Wow!” That never happens. Okay.

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Great addition. Great addition to the list. You’re right, “obviously” is not a positive addition to any sentence. It’s not. Well done.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, let’s hear about energy. How do we shift it?

Dr. Michelle Johnston

So I think a lot of leaders are burned out. That’s what I’m hearing, and, particularly, when they’re in charge of meeting after meeting after meeting. And so one of the ways that I tell them to shift their energy is if they’re feeling, at the end of the day, completely wiped out having to run all the meetings, “Why don’t you share the responsibility of running these meetings because that’s a great opportunity to develop your people?”

So, for example, if you meet with your team for a virtual meeting every Monday from 2:00 until 3:00, why don’t you, as the leader of the team, take the first Monday of the month so that you can set the vision, you can set the priorities, share the agenda and just kind of the the cadence of how the meeting is going to run?

And then maybe the second Monday you ask somebody else on your team to run it, and then they can be in charge of the agenda and the priorities. And that’s a way to develop your people. So that’s the first thing.

The second thing is begin with a connection question. So, typically, if you hop on a call and you just start talking at people, the energy goes down because you didn’t give them any chance to be a part of the conversation. You’re just talking at people, and that’s when people switch off their cameras and start multitasking.

So in order to keep the energy high, people want to be seen. To me, the definition of connection is five things. Connection is, “Are you seeing your people, making sure that they feel seen, heard, valued, respected, and appreciated?” You, typically, can hit on all five of those cylinders just by beginning with a connection question.

So in your weekly team meetings, just say, “Hey, I’m interested. And how are you all doing? On a scale of one to 10. Let’s go around.” Pete, on a scale of one to 10, how are you doing personally? How is your day going?

Pete Mockaitis
I’m doing a 9.3, Michelle. Thank you.

Dr. Michelle Johnston
A 9.3. Bravo! And you don’t have to go any deeper. I’m not advocating that any leader becomes anybody’s psychiatrist or therapist. I’m not advocating for oversharing at all. It’s just begin some sort of question that shows that, “Hey, I want to know how you’re doing.”

Especially, because in virtual, it’s hard to do that. You don’t have the coffee, you don’t have the water cooler, you’re not walking to the meeting together. You’re just, all of a sudden, popping into this virtual room. So just say, “Let’s go around.”

And that’s a way that your team feels that they’re a part of it. And then if you have a really big team, say you’ve got 50 people, 100 people, one of the ways to promote more energy in these meetings is use the breakout room. Do you use breakout rooms? I try to use them. I love them.

So whenever I’m teaching online, I’ll say, “Okay, here’s the topic. We’re talking about creativity and how to be innovative and share ideas. I’m going to put you all into breakout rooms of three people. I’m going to give you 10 minutes and I want you to generate as many ideas as you can of how to solve the housing crisis on campus,” say, if I’m working with students.

And so that gives them a way to actually share their opinion in a smaller group. It increases and improves their energy, right, because they actually have to participate. And then we come back into the big call, and then there’s a spokesperson and we do shout-outs, right?

So the goal is, in order to increase energy on these virtual calls, is you really want to be intentional with connection. You want to ask connection exercises. You want to put people in smaller breakout rooms where they can speak, their voices are heard.

And then, at the very end, one of the things that you can do is end your meetings with a shout out, like, “Who needs to be shouted out today?” or, “Who needs a shout out?” or , “What sort of gratitude or appreciation?”

We’re just not really taking time to celebrate wins, to celebrate, to show appreciation, to share gratitude. And if we, I believe that if we keep showing up more intentionally and trying to build more ways to connect with each other as humans, then the energy is going to be better in your organization.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Thank you. Well, Michelle, tell us, any top do’s and don’ts you want to make sure we lock in before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
I would strongly encourage you on these virtual calls to ask for people to turn their camera on and turn their phones off and try to be present. That’s definitely a do. You want to model the way, right? You want to ask or share your expectations of what you have for your people.

You want to recognize that if you’re having a bad day and your energy isn’t that good, you might just begin the call and say, “We’re going to go around, on a scale of one to 10, because I want to know how you’re doing.” And then you always answer, too, and you be honest.

So another do is be honest as a leader and say, “I’m having a really tough day. My dog is in the hospital. That’s like, I got this dog during COVID. This is my best friend, right? And this is just so, if I’m not on my A game, I just wanted you to know why.”

So being real, showing up real, being honest, sharing that, leaning in with connection, creating more space for connection, that’s where you’re really going to get these seismic shifts that we’re looking for.

Here’s what I don’t want you to do. Act like a jerk boss. I don’t want you to be a military drill sergeant. I don’t want you just to talk at people all day and not make them feel seen, heard, valued, respected, and appreciated, right? I don’t want you to have this toxic culture of fear where people are scared to speak up and give their ideas.

So, again, the opposite of jerk boss, drill sergeant, culture of fear, is to be super intentional by creating connection during your meetings, during your conversations, with the language you use, the language you lose, and then the energy that you bring when you show up.

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

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Stephen Covey, the most important part of communication is how somebody interprets what you say. So the quote goes something like, “The only message that counts is the one that’s received.”

And in this land of, in this era of text messages where tone gets misinterpreted, you can’t just assume that you’ve communicated effectively. So think about “The only message that counts is the one that’s received.”

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

Dr. Michelle Johnston
I think the Hawthorne effect was something that I held on to when I was getting my PhD at LSU, and the Hawthorne effect was at the GE facility in the early 1900s. They really wanted to look at efficiency and they wanted to figure out the most efficient factories.

And they found that when researchers went to the Hawthorne facility and paid attention to the employees, their efficiency went up. So it really had nothing to do with what standards and procedures they were putting in place. It had to do with, “I’m being paid attention to and so I’m going to work harder.”

And so that really was the foundation of all of this research that I’ve been doing throughout my 25 years as a professor is, as a leader, you’ve got to pay attention to your people.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
One of my favorite books recently is by Garry Ridge, and it’s in my stack over here. And it’s Any Dumb-Ass Can Do It.

And Garry Ridge was the CEO of WD40. He did a phenomenal job as the CEO for 25 years at WD40, and he was a truly connected leader. And so when he retired and left them in great shape, he wrote a book called Any Dumb-Ass Can Do It, explaining how you need to be a people-first leader.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Asking other people about themselves.

Pete Mockaitis
Do you have any favorite ways you do that?

Dr. Michelle Johnston

Yeah, you got to stop talking about yourself.

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

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Yeah, I’ve been so honored to be on NBC News twice talking about connection with Kate Snow and Vicky Nguyen. And it was the quote when I said, “Okay, y’all, pull out your phones, show me your calendar, and I will show you your priorities. And it might make you really uncomfortable.”

And you should have seen the look on their faces, and they both said, “Oh, my gosh, I need to do things differently because I’m not prioritizing the most important people in my life.”

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

Dr. Michelle Johnston
My website, MichelleKJohnston.com. Please holler at me and stay in touch. Connect with me. I want to hear from you what’s working, what’s not working. And let’s build better connection for better results.

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

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Begin your meetings showing your people that you care about them.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Michelle, thank you.

Dr. Michelle Johnston
Thank you so much. Thank you, Pete.

1176: How to Stay Effective Amidst Chaos with Melissa Swift

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Melissa Swift shares strategies for navigating the chaos of the modern workplace more effectively.

You’ll Learn

  1. The four trends making work feel more intense and chaotic
  2. How to hone in on what makes you effective
  3. Two critical questions to ask in the face of chaos

About Melissa

Melissa Swift is a leading voice on how organizations, teams, and individuals can succeed in an ever-more challenging world of work. As founder and CEO of Anthrome Insight, she is a practicing consultant and keynote speaker. She has held consulting leadership roles at Capgemini, Mercer, Korn Ferry, and Deloitte. She is also the author of Work Here Now: Think Like a Human and Build a Powerhouse Workplace (Wiley, 2023).

Her quarterly columns in MIT Sloan Management Review often rank among their most-read articles. Swift speaks regularly at events, including the MIT CIO Symposium, and has been quoted on the subject in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, NPR, Newsweek, The Economist, The Washington Post, Axios, and more.

Throughout her career, Swift has pioneered techniques to reshape organizations for digital and workforce transformation, leading breakthrough projects across industries ranging from manufacturing to professional services to biotech to consumer goods. She earned her B.A. from Harvard University and her MBA from Columbia Business School.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Shopify. Start your free trial at Shopify.com/awesomepod
  • Vinted. Download the Vinted app for free to start selling with no seller fees!
  • Fitnexa. Get $10 off the SomniPods3 with the link and code AWESOME

Melissa Swift Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Melissa, welcome!

Melissa Swift
It’s great to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about “Effective: How to Do Great Work,” you know, being awesome at your job, being effective at your job are kind of similar, and we could debate the distinction. But could you maybe kick us off with a definition of effectiveness here?

Melissa Swift
Yeah, so I think effectiveness is getting done the things you really need to get done. There’s a ton of literature on kind of productivity that you can do all the things. And I don’t think effectiveness is about doing all the things. It’s about doing the things you really want to do to the standard you really want to do them and to the standard that others are happy with as well.

Pete Mockaitis
And I guess I would imagine there’s also, perhaps, a dimension of, in a way, that doesn’t leave you bitter, burnt out, exhausted, furious, frustrated.

Melissa Swift
Absolutely. Because if it takes all of your energy to be effective for this period of time, what about the rest of the time?

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so I’m eager to get into the particulars of the how this is done. But could you perhaps kick us off with a cool story of someone who thoughtfully applied some of your insights and really cranked up their effectiveness?

Melissa Swift

So one story that I absolutely love, that, actually, I talk about in the book is the CIO of a company called Ferrovial. They’re doing the, I don’t know if you’ve flown through JFK Airport in last, you know, a year, a couple years, right, but there’s this massive renovation of JFK going on. And Ferrovial’s doing it.

And Dimitrius Bountolos, who’s the CIO of Ferrovial, one of kind of sort of his key pillars for dealing with chaos, which is a topic I talk about in the book, and I talk about the strategy, is this idea of, “What activities do you need to protect in a chaotic environment, right? What can you let go and what must you absolutely protect?”

So, you know, for instance, right, it’s been getting fairly hot here in New York in the summers, one activity they need to protect is they absolutely have to make sure, they’ve got like little mini data centers running as part of this massive renovation project, they have to make sure the air conditioning stays on.

And I love that simplicity and clarity of, “Okay, crazy environment, 20 zillion things going on, large-scale capital project at a live airport, and you know what we need to do? Air conditioning.” That level of focus and that level of clarity, I think, is really powerful.

And that’s what’s enabled them to keep the lights on during, again, a project at a complexity and at a level of stakes that, I think, many of us would be very intimidated by.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yes, I was intimidated just imagining, beginning such a process or program.

Melissa Swift

Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis

And that is a key thing, keep the air conditioning going. I suppose what might be harder for some is identifying, “Well, what can they really let go of?” “Yes, we have to have the air conditioning and the catering and the hydration station,” you know? So do you have any pro tips for how folks think through, well, what can they let go?

Melissa Swift
I think this is a good kind of role for scenario planning, to be honest, you start to just think about it, like, “Okay, that’s critical, that’s critical, that’s critical.” Okay, well, scenario plan it out.

Let’s say you let this piece drop. What’s going to happen? What might happen? What is not just what you think is going to happen, but what are a few different scenarios that might happen? If you really pressure-test all of this stuff, you might say, “Well, okay, if I don’t do that initiative, oh, my gosh, this very senior person is going to get angry at me.”

Or, scenario two, they might not notice. Or, scenario three, somebody else might notice that you appropriately prioritized the task they were advocating for, etc. So just doing that kind of pressure-testing on different scenarios of how things might play out, I think, sometimes helps us, like, overcome our anxious mind.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly. So the scenarios you’re imagining are, “If this element just disappeared, got no love attention whatsoever, what are the consequences?” And sometimes you see, “Well, the consequences are absolutely catastrophic,” versus the consequences are, “Oh, someone is a little bit miffed.” It’s like, “Hmm, okay, well, that one is much more severe than the other.”

Melissa Swift
Absolutely. And our psychology plays tricks on us, right, especially if, you know, I talk about people having kind of different things that might make them effective, in the book. So if the thing that makes you effective is dealing with people, you might intuitively have this response about, “Oh, gosh, I cannot get people mad at me, right, because my human connections are so important.”

But you have to be able to take that step back and say, “Well, what are the actual other scenarios, and might there be some where it’s not just about people feeling bad, it’s like there are concrete bad events that might result?”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I think that’s great in terms of we go from the general to the specific. And I, too, really like my relationships and good agreeableness. And every once in a while, though, I encounter a situation where it’s like, “You know what? Even if this relationship were utterly destroyed in the course of this series of conversations, I would be okay with that if I got what I want. And even if they were to scream that they hate me every time my name is uttered in their presence.”

Now this is, again, is scenario planning. It’s extreme. I don’t think this has ever happened to anybody, and rare, but it’s good to take that stock of, in this particular circumstance, perhaps the people relationship-y matters are not the number one consideration.

Melissa Swift
Yeah, absolutely.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, so you’ve got four areas, and before we sort of tick into each of them, could you share with us kind of your big message of Effective? How do we do great work in a fast changing world?

Melissa Swift
I think it’s two things. I think, number one, understand what makes you good at your job. And those are the four things that we’ll get into in a second. But this fundamental thing of, “What actually makes me decent at the work I do?” I think it’s gotten really lost in our contemporary context that it’s all like, “You must have these 20 emerging skills and these 17 things,” and it’s exhausting, it’s overwhelming. It’s like, “No, basic, basic stuff. What makes you good at your job?”

And then, number two, I think you need to know what you’re up against in contemporary working contexts and just have some plans, have some strategies. So I talk about chaos, which we already spoke about.

Hyper transparency is an interesting one. There’s all this information floating around organizations and like, “What do you do?” Work intensification. Work has simply gotten more overloaded in recent years. And then also work has gotten very emotional as well. And I hear a lot from people who are really grappling with that.

And so if you know, “Okay, this is kind of the current set of stuff we’re up against,” and you know what makes you good at your job, a lot of the battle is fought, you know? It’s not everything, but day to day, you’re kind of like, “All right, this is what I got to amplify, and this is what I’ve got to combat.”

Pete Mockaitis
Well said in terms of fast-changing world chaos, yeah. And not to be the introduction to every business book ever, “But today, everything is different and it’s so hard.” And so, yeah, I mean, there’s certainly truth to that with new technologies and AI and yada, yada. Tell me about work becoming more emotional in recent times. What’s this about?

Melissa Swift
This is an interesting one. I think some of it is, and a big theme of the book, honestly, is that, I think work goes through cycles and we’re just at kind of like a tricky point in a cycle right now. And a lot of it relates to technology, and this is a good and a bad thing, you know?

And the good part is we have these amazing technologies and they, like, save people’s lives and they enable us to do all these incredible things, but technology, also, is gumming up the works in certain ways.

And a big part of where it’s gummed up the works is kind of in the communication realm. I mean, I quote some crazy stats in the book that something like 85% of emails contain some form of misunderstanding or miscommunication. And that’s nutty. That’s just absolutely cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

But what happens when we have all this sort of weird electronically intermediated communication, the emails and the Teams chats and the texts and the pings, and a lot of crossed wires and misunderstanding is it ends up, there’s this weird paradoxical thing where all of this flat electronic communication, people get really stirred up and emotional.

And then you combine that with, again, some stuff, like the world is at a weird cycle point, too. You know, we’ve got a lot of sort of political polarization, a lot of geopolitical conflict, a lot of, you know, again, the environment is going through kind of a weird moment by certain measures, we’re at a moment equivalent to like the late ‘60s or something. There’s a lot going on.

And put those two trends together, and you’ve just got these very emotionally stirred up workplaces. And it absolutely takes a toll on people. I mean, again, this is one I just hear about a lot. And I think it’s worth consciously taking a step back and saying, “Okay, well, I do feel like I walk into an emotional house on fire every day. What am I going to do about that?”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, tell us, what do we do about that and doing great work, in general, in this chaos?

Melissa Swift
So, number one, part of what we need to do to kind of minimize, like, the emotional load in the workplace is very, very simple. I interviewed a professor from UVA, Jim Detert, who’s an absolute guru to me, and he studies civility in the workplace, how we actually get along in sensible ways.

And one of the things he said was, by the time somebody’s upset or yelling or emotional or crying, they’ve usually tried to express that message before in a quiet and calm fashion. And you know what happened? When they did that originally, is nobody listened.

So if we can do a better job at listening to and picking up on even messages we don’t love to hear, right, or bad news, disconcerting stuff, stuff that you might want to brush away, that minimizes the number of people who will, then, end up coming to you really emotionally stirred up.

Again, it doesn’t solve for everything, but I think there are some of these little tips and tricks that if we took a step back, and the first time somebody tries to deliver a message, really heard them and said, “Okay, I hear you. I’m going to do X, Y, and Z,” didn’t dismiss them, then we get hit with those emotional aftershocks a lot less.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, okay. That’s great for the emotional side of things, is if we are proactively listening hard, we are less likely to encounter subsequent blow-ups. That makes sense. Can you share with us the overarching approach you recommend for being effective in the fast-changing world?

Melissa Swift
So, number one, know your job. And it sounds silly, you know, okay? When you signed up whenever that was five minutes ago, five years ago, fifty years ago, you know, you got a job description. Those job descriptions, A, are usually not that fabulous in the way they’re written.

But, number two, they change in real life, in real time. And, again, especially with a lot of technological change in the equation a lot. And then you get things like mergers and acquisitions, company restructurings, re-orgs. Our jobs change.

So, number one, take a second and think through your job from the point of view of all the different people who encounter it. So what does your boss think your job is? What does your customer think your job is? If there are people who are your peers, what do they think your job is?

Are there people who are doing the same job as you completely differently? Which happens a ton, especially in large organizations, but honestly in every organization. So, number one, do some thinking about what your job is.

Number two, what makes you good at your job? So is it knowledge, right? Do you just have this amazing kind of storehouse of facts and insights in your head? Is it methods? Are you like a great operator? Are you just great at operationally putting all this stuff together and getting things done?

Are you great at relating to people, right? Are you good at managing people and navigating stakeholders, all that stuff? Or are you great with technology? And, you know, most of us are some combination of those four things, but you know, we pretty much all have one kind of bigger spike.

So once you know, “Okay, this is my job, this is what makes me good at it,” and then those four forces we talked about, the chaos and the emotion, blah, blah, blah, “What is potentially impeding my effectiveness?” And again, different workplaces, some workplaces might be very high on chaos. Some workplaces, honestly, hyper transparency might be more of a struggle.

And then you get effects between those, that sometimes hyper-transparency, if everyone talks about everything all the time and nobody knows the quality of each other’s information, that can cause chaos, for instance, but it’s kind of that multi-step.

And then, finally, the sort of the fourth step that I talk about in the book is there may be times when you cannot be effective at your job, and then you have to figure out what to do from there. And there are a zillion pathways there, starting with, talk to your boss about how your vision of your job might differ from theirs.

Talk to a mentor. Seek out other roles in the same organization. There’s a lot of different non-dramatic ways that, if your job is truly one you cannot be effective in, and I’ve list a whole set of criteria for that, that you can kind of change the game there.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, thank you. There’s so much goodness here. I’m intrigued by the notion of what makes you good at your job. And you’ve proposed four elements. I’m imagining, in so far as you have the, assuming, equal levels of enthusiasm, drive, motivation, hustle, like hours to pour into something, assuming that those are constant, you know, between two different people, yeah, I mean, it feels pretty good with regard to, “These are the four superstructure, macro categories by which we could be effective or ineffective.”

And I think, maybe, individual people come to mind with regard to, “Well, that person has high knowledge, they’ve got low knowledge. They’ve got high-people ability, they got low-people ability.” So could you elaborate upon, for a sentence or two or three, each of these elements what precisely do you mean by it? Like, how is knowledge different than methods, for example?

Melissa Swift
So knowledge, it’s really about the stuff behind the stuff. So I’ll use a concrete example, right? So you could have two chefs, and one has got this incredible knowledge of, like, the chemistry behind cooking, right, like molecular gastronomy and oil’s boiling points and stuff like that, right?

Another one is just really good at kind of intuitively figuring out when things need to sort of like shift off the burner, how to do kind of the mise en place, so like the timing is right. It’s all of these kind of very, like, operational elements. And they could both be great chefs, but their source of greatness is wildly different. And, oftentimes, great kitchens will have a mixture of those archetypes.

I quote in the book, I quote a scene from “The Breakfast Club” where it’s, I forget, it’s like the criminal guy and the nerdy guy. And they’re arguing, about the nerdy guy is complaining that he got an F in a shop class because his lamp wouldn’t, like, turn on, right? It’s the only bad grade he ever got, you know?

And so he’s explaining to, like, the criminal guy, he’s like, “Do you understand how much the theory of electricity and the trigonometry that, you know, blah, blah, blah goes behind, you know, that without all that, there would be no electricity?” And the criminal guy goes, “Well, without lamps, there would be no light.”

And those are kind of the two different archetypes, right, between knowledge and methods. The knowledge people understand the electricity and the atoms and all of that, and the methods people are good at making lamps, and you need both.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, while we’re talking about recipes, and I’m thinking about “Breaking Bad” as I often do, you know, and there’s one scene where – I won’t spoil it for anyone who hasn’t seen it, but it’s been a while for a while, I’d recommend it. It’s the best.

So our protagonist has deep, profound knowledge of chemistry, and he’s making meth. And then he thinks that he’s, like, irreplaceable because of his tremendous knowledge. And then this guy who’s just been watching them in the meth lab for a while just starts doing it. And he’s like, “It’s a recipe.”

So that’s what’s crystallizing for me – crystal, ha, ha – between knowledge, you know, Walter White versus method, “Hey, just follow the recipe,” that difference there. And, I guess, in some ways, to be effective or awesome, these things really do flow into each other. You know what I’m saying?

Like, your knowledge can be translated somewhat into methods, which can be transferred somewhat to people, and a portion of which could be transferred into software or technological incarnations of that. So there’s a bit of a fluidity interchange among them.

Melissa Swift
Absolutely. And some of it is, like, you don’t want to get too intellectualized about it. What I recommend in the book is, “How are people interfacing with you?”

So, for instance, there’s actually, this is hilarious because researchers have documented this. There’s a phenomenon of becoming the informal IT person for your office, right? You are not in the IT department, you are not the help desk, you are doing some totally other job, and you become the de facto IT person.

And it’s, oftentimes, in the research, they describe it as well, it’s like, you know, it’s that like Alaska, remote Alaska office, and there’s no one else. But it happens in a lot of, like, big complex offices, too, in far less remote locations. And so that’s when you got to say, take a step back, and say, “Okay, well, you know what? I might be good at technology.”

And it’s a funny one because, a lot of times, people will not describe themselves as being good at technology. And then you say, “Okay, well, have people ever treated you like IT support?” And they’re like, “Yeah, all the time. All day long, everyone’s bugging me, ‘How do you use this? How do you use that?’”

Well, you have some chops that you may not have given yourself credit for. And that’s why it’s important to kind of look at, “How is the world interfacing with you?”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. And I’m thinking that’s so true that, often, when it comes to strengths, we undervalue them just because they’re easy for us, it’s just like, “Well, I don’t know why everyone else is just such an idiot when it comes to their laptops?” It was like, “Hint. Hint. You have a strength, a gift, some talent in the zone of technology ability, and you didn’t even know it just because it seems pretty easy to you. You don’t even know if you would call it that.”

And what’s funny, I’m thinking about my buddy Kwame, who’s been on the podcast a couple of times, says, “I buy what Pete buys because I know Pete has done an outrageous amount of research on any purchase that he makes.”

And so it’s a joke, but he’s done it again and again and again. And so in that zone, I suppose it’s a bit of knowledge, it’s a bit of methods in terms of, my method is I obsessively research a thing in tremendous detail. And by doing so, I acquire knowledge and I say, “This is the thing I love.” And then Kwame just takes the shortcut, and says, “Okay, I’m buying it.”

Melissa Swift

That’s what my late father used to do that with ordering off the menu that I had. In general, I’m a knowledge person, but when it comes to menus, I’m very intuitive. I’m just, like, I can spot descriptions of things that are going to taste good. I don’t know, it’s in a different part of my brain.

But my dad used to just, yeah, whatever I would order, he would order the same thing. I think it was after, like, years of him just eating my food off my plate and me telling him, “You got to order your own thing,” and it evolved into that. But, yeah, same approach, right. The world is giving you feedback about something you’re doing well.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So when we follow these broad steps, hey, we know our job and we know it, not just what the original job description said, but in terms of how our boss would describe it, how our peers would describe it, what it’s looking like right here and right now. I’m curious, do you have any pro tips on knowing better what your job is, if you have perhaps made some assumptions?

Melissa Swift
Yeah, so the interesting thing is the federal government actually maintains a database of all jobs called O*NET. And there’s, like, a certain fraction of, I’ll say O*NET to an audience and occasionally somebody will, like, sit up in their seat, right, because it’s a really cool database. It contains, basically, every job, you know, “What does this job do?”

So one thing you can do is go into O*NET and, literally, if you’re having one of those, “Am I losing my mind? I feel like this job is the weirdest version of this job possible,” you can actually look at, like, the government account of your job and say, “Okay, well, all right, this sounds nothing like that.”

I’m also a big fan of the talk to your peers, talk to the extent that you can do so without giving away trade secrets. Talk to your peers at other organizations. That can be very telling. Organizations can get super idiosyncratic about what it means to be a financial analyst or something that sounds completely generic.

Within a particular organization, they can end up with a strange version of that. So, again, don’t give away any trade secrets, but talk to people at other organizations. You can go back to the job description you were hired to.

Now, do I think that will be a useful conversation where you march into your boss’s office waving your job description? Like, no, of course not, but it can at least give you some language to say, “Okay, well, you know, is this aspect of the role being neglected or something like that?”

It’s just giving you, I think, the key thing is just have something to hold it up against. You need some alternate version of something to make the comparison, because that’s where we go wrong. We start to ruminate about, “Is this the right way to…oh, I just don’t even know.”

And the second you start comparing it, either you’ll say, “Okay, well, no, you know, the federal government, I don’t agree with this version of the job, right? I think the way my company does it is better.” Or, “OSomebody working for my competitor is working half the hours I’m working because they don’t have all this weird stuff loaded in, you know?”

But it gives you something to react to. Basically, you have to go out and find some account of your job, either through a person or in a documented way, to at least start just making comparisons. And to do that, by the way, you also have to be honest with yourself about what you do all day, which is something that many of us struggle with.

And to do that, you almost want to do your own little time and motion study, right? These are the famous, you know, from like the 1800s of like, “Okay, then the factory worker puts like the brick here,” or whatever. Just write down for a day what you do. Do that across a week.

I think many of us would be shocked, and there are some good effectiveness insights just from doing that, because you may say, “I thought my job was this, but actually, I’m spending my time on this, and I forget any other accounts of the job. I don’t think this is what I should be doing.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yes. Well, no, we love time diaries here. Laura Vanderkam has been on the show a couple of times talking about it, loving it. And so that’s good. So we had a really clear sense of what is the job, and I think within that, we want to get a sense of, thusly, “So what does good look like? And what does bad look like? And what does, like, okay look like in practice?”

Melissa Swift
Yeah, absolutely. And, again, separating that from our own emotional constructs around that, because I think sometimes what trips us up is the things that feel good to do aren’t necessarily the things that really hit outcomes properly.

So, for example, I think many folks in managerial roles, it feels good to overload yourself because you’re like, “I’m busy. I’m really busy. I’m doing all the things. I’m, like, in it to win it.” That feels good emotionally. I mean, of course, until it doesn’t, until you burn out, you’re exhausted, you can’t do anything. But until that point, right, to a lot of people that feels great, “I’m crushing it.”

Whereas, what would actually drive outcomes is to say, back to our discussion about, “What are the activities I absolutely must protect?” is to say, “Okay, well, you know, these three things are the core of what my next six months are about. And I’m just going to really lean into those. I’m going to let some other stuff drop.”

And you have to live through that moment of, “Ugh, that doesn’t intuitively feel good to me, but I’ve made this agreement with myself that these are the outcomes I’m seeking.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s nice. Okay. Well, so in the midst of the fast-changing world, can you give us the quick rundown of work intensification, emotional inflection, hyper-transparency, sheer chaos? What’s the deal there? And what are your best tips on how we can keep our cool?

Melissa Swift
Well, I’ll start with work intensification because, probably, out of those terms, that’s one of the ones people will be less intuitively familiar with. Although, once I describe it, you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about.

So work intensification, there was a great study out of the EU a few years ago that defined it, and it defined it in three pillars. First pillar, too many tasks in too little time, right? We have all been there.

Second pillar, excess interdependence. And I love this one because I think it’s an addressable lever both for individuals and for the companies they work for. But we often don’t, we just sort of don’t think about it this way. This one was a big aha for me.

So interdependence is when you depend on too many other people to get any one thing done. And I did some research last year, and people actually feel more effective when they can work with a smaller circle of people on any given task. And sometimes that’s not always within your control. I don’t want to pretend that’s always within your control, but sometimes it is.

And it’s great to look for those opportunities where, if you set as your mental goal, “My goal is actually to work more independently,” which, again, that might feel weird or countercultural, or like we’ve all been beaten over the head to collaborate as much as you can.

You say, “Actually, I’m going to prioritize independent work because I know I’m already at a very high level of collaboration.” That can be really game-changing for that excess interdependence one.

And then the third pillar of work intensification, which I actually treat separately in the book because it’s got its own ball of wax, is just excess emotion at work. And that can show up a lot of different ways.

You could be at a tech company where teams regularly bicker with each other, or you could be a frontline worker in a healthcare environment where patients routinely yell at you, right? There’s a lot of different ways to be emotionally saturated. So that kind of covers those two.

I think chaos is fairly self-explanatory. In the book, I do talk about two types of chaos, that there’s just the natural chaos of the world, right, like, Komodo dragon exerts a breath and a volcano goes off halfway around the world, kind of stuff. That just is. That’s just a part of life.

And then there’s actually chaotic ways of operating, which you employ different strategies to defend against, right? So for the chaos of the world, you might say, “Okay, I’m going to figure out my activities to protect.”

When people are operating chaotically, you might say, “I actually need to protect my personal boundaries. So I’m going to do things like if I have a coworker who I know is totally chaotic, and meetings always go upside down with them. You know what? That coworker is no longer allowed to meet with me on Friday afternoons because I am emotionally exhausted at that point, I don’t have anything left to give. And, by the way, I need to, deal with family dinner at 5:30. So if the meeting goes on forever, right, that’s going to mess up my whole work-life integration.”

So that’s the chaos one. And then, finally, hyper-transparency is just an interesting consequence, again, of a more data and information-driven world. That if you think about it, if you were a CEO in 1955, a lot of how you sort of had control over your corporation was you had this giant information advantage. You knew so much that your workers didn’t know.

Today, not as much, that a lot of times, especially within a particular team, the workers on the team, like, will know more than our bosses know, because, you know, there’s 20 zillion data feeds coming in, 20 zillion dashboards, everyone’s on Teams pinging each other, everyone’s texting. We’re floating in information.

And, in general, a lot of that’s good. It’s good to have more information, except sometimes you learn things you didn’t want to know. So look at what’s happened with pay transparency, right, that you know, “Okay, oh, my gosh, they just posted for a job similar to mine, and the pay is twice what I make,” you know, things like that.

And so it’s emotionally tricky to live in a more transparent work world. You might find out things about your boss on social media. You don’t necessarily want to know all this stuff.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, no doubt there, it’s a tricky world and these things are happening. So tell us, what do we do about it?

Melissa Swift
Well, I think, for hyper-transparency, one of my big tips is just kind of be a fiend for the truth. And you can’t stay completely out of that information soup. It used to be, you know, it was like, “Well, I’ll stay out of office gossip.” And I would say, you know, to the extent possible, but also you might miss key information if you’re not communicating with people.

But being a little bit intense about, “Okay, you just told me something as if it was a fact. Where did you get your information from? Okay, where did that person get their information from, right? Is this written down anywhere?”

So just being a little bit obnoxious about whether the facts and data that are coming to you at work are actually facts and data, “Okay, well, look, this dashboard says you’re down 17%.” “Okay, well, what’s the source of that data?” I’ve been personally in situations.

I once had someone have to call me up and apologize and say, you know, “We just tried to hold you accountable for the entire performance of the Atlanta office, and you only have three team members there.” It’s like, “Okay, you know, fair enough. Thank you for that. But, you know, it was at the time in the meeting, it was, ‘This is the data, Melissa. What are you going to do about it?’” And I think we all have a lot of those moments.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, we can all see that. Okay, so when you say be a fiend for the truth, tell me more about that. Because at times, I find, for me as a super curious individual, that’s been suboptimal in moments of, for example, with the news.

I hear something that sounds not quite right. And, by golly, I’m going to get to the bottom of it. And I’ve done this many times. And so it’s like 40 minutes later, I feel like I have a deep, thorough, nuanced understanding of the matter.

But it’s like, “Wait, who cares? Why? Why did I invest that time in doing that?” So this, I’m a fiend for the truth at times indiscriminately, not a selective fiend. So tell us, how do we apply our truth fiend tendencies and how do we not?

Melissa Swift
I think some of it is just having kind of, if your standard basic question is, “Where did that information come from?” you know, a lot of times that’ll cover it, and you don’t have to, to your point, go down a 40-minute rabbit hole, you know?

Because the part of it is you’re trying to drown out some noise that organizations today, there’s the possibility to, like, really swirl on things because, again, of just the constant chatter that, if you’re in a group chat with dozens of people, which is not uncommon at this point in history, and people are constantly like coming at you with, “Ooh, this is going to happen, this is going to happen, and did you know this was going on?”

And some of it is you need to know what to just absolutely ignore and not think about again. And, to your point, save yourself some time with the rabbit hole. So just being able to pick your rabbit holes, you need kind of a screener question. And my screener question is always, “Where did that information come from?”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like that a lot. And I’m finding that more and more. I am getting a bit more, shall I say, assertive in my decision-making even though no one else is around. I’m looking at, like, a headline or a YouTube title thumbnail, it’s like, “I definitively choose not to care about that at all. Next.”

Melissa Swift
Same. I do the same thing. I do the same thing, “I’m just going to scroll right on by that one, as triggering as it is.” But I think that’s what you have to do in that. Part of what what’s going on here is the world is designed to trigger us more.

And at work, we’re all kind of trying to get each other’s attention all the time, and we’re all trying to interrupt each other all the time. That’s one of the most interesting facets of, especially, modern knowledge work to me.

You don’t get this dynamic in a warehouse or a manufacturing plant. They’re not all trying to interrupt each other, right, because that would be actually physically dangerous. But in knowledge work, right, we are just constantly, “Ping, ping, ping, ping, ping, ping, let me interrupt you. You interrupt me.”

And some of it is, in the book, I actually talk about, there’s an emergency room physician, Dr. Rebecca Parker, who I interviewed, and she talks about, she had to get good at being interrupted. That was an actual skill that she developed. And for her, it was just about knowing the points in a task when you can and can’t safely stop.

So if somebody interrupts her before she’s written down all the notes from the patient she just saw, she’s just like, “Nope! Whoop! Nope! Don’t talk to me yet,” finishes the notes, “Okay, now you can talk to me.”

And I love that because, you know, that’s sort of the nature of the modern workplace. And the more we have strategies like that, the more we can feel like we’re just in control of what’s happening with us.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, before we hear about some of your favorite things, could you give us your top most favorites, strategies, tactics, approaches that make a world of difference?

Melissa Swift
I think another strategy I really like, on the hyper-transparency front, is just being a bit simple about things. So think about a wall in your house. If it’s super minimalist, there’s one painting on it, it’s pretty easy to keep clean, right?

If you got shelves of knick-knacks, right, you’re dusting, you’re doing all this stuff, it’s the same with when transparency happens. So if you’ve got all this complex, weird stuff going on behind the scenes at work and you got all these little intrigues and office politics and you’re doing strange things, and then somebody finds out about it, because people find out about all kinds of stuff at this point in history, it’s a lot to explain.

So just having less to explain, I think, is a powerful strategy because it works well for hyper-transparency, but it also works well for chaos and work intensification and all that. Just being like sort of, “I’m going to Marie Kondo my work life.” That one, I just think, has a lot of power across a lot of situations.

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

Melissa Swift
So I’m not going to get it right verbatim, but there’s a quote from Dr. Richard Feynman, who is this illustrious physicist who was the part of the Manhattan Project, and he talks about the diabolical thing with computers. And remember, he’s talking about like punch card computers at this point, right? This is like mid-20th century type computers.

It’s like, “The diabolical thing about computers is you play with them, it’s intriguing with the ones and the zeros.” And what I like about that quote is he’s talking about enjoying technology, which is something we could stand to do more of at work.

And we would also just get a lot more done and be a lot more effective if we could get back to that place of, “I enjoy the technology I work with.”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And could you share a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Melissa Swift
There’s a study out of Germany that talks about different kinds of systems. So they talk about naturally occurring systems, and that’s, like, the water cycle, like actual things in nature. And those just work. They’re amazing.

And then they talk about engineered systems. Those are the systems that, you know, humans build, right, the interstate highway system, you know, something like that. And then they talk about, and this is very common in organizations, slipped systems. So you built the system to do this, but actually it’s kind of not doing that. It’s doing something else.

And so I always mash that up with the Stafford Beer systems thinking, you know, the purpose of a system is what it does, right? I think about how many organizations are dealing with slipped systems that, “Okay, performance management is supposed to operate this way and we’re all supposed to be doing this, but we end up doing this because it kind of pushed us in the wrong direction,” or something like that.

And I think it’s a great insight, again, to have as an individual is, “Okay, I’m dealing with a slipped system.” And that gives you that nice moment of awareness of, “I’m going to stop thinking that, like, I’m the problem in every possible way. And I’m going to start saying, ‘Okay, how do I better grapple with a system that’s not perfect?’”

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Melissa Swift
I’m going to forget the author’s name, but The Warmth of Other Suns, which is about the Great Migration, and I love it because, in some ways, it’s about kind of individual worker agency because it completely reshaped the American economy. Completely. But it was a bunch of individuals saying, “I don’t like how I’m treated in this society. But a lot of times, I don’t like how I’m treated at my job. And I’m going to make changes that are going to make my life better.”

And, for me, that’s a big theme, and it doesn’t have to be that you leave that job and you move geographically. It can be really micro stuff, but having that moment of agency and saying, “I want my life at work to be different than it is exactly right now,” that’s awesome.

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

Melissa Swift
So you can find me on LinkedIn where I’m very active. You can find me at my company’s website, AnthromeInsight.com. I have a small presence on Instagram and a burgeoning presence on TikTok as well. But first line of contact, LinkedIn is always fabulous.

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

Melissa Swift
Figure out what you’re great at and lean in on that and ignore some of the rhetoric about kind of, like, “Oh, human workers are very endangered these days,” and just figure out what you’re amazing at and be in that space. That’s a great starting point for anyone.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Melissa, thank you.

Melissa Swift
Thank you.

1175: Reclaiming Time through Effective Delegation to Humans and AI with Ari Meisel

By | Podcasts | 2 Comments

Ari Meisel shows you how to optimize, automate, and outsource your way into more time and freedom.

You’ll Learn

  1. How to build systems that don’t rely on you
  2. How to deploy AI agents to do work for you
  3. The rules of effective delegation

About Ari

Ari Meisel is a self-described, “Overwhelmologist” and founder of Less Doing. He helps entrepreneurs who have opportunity in excess of what their infrastructure can support, find focus, flexibility, and freedom in their business. His leadership skills, his coaching prowess, and his ability to inspire leaders to become more agile, have earned him the reputation as the preeminent Entrepreneurial Strategist. 

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Ari Meisel Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Ari, welcome back!

Ari Meisel
Thanks, Pete. Good to see you.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to dig into your story and what you’ve been up to for the last seven years since your last appearance on How to be Awesome at Your Job. For starters, could you perhaps orient listeners who didn’t catch that one seven years ago, what is Less Doing and what’s that all about?

Ari Meisel

So Less Doing is the productivity methodology that I created, gosh, like 15 years ago now, and it is my company where I do productivity and business coaching for entrepreneurs, founders, executives, all over the world, and have been doing that for about a decade and a half now.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, beautiful. And so last time we talked about optimizing and automating and outsourcing. And so we’ll talk about some of that again with some new insights and tools and goodies. But, in your life, this notion of less doing took on a not just sort of a nice to have, but an absolutely critical must-do kind of a vibe. Can you tell us the story?

Ari Meisel
So when I got out of college, I was working in real estate development and construction, and built a big project in upstate New York. But I was really hands-on. I was working my butt off and not living a particularly healthy lifestyle and under a lot of stress, and ended up finding myself in quite a bit of debt when I was 23.

And I was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease. And Crohn’s is considered to be an incurable illness that affects the digestive tract. And I was able to overcome that illness and have been free of it for a long, long time now.

But the main constraint that I was faced with was I went from working 18-hour days to barely being able to get an hour of work done a given day. And that extreme restriction on my time is, honestly, what has led to everything that has come since then because, and it’s an exercise that I take people through, which is, “What would you do if you could only work an hour a day?”

And the question at that point, really, isn’t, “What would you do?” it’s, “What wouldn’t you do?” because if the things that you need to do have to get done by something or somebody, you’re going to have to figure that out so that that hour becomes a thing that only you can do.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s powerful. And can you share with us, so you said you could only do one hour of work for those who are not as familiar with Crohn’s disease and its impact, like what would happen if you tried to push more than that?

Ari Meisel

So it was both a physical and, I’d say, a psychological barrier that I was dealing with because, first of all, any autoimmune disease, you’re, essentially, like at war with your own body, which is challenging in itself.

Crohn’s, again, it affects the digestive tracts. So not only is it difficult to eat and enjoy food and benefit from food, but there’s also like a nutrient deficiency thing that kind of happens because of it. And it just creates all sorts of problems.

So there was, literally, the physical weakness where there were days where I just didn’t even want to get out of bed. And then there were other days where, you’re diagnosed with a chronic and incurable illness, it’s like, “Well, what’s the point of doing any of this other stuff?” So it’s really challenging.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. That’s brutal. So what did you do, precisely, in order to make work fit in an hour?

Ari Meisel
So, at the time, it was very different than things we can do now, of course, with AI. But the framework that I came up with was optimize, automate, outsource in that order. So we have to optimize and look at what we are actually doing and sort of do a bit of an audit, which sounds kind of basic, but most people just don’t do that.

The second step is, once we’ve done that, we look at automation. And, again, automation, the tools at our disposal have changed quite a bit over time, especially in the last year. But we automate what we can and then whatever that’s left over is the stuff that we give to a person that we might outsource or delegate to help with that, whether that’s a virtual assistant or a graphic designer or a coder or whatever it might be.

So it was really the sort of systematic approach to doing that, and that was the personal methodology, the Less Doing, More Living was what it was really called. And then over a few years, that morphed into a bit more of a business-focused methodology, which I would call the replaceable founder.

And the idea there is to make everybody in the business, including the founder, as replaceable as possible by creating systems and processes that stand in for the things that you do at a level that is not at your level of genius, essentially, everything else. And it, again, became this really systematic approach at making yourself more replaceable.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, could you walk us through some of those steps in terms of the questions, the prompts, the activities that you do when you are optimizing and automating and outsourcing, and maybe share some specific tasks that you, with the condition, ended up working through those three steps?

Ari Meisel
So I’ll give you an example that’s going to sound like a really weird one, but anybody who’s got a family, in addition to their work and their business, and kids might be able to appreciate this. So I have five kids, and I have five kids right now that are in different camps, and camp requires lots of forms to be filled out.

And I can’t tell you how many times I’ve encountered this where there’s entrepreneurs who are also parents and they feel like they have to be the one to fill out the form. Nobody else could possibly do that, “Oh, there are so many questions that I have to answer. And, also, like, it’s for my family, so I’m going to do it.” And there’s a lack of knowledge there and, first of all, in terms of like what actually could be done by somebody else. There’s also an ego thing and, like, a value thing, right?

And the problem with that is, if you’re working, and you’re efficient, you’re making money and you’re supporting your family, great, and then you come home and you have to spend an hour doing paperwork.

Like, there’s this weird stigma, it’s like, “Oh, I couldn’t outsource something like that. It’s personal. It’s for my family. And there’s also no ROI on it.” It’s like, well, there actually is because that hour is something that you could be doing with your family and having the human element there as opposed to sitting and filling out paperwork.

And I promise you, you’re not the best person on the planet to fill out paperwork. There are other people who can do that better than you. And now there’s, you know, AI agents that could do that as well or better.

So that, again, that sounds like a really trivial example, but you have things like that in business all the time where people feel like, “I have to be the one to do it. Nobody else could possibly check the boxes like I do.” And it sounds like I’m being facetious, but that is, literally, like the mindset.

I can’t tell you the number of companies I’ve dealt with where you have a COO of a multimillion dollar company booking travel for the CEO, because that’s the only person they trust to do it, right? Because you couldn’t possibly codify your seat preference and your, you know, the how many hours.

It’s true, though, and it’s crazy. Like, I actually just got off the phone with a client who runs an eight-figure company and he’s got a full-time executive assistant. He books his own travel. He’s got the apps on his phone. He just does it himself. And it’s like, “Okay, sure.” But it’s just so crazy. And that’s the one that comes up a lot.

And then you have the things where people have just been doing it a really long time, and they feel like the reason that they’re able to do it is because they know it better than anybody else. But if you know it that well, you should be able to teach it. It’s a really good sort of, you know, litmus test for how well you know something.

And if you can teach it, not only are you enabling yourself, you get to remove yourself as a bottleneck, but you’re doing something that a lot of people miss out on when they try to delegate something, which is empowerment.

A lot of delegation for people who do it is, “Here’s an annoying thing that I don’t want to deal with or I’m not good at, so I’m going to give it to somebody else who has less context, less information, and, at the same time, I’m expecting them to produce a superior result to what I was going to produce myself. So I’m literally just setting everybody up for failure and then I get to reinforce the idea that outsourcing and delegating doesn’t work for me.”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I love that so much in terms of, one, getting over yourself. And we had Dave Kerpen on the show who talked about that concept, and has a book with a similar name, in terms of like, “No one could possibly do the camp forms or do the travel the way I like,” or there’s like a hang up, like, “Well, that’s just what a good dad or a good mom would do for their kids. They wouldn’t dream of outsourcing.”

And so you’re directly challenging these internal narratives, which I think is excellent, in terms of, “Well, no, if you took the time to really speak what it is you need in a seat…” because, in a way, I get it a little bit in terms of, like, when I’m choosing between three different flight options, there are trade-offs.

And how do I articulate to another person, “I’m willing to pay an extra $60 dollars if it means that I don’t have to hang with a two-hour layover. So what’s my layover minutes per dollar conversion rate?” Like, how do I algorithmically, contextually convey that? That’s kind of tricky. I don’t know. Ari, how do I do that?

Ari Meisel
So this is going to sound really reductivist, but a lot of times, people don’t convey the outcome that they’re trying to achieve.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Ari Meisel
So I’ll give you a good example. Actually, it’s one of my favorite outsource, one of my favorite virtual assistant stories ever. I was going to Canada. I lived in New York at the time. I was going to Canada for the day to go to an event, that I had to be at the event, I think, at about 8:30 in the morning. And I go to this event somewhat regularly.

But I was sitting in the airport at 5:00 in the morning, or 5:15, whatever. And I get a text on my phone from my virtual assistants at the time that says, “Your flight is getting canceled, but we re-booked you on United Airways. Go over to gate B6.” And I’m like half awake. There’s a bunch of people around me. Nobody’s reacting or saying or doing anything. And I’m like looking around, “Okay.”

So I get up and I start walking, and I get about 100 feet away from the gate and they made the announcement that the flight was canceled and there was, like, pandemonium. And I just walked to the gate, got on the other flight.

And so the virtual assistants had booked the flight for me, and the outsource, what I had delegated was like, “I need to be there by, you know, 8:00 o’clock.” So because my flight got canceled, they didn’t stop and ask me, “Do you want to get on this seat or that?” No, they immediately, going with the goal, they re-booked me on a flight that would get me there and meet my requirements. And that was done.

So, that was amazing. That was like such an awesome experience. But, so, a lot of times we just say, “It’s like, oh, you know, update this spreadsheet with these 150 lines or, you know, sort this email.”  But we’re not conveying what the actual outcome is. Like, “Why are we doing this? What are we trying to achieve?”

And to some extent, yeah, sure, sometimes I just need something to get done and I can tell you that. But when there’s any variability and you need to create sort of this sandbox within which a person can feel like they have some autonomy and, actually, not even autonomy, agency to overcome problems and get to that outcome, people engage with that work much better, first of all, because, again, it’s empowering. It’s not just like sweeping crap under the rug.

But what’s really amazing is that, a lot of times, the people who are delegating, the leaders, don’t even have an idea consciously of what that outcome is. They’re just sort of going through the motions.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. And with flights, you’re right, it’s, “So I want to appear no later than this time in this location, with the minimum amount of stress and fuss and headache and rush at a reasonable price point for the fare. That’s what I’m up to.” And I guess you can elaborate a little bit, “Here’s what I mean by reasonable. Here’s what I mean by fuss.” And then go at it.

And so, in your case, what I love about that is your delegation resulted in an outcome far better than you could have achieved on your own if you were like out of it in the morning, and then everyone else was in trouble because they didn’t get the memo quick enough because your folks were on top of it. They were watching it and they knew what you needed and, bam, that’s fantastic.

And I felt that in my own world with regard to, I’ve been reluctant to let go. And then when I did, I was like, “Oh, this is just so much better. I should have just done that earlier.” Very true.

Ari Meisel
Exactly. Yeah, and that’s truly the power of delegation, right? It’s really supposed to be a multiplier in that way when you do it correctly.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, okay. Well, let us know. So if someone is listening and they don’t want to fill out the camp forms, what’s the trick on this one, Ari?

Ari Meisel

Well, now it’s AI agents. So I’ve built an AI Chief of Staff framework that I share for free on my website, anybody can get it, that is based on my years and years of experience, not only working with hundreds of virtual assistants personally, but running my own VA company. And I really think this thing that I’ve built is better than any of the ones I’ve ever worked with.

And so, actually, I think it’s doing something right now. So this was another good story. So I was on a call yesterday, on a Zoom call, and a text message came in from camp and said, like, there was some waivers missing or something for two of my kids for some place they were going to go next week. And I saw it pop up, I was like, “Okay, whatever.” I got off the call about 20 minutes later and it was already taken care of.

So my iMessages are connected to my agent through a tool called BlueBubbles, and, basically, the agent saw the message and felt like an action needed to be taken, and it logged into the camp website, found the waivers, signed the waivers, which it had done before, so it wasn’t just going completely off the rails, like I had asked it to do that before, and then updated the camp with a text message back saying, like, “These waivers are done.” So that was all done before I even got off the call.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that is stunning. Wow! Okay. So we just go to LessDoing.com and we can get ourselves Chief Staff Agent like this?

Ari Meisel
For that one, you go to LessDoing.ai.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s wild. So many questions from that. It’s like, “How do I know it’s not going to go rogue and do something horrifically bad that I don’t want, that I can’t undo?” How do I do that?

Ari Meisel
And I’m not, like, gatekeeping here because it’s free, but there are actually, like, 18 foundational rules that I’ve developed that are in that AI Chief of Staff framework. So it’s actually not that hard to achieve. Everyone worries about, like, hallucinations, all this stuff.

One of the most basic things, there’s two really, really basic rules that I have for the AI agents, which, the fascinating thing about this for me is that you have all this stuff about like, “Oh, this is the 30-word prompt that’s going to turn your business into a billion-dollar company and, like, all these perfect prompts,” and it’s all total BS. There is no such thing as the perfect prompt. You need to have good structures and foundations in place, and then you don’t need prompts.

So, basically, two of those really important foundational rules, which are, well, so this is what I was going say. It’s not an AI skill. It’s delegation is the skill. It’s the same stuff I’ve been teaching forever. So two of those really important rules, which again, I would give these to a human also.

The first one is, anytime you do something, the next step is to verify that you did the thing that you were supposed to do. It sounds really silly, but most people, it’s like, “Have my AI send a whole bunch of emails.” And then the AI comes back and says, “I sent all the emails,” but it didn’t, or the emails were blank, or it wrote them but didn’t send them, or it sent them to the wrong address, you know, all these things.

So every single action that I have an AI agent do, the next step is now go, “You sent an email? Next step is go look in the sent messages and compare what was sent to what you were supposed to do. You’re supposed to put a Slack message? Now go read the Slack message. You’re supposed to write a document? Now go read the…” Again, it sounds basic, but people don’t do that.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I think that, so people, when you give this duty to a human, I’d say people do it so automatically they don’t even realize that they’re doing it. Because I think about that with Slack, is like I type it, I push enter, you know, I do spend maybe a tenth of a second looking, “Oh, did that text show up in Slack such that it’s sent?”

Likewise, with my emails or attachment, “Did I attach the correct version to this email, and that’s the new updated, freshly saved version to this email? Oh, did this hyperlink that I pasted in, in fact, point to the URL I intended it to point to?” So, in a way, I think many of us are doing it so instantly, automatically, we forget that we are doing it.

Ari Meisel
Some of you are. I am not one of those people. I am not one of those people. Attention to detail is not one of my strong suits. And I’m aware of that. And that’s why I often hire for that when I would hire people. I’ll send it, and then I’ll move on to the next 16 things. And then someone is like, “Hey, you forgot the thing.” And I was like, “Oh, right. Okay.” So, yeah, you’re right.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s great. Verify that you did the thing. Human or AI, verify that you did the thing. Cool. Next.

Ari Meisel
So that’s one. The other one is I do what’s called a nightly knowledge card. So you can do this kind of anywhere you want. It could be a Google Doc, it could be Notion, it could be Evernote. It doesn’t really matter. I use Trello just because I love Trello.

So every one of my agents, and I’ve got 32 active agents right now, every single night at 11:00 p.m., it updates a Trello card with a comment. And the comment is, “What you accomplished today, what automations ran, what blockers were encountered, what solutions were developed, and what is the plan for tomorrow,” every single night.

I have a couple agents that have been running nonstop for over 160 days now, and so there are over 160 comments on that card. So what that means is two things. One is it never, ever loses track because, every morning, it’s supposed to check that card and know where it’s off to.

So that’s first, like, that’s a very basic sort of cron job, you know, “Check your nightly knowledge card to see what you should be doing and where you’re at and compare that against the instructions that you already have.”

The other one is that, if I ever want to move to a different AI platform, agent platform, or I want to build that into another agent, or have a new agent spin up that’s based on another agent, that entire history is there. So it becomes really difficult, at that point, to sort of go off the rails. It’s not impossible, but it’s very difficult.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so, we’ll drop by LessDoing.ai, but when you talk about an agent platform. For folks who just say, “I just know ChatGPT, I type some things, it’s like a better Google,” what do you even mean by an agent platform? Is that some software we go download or buy somewhere?

Ari Meisel
Yeah, so ChatGPT is an LLM, right, so that is a great resource for getting information, maybe compiling some documents, putting together an image or a presentation. It’s very much a push-pull, right, “I want something. You give me the thing.”

Agents are proactive, where it’s like, “Here’s the outcome. Here’s the goal. Now figure out and go do those things and run all day every day without having to bother me for things.” So a lot of the LLMs have agent platforms, but the most popular ones right now, I would say, are probably Claude Code and Hermes.

And the one that I use, which is Tasklet.ai. So Tasklet is a web-based platform. And, for example, you can take, if you go to that LessDoing.ai, you’re going to get a PDF with the whole framework of the whole Chief of Staff thing. You take that document, drop it into Tasklet and it will build it out for you and start asking you some questions of like, “Connect me to your GMail, and connect me to your calendar and let me get to work.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And you haven’t witnessed anything catastrophic happen to you or any of you the people you’ve hooked up to this?

Ari Meisel
Nothing.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Good news. All right. Well, that was a fun deep dive, a little treat. But zooming back out, optimizing, automating, outsourcing, so you’ve got two great rules that you shared with us with regard to when you’re delegating stuff to humans or robots. Any other powerful questions, guidelines, principles you’re using as you consider optimizing, automating, and outsourcing?

Ari Meisel
Yeah, so at a very fundamental level, sometimes we really need to ask why we do things the way that we do them, which again, sounds sort of basic, but they’re the most common answer to why in a business, you know, “Why do we use this accounting software? Why do we use this landscaper that mows the front lawn of our store? Why do we do anything?”

The answer most of the time is, “Well, that’s how we’ve always done it.” And that’s a really, really bad reason to keep doing something. Now, to be fair, a lot of smaller businesses, a lot of bigger businesses, simply don’t have the bandwidth to re-examine those relationships, those tools, consider the migrations. It becomes a very big headache very quickly.

But now with AI, we can do that in such a bandwidth, you know, unlimited way in some cases. So, for example, right now, I’m sitting in the Princeton First Aid & Rescue Squad. We are the EMS provider, the ambulance provider for the town of Princeton, New Jersey, and I am the executive director here. It’s one of my side passions. I’ve been an EMT for about 15 years, and I was a volunteer here for about five years, and now I’m the executive director.

So this is an 86-year-old organization and there were a lot of things in place where it’s like, “Well, that’s the software we always use. And this was how we did these. And this is when we had our meetings,” and every single thing I’m able to say, “Hold on, let me take that bill and give it to my AI agent. I have a
Chief of Staff Agent that I built here. I also have a bookkeeper agent that I built here. Go out and get three quotes. See if this is competitive.”

“Oh, it’s not? Great. Send an email to this person with a negotiation and see if they can match it. Otherwise, let’s switch. Cool.” And that’s been huge for us here. Billing. “We’ve been billing at this rate for about six years now. We probably should bill more, but can we justify that? Well, let’s take all that data and crunch it and see what number we really should be billing at. Here it is. Okay, that’s what we’re going to do now.”

Again, none of this is, like, rocket science. It’s so much easier to just keep going than to be like, “Hold on a minute. Let’s figure out if there’s actually a better way.” It takes more work initially to do that.

Pete Mockaitis
So when you say have an agent go get quotes, that sounds pretty sophisticated in terms of how much guidance do you have to offer? I mean, does that just consist of, “Look up vendor. Find email address for vendor. Email vendor. Describe situation. Ask for price,” and like that’s the series of tasks that they’re up to there?

Ari Meisel
Yeah, I mean, it’s not much more, but that’s the thing, right? Like, it’s not much more complicated than that. And, again, that’s just the thing where people are like, “I couldn’t possibly make that into a binary decision.” It’s like, “Yeah, you can.” “This is what we pay for this thing now. Do you offer this thing and how much do you charge for it? Is that number bigger or smaller than the number that I’m paying now?”

But, seriously, you have people that are like, “Nah, you know, you don’t know these guys and, like, I got to talk to them and explain the whole situation.” No, you don’t. You don’t. And you’re not the best person in the world to do that. No person that I’ve ever met is the best person at describing the situation that they’re in so that somebody else can give them a price for it.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I love it. Oh, man, these are some hot takes. Well, I guess, though, the flip side is, sometimes, it’s annoying. When you’re trying to purchase services and you want a price, sometimes the sales folks are trained, “Oh, we don’t give that away without a call. You got to hop on the phone or the Zoom to get that info.”

Ari Meisel

My AI agents can make phone calls.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. It’s like, “Hello, Ari. What is the price for your coaching services?”

Ari Meisel
So, you know, it’s funny, they’re actually quite good now, because I’ve listened to the recordings of some of the calls, and this is just my anecdotal take. It’s kind of a known thing, I think, in the call center industry, this shouldn’t be shocking to anybody.

But a lot of times, for better or worse, when somebody picks up the phone, if they hear somebody say something with an accent, it’s like, “Well, it’s a telemarketer,” and they hang up. We know that that’s a thing. Same thing with agent. You have people like, “Human. Human. Human.”

So my anecdotal take on this, from my own personal experience, but also from hearing a bunch of these calls, is I don’t think people have a problem with the accent or with the AI, with the automation. I think they have a problem with bad ones where there’s a lack of understanding. There’s a delay. They have to repeat themselves.

The AI that I have right now work, and it’s not my technology. I use Bland.ai and RetailAI, they’re really, really good. And I’ve had people have full-on conversations with the AI where it’s, like, I really can’t tell if they can tell. And if they can tell, they don’t seem to mind.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. They’re not saying, “You stupid clanker.” You’re not hearing that on the other side?

Ari Meisel
No, I had my AI Chief of Staff call the vet to get, like, a bill. We needed a bill that they hadn’t sent me, whatever. And the AI voice agent spelled our cat’s name for the person at the reception, and it’s a French name.

So, like, they did it perfectly and did it clearly, and the person heard it and they didn’t have to repeat it. The person gave some information back, the AI understood it, didn’t have to repeat it back, like it was a very fluid conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, this is pretty mind-blowing stuff in that I’ve heard, like, enthusiastic hyped tech bros claim that this is what the future is going to be, and you’re telling me, “Oh, no, I am doing it right now easily without worry or catastrophe or trouble, and it’s been a delight.” That’s what I’m picking up from you, Ari.

Ari Meisel
It’s been the greatest thing I’ve ever experienced in my entire career.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Ari Meisel
Let me just give you just some context to this, right? So do you know what the Jevons Paradox is?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I’ve heard of it, but I forgot. Lay it on us.

Ari Meisel
So the original one was from the Industrial Revolution when there was coal production. And, basically, Jevons Paradox says that while we would assume that when something becomes more efficient – a process, an engine, whatever – you need less of it.

In a Jevons Paradox, the opposite happens, and we have this explosion. So coal production was an example of that, right? We could suddenly power all of America with a tenth of the factories, but now we quintupled the number of factories because we wanted to expand so fast. AI is another example of that. I am an example of that.

So I have, you know, famously, I mean, I’ve been quoted for this a bunch of times, but I spent several years where I was probably working 20 minutes a day doing all my coaching and everything, and that was legitimate.

Now I am busier than I’ve ever been in my entire life. And it’s amazing, though, because I think that I’m accomplishing more than a hundred people could accomplish. I have my company, so my coaching business. I am here as the executive director of the Princeton First Aid & Rescue Squad.

I have two other W-2 jobs because people now don’t want to just have me be a coach. They want to hire me on as an employee. For some reason, that’s been a new experience for me. I also sit on several boards. I’m on the school board here in Princeton, which is an elected position. I have five kids, three cats, two dogs, and I’m still able to sit here and have a really great conversation with you, Pete, because of all of this stuff. I have 32 agents working on stuff for me.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s wild. Well, thank you for giving us a taste and a glimpse of that whole world. I wanted to hear about your profound love for asynchronous voice or voicemails. Because if you’re on LessDoing.com, that shows up pretty front and center that you love these voicemails. Tell us what’s so great about them.

Ari Meisel
Okay, so there’s a number of platforms to this. A lot of people are probably familiar with Voxer. You can do this with WhatsApp and iMessage, but they just don’t work as well, in my opinion. So I use Carbon Voice now, that’s my platform of choice. And it is, primarily, a voice platform.

And what I like about that, it’s funny, this actually came out of a weird, specific thing to me, and now this is such a different issue entirely. For so many years, I was known for all the virtual assistant work, I was doing all the outsourcing stuff, so it was always a constant thing where I would have to convince people that they were actually talking to me.

So it would be like, “Hi, Ari, or Ari’s VA, or Ari’s automation.” I was like, “No, no, it’s really me. Like, here’s today’s newspaper, I swear.” And with voice coaching, particularly, I don’t have to say, “This is not a VA. It’s not an automation.” And, of course, now we have voice cloning, but it’s not quite there. People can still tell.

So I don’t know, five, six, no, maybe seven years ago now, I switched from the traditional coaching model of meeting with clients one hour a week, every week, and talking through stuff to fully asynchronous.

So now, instead of a client having to wait till next Wednesday for us to talk for 45 minutes and get the three-minute answer that they need, now they can walk out of a fight with their co-founder on a Friday afternoon, send me a voice message. A couple hours later, I can listen to it, think through my answer and respond to them with like that 90-second silver bullet answer that they need to get through their weekend and focus on other things.

And it’s such a more effective form of coaching, but it also allows me to never miss a soccer game and take my kids to school and pick them up every day because I’m never on someone else’s schedule. Everything is, I mean, 99% of my communication is asynchronous.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. And so, as opposed to email or text message, I mean, you’ve got the richness of the voice and the emotion and the nuance and texture and tone. That’s cool. I guess you also do it faster than you type words. How else are you thinking about this versus email? And how do you deal with email, generally?

Ari Meisel

Yeah, so people, generally, speak four times faster than they type. I certainly do. I’m also a very audio-visual kind of person. So I’m not a great reader. I’ve never been my whole life. It just, I’m that person that reads a page and then they’ve been thinking about something else all the time and have to read the page again.

But, like, I can remember lines from movies that I saw when I was 15. Like, I don’t know that’s a good thing, but it’s just how my brain works. So I can listen and think through a problem with a client and then respond really well.

The other thing is, and this is another limitation I recognize in myself, my initial response sometimes is probably more aggressive than I want it to be because I can get annoyed very quickly because I’ve seen these problems so many times.

So having me have the ability to take a little space and be like, “Yeah, that’s not going to come off right. Let me think through that again.” And even, in some cases, record the voice message and then recall it because I was like, “Nah, that wasn’t what I wanted to say,” it ultimately ends up being a much better experience for the client, and it’s a really incredible, like, sort of learning experience for me as a coach. I get a do-over sometimes.

But I often will say that I can tell more about a situation from the way a client says something than what they actually say. And you just lose that in an email. Plus, at this point, so many, there are so many tools, so many AI tools for writing emails for you, imagine emails for you.

Like, when you’re dealing with voice stuff, you really know that you’re talking to the person. And, again, like, I have voice cloning on the app because it’s built in. So if I type something, it will speak it in my voice, but still, it’s more natural, but you know it’s not actually me. So there’s just something very intimate about that.

And also, one more thing about that, too, is it’s such a common practice, I feel like, for people to outsource their inboxes, which I have never ever been a fan of because I think it’s a real breach of trust, honestly.

And if somebody knows that they’re communicating with someone’s assistant through that person’s inbox, I think it just creates a very weird sort of scenario. This is always private and always like me and them, which is hard to achieve nowadays.

Pete Mockaitis
Right. Well, tell us, what do you have running on your own inbox? I like Superhuman as an app, although it’s still me, Pete Mockaitis, the person, typing out the things. What are you doing there?

Ari Meisel
Just good old Gmail and some good habits.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, but, I mean, so super automation, outsourcing, you know, optimizing, you’re just like tapping away in Gmail?

Ari Meisel
Yeah, yeah. Well, yes, with one caveat. So I actually, unfortunately, I have to use Outlook also for a couple of organizations I’m involved in. I hate Outlook. But, basically, well, yeah, mostly in Outlook. So for certain emails from certain people with certain topics, my AI Chief of Staff will draft emails for me in response. And then I’ll usually just go in.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, so you review and then send.

Ari Meisel
Yeah, and they’ll send them. But there are also quite a few where it can autonomously just send it without having to draft first. So, like in Slack, for example, this has actually been so fun. So I use Slack with a few different companies, too.

And, for example, I have an AI agent that was building a website for the company because I don’t have the attention to detail. I put it into the Slack channel with six people on the team and like, “Hey everybody, can you check on the website and make any comments of things that you see that are wrong?”

And what was so fun was, so someone would make a comment, “Oh, this page doesn’t load, this link’s broken.” The AI is in Tasklet, the agent, sorry, Taslet is in Slack, so it would immediately be like, “Oh, thanks for catching that. I’ve already rolled that into the next version and deployed it.”

So then the next person is like, “Oh, well, I see this thing and this thing. It would be great if this was here.” “Oh, great idea. Thank you.” So what ends up happening is you go through, you get to like v7 within 20 minutes and each person, we don’t have six people looking at v1 and giving comments. Every person that looks at it is seeing a better version than the last person that looked at it.

And so in a matter of 20 to 30 minutes, you’ve gotten this incredible iteration, and the website is fantastic now. And in that case, I’m not drafting anything. I’m not approving. It’s just going and it’s taking feedback, fixing it, and doing it again.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s really cool. So that was fun for that particular project, rather than we’re emailing a designer or a robot designer, and then waiting. And so, inside your Gmail or Outlook, you are just like a normal person, reading messages and replying to messages that don’t fit into the narrow AI autopiece. Well, you mentioned the AI is drafting kind of logistically, tactically. How does one get an AI up in their Outlook and/or Gmail reading and drafting replies?

Ari Meisel
So a lot of the agent platforms can just do that. You just say, like, “Connect to my Gmail,” and it’ll do that through whatever means it uses. But the key, of course, I would say, is to have it look back through a lot of the emails that you’ve sent to get your style and that sense of style.

The other thing that I’ll do, so I do manage my own inbox for the most part just because I have a whole methodology around this. I’ve been teaching forever called the 3Ds for Inbox Zero. But what I will do is, if I’m unavailable for some reason, like tomorrow, for example, I’m going to be at this event with one of my kids and I will not be on the phone at all for like six or seven hours.

What I’ll usually do in that case is if I get back on my phone and there’s like 60 emails, I’ll just go to my Chief of Staff and be like, you know, “Just triage the inbox.” And so then what it’ll start doing is it can draft, it can archive, it can answer things that it needs to.

And the example I gave of the camp waiver, like if it knows that an action needs to be taken and it knows that it can take that action, it is instructed to just do that and get it done.

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

Ari Meisel
People should go to LessDoing.ai. There’s a free, like, five-day boot camp thing. It’s not an upsell or anything. You get this document and you don’t do anything else with it. I think that’ll probably be really eye-opening for people.

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

Ari Meisel
It’s a Robert Heinlein quote, and I look at it every year. So it’s, “A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, con a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”

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

Ari Meisel
So I’ve been very interested in how environments affect our productivity, mood, all sorts of things, so whether it’s lighting or temperature, or even an interesting one. So I have a thermostat in my office here that doesn’t do anything. Actually, the building temperature is controlled centrally. So I’m not even sure why they set these up when they do this.

But if you give somebody a thermostat in their office and they think that they have control over their thermal environment, they will be more productive and actually happier. So I find a lot of that stuff very, very interesting, how you sort of set up your environment for greater productivity and happiness.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And a favorite book?

Ari Meisel
Emergency by Neil Strauss.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Ari Meisel
Tasklet.ai probably would be my favorite tool.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Ari Meisel
I’ve gone through so many different seasons of exercise in my life, but I’m 43 now and I’ve got kids and it’s busy. Every morning, I do a kettlebell workout before 6:00 in the morning, basically, and sometimes it’s five minutes. But every morning, I pick up that kettlebell and I do something. And I think that that has a really measurable effect on how the day goes for me and mobility and just how I feel.

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

Ari Meisel
“You can’t read the label from inside the jar.” In seven years, you can say that back to me.

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

Ari Meisel
LessDoing.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?

Ari Meisel
Yeah, try to become more replaceable. So, try to take a list of the things you do on a regular basis, 10, 20 things, and then try to pick eight, or 80% of the things. So if it’s 20 things, 16 things from that list that, in six months, you will no longer do anymore. And then figure out if you’re going to optimize, automate, or outsource that thing so that you’re not doing it.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Ari, thank you.

Ari Meisel
Thanks, Pete.