Automation Archives - How to be Awesome at Your Job

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.

Pete Mockaitis
Paul, welcome!

Paul Leonardi
Hi, thanks for having me, Pete. I appreciate it.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to be chatting. We’re talking Digital Exhaustion. But first I want to know, I understand you are the youngest blackbelt in U.S. Aikido history. Tell us about that.

Paul Leonardi
Well, I was, at least circa 1992, or somewhere around there.

Pete Mockaitis
I assume 12-year-old or someone just have to usurp you. The nerve.

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, well, they might have in the last couple of decades. Yeah, I started practicing Aikido when I was in second grade, and I didn’t like it when I started because I just wanted to be like Bruce Lee or the Karate Kid and punch and kick stuff. And my parents didn’t like that idea very much, and said, “We’ll put you in a defensive martial art,” and I didn’t really understand what that meant.

But Aikido is about using your opponent’s energy and reorienting it so that you can throw and pin and do things like that. And I think it’s actually turned out to be a pretty good metaphor in my life. Like, how do you take energy that’s moving in one direction and recast it so that you can move in other directions and do productive things?

And so, I’ve really enjoyed, you know, I don’t practice regularly anymore. But it’s certainly an important part of my identity. And what was kind of interesting is I did it with a bunch of kids, and several of those kids ended up going on to graduate school and getting PhDs. We didn’t come from like an affluent or highly educated area.

But I think there’s something about the discipline of doing a martial art, combined with, and Aikido is very much like this, where you have to do improvisations all the time on key techniques to deal with opponents that are doing different things. And that kind of focus of technique plus improvisation is something that lends itself really well to doing research and focusing on topics, you know, sort of ad nauseum for a really long period of time.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m glad you mentioned directing energy because that’s exactly where I thought this might go. This is we’re talking about digital exhaustion. Well, first, can you define what do mean by this?

Paul Leonardi
It’s a hard thing to define in words, but let me try to define it in actions, behaviors. So, here’s the story I get from a lot of people. “I get midway through my day. I’m staring at my screen. I realize I’m just scrolling. I’m clicking on some random stuff. I know that there’s an email that I should respond to, but I just don’t want to do it. My eyes are sore, but I can’t look away from the screen. And I just feel this sense of bleh, even though I still like my job and I like the work I’m doing.”

I think that really characterizes the feeling of digital exhaustion. It’s that we are so enmeshed in this world of communication and tools and data coming at us. And we need it, and it’s useful, but it’s also just wearing us out.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, could you share with us, I think many of us can relate to that, like, “Oh, yeah, sure. Okay, mm-hmm, understood.” I’m wondering if you discover anything really shocking as you dug in your research here.

Paul Leonardi
One of the things that I expected to hear from people was, “I’m going to…like, I want to give up my tools. I want to go on a digital detox. I want to stop using…” name your social media platform. And rarely anybody said that to me. Most people said, “I want to be able to do all the things, but I need to figure out how do I do it better? How do I do it in a way that feels like I’m in control and isn’t sapping all of my energy?”

And I thought that was interesting because most of the discourse that we have today seems to be you have this sort of either/or choice. You’re on social media or you decide not to be on social media. You get a dumb phone or you get a smartphone. You stay away from your tools, right, whatever it might be. And we just don’t live in a world where you can choose to walk away from most of our technology. And most people don’t want to because our tools do great things.

If it weren’t for the internet and video conferencing and USB mics, we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now. So, we like our tools, we want to use them, but we need to reorient to them in ways that are making sure that they’re energizing us, allowing us to be productive, being engaged and not sapping us of all our enthusiasm and excitement.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I wonder, are they? I mean, I think some of us feel it, like, “Yes, my phone is a problem.” And I wonder if others among us are not even aware of damage being done. Can you orient us to the lay of the land with the research here?

Paul Leonardi
I started questioning people about feelings of digital exhaustion in, roughly, 2001, 2002. And I did that because I had a few experiences when I was doing some research at this large atmospheric weather science organization.

And the scientists and the admin people there kept telling me about how they love doing research about atmospheric conditions, and they loved working with these fancy computer models. And they thought they were really making a difference by giving reports to the FAA to help with plane routings and things like that.

But that they just start were feeling like there was so much data coming at them and so many different tools that they had to learn, that they were kind of feeling overwhelmed. And almost everybody that I talked to said that. And when I asked them, “Okay, well, do you feel like you are exhausted by your tools?” roughly half of them said immediately, “Yes!”

And the other half said, “What do you mean exhausted by my tools? I mean, I kind of feel like worn out by them, you know, but exhausted? I don’t know. I just use them.” So, I’ve been asking that question ever since. And I’ve asked it thousands of times. And I’ve got over 12,000 people that I’ve interviewed and surveyed for the book.

And what’s happened over time is that, each year, it seems, that I asked that question, more and more people from that 50% that said, “No, I don’t feel exhausted,” have been moving into the exhaustion camp. I think we’re becoming more and more aware of the toll that our tools take on us.

And when you read a lot of the popular press and books and things, like Jonathan Hyde’s The Anxious Generation that talks about these big problems associated with social networking sites amongst adolescents, in particular, I think more and more of us are becoming reflective about the role that technology is playing in our everyday lives in ways that we hadn’t really considered before.

So, there’s this dark side that comes with all of the positives of using our technologies and that awareness has been growing.

Pete Mockaitis
So, boy, 2001, those feel like quaint, simple times as compared to today.

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, I know. It’s true.

Pete Mockaitis
So, what’s our percentage at nowadays with your surveys with regard to digital exhaustion?

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, so I survey people on a scale that goes 0 to 6, and it’s probably not super interesting to talk about why that scale is 0 to 6, but what in 2000 to 2001 timeframe, the average response was about a 2.5. So, you know, like, “Okay, I feel a little exhausted,” but sort of low. In 2022, which is the last time that I really conducted a large-scale survey of this, it was up above 5. So, it’s doubled in that 20-year period.

And what’s interesting is there’s been two major inflection points, so two points at which the graph just sort of trended up. The first one was right around 2010, and that’s a particularly important period because we had just seen the introduction of the iPhone two and a half years prior, and Facebook reached a hundred million monthly active users at that point. So, 2010 represents a period of time where social media, in particular, really has, you know, arrived en masse for most people.

And then the second inflection point was 2021, and that’s right after COVID. And, of course, we all know that even for those that worked really intensely on screens and in a very digitally mediated world before COVID, the move to mass working from home, interacting with everybody through digital platforms really seemed to create another spike in that graph.

And what surprised me is that I would have expected at both of those points, as I was watching those numbers increase in real time, some decline afterwards. But I’ve not seen a decline in either of those trends after 2010 and after 2021. The numbers just sort of remain flat. And so, I wonder if we just kind of keep adding a digital tax to our lives and have not been finding a way to reduce that burden.

Pete Mockaitis
And I also wonder, you asked about exhaustion associated with the use of the digital tools, are we pretty sure folks are attributing it accurately or correctly, there’s not some mystery third force bringing in exhaustion upon us and we just blame the tools?

Paul Leonardi
There absolutely might be. You know, there’s a whole confounding set of factors that are important to consider when we talk about exhaustion. One is stress. We get stressed by lots of different things. Not all stress is bad, right? Some stress is good. It creates an adrenaline and cortisol release that allows us to do good things. But we get stressed, and stress is different from exhaustion, I would say. Stress is kind of the more momentary feeling of, “Oh, you know, I just have to respond to these emails. It’s driving me nuts.”

And exhaustion is the cumulative effect of those stressors over time. Now, we get stressed by many things other than our technology, right? We get stressed by the demands people placed on us. We get stressed by, you know, the way people act or behave towards us. We get stressed by the volume of work we might have. So, there’s lots of other stressors that are kind of mingled in with the digital activities that we’re engaged in.

Also, stress and exhaustion are both kind of driving forces that can lead, ultimately, to burnout in our jobs. But burnout is a much bigger concept than exhaustion because burnout is about how we orient to our work more broadly. Are we getting opportunities for promotion? Are we feeling like we’re making a difference? If we don’t have those kinds of things, the research suggests that we tend to feel more burnout.

Exhaustion, though, is a critical component of burnout. Christina Maslach, who developed one of the best burnout inventories, talks about emotional exhaustion as being one of the key predictors of burnout. And it’s perhaps the one that is most prevalent when you are talking about burnout is like how emotionally worn are you. So digital exhaustion is certainly a part of that. Is it the only thing? No. But I do think it’s one important factor that we can control through some changes in our behavior.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, shout out to Christina Maslach, a guest of the show. Yes, understood. Well, then, I’m curious, theoretically, these digital devices “should” be making our lives easier, simpler, better, lower stress, right? Like, whereas, before we had to do all these old-fashioned things, like, you know, find an envelope and a stamp, to send an old-fashioned letter before email.

Or, you can just ramp it up, or we have to mosey on over to a computer to send a note as opposed to getting it on our phones, etc. So, in some ways, or at least that’s part of, I’d say, the promise or the marketing or the hype associated with tech tools, and we’re hearing it now with AI, “It’s going to make your life so much easier.”

Paul Leonardi
Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
How is it that it is a factual statement that I can spend fewer minutes of my life achieving a given outcome by utilizing these digital tools, and yet, I feel more exhausted instead of less exhausted with this empowerment?

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, it’s a great question and it feels like a paradox of sorts, doesn’t it? But let’s take a look at two major drivers of our digital exhaustion – attention and inference. And let me try to give you an example of why what you’re saying, you know, our tools help us to do these things that are supposed to make our life easier, but at the same time end up contributing to our exhaustion, like how both of those things can exist simultaneously.

Okay, so let’s start with attention. We, as humans, appear not to be very well made to move very quickly across lots of different tasks. Our brain takes a beat to disengage from what it’s doing and reengage in a new context. And there’s lots of good science that shows that the kind of disengagement that needs to happen makes it difficult for us to multitask.

But our devices are demanding more and more switches and attention from us all the time across different applications, across different areas of work, across different arenas of our life, from work to home and etc. And we’re just not made for those rapid switches in connection and disconnection that technologies create for us.

So, you’re right on the one hand that it’s wonderful that if an urgent work problem presents itself when I’m at a soccer game for my kid, I don’t now have to, like, you know, maybe 15 years ago, I got the phone call and I’m like, “Oh, no, I need to leave the soccer game and run into the office.” And that would have been really disruptive. Now I can deal with that problem on my smartphone pretty easily from the soccer field.

But what that has created is this fracturing of our attention between my home life and my work life. And I’m now, all of a sudden, situated physically on a soccer field doing work, disembodied, right, and I’m working through my screen in order to sort of be in the office. Not to mention that I’m on an application and, like, I’m working in Google Docs, and all of a sudden, I get an email notification, and I quickly switch to go see what that email notification is.

And then I go back to my Google Docs, and I don’t seamlessly pick up where I left off, because it takes a while for me to re-adjust and port my attention over from the thing I just left. And there’s lots of good research. Gloria Mark is one of my favorite scholars who does a lot of work on attention. And she gives an example that I love, which is that our attention is like a whiteboard.

We think that we’ve written all over the whiteboard and we just erase it and we can write something new. But if you look at most people’s whiteboards, you realize there’s still residue left over from what they wrote before. It’s really hard to erase everything.

Pete Mockaitis
Got to get the spray cleaner going.

Paul Leonardi
Oh, yeah, that little “pst, pst, pst” going. And that’s what our minds are like. And so, it takes time for us to reorient to different activities. And that reorientation, those switches in attention that those reorientations require, are really a great source of our exhaustion, even though the technologies that are allowing us this access in multiple ways are making our lives easier. So that’s one example right around attention.

The next one is what I call inference. And inference turns out to be a huge driver of our exhaustion. And let me kind of take it this way. We are inundated with many, many, many data points all the time. Pieces of emails that come at us, right? We see images that are posted on Instagram or little videos on TikTok. And we get a glimpse about, “Well, what is this person interested in? What is this report really saying? I got this little bit of data from our customers about how many emails they open or whatever it might be.”

And we are constantly forced to grapple with the fact that we see a little and we know we don’t see the whole picture. And so, we’re always trying to fill in the blanks or make assumptions about what’s going on behind the scenes. And that inference-making is like turbocharged now, because we’re constantly inundated with pieces and half-truths and little examples and almost never the full picture. And it takes a lot of cognitive and emotional work to be in a constant state of inference-making.

One example that I love is that I talked to, in interviews for the book, this guy by the name of Dean, and Dean was telling me how, when he was just after graduating college, his buddies wanted to go on a bicycle trip through Europe. And he decided at the last minute he couldn’t go because it just wasn’t a financially prudent move for him.

But he kept watching on Instagram, you know, all the great places they were cycling, the beautiful vistas that they saw, the great pubs that they went to along the way and the friends they were making, and he was making all of these inferences about how they were having the time of their lives, how he felt like a loser because he couldn’t go on the trip with them, so on and so forth, right?

And this might just sound like, “Okay, so what? You’re looking at a bunch of pictures of people’s posts on Instagram.” But having to contend with a world out there that’s giving you pieces of information and making sense about, “Where’s my role in that?” is a really exhausting experience. And we do that all the time. Sometimes it’s through images. A lot of times it’s through just pieces of data that are coming in.

And we’re always looking at ourselves in these platforms also, “How do I appear to other people?” And then making inferences about, “How must they think that I appear given what they see about me? And, oh, did I give the right impression? Did I not?” So, if that all sounds tiring as I’m explaining it, think about what it’s taking in our minds and in our hearts to do that.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, boy, you really put a nice point on that and in terms of inference being exhausting. And I’m thinking and talk about half-truths, I find it, I feel that when I watch the news, because I’m doing exactly that, I’m trying to make sense of what’s being communicated to me. And, particularly, I’m going to say politicians, or statements by leaders of technology or business, in terms of, “Is that true? Why do you suppose you said that? Am I being lied to right now? And is that partially true?”

When you said half-truths, I could imagine, in a way, that’s how I feel about most also marketing communications, particularly around AI products, I’d say in terms of, “Okay, what you’re saying seems to be technically not a lie. Like, this application does, in fact, do the thing you say it does. However, it does so unreliably and inconsistently with such need for correction, fixing, editing, redoing, babysitting, it’s like, I’m not quite sure it’s actually useful or value added at this stage of the game in late 2025.”

And, in fact, I saw a study associated with software engineering, for example, which says, “Hey, we actually did a randomized control trial associated with folks who are using AI versus not using AI, their experience, they know their code base and what they’re up to. And when you measure it on the clock, it was slower, fixing the AI errors.”

And yet it feels faster because sometimes it gets it right, and it’s like, “Whoa, that’s impressive.” And it’s just a good feeling and it is sort of, like, wowing. And so, I think you’re right, in a world where we’re getting lots of half-truths, it is exhausting. And I’m coming back to flashback. I had to check out, potentially getting a new roof.

We own a little multifamily home in Chicago, and it was over a hundred years old, the building. And so, it seemed like, “Oh, yeah, that roof may need some care.” And so, I was having a heck of a hard time getting anybody to come on over. So, I was like, “You know what, the heck with it. I’m just going to call 20 roofing companies.”

Paul Leonardi
See who shows up? Right.

Pete Mockaitis
“And we’ll see how many people show up.” And I got about five, which, I mean, is striking there.

Paul Leonardi
That’s about par for the course these days. Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, 15 out of 20, just don’t even want your money, but, okay. So, I got about five, and it was so tricky because some people say, “Oh, no, you got to tear off the whole thing and just start again.” And others were like, “Oh, no, we can just put another layer on the existing.” And it’s like, “Well, putting another layer is much cheaper, and so I would like to do that if I can, but can I?”

And I found it very mentally exhausting because, here I am, it was about three versus two, the opinions on just another layer versus just tear the whole thing off. And I think that this is just so common of so many situations. It’s like there’s ambiguity and we’re getting different messages from different people.

And you’re wondering, “Am I being straight up lied to by one of them? Is there a nuance I’m not understanding? Like, how can I deduce what is true?” And it’s exhausting. I see the same thing when I’m evaluating potential marketing initiatives. It’s just like, “Well, who knows what’s going to happen?”

Paul Leonardi
I like your roofing example. It rings true. Maybe we’re just unlucky and need to buy roofs, the two of us, but I think this sort of puts it into perspective. In 2000, or like early 2000, I also owned a rental property that needed a new roof. I’m not making this up. And I also got some conflicting bids.

And I remember thinking at the time, that I know nothing about roofing and I still don’t really know much about roofing today. And I had few ways of really knowing what was the best course of action. And, more importantly, I didn’t know, I didn’t think that I could find out. I really needed to figure out who was the best expert or who could I trust and I would lean in on their expertise.

Today in 2025, if I needed a new roof, and I got conflicting estimates that said, “You needed to do things,” the first thing I would think is, “I can figure out what really I need here.” We have this impression that the world’s information is at our fingertips, and if I only look in the right places and if I do the right kind of research, I’ll be able to determine what the right course of action is. The reality is, even though we might think that, it’s really hard to do.

But knowing that the possibility exists, and thinking I should be going and looking for it is exhausting. And for many people, it’s demotivating. And this is one thing I found over and over again as I was doing the studies for this book, that when you reach these kinds of critical decision points where you feel like, “The world’s information is at my fingertips and I should be able to make a great decision out of this, and I’m an idiot if I make the wrong decision,” people just don’t act a lot of times. It stalls them.

A kind of a funny related story, this was maybe 10 years ago. I was doing some work with a really large company, a software company that is, I won’t name, but is very into search. And I was with a group that sort of, that helped advise companies about ad buying.

And what was really funny to me in these meetings was, somebody would come, like a project manager would come, and they would say, “Okay, here’s the strategy that we think we’re going to use to advise this company on how to make their ad purchases,” how to increase click through rate, let’s say.

And someone on the team would say, “Oh, do we have data to test your hypothesis?” And then everybody would kind of giggle, and be like, “Yes, we have all the data.” And so, they would say, “Well, go test that hypothesis and then come back and then we’ll decide if we should advise the company to do this or not.”

So, they would come back, and then someone would say, “Hmm, what if this?” “Oh, do we have the data for that?” And then they’d all laugh and then they’d go back. And it was this whole, like, analysis, paralysis by analysis. It’s like they almost never made decisions about what to do because they realized, “We have all the data. We should just keep going back and looking at it.”

And this is the kind of thing that I see people doing all the time, is we just don’t act because we feel that we should do more. And the act of trying to do more is exhausting, and knowing that I’m never going to get the complete amount of information wears us out just thinking about that. So, it’s this matrix of data and technology and expectation and inference that we’re trapped in these days, I think, that creates these real deep feelings of like, “Aargh, why do I have to do more? Why can’t I just break free?”

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. Okay. Well, I think this is hugely valuable already, just surfacing what’s going on, “Oh, hey, you’re doing a lot of attention switching, you’re doing a lot of inferring, and you have too much to look at with regard to your switching of attention and your potential extra data points to go about your inferring.” So, Paul, lay it on us, if we want to find more energy, less exhaustion, what’s the most leveraged stuff we can do to achieve this?

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, so where I like to begin is to say, if you understand that these attention switches, this inference-making, these are the key contributors to our exhaustion, then what we need to do is figure out, “How do we reduce the amount that we are switching our attention and the inference making that we have to do?” So that’s the big picture. Those are the things we need to work on.

So, then we can start to talk about very specific strategies that help us to do that. One of them that I love that I call, it’s rule number three in my book, it’s called make a match. And the premise is simple. The execution, though, is harder. So, here’s the premise. We often are dealing with situations that are ambiguous. The answer is not straightforward. There’s going to be some amount of negotiation or conflict that I need.

These are regular occurrences in our work days and in our lives outside of work. We also deal with some situations that are pretty straightforward. You know, like, “Are you going to pick up the kid or am I going to pick up the kid?” “Do we send this email to the client tomorrow morning or this afternoon?” We don’t need to reduce a lot of ambiguity, have a lot of discussion around a lot of those issues. They’re pretty easy to resolve.

What I see happen often, though, is that we choose the wrong medium, the wrong tool for the job given the level of ambiguity, disagreement, discussion that needs to take place. So, think about an issue, I’ll just give an example of something that happened to me. We needed to do some re-budgeting in the department that I worked with, and I chair a department and I was working with one of our assistants.

I happened to be traveling. I was in Europe when this issue came up and we needed to sort of quickly talk about the budget and recategorize some things. And I just kept thinking, “This is like a straightforward issue. Let’s just do X, Y, and Z.” And my admin person that I was working with kept, like, responding in these kinds of weird ways. And it wasn’t clear that she was going to make the changes that I was suggesting.

And then, like I would get kind of more upset and my email became a little tenser, and I said, “Look, we just need to act on this.” And then there was a day of response, compounded by the fact that I was overseas, and I was eight hours’ time difference. And this became such an emotionally exhausting interaction for me because I began to think, “Oh, man, she’s trying to subvert me. Like, she’s not responding on purpose to this.”

And I was kind of spiraling, having these negative assumptions. And what I realized kind of in the process was, “You know, this is not a super simple issue. My first impression was this was simple, but if I really thought about it, this is much more complex. And I’m trying to resolve this complex issue through email asynchronously. And we have this time difference.”

“And the best thing that I could do to reduce this ambiguity and to stop me making so many assumptions and her making so many assumptions is just to hop on a Zoom call.” And we did, and we hammered out the whole issue in like 10 minutes. But it was two days, or almost three days, of me like wasting my life away, it felt like, being upset about this. I talked to my wife, I was like, “Oh, I’m so frustrated by this interaction that I’m having.”

But what didn’t I do? I didn’t stop to say, “What am I trying to accomplish here? And what’s the best mode of interaction to deal with this problem? It’s an ambiguous situation. It’s going to require some collaboration, some real time discussion.” And if I just had picked up the phone, just had done the Zoom, I would have resolved this so much faster.

But when we don’t do that, things escalate. We send more emails that are pulling us out of our attention that we’re paying to other things at the moment. We’re forced to make more inferences about, “Why didn’t this person respond faster? What did they mean?”

And the same goes in the opposite direction, that if we have a super simple issue and then we have a big meeting to discuss it, when really it was like, we pretty much could have just decided this via email, we waste a ton of time and attention and emotion talking to death about something that we could have resolved much more easily.

So, we can reduce our attention, we can reduce the amount of inference that we’re making, if we’re matching the complexity of the challenge with the capabilities of the tool. So, the shorthand here is, if you’ve got a more complex challenging issue, you want to use a tool that’s going to put you in real-time collaboration and discussion so you can resolve those issues interactively.

And if you have a pretty basic kind of thing that you’re trying to solve, then switching to a low-fidelity medium that just like allows you to say yes, no, agree and move on, probably is going to be the best bet. So, making a match between those information requirements and the capabilities of the technology is one key way to reduce that inference-making and attention switching.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s handy. And I’m also thinking about making a match associated with the time necessary for something. I think if you’ve got a mismatch on either side, it’s frustrating and annoying in terms of, “Why are we having a three-hour meeting about this? This is ridiculous,” versus, “Okay, we’re just going to figure out this tricky challenge that’s been vexing the business for eight years in our little 30-minute call.”

Paul Leonardi
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, either way, you’re going to find frustration if you have a mismatch of the tool, the medium, or the time. And then I think that expectation piece as well is tricky in there because it almost seems like you “should” be able to resolve it in the time that you have scheduled for it when you may just have scheduled the wrong amount of time.

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, and then everybody feels frustrated and demotivated because, “Well, clearly, we didn’t do our job right. We should have figured this out in an hour. We must be a dysfunctional group or we must not have brought the right information to this meeting.” When, to your point, perhaps it was an inappropriate time allotted for this in the first place, “And we never could have done it. And now we just all feel worse for having tried.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, make a match. What’s your other favorite approach?

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, another one that I really like is the first rule that I talk about, which is reduce half your tools. And this is one that a lot of people give me the side eye about when I say it, like, “What do you mean by just like stop using half of my tools? Am I really going to be able to do that?” The answer is, yes, you’re really going to be able to get most of the way there at least, you know, 50% is just a rough number anyway.

But if you think about these ideas of attention switching and inference, the fewer tools that we have in our toolset, the less likely we’re going to be to suffer the problems associated with those two drivers of exhaustion. So, one of the things that I really suggest that people focus on is to look at, and really make a list of, “What are all the different technologies that I’m using on a daily basis?”

I used to ask people to do this 10, 15 years ago, and they come up with about 10. And a lot of those were hardware. So, they would say, “I use my laptop, and I use my BlackBerry, and I use…” you know, whatever. Today, the number is more like 30. People come up with about 30 different tools that they use in a regular day, and most of those are applications. Many of them are at work, “I use SharePoint. I use Zoom. I use, whatever it might be, ChatGPT.”

And many of those are at home, “I use Instagram and I use Zillow and I use Game Changer app to keep track of my kids’ games.” And one of the things that I recommend is, when you make this list, that you first start going through and you say, “Okay, well, which ones of these do I have the actual power to cross off this list?” And, usually, we have more power at home than we do at work.

And then I say, “Well, which ones are functionally duplicates of each other? So, are we using two tools to do roughly the same job? So, do I have a Zoom meeting sometimes and then I have a Microsoft Teams meetings other times? Or do I use Canva and Photoshop, when, really, they’re doing the same thing and I don’t know why I use both of them anyway?” And so those are candidates for reducing from our list.

And then there’s other ones where, “I’m actually just sort of in charge and there aren’t network effects.” So, you know, it may be that I say, “I really would love to give up Slack in my organization, but I can’t just give up Slack because everybody uses Slack, and they depend on me.” However, I’ve talked to a lot of people that have two or three team chat applications. And when I ask them, “Well, why in the world does your team have two or three?” nobody can really recall.

And so, what I find is that many people have told me that they actually will raise this in their organizations, and say, “You know, like we’re chatting on Teams and on Slack and on this third application. Like, is it possible we could just reduce to one?” And usually the team is like, “Yeah, like why don’t we just stick with Slack or whatever?”

And so, we actually do have the power to reduce the number of tools in our toolset. I think, in more ways, we have more degrees of freedom than we typically think we do. And doing that just means that now we’re switching between fewer applications and we’re doing fewer things that are creating those attention-switching and opportunities for inference.

You know, just a super quick example in my own life, it used to be that in a given morning, I might be on Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Cisco’s Webex, you know, I would be doing video conferences on all three. And that doesn’t sound like a big deal except that I’m very comfortable with Zoom, because that’s the one my organization uses most often.

And when I switch to a different one and I’m trying to share my screen or engage in the chat or create a breakout room, there’s those moments of, “Oh, where’s the button for that? And how do I create the breakout room because I’m not as familiar with the other platform?” And it’s those little moments of friction that add up to be exhausting.

And reducing those, as much as we possibly can, just give us a cleaner starting point and is going to reduce the odds that we’re going to feel exhaustion from our tools if we can reduce the toolset. And my advice to leaders in organizations is that, often it’s difficult to really make a noticeable difference in the volume of tools that we have unless you step in and you make some decision.

I had one senior leader tell me, “You know, I think of this like the Smokey the Bear slogan, ‘Only you can prevent forest fires.’ It’s like, I feel like I’ve really realized only I can prevent technology proliferation.” And that’s because you’ve got the model for many of these SaaS vendors who sell tools in your company, is to price it in just a way that anybody can buy that application with their credit card.

It sorts of sneaks in right below the spending limit of, “I need formal approval from IT.” So, you get all of these applications that kind of spring up everywhere. And unless you have someone looking and saying, “Look, we’re not paying for 20 different subscriptions to the same kind of tool,” or, “We don’t need three different kinds of computer rendering platforms,” it’s really easy to get stuck with too many tools and increase our overload.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, it’s interesting how I’ve experienced this and, it’s so funny, it doesn’t seem like it “should” be that big of a deal. But if I have to hop into six different tools to accomplish a task, even if it’s only like a 10-minute task, it really does take a toll, more so than if I were just cruising through email, say, for 10 minutes. And it’s just so funny that that’s just kind of the human condition.

Paul Leonardi
It’s true. And we don’t notice it. I think I liken it to running sprints, okay? So, if you run all out on a sprint, let’s say for 10 seconds, and you cover a hundred meters, you feel pretty good. And the next sprint that you run, if you’re not resting adequately, you might cover a hundred meters in 12 seconds. And then the third one, you cover a hundred meters in 14 seconds.

You feel energetic, right? You feel like, “I can do it,” but it’s the accumulation of that fatigue over time that eventually hits you, and someone says, “Okay, run one more hundred-meter sprint,” and you’re like, “No, I can’t do it. I’m too exhausted.” And it’s those little micro moments that add up to big exhaustion feelings at the end of the day, just like you described.

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

Paul Leonardi
I just want to say, okay, AI, this is where I think AI, if we do it right, because we’re still in the early stages, could be really useful. If we can figure out how to put AI in a role that helps us to stay engaged in a task, keep our focus without having to switch across so many different applications, without having to go look for so many different pieces of information, that’s where these tools could be most useful in helping to reduce our exhaustion.

So, I’m optimistic. I wouldn’t say that I think that that’s where everything is going, but I’m optimistic that these tools might be helpful as they keep us in our workflows, keep our focus and engagement in areas that we want by reducing the number of tools we need to switch across and reducing the amount of attention changes that we constantly have to make.

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

Paul Leonardi
It’s attributed to the philosopher Voltaire. I’m not sure if there’s any real record that he said it, but the older I get, the more I appreciate this quote. And it’s, “Cherish those who seek the truth. Beware of those who find it.”

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

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, one of my all-time favorites is The Jam Study that was done by researchers at Stanford, Iyengar and Lepper. And what they looked at was people buying jams. And it was a really neat little experimental condition where they showed people, I forget the exact number, but like three or four jams, and then said, “How many did people buy jam?”

And then they gave them a display that had like lots of jams, like 20 jams on them. And then they said, “How many people bought jams?” And you’re way more likely to buy a jam if you saw three or four jams than if you saw 20 jams. And their conclusion was too much choice is demotivating. And I love that. It’s a simple study, a powerful finding. And every time I go to a restaurant and get one of those menus that seems to span 30 pages and can’t decide what I want to eat, I remember that study.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. And a favorite book?

Paul Leonardi
One of my favorites is At Home by Bill Bryson. I just really love the way Bill Bryson writes. He does a couple of things. One, he just takes these, what you would think are mundane topics, like At Home, he has a 17th century English farmhouse that he lives in, and he uses that, he walks through every room in the house, and uses that to talk about, “Well, what was life like four centuries ago?” And that’s cool.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Paul Leonardi
This is one that I’ve been cultivating much more since writing the book, and it’s about being intentional. So, when I pick up one of my devices, or I’m going to get on my computer, I really take a beat and think, “What am I trying to accomplish? And how will I know that I got there?” And what that does for me is it allows me to bookend my experience.

It tells me, “You did it. Time to close your browser,” or, “Okay, you finished doing this. Time to put your phone down.” And if I don’t start with that intention, it’s easy to spiral into just continuing to scroll and doing all the things that make me exhausted. So that’s my new favorite habit, be intentional every time I sit down in front of a device or pick one up.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And is there a key nugget you share that really connects and resonates, and people quote back to you often?

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, they say about this, the idea of, “I don’t want to give up all of the technologies that do great things for me. And I haven’t been able to figure out what I’m supposed to do then to find the right balance.” And the fact that you give some rules and say, “Technology is not the problem. It’s how we use it, how we orient to it, that it really is,” they tell me that’s been empowering.

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

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, I say go to PaulLeonardi.com, or you can find me on LinkedIn. I think P. Leonardi is my handle there. Those are great places to find me, or at UCSB’s Technology Management Department.

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

Paul Leonardi
Yeah, I would say really practice being there, wherever you are. We live in a world that makes it very easy for us to be everywhere else but here, which we can teleport in our minds to places, we can be on our devices and be halfway across the world. But there’s a real power in just being where you are, be in the meeting, be in the conversation, be with your kid. Try that and I think you’ll see there’s a big difference.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Paul, thank you.

Paul Leonardi
Thanks so much for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Gianluca, welcome!

Gianluca Mauro
Hey, thank you for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to be chatting with you about AI. You are a genuine expert. You’ve been researching and studying this stuff way before even normal folks had heard of this ChatGPT business. So great to have you. And tell us, any super surprising discoveries you’ve made along the way as you’re researching and teaching this stuff?

Gianluca Mauro
Well, first of all, I think something that is interesting to think about is when ChatGPT came out three years ago, it was the “Oh, my God” moment for most people, right? But AI has been out there for quite some time in different shapes and forms and with different levels of usefulness, let’s say. And I think the first “Oh, my God” moment for me was when I realized that, basically, every industry and every professional could find a use for AI.

And I’ll tell you probably what was the most interesting, or strangest maybe, project I worked on. I worked on an AI project to control the quality of diapers in a factory. So, yes, you can use AI for pretty much everything.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now I just can’t let that go. How does AI help do quality control for diapers?

Gianluca Mauro
Well, so are you ready to go on a journey on how a diaper factory production unit works?

Pete Mockaitis
I imagine AI might be able to analyze rapid photographic imagery of diapers as they come off of the line to assess quickly potential for defects and fix the issue more quickly upstream prior to them being packaged and having to be thrown away. But I’m totally making that up.

Gianluca Mauro
You got it.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I feel like a genius. Yes!

Gianluca Mauro
Oh, my God, you are. This is extremely accurate. Extremely accurate. We had this issue that, you know, they basically have, a diaper is basically two layers of elastic material with something that is absorbing in the middle. And then if you pull this elastic material too much, it breaks, especially when you’re cutting it into shape.

Pete Mockaitis
Been there.

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, exactly. So, if you had kids, you know that that’s not fun. So, we were looking at all these pictures in the factory as they were cut into shape to try to understand, well, what was the ideal size of those big elastic rolls and try to basically optimize productivity. So, that was quite a crazy moment because, think about this.

I did this project maybe seven or eight years ago, so three or four years before ChatGPT came out. It was not obvious for anybody or for any company that they might have a use case for AI.

So, imagine me when I went and pitched a diaper production company, “Hey, maybe you should look into AI to minimize the mistakes, the defects that come out of your factory.” It was not obvious at all. It was quite interesting to find actually amazing use cases in that context as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s very, very intriguing. Well, so we’re talking about everyday professionals utilizing ChatGPT or other AI tools to be more productive. You’ve got a LinkedIn Learning Course on exactly that. So that’s pretty handy. Could you maybe start us off by sharing what’s perhaps a fundamental misconception or mindset shift that helps make all of this stuff make sense?

Because I imagine we could spend all day talking about, “Oh, here’s a really cool prompt,” or, “Oh, here’s a fun little tactic,” “Here’s a nifty little thing you might try.” But could you maybe set the stage for us on a more principled foundational level to help us scaffold the rest?

Gianluca Mauro
Absolutely. And I think the most important thing for everybody listening, you need to understand that, in order to really get value from AI, the number one thing you should focus on is your mindset and changing your habits. This is not anymore about necessarily getting the right tools. Most tools are pretty good today, not perfect, but, you know, they’re pretty solid, especially compared to three years ago. And it’s not even about having the most amazing prompting skills.

The biggest bottleneck is your habits. How much have you embedded AI tools and new different workflows and ways of working in your day-to-day work?

I’ll give you an example, I love making this metaphor. It’s like going to the gym. So, let’s say that you have the best equipment. That’s the equivalent of having the best tools. And let’s say you also have amazing skills. You have a squat with perfect technique and you know exactly how to do a really good bench press. And that’s the equivalent to having really good prompting skills.

But then let’s say you never go to the gym. Guess what? Your muscles ain’t going to grow. You’re not going to lose the weight that you want to lose. That’s not going to happen. I would rather see somebody with okay tool selection and with okay prompting skills, but, really, somebody who’s invested a lot in rethinking the way that you work and is curious and is constantly trying new things out than having somebody who has read all those scientific publications about best prompting techniques and has bought all the AI tools, but then has not adapted the way that you work to work with these tools.

That’s the most important thing today in this context. I wouldn’t have said that three years ago, but that’s where we are today. You need to really change the way that you work and embed them in your workflow. And that requires a little bit of effort.

Pete Mockaitis
I hear you. It does require a little bit of effort. And I would also say some discernment, because I think that my impression is, and you can tell me if this is accurate or not from your research-based perspective, it almost feels like a lot of companies, CEOs, products, just kind of want to shove AI into something because investors want it, the stock market seems to like it, and maybe some people are impressed.

But I’m almost at the point now, when I see a tool say, “Oh, now we have AI,” I’m like, “Oh, geez. Is it any good or is it just going to disappoint me again like all the rest, you know?” And so, that’s my take is that, yes, we should take a look at our habits and get into the groove of using AI tools where they’re genuinely helpful and useful and handy. And that requires a little bit of change management on our own parts.

But my hunch is there are also times where you say, “No, AI has actually no place in this little piece whatsoever, and so we’re going to deliberately choose to not stick it here but instead put it over there.”

Gianluca Mauro
You’re spot on. And there was actually research about this that I found really interesting. It was done by Stanford with a couple of other people, and then the Harvard Business Review wrote an article about this that went quite viral. The title of the article is “AI-Generated ‘Workslop’ Is Destroying Productivity.”

Pete Mockaitis
That’ll get some clicks.

Gianluca Mauro
That’s going to get some clicks. Exactly. And so, the main outcome of this research was that if you ask people, “Hey, what do you think about your colleagues who use AI?” You’re going to find that colleagues who use AI are often perceived as less creative, less capable, less reliable, less trustworthy and less intelligent. And that is not great.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, fair.

Gianluca Mauro
You do not want to be perceived as less intelligent, trustworthy, reliable, capable and creative. So, the interesting thing in this case was I honestly don’t think, and that’s also what the researchers found, that that’s a problem of AI per se. The problem is that a lot of people are using AI just in the wrong way. What does that mean in practice? Well, AI workslop is basically when you are trying to use AI as an amplifier of your laziness, basically.

Pete Mockaitis
Ooh, tweet that!

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, and I want to give a practical example, okay? Let’s say that you ask me, “Hey, Gianluca, I want to know how I might use AI in my podcast,” okay? And let’s say that I am just so lazy, I don’t want to think about what are your challenges. I don’t want to think about what are your objectives. I don’t want to think about your audience. I just go on ChatGPT and I ask, “Hey, how might a podcast producer or host use AI?” I get a research. I copy it. I send it to you. What happened?

I got a generic piece of, like a bunch of text basically, on a PDF. I gave it to you and it took me no time to produce that. It took me, like, 30 seconds to get like a bunch of text that sort of makes sense. But I’m going to waste your time reading something that is so generic that you could have found on one Google Search. So that is something that damages you because you just wasted your time reading the report that is generic and has wasted my time as well, because now you’re going to ask me questions I need to go and fix it and you’re going to think less of me, etc.

Now let’s see what I should have done if I wanted to use AI to make it way, way better, way more interesting. I would have started asking you questions, “Hey, Pete, what are the top challenges that you have? What are your objectives for next year? What do you think could be the thing that helps you the most? Do you want to be more productive? Do you want to repurpose your content more effectively? Do you want to be able to research your guests better? Like, just tell me, tell me what’s going on.”

You provide me some context. Context is a keyword that is super important in today’s AI era. You give me some context. Then with this context, I go on ChatGPT, and I say, “Hey, I interviewed Pete. These are his top challenges. What do you think might be a relevant use of AI?” Now start getting something interesting. I start getting something that is more relevant.

And then I might say, “Okay, cool, ChatGPT. Now go and find top case studies of similar podcasts to How to be Awesome at Your Job that have done something similar. Now find some tools. Now tell me what could be potential risks.” The output, then, that I send you is going to be much higher quality and it’s going to actually give you value.

But notice how the difference is not the tools. It’s not that I used a different tool that is not ChatGPT, or is that I had some special prompting skills. It’s just that I’ve been mindful. I’ve been mindful of what might be interesting, what might be relevant for Pete, and how might I use ChatGPT to basically boost my productivity and make my suggestions for Pete even more and more relevant and useful.

You see the difference. It’s not about the tool. It’s not about how good am I in prompting. I didn’t talk about doing anything particularly fancy here, okay? It’s not fancy prompting technique, there’s no coding involved, it’s just a different mindset. I tried to use AI to amplify what I would have done if I didn’t have AI. And that really works.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, it really does. And what you’re reminding me, and you’re talking about amplifying your laziness. I’m thinking about there was a fabulous interview on The Copywriter Club Podcast, which I listen to, even though I’m not a professional copywriter, but we’re doing copywriting all the time. And there was a famed copywriter on there. We’ll look him up and put him in the show notes.

And he said, “When I’m using AI to assist me with copywriting, I don’t say, ‘Write me a sales letter.’” It’s like, “What I do is…” well, first of all, he’s using the custom APIs of an AI tool as opposed to any off-the-shelf chatbot. And then he’s saying, “Okay, I’m going to write this part of a sales letter, given all of these instructions that I have previously written for what I’m into, as well as several examples, as well as what the product is and how it’s helpful to a certain user base on these needs and want and preferences and desires and pain points. And then, so voila.”

And so, there are numerous multi hundred-word prompts associated with doing a thing. And then he was like, “Okay, this is a pretty good draft. And from that I can tweak.” And so, we’re not amplifying laziness. In fact, a tremendous amount of thought has gone into what we’re doing here. And then, because he’s done it many, many times, and he also said AI does not account for taste.

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
And then from there, you can get it. And that was a real lightbulb for me, which I’m connecting now with your amplifying laziness comment. It’s like, yeah, if you just say, “Hey, do this thing,” you’re going to be disappointed. But if you put a ton of thought into it, it can kind of get you to a draft substantially faster.

Gianluca Mauro
Absolutely. And I’ll tell you what, you can amplify laziness, but you can also amplify your expertise. You can also amplify your perfectionism, if you’re a perfectionist like me. And I will give everybody a very simple thing that they can try right now. So, I’ll give you a simple prompt structure that you can use. And it’s very simple, okay? Just four lines.

So, start with some context. Context is basically the who, the why, and the what. So, you might say, “Hey, I am a podcast host. I need to…” whatever, “…prepare for a new interview with this person. My objective is to make sure that I ask the most interesting questions about this person.” Okay, that’s context. What are we talking about? I’m assuming I’m putting myself in your shoes, by the way.

Okay, so that’s the context. Then you say, you ask AI, “I will give you, for instance, a list of questions I prepared.” Something you’ve done, okay? Something that, you know, maybe 50% effort, something that is almost there. And then it will say, “You will tell me…” that’s what you’re telling the AI, “You will tell me three things I’ve done well and three things I could improve.”

“For each improvement opportunity, provide suggestions on how I could implement them. Make your feedback concise and reference specific parts of the text I gave you.” And then you just paste in your work at the end. I use this all the time.

And it’s such a simple way of using it, right? It just takes something you’ve done, and you just say, “Hey, this is my context.” Again, context is super important. It’s super important, because if you don’t put your who, why and what, then you’re get generic advice that might actually lead you in the wrong direction, right?

So, if you put the right context and if you ask this, so much value and, honestly, you can get to some pretty amazing return investment in like two minutes. Every skeptic I have, every skeptic I speak with, and, you know, I still meet quite a lot, I ask them to do this, and they always come out quite interested in the tool after that.

An example I can give you is I worked with lawyers. Gosh, lawyers are an interesting crowd, because obviously, they’re very critical for really valid reasons.

And I always tell them, “Look, take a case that you have that you can share publicly, take a response that you have written or something that you’ve produced, and just ask for three things that you’ve done well and three things that you could potentially improve and how.” And, usually, they get one thought, and they’re like, “Huh, I haven’t thought about it. Interesting.”

Then they might decide not to use it. That’s up to them. But having a really expert second opinion with a one-minute effort and for free, honestly, “Where do I sign?” It’s amazing, isn’t it?

Pete Mockaitis
Yes. And I’m thinking about, when you said expert opinion, it’s funny, when I heard that, I reacted a little bit because I’m thinking about Sam Altman talking about, you know, doing his very Sam Altman storytelling thing that he’s good at. Talking about the release of GPT-5, it’s like, “You know, before it was like you’re talking to a high schooler. And now it’s like you’re talking to a PhD in any area.”

And so, I was like, “Hmm, this is really not my experience at all, good sir.” But I think it’s expert in the sense that it’s been around the block. It’s like, “Yo, I’ve read the whole internet, okay? So, in that sense, I’m expert.” And I’m thinking about, there’s this book called Obvious Adams. It’s all about thinking, “Well, what would be the most obvious thing?” Or, Tim Ferriss says a question, “What would this look like if it were simple?”

That’s often my experience is it says the thing that’s not crazy, innovative, and brilliantly never before seen, but it’s like, “Huh, I probably should have thought of that, but I didn’t, and you did. And because you’ve surfaced that, we’re moving this forward, and that’s helpful. Thank you.”

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, absolutely. So, I think one thing that is really not intuitive is that AI sometimes feels extremely smart and sometimes feels extremely dumb. And it’s really hard to predict, whether for my specific task is going to be, you know, the former or the latter, like, “Is this a 10 out of 10 question or is it going to be a one out of 10 question?”

There was this famous viral thing, viral experiment that came out, which is if you asked AI to count how many Rs are in the word strawberry, it would just say two, and there are three, right? I think a five-year-old can do that, probably, you know, but AI can’t do that. But, hey, it can write a pretty good legal letter for, you know. It’s just like so weird. It’s like it can do math, it can write code, but then it can’t count Rs in the word strawberry. Like, what is this?

And I think we just need to understand that it’s called artificial intelligence, but it’s not intelligent in the same way that humans are. It’s a different kind of intelligence. It processes data in a different way. It’s really hard to just give people a sort of like cookie cutter, very simple rule of thumb to understand when you’re in a good space to ask questions to AI and when not.

You just need to develop a little bit of sort of a gut feeling for, “Hey, this is something where I might get something good, and this is something where I might not get something good,” but there are guidelines. And the guidelines are, there was this research done by Harvard Business School, and they basically came up with a very simple classification of skills that AI has, so to say, AI capabilities. They call them within the frontier skills.

And these are four, very simple. Copywriting. AI is amazing at taking text and just turn that into other text. Now, a professional copywriter might argue whether that’s good copywriting or not. That’s a different conversation, but it’s amazing at just manipulating text, writing poetry or, think about this. It can write poetry and a legal document. I can’t do either, okay? So, it can do all these things. So that’s the first one, copywriting.

Second one is persuasiveness. So, it can write pretty good arguments if you ask it to, which is interesting. The third one is they call it analytical thinking. And it’s quite interesting if you give it a complex problem, and if you ask it to analyze it, it can give you recommendations or different ways to look at it.

And that’s the example that I gave you before, right? If you give it something that you have produced, legal letter, interview questions, whatever, and you say, “Tell me three things I have done well, three things I could improve based on the context,” it does it really well. So, this sort of like analysis, analytical capabilities.

And the fourth one is creativity. Now, people argue whether that’s real creativity or not. I don’t want to get into that philosophical conversation, but from a pragmatic point of view, it is quite creative, honestly. I had this thing a few days ago where I had a framework that I came up with to support companies in finding use cases for AI. And I was like, “How do I call this thing?

And I just gave it to GPT-5 Thinking, and I said, “Just please come up with an acronym.” And I would have never come up with any of them. It was super interesting and creative and it worked quite well. So, these are four things where you can feel quite confident. So analytical thinking, copywriting, persuasiveness, and creativity.

Now they also found where AI does not perform well at all. And that’s when you’re asking it to give you a recommendation, analyzing a bunch of different conflicting pieces of evidence. Let me give you an example. What they did is they took a few researchers, sorry, a few consultants from Boswell Consulting Group.

They took these consultants and they asked them to analyze a bunch of evidence of different strategies that a business might decide to go for to launch a new product, okay? Three different strategies. There’s a PDF with a bunch of interviews. There’s an Excel sheet with a bunch of numbers. All of these things, you need to look at this evidence and ask AI to help you in identifying the right strategy.

What they found is consultants perform better if they did not use AI to come up with the right strategy. Why did that happen? Well, because when you have conflicting evidence, conflicting pieces of information, in this case, imagine data said, I’m just coming up with stuff now, data said that sales were going up. But in an interview, somebody’s sales are going down. There was this conflicting piece of evidence.

AI was basically just like going with one. It was really hard for the AI to understand what was true and what was not. Whereas, for humans, it just made more sense to, for instance, look at Excel sheet, but ignore the interview because they thought maybe this person doesn’t know, doesn’t have the most updated data, for instance, that’s an example. So, AI was just like misled by the data that you provided.

Unfortunately, that’s how a lot of people use AI. A lot of people use AI today this way. Get a bunch of PDFs, a bunch of data, a bunch of emails, a bunch of stuff, throw it in, and they just ask for a quick answer to the problems. AI doesn’t work that well when you provide an insane amount of information and just ask, “Hey, tell me what I should do.” You should go step by step. You should use it to, again, amplify your thinking.

So, a better way would be, put this data in and say, “Hey, can you summarize the key takeaways from each one of these documents?” You take them and then you say, “Okay, what might be a good strategy? What might be good arguments for strategy one? And what might be good arguments for strategy two and strategy three?”

You see how you’re using it as a co-pilot. And that’s a really good branding from Microsoft, by the way. You’re using it as something that assists you in thinking rather than a, “Hey, I’m going to throw all my data. Just go ahead and do my thing. I’m lazy. I’m just going to copy your output and give it to my boss, you know.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like that a lot. And, in a way, it really makes sense that it is that way because it just says, “Hey, I just know what words mean and what words tend to come after and next to other words. I don’t actually know that some dude’s opinion is of less importance and should be given less weight, gravitas, than a summary sales data reflective of millions of transactions.

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, and it’s sycophantic as well, so it’s trying to please you. Imagine like, you know, you go to a doctor and say, “Hey, I have some headache,” and the doctor tells you, ‘Get this. Get this pill and just go.” Well, that’s not a good doctor. You should ask a little bit more questions and trying to understand.

What AI, and this is improving by the way, but historically, has been trained and, you know, it’s used to just get an answer. And so, if you provide maybe conflicting piece of information, as we said in the case study before, it’s just going to try to give you an answer rather than pushing back. And I go back to what I was saying before. This means that the tool is powerful, but it all comes down to the mindset that you have when you use it.

Do you want to have quick answers and you just want to get as fast as possible to a bunch of texts you can send to your boss or you can publish on LinkedIn? It’s probably going to just boost your laziness and just not get anything high quality. But if instead you use it as an amplifier for your curiosity, for your expertise, for your capabilities, well, now we’re talking. Now you can really get to some amazing outputs.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, I like that a lot, the amplifier. And it’s interesting, is sometimes, I think when you look at the prompt that you’re sharing, it really does kind of garbage in, garbage out, and it’s the opposite, you know, magnificence in, magnificence out. So, I could say, “Hey, give me some information about sleep apnea.” And so, it can say, “Oh, well, this is a common affliction, blah, blah, blah.”

But then what I’ve said is, “Show me the results of several human randomized control trials that utilize novel interventions for the treatment of sleep apnea, i.e., not a CPAP machine. And give me a summary of the quantified impacts associated with the apnea hypopnea index reduction associated with each.” Now that, and sure enough, that has led me to some interesting places. And I found this thing called inspiratory muscular training. You breathe against resistance. And what do you know, that really helps.

Gianluca Mauro
Interesting.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’m not using a CPAP machine. So, thank you AI for putting me in some good directions. But I think it shows that, “Are we amplifying laziness or are we amplifying a targeted, ferocious curiosity?” Like, “No, find me precisely this, and then we can play ball.”

Gianluca Mauro
Absolutely. You’re spot on. It’s perfect. But, to me, the interesting thing about this whole concept is that there’s quite a lot of responsibility on the user.

It’s basically telling people, “Hey, if you don’t get the right output, it might not be because of the tool. It might be because of the way that you are using the tool,” which from one point of view, I think is empowering because it’s basically telling me, “Hey, amazing, I have some agency over the output that I get.”

But from the other point of view, I think some people might find it a little bit stressful, “Now I need to learn about A, B, C, D, all these different things so that I can actually use this machine well.” Well, yes, but at the same time, honestly, as I was saying before, it’s about changing habits. It’s not that hard. You don’t need to get a PhD in Math to understand how to use one of these tools.

And so, what I recommend to people who might feel a little bit maybe overwhelmed, or maybe afraid that you’re using it wrong, I always tell people, “Hey, find your little safe space to experiment. Take a hobby that you have. Maybe you’re interested in, I don’t know, Formula One.”

That’s one of the latest things that I’ve been nerding about. And just go and try to do your researches and prompts and test things about Formula One that’s maybe not related to your job so you feel safe. There’s no fear of putting sensitive information into these tools, and just try to get a sense of how the tool might be helpful and useful for you in a setting where you’re free to experiment. And then you can take all these learnings and apply them to your job.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so you are somewhat famous for your CIDI framework – context, instructions, detail, and input. And it sounded like you were giving us exactly that in the context of, “Hey, give me some feedback on a thing.” And so, can you give us a little bit of detail for how we might think about applying this in all kinds of different ways?

Gianluca Mauro
Absolutely. So, the CIDI framework is a framework that I came up with, I think, a couple of years ago, maybe. And my objective was to find a simple recipe to get people to think about their prompts in the same way that I think about my prompts.

And so, it’s quite simple. It starts with C stands for context. Tell me who you are. Why are you doing this task and what do you need to do? Just try to make AI get into the zone of, “What are we talking about?” Think about this, AI might act like a lawyer, might act like a doctor, might act like anything, right? So, you need to zone in.

The second part is instructions. When I say instructions, it’s important that you’re very clear, and you’re talking to a thing, not to a human so you can be very direct. And I typically give my instructions this way, “I will tell you this, you will do that.” “I will give you an email I wrote, you will give me feedback on it.” That’s the instructions part.

The third part is details. Details are, basically, I look at it this way, it’s very simple, “Explain what good means for you. What does a good output look like for you?” And that’s an interesting question. I feel like it’s almost meditative. It’s almost like therapy. You need to ask yourself, “What do I want? What do I really want? How does a good podcast script look like? How does a good LinkedIn post look like?” And just describe it in plain words.

Pete Mockaitis
Or, I guess this could also be examples, like, “And here are three instances that I consider good.”

Gianluca Mauro
You got it. That’s the part of the prompt where you might want to put, for instance, something you’ve done in the past, and say, “Hey, look, this is something that I consider to be really good,” or, “This is something that represents my tone of voice, and I want you to try to replicate that.” That’s the details part.

And the last part, the input, is when you put actually what you need to produce. So, for instance, if you need to have feedback on a legal document, you put it all the way at the end. The reason why I structure it this way – context, instructions, details, and input – is that it’s very easy to reuse.

So, if I write a really good prompt that explains exactly who I am in the context and what I need to do, exactly what I want out of it in the instructions, in the details, and then the input is, let’s say, this legal case that I need to analyze, the next time I have a new legal case to analyze, I just need to replace the last part of my prompt. The first part of the prompt, the context, instructions, and details are the same.

So, it makes you, number one, think about all the important things in a prompt and leaves really little room for error, because you need to think about all of them – context, instructions, details, and input. But it also makes your work scale a little bit. Because some people, and I get it, get stressed, “I need to write a good prompt. How long is it going to take me to explain who I am, what I need to do, yadda yadda, yadda. What does good look like?” I understand it can be a little bit of a pain if you want to write a really long and cohesive and complex prompt.

But if you write it this way, then it’s very simple to reuse. And that’s your copywriting podcast guy. That’s a perfect example. I think he was prompting, using, maybe without knowing, but he was using that sort of structure, it sounds like, because he had some things that you could probably copy and paste again.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly. I think it is John Morrow is his name, and we’re going to include that in the show notes. Indeed, the context is, “Hey, we’re a sales letter for this product for, you know, which serves this user with these needs, wants, concerns, who use language like this.” And then the instructions are, “Write the headline of a sales letter.”

The details are, “Here are some other headlines that we think are fantastic, as well as the general guidelines of copywriting that we find to be effective in this industry.” And that might be hundreds or thousands of words, and that’s acceptable, right?

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, I mean, always try not to go too crazy because then it becomes too much context, right? I think AI could maybe process it, but I always say, you know, if you try to put too much stuff and you’re not fully sure about what you actually put in, then you might have added something that is actually misleading. So, try to keep it in check. Don’t put too much if you don’t know what you’re putting in. But, yes, conceptually makes sense.

Pete Mockaitis
And to that point with the context, I mean, I believe, you know, we’re like a hundred thousand plus tokens. So, is it your professional opinion that, okay, you might have a hundred thousand tokens, but don’t use 50,000 words? Or, what’s your take?

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, so, I mean, for people who don’t know what tokens are, tokens are basically AI breaks down your messages into parts, parts or tokens. So, if I say, for instance, “Hello!” it might be two tokens, “Hello” and the exclamation mark. And there’s something the AI models have called a context window, which is basically how many tokens they can take a look at, at once. And I think GPT-5, the latest model from OpenAI, is at 400,000 tokens. Some models are up to one million tokens.

So, while you can add a million PDFs and resources into a prompt, then you risk getting into a situation in which you’re adding, if you’re adding not high-quality context, you’re just misleading your model. An example that I always make is the following. You go to a doctor and you say, “Hey, as I said before, I have a headache. What do I do?” That’s way too little context.

But if you say, “Hey, I have a headache. Let me tell you my medical history. When I was two years old, I once fell and hit the knee on the floor, and it was really painful. Then when I was three years old, I once ate spoiled milk. When I was four years…” that’s too much. You’re just confusing your doctor, right? So, you want to try to select some context that might be relevant.

Because, again, you never know if you’re just putting something that is just misleading or it’s just not very relevant to your question. Don’t stress too much about not putting enough but also don’t go crazy.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I guess what I’m saying is, what I want your professional judgment on is, if I throw in the full transcript of a meeting, or a book, you know, is that likely to help or hurt me or under what context?

Gianluca Mauro
Oh, I do this all the time, by the way. Like, if I take the whole transcript of a meeting, and I need to write a sales proposal, transcript of the meeting, the whole thing, because it’s all relevant. It’s my meeting with a customer, it’s all relevant. And I take that, I take an old proposal that I wrote, and say, “Adapt this proposal to the context of this meeting.” That’s perfect. But think about what I added in. I added only relevant material for my task.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s helpful. You mentioned it’s bad at analyzing conflicting information. And I’m thinking, sometimes it also seems bad at giving me precise pinpoint pieces. For example, if I say, “Give me verbatim quotations of something,” it seems to really struggle.

And maybe it’s just trying to not violate a copyright or something, but I feel like the more I want it to be super precise, specific, narrow, exact, data point or quotation, it seems to struggle.

Gianluca Mauro
Yes, and you will be correct in saying that. And, I mean, there’s a technical reason why this is happening. It’s just in the way that these tokens are processed. It’s basically making a big average of everything that it has read up to that point. But conceptually, you can look at it this way. This is not a truth machine, okay? This is not like a search engine.

A search engine takes a bunch of data, the entire internet, and it just points you to the right point. It tells you, “Hey, this is the link that it’s the most relevant to your query.” This is not that. A good way that I look at AI is it’s a compressor of knowledge. It took all the knowledge of the internet, compressed it into a thing. And then when you ask questions, it can decompress it and give it back to you.

So, what this means is that sometimes you lose some information in that, say, decompression. And I mean, I think this is a metaphor that is, really, maybe it makes sense just to people who are into audio and this sort of stuff because you have this thing. You’re losing quality as you compress it. It’s the entire internet, but you can just like quit it like this in a second. So, you lose a little bit of quality. And so sometimes you have these errors. But I have to say it’s improving really fast.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, is there anything else that it’s bad at?

Gianluca Mauro
I think a good way to look at this is thinking that it’s an amplifier, okay? So, it’s bad at telling you, “Hey, what you’re doing, it’s not ideal.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, “You’re asking the wrong question,” you know?

Gianluca Mauro
Exactly. It’s not going to do that, which is like, I think, the most important skill today is not being able to find answers. I think it’s being able to ask the right questions and being able to look at answers and be like, “Oh, this isn’t, actually, this doesn’t make any sense.” I’ll give you an example. I think this is quite funny.

I asked AI to give me feedback, as all of you know that I do that quite often, on a PowerPoint presentation that I created. But instead of, like, uploading the slides, I just took all the texts and I put that in. And in the feedback, it told me, “Hey, you’re not using enough visuals.” And I was like, “Of course, you’re telling me this. I didn’t give you the visuals. I just gave you the text.” It makes no sense, right?

But looking, you know, critical thinking, and this is a very simple example, but I had to take that piece of feedback. And even though the best top AI model in the world told me that I need to add more visuals, I discarded that feedback because I was like, “I know that you’re just lying to me. You’re just coming up with random stuff.” So that’s one important thing.

And, by the way, I think something that really scares me is a lot of people are using AI for almost as a therapist to get support in relationships with their loved ones. And, again, remember AI is sycophantic and it’s going to try to please you, so you’re always right. It’s really rarely going to tell you, “Hey, Gianluca, you know, your…”

Pete Mockaitis
“Your behavior is toxic and causing problems. Look in the mirror and fix it.”

Gianluca Mauro
Exactly. It’s always the other person’s fault. Yeah, I had this friend of mine who came to me, and was like, “Hey, I have an issue. Every time now I have an argument with my partner, she goes in a room and then comes back and has a perfect, like, perfectly phrased argument to explain to me why I’m wrong. And I know that’s coming from ChatGPT.”

So, she’s just getting in a room, and saying, “My boyfriend did X, Y, Z, you know. How can I just try to win this argument?” which, again, I think there is some value in that if you use it correctly. Again, I feel like I said it a few times, but I really want to make sure the audience comes back with this. Think about if you instead use it this way.

Go back to your room and say, “Hey, I had this argument. What might be the other person feeling that I’m not thinking about? What might be some blind spots that I might be having? What are things that I’m not considering when I’m accusing, I don’t know, whatever my partner of, X, and Z?” Now you’re actually going to use it as an empathy machine rather than as a, I don’t know, ego booster kind of thing, right?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, well said. Are we amplifying the, “I’m right, they’re wrong,” make the case, or are we amplifying, “I’m trying to be understanding and compassionate”? And it will seek to please you. And so, yes, if we amplify the wrong thing, we’re just getting farther down a bad path.

Gianluca Mauro
Correct. And isn’t this cool? Like, the idea that I have so much agency and power over the outcomes of my use of AI, depending on how I use it, depending on the questions I ask and what hat I decide to wear on this day. “I want to wear the hats of the empathetic person who tries to understand what this person might be feeling.” I can have vastly different outcomes. I found this really empowering.

I understand it might be a bit scary, because it’s like, “It’s all of me?” Yes, I get it. But, again, if you have that approach of being curious and just trying different things out, I find that super empowering, honestly.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool. Thank you. Well, now I’d love to get your take in terms of, boy, there’s a lot of different chat bots and AI tools, if you want to do ChatGPT or Gemini or Claude or Grok. Is there a way, and this is going to change every few months but, you know, for now, is there a way you think about for certain use cases, “I prefer this tool over the others”?

Gianluca Mauro
Yes, but in a way that might be unusual for the audience to think about. So, I think about it this way. I think in my AI, I call it my AI tool stack, like all the tools that I use, I think about three main categories. The first one is generic AI tools. These are ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Claude, Grok, basically these five. And, for me, it doesn’t matter too much which one you’re using. All have each respective strengths and weaknesses, but they’re all quite similar at the end of the day.

I personally use ChatGPT. That’s the tool that I started on. That’s just the tool that works the best for my use cases. But, again, I don’t have a strong argument for people to say, “You must use ChatGPT.” Use whatever you want. But the interesting thing is when I look outside of these generic AI tools and I start looking at specialized AI tools, and these are tools that are specifically built for one use case.

An example, I use a note taking tool called Granola, which I really love. I have a lot of meetings in my life, and Granola is specialized in note taking during meetings. Absolutely beautiful. And I’m not affiliated with Granola at all, so I can tell you there are other tools that do that as well. Otter is one. It’s pretty good. There are a few ones.

But, again, for me, who, I take probably too many meetings. Having a specialized tool for note taking during meetings is super valuable. But there are specialized AI tools for lawyers. There’s a tool called Harvey. There’s a tool in Europe called Legora that’s amazing. And these are specialized for lawyers. They give you a bit more features that you might be interested in. They’re a bit more accurate. They have maybe all the laws of a country already loaded in. You know, they’re more helpful.

I have a startup called Epiphany and I built a specialized tool for instructional design. It helps people who create training, create better training faster. And it’s really interesting when you start looking at those specialized AI tools, because, again, you might find something that, for you, specifically for you, can have a lot of value.

I know, for instance, there are tools for podcasters. Like Riverside has some pretty interesting tools to, like, repurpose content. You might find a lot. Curious to know if there’s anything that has really changed the way that you work in that space.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, it’s funny, we do a little bit here and there, but we’re actually still transcribed by humans, which could shock some people. So, we use it in specific, narrow targeted places, but, still, each episode is getting many, many human hours to put out the door.

Gianluca Mauro
And that’s perfect. Again, for me, what I advocate for is thoughtful AI use, not just like take it and put it everywhere. That doesn’t work for me. So, it makes total sense. But that’s the second sort of area that you might want to look at. So, pick one generic tool. That’s like saying Excel. You can use Excel if you do marketing, if you want to track your campaigns. You can use Excel if you’re in finance. You should use Excel if you’re in finance, but you understand where I’m going.

Same thing, ChatGPT or Gemini or Claude can be used by people in every single industry. But then look at those specialized AI tools that might help you even more.

And then the third area is those custom-built automations that you might want to build for yourself. That’s when we’re getting really nerdy, okay? But I love that. And the interesting thing is that the barrier for building your own custom automations has gone down so much. It’s crazy. There are all these AI no-code tools that allow you to plug different tools together so you can build an automation like, look, I’ll tell you one that we have in my company, in AI Academy.

Whenever somebody writes on our website, “Hey, I’m interested in a custom enterprise training.” There’s this custom automation that researches the company and just gives to our salespeople on Slack a message, and says, “Hey, this person has reached out. This is who this person is. This is what the company does. This is what they want.” Research is done already. It’s like a sales assistant, basically.

We built it ourselves. It took us, I don’t know, we know how to do it so it took us a couple of hours maybe, maybe three, I don’t know, something like that, okay? Hours, not days. All right? But we have seen people starting from very limited technical skills, being able to build those custom automations for their business or for their freelance profession in just a few weeks.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. That’s good. Well, talk about dorky, even though I am not at all a coder or a developer, my favorite YouTube channel is Fireship, which has all these jokes and stuff. And so, I’ve heard, I know a couple of the buzzwords associated with AI automation, like the MCP, the model context protocol, as well as the N8n.

Gianluca Mauro
Amazing.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, I know those are key words I might Google and research. But you tell us, if we are just starting to tiptoe down the, “Hey, I got a thing in my life I need automated. I think AI could probably do something about it,” what are the first steps to explore pulling that off?

Gianluca Mauro
Yeah, so I’ll just tell you basically how we help people go from, “I might want to automate something” to “I’ve built an automation.” And that’s just because we know that that’s a process that works. The first thing you have to do is understand what to automate, what not to automate. And it sounds very basic, but I guarantee you that’s where you decide if you’re going to be successful or not.

Most people want to automate too much. And then they start building spaceships that are never going to work, never going to give them the result they want. They’re going to get tired after some time when they try to build it and it doesn’t work, and then give up.

Instead I always tell people one day I’m make a T-shirt with this sentence, “Find the smallest possible thing that could possibly work.” The smallest possible automation that could give you some value. Start with that and then you can expand, all right?

The second part is don’t stress too much about the tools, you know, the N8n or Make.com or Crew AI, all these tools that are coming up, but try to write a pretty good prompt that should power your automation, okay? So, focus on the AI component, and find a way to test it well.

What do I mean by this? I’ll give you an example that I had. There was this one of our students, he was a doctor and he wanted to not just build an automation. He wanted to build a product to give to his colleagues so that they could easily write referral letters, okay? And so, he had to make sure that this thing worked really well because, again, doctors, you know, it’s a lot of responsibility.

So, what did he do? He just found a bunch of referral letters, or he wrote a few with ChatGPT, and he corrected them by hand. And that was his set of examples to test whether his prompts were actually producing something that was good enough.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, like, “Can the AI actually achieve the thing I’m hoping it to do? Let’s test that before I build out a whole thing and go oopsies.” Love it.

Gianluca Mauro
Correct. Another one of our students, I saw this last week, so I remember really well, did something to create LinkedIn posts. This guy works in marketing and risk is very low in that case. What’s going to happen if you publish a really bad LinkedIn post? I might get annoyed, but no one is going to die, right? But still what he did is he used his prompt to create a bunch of LinkedIn posts and then he wrote some and then he gave them to some of his friends and said, “Hey, which one do you like the most?”

And he tried that with a few different prompts, with a few different models. He tried with GPT-5, he tried with Claude, he tried with Gemini, and then he just found the best. And then he knew, he had the confidence that this automation was going to work because he had done the work of testing it and collecting the data.

After you’ve done this, step three is now, build your automation. And, you know, there are different tools that are pretty good at this.

Make.com is one that I really like. I use it a lot. Zapier is probably the easiest one to use. If you want to get started and don’t want to waste too much time learning how to use slightly more sophisticated tools, Zapier is a great place to start. N8N is probably the one that gives you the most flexibility on things that are the most capable. And I like that a lot as well.

But again, does it matter? Not really. At the end of the day, if you had a good idea about what to automate and there’s real value, then you can just swap tools and you’re going to be good. So, I suggest that that’s the last thing that you start thinking about.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. Well, shoutout to Zapier. We had Wade Foster. Or is it Zapier? I don’t know. Zapier or Zapier, we had Wade Foster on episode 466 back in 2019, and they are still going strong.

Gianluca Mauro
Amazing. Super strong.

Pete Mockaitis
Good, handy stuff there. All right. Well, Gianluca, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about a couple of your favorite things?

Gianluca Mauro
No, I think we’re good.

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

Gianluca Mauro
I wish I could say who it comes from, but it unfortunately comes from a random guy on the internet. And the quote is, “The hardest part of getting what you want is figuring out what that is.”

Pete Mockaitis
I dig it. And can you share a favorite study or experimental or piece of research?

Gianluca Mauro
I will share the research that I was talking about before, the one from Harvard, where they looked at all the different capabilities of AI. And the name of the research is “Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of AI on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality.” It’s really cool, still very relevant from a couple of years ago, but, honestly, I still quote that, basically, in every workshop that I do because it’s really valuable.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Gianluca Mauro
Ruined by Design.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool, something you use to be awesome at your job?

Gianluca Mauro
Another tool that I started to use recently is a tool called Wispr Flow. It’s quite interesting. It basically allows you to dictate and it just puts whatever you said into a box. But again, it uses AI to just change that a little bit so that it’s, first, it’s formatted already.

So, when you’re writing emails, you might want to just record and say what you want to say, and say, “Here, I want some bullet points,” and you’re going to see the bullet points. I’ve been using it for a couple of weeks and I might see that becoming a key part of my tool stack.

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

Gianluca Mauro
You can go on GialucaMauro.com. That’s G-I-A-N-L-U-C-A-M-A-U-R-O.com or on AI-Academy.com where you can see all of our trainings so you can get better at AI.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, this has been so fun. Thank you and good luck.

Gianluca Mauro
Thank you. Thank you for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Kwame, welcome back.

Kwame Christian
Hey, thanks for having me, buddy.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, this is fun. We are not going to talk about negotiation, or persuasion, or psychology directly, or diversity. We’re talking about taking notes, and we both are so excited.

Kwame Christian
So excited. So excited because we’ve been friends now for like five, six, seven years, and one of the things that brought us together is our nerdiness. And so, this is an opportunity for us to talk about this stuff we talk about all the time offline, so I’m pumped about this.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, so you told us something that blew our minds in our podcast mastermind group, we got together. You were playing a text-to-speech audio on your phone at super high speeds, such that a couple of us said, “There is no way you understand what is being said there.” And you said, “I absolutely do.” And we’re like, “What? What is the story?” So, tell us, you started doing a note-taking thing. First of all, why? What were you trying to accomplish by doing that? And then we’ll walk into a little bit of the details of what you’re doing.

Kwame Christian
Yeah, man, it’s a fascinating story because it goes all the way back to undergrad. I had a friend who was blind, and he became blind in undergrad. So, he had to learn how to be blind, which was a really tough thing for him. And so, he was shadowing another lawyer, and instead of reading using Braille, she was reading using text-to-voice. And he said it was so fast that he wasn’t even able to identify that text, that voice as words. It was that fast.

And so, what I learned from him telling me that story is that you’re processing speed is a skill. With time, you can get it faster and faster and faster. So, from undergrad, I’ve been training myself to go from listening to things in regular speed to 1.25 to 1.5, and now, on Audible, it’s up to, I think, 3.5. That’s the max. But then, with the note-taking apps that I use, you can go up to, like, 600 words per minute.

And so, for me, the reason why I do this is because I’m an avid note-taker. When I read books, I take tons of notes, like 20, 30, and sometimes up to 60 pages of notes, size 12, single space. But I recognize that reading is nothing without retention. So, I want to make sure that I’m reviewing those notes with regularity, but I want to do it quickly. And so, this helps me to really not just consume a lot of information, but also retain a lot of information because I can review it really quickly.

Pete Mockaitis
Wow, so 600 words per minute, I think you said, which is about 4x, if we’re thinking about 150 words per minute as a typical speaking rate. And so, first of all, it just sounds amazing, like for a superhuman ability. So, you are telling, you’re going on the record, this is, as you know, being recorded, that you can understand words played at 600 words per minute.

Kwame Christian
Yes, and let me put a little caveat here, because you will, for sure, miss a couple of words every sentence. So, if it’s a text I’m completely unfamiliar with, with zero context, I won’t be able to do it. But, if it’s notes that I’m somewhat familiar with, and that I have some idea of what it is that we’re talking about, then I can follow it enough to retain the meat of the information. And if you want, I can pull it out and show listeners kind of what it sounds like. You want to do that?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, let’s do it.

Kwame Christian
You want to?

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, I do. I do.

Kwame Christian
Okay, cool. Let’s see. Ah, philosophical articles. Great. And let me make sure the tempo is at the right thing. This is 605 words per minute.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. All right now, Kwame, what did he just say? Or she, I can’t tell.

Kwame Christian
You can’t tell. So, he was talking about Socrates and his philosophical approach, and then going deeper into other philosophical like ideologies, mindsets, thought process, things like that. And so, for me, it’s like, “All right, I read that previously, and so I just want to make sure I’m getting refreshers so I can keep it top of mind because I know that memory decays after time.” So, I know for the things that I really want to retain, I need to revisit them with regularity in order for it to really become encoded in.

So, for me, I know that this is something that I have visited before. So, this is me revisiting these notes, and so for me, memory is nothing without retention. So, I want to make sure that I’m going over these things with regularity so it becomes encoded in my memory at a deeper level.

Because, for me, as a content creator, so as a podcaster, it’s helpful to be able to go back and talk about studies and different methodologies for negotiation, and then also as a speaker too, and a recovering lawyer, I feel the need to cite my sources. So, if I’m talking about different perspectives and different approaches, I can say, “Well, this person approaches it this way, but on this topic, another person approaches it this way. And here’s a book reference for each of those so you can go deeper if you want to.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, and I think that really is distinctive in terms of making content great, so that’s super cool. So, if anyone’s in disbelief about the speed thing, I have been playing. So, you use the, I believe, Voice Dream Reader app, and there’s a few I’ve seen out there. This one has a lot of history and a lot of street cred, it sounds like, with the blind community from the reviews I was gathering.

And so, I started doing it in terms of reading books, which it can do as well, and I was fascinated to see it didn’t take years to develop the skill of being able to understand rapid speech, but rather I was able to crank it up pretty good, like over 400, sometimes 500, so well over 3X, and understand what was happening. And it was fun for me, I was training that skill by also looking at the text because it highlights the text as you move down at the same time.

So, what I found interesting was it’s almost like when you can ride a bike in different gears and go faster depending on how much energy and oomph you’re ready to put into that thing. And so, too, I found, “Hey, my brain is ready to go. Let’s do this thing. I can go fast.” And I actually appreciate going fast. Like, it matches my state, and I’m not bored by what I’m reading. Instead, it’s like, “Hold on tight. Here we go.” And it’s cool.

Or other times, it’s like, “You know what? That just seems overwhelming right now. I don’t want to go there. That’s fine. We’ll slow it down to something a little bit more reasonable,” which still might be like 2x, 300 words per minute. So, that was eye-opening for me, just playing around with that a little bit and feeling like, if your brain is tempted to distraction, which mine certainly is, when you’re reading and you start thinking of something else, like, “Oh, wait, what did I just read?”

When I’m looking, the line is being highlighted and I’m hearing the audio, it’s like we’re not deviating from this text, and it’s very effective when you don’t want to read something, it’s like, “No, no, we are powering through this, every line right now.”

Kwame Christian
Oh, that’s smart. I’ve never thought about looking at it as I go, but I think that multimodal form of digesting would lead to greater retention, too.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I think so. I think it has and I dig it. So, okay, we know it’s possible to listen at rapid speeds. You’ve done it. I’m kind of doing it. Blind people have done it for a long time, and it’s been helpful for you to retain stuff. So, give us a picture for like how is life different as a result of you having this as a regular practice? You take a lot of notes and you listen to review those notes at rapid speed. Is this just another Kwame quirk? Or to what extent is this truly enriching you and how?

Kwame Christian
Well, I think, like I said, the retention is big but it allows me to consume more information more quickly. So, I’ve shifted from not just doing audiobooks in this way, but also doing everything. Like, when we hung out in Washington, a couple months ago, you heard me reading my emails that quickly, and so it allows me to consume more information just in general, because now I’m putting everything through a program like that.

But the other thing that I found was an interesting side effect is that I feel like it helps me to be a better listener because, for me, I can listen and still be fully engaged with that person while thinking of what a follow-up question could be. And a lot of times, when people are acting like they’re listening but not really listening, they’re thinking about what’s going to come next, but now I’ve found that I can actually wholeheartedly engage with what the person is saying while anticipating what might be coming and then coming up with a follow-up question.

So, it’s made me a better podcaster because it feels like everybody is talking in slow motion. It’s really, really fascinating. And so, that also comes with a little comical downside, too. It also makes me incredibly impatient with content that is not accelerated. If something is just in one-time speed, I’m like, “I am wasting so much time here. Can you please go faster?” But in everyday life, when you’re actually engaging with people, it really does feel like a superpower, because listening feels less effortful.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s really cool. Let’s hear more about the potential downsides. So, you’re irritated by 1x content sometimes. That happens. What about just like the potential toll? I’m wondering, if feels like if you’re reading fast or listening to things fast, like you’re demanding more of the machine that is your body and nervous system and brain.

It’s almost like you’ve had a huge workout and you’re maybe fatigued afterwards. Is that a thing you’re noticing, in terms of like, “Whoa, more of my energy was sapped in that hour because I consumed more words in that hour,” much like more of your energy would be sapped on a fast bike ride of an hour than a slow bike ride of an hour?

Kwame Christian
Pete, I wish we would have had this conversation years ago because that was an element that I never considered. But this last Christmas break, every Christmas break, I take time to review my notes in 500 times speed and think through everything that I’ve done because I don’t just take notes from the books that I’ve read and the articles that I’ve read. I am kind of like my life stenographer. I’m sitting here just writing down every thought that I care to revisit, anything that I’ve learned that I want to retain, any insight.

So, I’m constantly taking notes, dictating notes into my phone, and then listening to them later. So, every month it can be over 100,000 words of Kwame notes that I’ve created. And then I started to realize a pattern. I started to realize that there was a pretty consistent cycle of burnout that was occurring at predictable times.

And so, for me, as a keynote speaker, constantly traveling, that takes a toll, and I started to recognize that I wasn’t recovering from those trips as quickly as possible. So, I need to reschedule the way that I do things, like making the days afterwards to have a little bit more space. So that helped with burnout. But I was realizing there’s still something else that’s taking a toll. I couldn’t figure out what it was, and I realized that it was this pace that I was keeping with reading and retention.

And so, for the past few years, my goal has been to read – I use audiobooks, so I’m using the term reading loosely here – consume a book every week, taking those notes, and in the morning before I go to the gym, I would listen to those notes, I would review the book notes from the previous books that I’ve read, and during the day I’m listening to the book and taking notes, so it’s a lot on my brain, and I did not fully appreciate the toll it was taking. And to the point where, this year I’ve actually decided to pull back on the amounts of books that I’m reading because it was becoming just too much for me to do while still being well.

So, I’ve found that my mental health has improved as I’ve scaled back a little bit. So now I do it as I need to spot-learn specific things at specific times, but not really forcing myself to keep that pace. One book a week, reviewing the notes in the morning, it was just too much to keep up with, and it was leading to burnout. So, fatigue is real with this, because it does take a lot more to consume information in this way.

Pete Mockaitis
So that’s good to know, and you have that set of options then. You could choose to listen at a variety of speeds based upon your energy and other demands for the day, for the week, and you got that going for you. So that’s pretty nifty. With regard to your note-taking, can you get a little bit precise with regard to, Voice Dream Reader is how we’re listening to or hearing the notes, but you say you’re dictating them to capture them? Or, what’s the capture side look like?

Kwame Christian
Capture side is pretty basic, just the iPhone Notes app. So, I would put it in the iPhone Notes app and then I would just copy and paste it into Voice Dream. And, actually, it might be helpful to go into the types of notes that I’m taking, because I talked about a couple of those things, but I can go a little bit deeper too.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yeah, so it’s any thought you might care to revisit, and stuff from books that it was good. That’s what we got so far.

Kwame Christian
Yes, so those are the things, and then also decision-making. That’s been a big focus for me, because, for me, my philosophy, I believe that we just live life decision to decision, and so the quality of our life is going to be contingent upon the quality of the decisions that we make. So, if I can learn how to make better decisions, then I will have a better life. Pretty simple.

So, I would read a lot of books on decision-making, but then I recognized that those books are great and they have a lot of studies that study other people but there’s nobody studying me. That’s my job now. So, any decision that I make, Pete, like any decision that I make that was suboptimal, I write that down.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now we got here some juicy examples, Kwame, suboptimal decisions.

Kwame Christian
Everything. And, listeners, as well, this is how you know that I know Pete, because I know Pete likes to optimize. And when I used the term suboptimal, I know that word to be your fancy, okay. So, this is great. So, I’ll give an example. It goes down to the most mundane decisions. So, I was doing a keynote in Vegas earlier this year, and I was going down to breakfast, and I was closing the door to my room, and I said, “Ah, I forgot my Chapstick. It’s okay. I feel fine.”

I go down, I eat breakfast, and now my lips are dry because we’re in the desert, and I said, “I should have unlocked that door, opened it, and got the Chapstick because now I’m going to waste five minutes getting back upstairs in this massive hotel. I will never make this mistake again.” So, when I’m talking about every decision, that’s an example of how mundane these decisions go.

But then I think about business decisions, and I think about mistakes that I’ve made in the past, and then, you know, hindsight is 20/20, and I look back, and I say, “How did I not see this coming because it seems obvious to me?” But then when I review the notes, I recognize the emotions that were going through my mind, that were in my body as I was going through this process. I think about how I was feeling, I write down what I’m thinking and what led to the decision. What I was feeling, what led to the decision, who I talked to and how I felt before that conversation, and how I felt after the conversation.

And then I started to recognize patterns. I’m saying, “Okay, this was a bad decision, and I recognize that even though I had the data to make the right decision, I made the wrong decision based on emotionality. Why? Oh, in this situation, I had a conversation with this person, and then they complimented me. I’m recognizing I have a vulnerability, where if somebody compliments me, it makes it hard for me to make a decision subsequently that is not in their favor.”

And so, now I’m more mentally prepared to protect myself to separate the decision from the compliment. So, I’ll put more space between a decision if I feel particularly good about a conversation that I had about a person. And so, like those are the type of decision-making patterns that I want to pay attention to, because once you start to identify those patterns, you can start to anticipate when a bad decision will come, and then you can start to force yourself to put yourself in a better mental and emotional position to make a better decision in the future.

Pete Mockaitis
That is very beautiful. And I’m thinking, even the minute ones can pack big insights. I’m thinking about a time that I had a friend, and there was a bachelor party fun, woo, going on, and I remember I was kind of thirsty, and I thought, “Oh, I should go get some water from the bartender there.” But then I thought, “Oh, no, I don’t want to inconvenience them with just water, which is free and doesn’t produce any income for them or their establishment, or tip for them, and so I just won’t bother them. You know, I can make do and just drink some water later anyway.”

So, the next morning I was feeling very not great. Dehydrated plus, if you will, and I was thinking about, “Boy, I really should have just asked to get the water.” And I was like, “What’s that about? Why am I not doing that?” And then you realize, “Oh, here’s a pattern for me.” It’s like, “I really, really, really feel uncomfortable about putting people out, having them feel inconvenienced for the sake of my needs and preferences.”

And so, that’s good information and to really have at the fore when you’re making a subsequent decision, it’s like, “I feel not comfortable. I feel uncomfortable about this.” It’s like, “Well, maybe that’s because you’ve got this weird hang-up associated with inconveniencing other people to meet your needs, as in not asking the bartender for some water.”

And so, that kind of reflection and note-taking is handy to surface those things. It could be a tiny stimulus or prompt – Chapstick, cup of water from a bartender – and yet have a huge insight on the other side of it that has ripple implications for many decisions.

Kwame Christian
Absolutely. And that’s when it becomes really fun, when you start to see these hidden patterns, and that’s the type of information that you can only get from evaluating and investigating yourself on a deep level. Because we can read all of these books, you and I both have podcasts, so we can talk to these incredible people who have incredible insights. But imagine if one of those incredible people was solely dedicated to investigating your life and trying to make it better.

And I recognize that has to be our responsibility because the ripple effects of these small things can be significant, and a lot of times you might not recognize it until you take the time to investigate it. And one of the things that’s really funny to me is when I sometimes go back to journal entries from years ago, like 2017, 2018, sometimes I will see the original thoughts that led to something that I do with regularity that I take for granted right now.

And that’s always really insightful because it shows me how you are with every decision, everything that we learn and then subsequently put into practice, we are really shaping who we are and changing our identity. So, right now, Kwame of 2024, I can listen to this and I can say to myself, “Yeah, this is how I see the world. This is how I navigate it. Obviously, why wouldn’t I?”

But then I forget how much time it took for me to build this part of myself up to make this a regular type of thing. And sometimes it takes multiple entries and multiple attempts to learn and put these things into place for it to become part of you, but I recognize that the more intentional I am about investigating things, the better I can be when it comes to making tough decisions.

So let me give a tangible example. So, for me, as an entrepreneur, I recognize that sometimes there are going to be times where, if I’m running a company, I want to have the best team possible, and that might require me to have to change the dynamics of my team by removing somebody from my team. And I remember the first time, we’ve been in a mastermind group for like five years, so you were seeing me go through this. It was like an existential crisis having to fire somebody because I had this belief that relationships should last forever. It’s an indictment on me as a leader to not be able to have this person with me till the very end.

And I recognize, through talking with you and the guys and lots of journaling, that it’s a problematic belief. It’s not true. I can overcome this. But I recognize that it took a lot of time and thought and intentionality to really evaluate those underlying beliefs that were leading me to feel the way that I’m feeling now. And so, now fast forward to this year, I had to let a couple people go. And each person, there’s a different emotional thing that was holding me back from making that decision.

And so, I was able to make, to do that evaluation much quicker, and, at the same time, at a much deeper level through this process to recognize those patterns of thinking that led me to make bad decisions in the past, to this time make the right decision. It was still very, very emotionally challenging, but I was able to get to that conclusion faster because of this process of self-evaluation.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s powerful. And those are definitely tricky emotional matters. And it’s funny, thinking about some of the mastermind group conversations, that’s often the case in terms of there’s a thing that we’re mostly sure should probably happen or not happen, and yet there is a little bit of uncertainty, but a lot of discomfort, and so we just stall for so long in terms of like launching this thing or shutting something down, and it goes way longer than it needs to because we are rational, cognitive creatures and also emotional creatures.

And it’s so helpful to, well, one, hey, I recommend mastermind groups for everybody, just as a general thought, as well as journaling and self-reflection. These are some of the top tools by which you can see what’s going on and, in fact, have a look in the past and see, “Oh, that’s pretty cool how much I’ve grown, how far I’ve come,” because in the day in, day out, you may not even realize it, just as you said, it seems like, “This is just how I operate. This is how I’ve always been.” No, it’s not.

Kwame Christian
Nope. Yeah, it’s powerful, man, and it’s very exciting, too. I think one of the things that was really helpful when it came to making better decisions, especially those emotionally heart-wrenching decisions, is I would journal how I would feel leading up to the decision, I would journal how I felt as I was making the decision, and then I would journal how I felt immediately after, and then as time passed. And so, it’s so interesting. It’s almost like watching a little kid jump into a pool for the first time, “I don’t want to do it. I don’t want to do it. I’m so scared. I’m so scared. Okay, I’m going to do it. Oh, that was scary. That wasn’t that bad. No, I feel really good now. Why didn’t I do that before?” And so, for me, one of the most empowering things is how I feel after the bad, the good decision. And I recognize that my emotions will lead me to make bad decisions that might feel good in the moment but feel bad for a very long time, and then I can set myself free with a good decision.

Now, the good decision will feel bad in the moment but will feel good after the fact. And so, when I see that freedom afterwards, I’m saying, “I’m not going to focus so much on the decision as I am going to focus on the future feeling of freedom after making the good decision.” And so, I’m like, “I want to make future Kwame happy. What would make future Kwame happy? I know Kwame in the present will feel really bad as he’s making this tough decision, but the future version of myself will appreciate it.”

And so, when I think about it through the lens of making future Kwame happy, that also helps me to have the right perspective, because I’m trying to play the long game. Usually, when it comes to good decision-making, it really comes down to prioritizing long-term benefits over short-term rewards. And when I continuously remember that, and I can see evidence of that throughout my life in this journal, then it helps me to feel confident in the decision, even if I don’t feel like doing the right thing in the moment.

Pete Mockaitis
Wisdom. Wisdom. So, you’re taking these notes, and I’m curious about the nuts and bolts here. Are they tagged by these categories? Or is it just one giant chronological situation? How do you find the relevant stuff from months past? What’s kind of the system that makes it work? We know how that gets captured. We know how it gets reviewed at rapid speed. How does it get organized such that it’s workable for you?

Kwame Christian
All right. Now, Pete, be ready to be disappointed because the organization is not strong. It is just a big old blob of notes, and that’s really what it is. But what I’ve started to do with time is categorize it by month. So, what month am I in, so I could go back into specific months now, but before it was, I would just put all of these notes into one iPhone notes document until the note became so big that the note wasn’t functioning anymore.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, wow, I’ve never gotten there before.

Kwame Christian
And then I would say, “Oh, okay, time to start a new one.” And so, the last year, I think it was eight different notes, like journal entries that were big, and each of them was probably and listening at, because I was listening at it for a long period of time so I was at like 400 or 500 words per minute as I’m reviewing that during Christmas break. Each one is about 10 to 12 hours long, so it’s a substantial amount of notes.

And so, I did the word count for the last year, it was over a million words of notes that I took. But this year I’m trying something new that’s been really helpful, and it was categorizing by month and giving every month a theme. So, what is the theme? And so, February, I had to let some folks go, so it was red February.

I had to make some really tough decisions, so I’m like, “Listen, okay, so I need to make these tough decisions in my company. What other tough decisions do I need to make in my life? What other things do I need to let go of?” So, I was focusing on some bad habits, some other things. I’m like, “All right, cool. I’m going to make some cuts this month.” And then I realized, red February hurts a lot. So, I said, “March is all about mindset. It’s mindset March. What can I do to be well again, to be more at peace?”

And so, I started to try to approach business as a meditation, approach life as a meditation, “How can I focus on my breathing through all of the decisions that I’m making, through all of the activities that I’m taking? And the worse that I’m feeling, the more I’m going to focus on my breathing. Can I turn life into a meditation?” And so that’s what March was about.

And then we were launching a program, Negotiate Anything Premium, and so April was all about just focusing on revenue. So how can I focus on making decisions that are geared towards revenue? Because going through the notes, I recognized that a lot of the decisions that I was making, they were about status. They were about image. They look good from the outside but the revenue really wasn’t there to substantiate the continuation of a lot of those strategies.

So, I’m like, “Let me evaluate this from a really focused business perspective. What can I do to focus on increasing revenue and increasing impact that we make with that revenue?” And so, that was the focus. So going through these months thematically has been really, really helpful because it’s not just an evaluation of what is occurring, it’s also helping me to make decisions in a way that help me to move my life in a specific direction with more intentionality.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s phenomenal. And so, then when you look back on things, it sounds like you just periodically are just listening kind of like often. But if you’ve got something from 18 months ago, you’re probably not going to listen to that, are you? You’re probably listening to the things you had one or two or three months ago. Is that accurate?

Kwame Christian
Yeah, 100%, because there’s limited utility in going that far back unless, honestly, if I just want to be entertained. But I try to go through it within 12 months, but this year I’ve been trying to go month to month. So, once I finish January, I’m going to review January and February, review February and March and so on. But again, that was leading to a lot of exhaustion, and so I’ve been actually challenging myself to make fewer notes and listen to the notes less. So, I’m still listening to it, but just trying to be in the moment.

Because part of what I discovered about myself in March is that a lot of times I can get so in my head about these things, it’s led to some overthinking in places where I should be in flow. So, when you think about just the psychology of flow, when you’re in that flow state, you’re not actively, really consciously, logically thinking about things. Your body and mind, they’re just kind of responding and reacting, and I know that I’ve consumed enough information, I’ve learned enough through my life that I can flow really well when I let go.

And so, it’s almost like I’m at this point where I’m trying to balance that depth of thoughts and my analytical thinking with my ability to let go and flow a little bit more. And so, to your point about avoiding burnout, I recognize that I have to kind of slow down with this retention, this process, because it’s been leading to burnout, and flow has been a focus.

So, I’ve actually, the last couple of months, this is going to sound very bizarre, but the last couple of months, I’ve been challenging myself to listen to more music and do less, and that’s actually been more rewarding, because I find, when I’m in conversation, when I’m on stage doing keynotes, when I’m doing podcasts and things like that, even when I’m just playing with my sons Kai and Dominic, I’m more present because I’m not over-analyzing things. So, it’s about finding that balance, because anything done out of proportion can be problematic.

Pete Mockaitis
And I don’t think you’re alone with that music comment. I remember at one point, Apple Music had a podcast advertising campaign, so it was on, they were advertising Apple Music offer when it was newer on Podcasts. And I was like, “Boy, there’s so much talk and noise and stuff going on. Like, boy, you know what’s great? Music.”

And I just thought that was such a novel like, “Wow, do you need to sell us on listening to music? It’s like an ancient human delight.” It’s like, “You know what’s great? Eating food. Give it a shot.” But, no, it’s like they’re meeting them where they’re at, “Hey, regular podcast listener, remember music? That’s a great thing to listen to as well.” So, you’re not alone there, and it’s good to be reminded.

Kwame Christian
Absolutely. And now, Pete, I am not perfect. Now, I don’t think I’ve told you this, this newest nerd move that I’ve been doing. So, I’ve taken the notes that I’ve written, like all, like millions of words, and I’ve put it into ChatGPT, and I said, “Okay,” because there are these new apps that are AI music generators.

And so, I don’t know if you’ve ever used these things. The one that I use is Suno AI, and you can give it lyrics and describe the vibe that you want to create, and then it’ll make the music, just brand-new music just off the cuff. And so, I told ChatGPT to take the themes that come up the most frequently in my journal, “What are the top 10 themes?” It’s like decision-making, family, legacy, business, those type of things, just, “What are the top 10 things? All right. Now I want you to make lyrics for music off of those things.”

So, I take those lyrics and put it into Suno AI, and so now a lot of times, where I’m like, “I’m going to vibe to some music, but I want to make sure my music has a good message, and I’d love it if it was talking about things that are relevant to me. Because, I don’t know, when I’m working out, I’m a family man, I try to help my community, talking about drugs and murder in my music. That’s not really the vibe, but I just like the beat.” But now I can take my journal entries and turn them into cool lyrics. It’s motivating.

Kwame Christian
It’s so powerful, I love those things. And, Pete, if you want to, it takes 60 seconds to make this. You want me to make you something, a song for you real quick? I can do that right now.

Pete Mockaitis
So, yep, let’s roll with it, see what happens. 

Kwame Christian
Yeah. Well, now, this app, it has the integration in there. So, it’ll make it yourself. So now, I’ll give it the inspiration. Let’s do customize. I’ll just give it some lyrics. It’ll randomize it. I’ll just say, “Create an inspirational song for my friend named Pete Mockaitis. He is a family man, a businessman, a hard worker, a deep thinker, always looking to optimize decision-making and life in general, and he loves to help people.”

Pete Mockaitis
Can it be a country song?

Kwame Christian
Oh, yeah.

Kwame Christian
So, I’ll say country song, male vocals, you know, inspirational, you want inspirational?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, yeah.

Kwame Christian
A little vibe. Okay, the song title it chose is “Rise and Shine, Pete.”

[Song playing]

♪ Rise and shine, Pete ♪ ♪ Family man, true and sweet ♪ ♪ Hard work in the ground, deep thinker, sharp mind ♪

Kwame Christian
It’s not bad. It’s not bad.

Pete Mockaitis
So, it’s good enough so I want to know what comes next.

Kwame Christian
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
I was like, “Why did you pull away from the microphone?”

Well, now you got me thinking about affirmations, like if you could put those to music, that might make it more interesting or more impactful, because that’s, ideally, what music should do. It stirs within you emotion and the human spirit. So, that’s fun. Okay. Wow, Kwame, you’re putting all of us to shame, right? We’re just brushing our teeth in silence, and you’ve got custom AI generated inspiring songs and/or rapid playing notes of brilliance. I just feel honored that I was able to draw you in a game of chess. That’s my greatest achievement with this great mind.

Kwame Christian
That was such a good game. It was a great game, and I think it was the perfect ending too. It was a draw. It was a lot of fun.

Pete Mockaitis
And I think you could’ve beaten me if you really wanted to put in the time, but I’m glad you didn’t. So, anything else we should mention before we hear about another round of your favorite things?

Kwame Christian
Yeah, so check out Negotiate Anything Premium. Of course, we have the podcast Negotiate Anything. It’s the number one negotiation podcast, but we have a premium offering for subscribers who could listen ad-free and some bonuses, “Ask me anything,” so you could ask me questions. I answer your negotiator-related questions. But that’s the main thing that we’re working on right now. We’re really excited about the way it turned out.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Now, could you share with us a favorite quote?

Kwame Christian
Yes. So, for me, one thing that I’ve been enjoying, and this is a quote I made up, “You don’t get bonus points for not using your resources.” And I feel like a lot of times, when it comes to the difficult situations that we find ourselves in, we almost think that there is some kind of valor in not accepting help from others and not using the resources available. And the people who are the most successful are the people who utilize the resources at their disposal.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, Kwame, that’s really, I love that. That’s hitting me.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And how about a favorite study?

Kwame Christian
So, my favorite study that I’ve been referring to a lot for my negotiation clients is a study on the principle called anchoring. So, I believe it’s the most powerful negotiation technique at our disposal and it’s really more of a psychological principle. It’s like a priming effect. And so, with anchoring, what you do in negotiation is you start off the negotiation with the most aggressive request that you can reasonably justify with the data available.

And so, what they found is that just having a more aggressive first offer dictates the outcome more than almost anything in negotiation.

Pete Mockaitis
No kidding.

Kwame Christian
I kid you not. And so, well, they did as study in real estate, and so they found that with anchoring, even with experienced realtors, it worked for them. So, what they had them do is go into a home and look at the home, and then there would be a list price. And so, look at the list price and then look at the comps. And then you would make a decision on what you think is a fair price for this home.

And so, in the study, what they did was they said, “All right, the list price is, let’s say, $200,000 in this scenario,” and then in the other scenario, the list price was $250,000. In the other scenario, the list price was $300,000. But the comps were all the same. And so, they’re like, “All right, come up with your estimation for what you’d think is a fair price for this home.” And, not surprisingly, based on the psychology of anchoring, the people who were primed with that anchor of 200 guessed an  average less than the people who were primed with 250, who then guessed an average less than the people who were primed with 300,000.

And so, my favorite anchoring study was actually the Gandhi study. So, what they had them do is they separated people into two different groups, and so they asked them ridiculous questions but they asked them the same question, the same second question. So, the first question they asked to Group A was, “Do you think Gandhi was older than or younger than 13 when he died?” Right? Ridiculous. Every picture we see of Gandhi, he’s very old.

And then the other group, they said, “Do you think Gandhi was older than or younger than 130 when he died?” Again, ridiculous. He was old, but not 130. And then they asked them the same second question, “How old do you think Gandhi was when he died?” And the group that was primed with 13 guessed on average 20 years younger than the group that was primed with 130.

So even when there is not legitimate information to back it up, the priming effect from anchoring still works. And so, that’s why, for me, with my negotiations, this is the simple rule that I follow. If I have as much information or more information than the other side, I’m always going to make the first offer because anchoring is so powerful.

If I have less information than the other side, I don’t have enough information to give a competent anchor because I might undervalue it unwittingly, so I’ll counter in that case. But anchoring is so strong, I always find a way to make the first offer if I have enough information to make a competent first offer.

Pete Mockaitis
Undervalue it unwittingly. Well, I guess if you’re on the purchase side, the buyer side, you would want a lower price.

Kwame Christian
Right.

Pete Mockaitis
So, it’s like, “Hey, this isn’t going to work unless I can get a customer acquisition cost of less than $1,000.” So, that’s a form of anchoring. It’s like, “Okay. Well, hey, we got the impressions and the conversion rates and da-da-da, so you’re exerting the pull.” I’ve heard that even judges who see irrelevant numbers, like a housing street address, different housing street addresses in a document, can, in turn, impact their judgment for what’s an equitable distribution of assets. It has nothing to do with the case at hand, it’s just a number. It got in your brain and then it’s in there.

Kwame Christian
Yup. And, Pete, with these studies, it’s like the researchers almost got playful with it because it seems like they’re saying, “How far can we push this nonsense?” Because they did a study where they anchored with the last four digits of a phone number. So, the people who had nine, eight, and seven, as the first number, they were anchored different from the people who had like 0, 1, 2, or 3, just based on those numbers.

So, back when I was practicing law more frequently, when I was making demand letters, if I was asking for a lot more money, I would write the date out numerically. I would write it with as many numbers as possible. But when I was asking for a lower number, I would just write out the date, and say January 1, you know, and not even put the rest of the date because I’m like, “Everything has an impact. I don’t know what that impact is, but I know what anchoring is going to do, so I’m going to go small numbers if I want a small number, big numbers if I want a big number.”

Pete Mockaitis
“Hey, I know it said 10,000, you were hoping for $50,000? But $10,000 is a lot more than January 1, so, I mean, in a way, it’s a bargain.” Well, yeah, that is wild, and I think a good lesson. And that’s also a good lesson just in preparation, in terms of knowing we are hyper-susceptible to these.

Do your research in advance to determine what is a number you can truly live with so you have that influence inside of you, as opposed to, “Well, you know what, we’re going to take a call and just kind of see what they come up with.” It’s like, “That’s kind of playing a dangerous game. You may find that you accept an unreasonable thing as reasonable just because you didn’t get yourself settled somewhere sensible in advance.”

Kwame Christian
Yeah. And, again, Pete, this gets really deep too because, you know, I like to make jokes every once in a while, but in a negotiation, I might make an anchoring joke, right? So, imagine you’re negotiating for a higher salary, and so you go into your boss and you act all serious, and you know a reasonable price might be, let’s say, $150,000 is reasonable. You’re at $140,000, you’re trying to get to $150,000 that’s a reasonable leap.

And so, you say, “Well, I know this might be a little bit awkward but I wanted to have a conversation about compensation.” “All right. Well, what did you have in mind?” “Well, I was thinking is would I want $653,000? No, I’m just kidding, I’m just kidding. But honestly, what I think is reasonable, if we could get to 155,000, that’s what I’d like.”

So, if you say something ridiculous as a joke, you have a little bit of tension that is diffused with a little silly humor, and then you give the real number, the contrast principle still has an effect, “I’m going to do a fake anchor with a joke, then do the real anchor, base it with data and science and the research.” But then it makes whatever you’re asking a lot more reasonable in content, when you consider the contrast principle there, too.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, then that gives you so much leeway with your joke in terms of if you say, “Well, I saw an article about a prompt engineer getting paid $360,000. And I said I know how to talk into, or type into ChatGPT, so that’s kind of what I was hoping for. But the market comp suggests to me…”

Kwame Christian
Exactly. Because you can think about it on the other side. Like, the anxiety, like the adrenaline will start pumping, they’re like, “Are you seriously going to ask? Oh, thank goodness.” And one of the best emotions to feel that’s truly undervalued is relief. Give them that feeling of relief, and now it just changes the whole vibe but also has a significant psychological impact.

Pete Mockaitis
And, you know what’s funny, I’ve also done that with my wife. If I have to deliver some bad news, it’s like, “Okay, so everybody’s safe. There were no injuries. We are financially secure. The structure of the home is still intact. However, I broke this thing and I’m sorry.” It’s like, “Oh, okay.”

Kwame Christian
Exactly. That’s a perfect example. Great example.

Pete Mockaitis
Because it does. It’s like, “Okay.” Because in terms of relief, she’s like, “Everybody’s safe.” “Okay. It must be pretty bad if that’s where we’re starting. Oh, okay. You just broke the dishwasher. Okay, that was dumb. You shouldn’t have broken the dishwasher, but I’m not going to give you a hard time about it because I guess you’re right, in the grand scheme of things, we’re okay.”

Kwame Christian
I love that example. That’s good.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Kwame Christian
Favorite book. Right now, I am really liking Unlearning Silence by Elaine Lin Hering. So, she is a Harvard law grad.

Pete Mockaitis
We had her on the show.

Kwame Christian
Oh, you had her? Oh, great. That’s great. Yeah, Elaine is amazing. And so, with her approach, it’s not just about the negotiation excellence because she has that in spades. It’s also about recognizing that sometimes people don’t feel comfortable standing up and speaking out about the things that are really meaningful for them. So, with that book, she analyzes what could be holding you back and then what you need to do to have that conversation and then how to have it more effectively.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Kwame Christian
Favorite tool right now, I mean, it would be hard not to say tools like Voice Dream and Suno AI and ChatGPT after this conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
You got it. And favorite habit?

Kwame Christian
My favorite habit right now is I’m really enjoying going to the gym. That’s something we bond over, too. I’m recognizing that it is a keystone habit for me because, for me, like the gym has been a core source of socialization. And you would love this because I recognize there was a hole in my social game when it came to creating relationships out of thin air. Like, if there’s somebody that I don’t know at all and have no connection with, I didn’t know how to just go up to that person and start a conversation.

So, as I was working out, I was learning how to do that because I read in a book written by a spy, The Code of Trust, Robin Dreeke. He talked about how spies would approach people and start organic conversations out of nothing. And I was like, “No way it’s that easy.” So, I started to hone that skill at the gym. And so, for me, after five years of doing that, because of course I’m keeping track, I have a list now of 306 people that I have met in the gym over the past few years.

Pete Mockaitis
This is one facility, 306 people.

Kwame Christian
It’s two gyms now, two gyms.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, my gosh. Wow, hardcore.

Kwame Christian
But yeah, that’s still a lot.

Pete Mockaitis
You go to two different gyms for your working out?

Kwame Christian
Well, I moved. So, it’s like 10 minutes away, right? It’s the same gym, different locations, but it’s been great. And what’s been funny, Pete, is that I’ve made some really great relationships there. I’ve had people who became employees of the company. That’s how I closed Chase Bank as a client with just making these relationships from the gym. So, yeah, physically, it’s been great.

It’s been helpful in terms of pushing myself harder in the gym. It helps me to understand how I can push myself harder in life, make these social connections. I feel a lot smarter because I have more energy during the day, and my family and my colleagues at work, they can tell days that I miss the gym. They’re like, “Hmm, something’s off Kwame. Did you go to the gym?” I was like, “No, I didn’t go to the gym today.” Yeah, they can tell. So going to the gym has been really, really helpful, not just for physical health but also mental health.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now, I’m curious. Well, we got to have you on yet again, because I’m imagining, so let’s just say here I’m filling up a water bottle, and you are also in line to fill up your water bottle, what might you say to me here in this gym situation where we find ourselves in?

Kwame Christian
Ah, yes. Okay, so this is the move. This is the move. What you do is you make an observation that both of you can appreciate or recognize.

Pete Mockaitis
“Water is good, huh?”

Kwame Christian
Yeah, “Water is pretty cold today, right, buddy?”

Pete Mockaitis
But, no, seriously though, it’s kind of tricky, like I can’t. I’m in that situation. Like, maybe you want to talk to somebody for any number of reasons, and that’s what I think come up with is something really lame like, “I sure am thirsty. How about you?” And then I think, “Don’t say that. That’s dumb.” So, what do you come up with?

Kwame Christian
So, sometimes it is as simple as like, “Hey, I’ve seen you in the gym so many times, I feel like I should introduce you myself. Hi, I’m Kwame.”

Pete Mockaitis
That’s it?

Kwame Christian
That usually works. I usually would do that with guys. Approaching a woman is different. Because of the dynamic in the gym, you have to be really mindful of that. But sometimes it’s a unique exercise that they might be doing and it’s just genuine curiosity. None of it is fabricated. I’ll say, “What? I’ve never seen that before. What do you…what do you…what does that…what does that do? Like, why do you do it that way?”

So, I’ll ask for advice, and they say, “Oh, yeah, it works the rotator cuff in that way.” I was like, “Ah, I’ve had shoulder problems. That’s really helpful. My name’s Kwame, by the way.” Or if I see shoes that I’ve never seen before, I’m like, “I really like that pattern. I’ve never seen that color combination.” “Oh, thanks, man. I appreciate it. I got it because of blah, blah, blah.” Start the conversation there. And then just say, “Oh, I’m Kwame, by the way.”

And so, whenever you introduce yourself, then people always reciprocate, and then you just build from there. And so, now it’s just like gym, “Hi’s” turn into, “Hey, how are you doing? Oh, what are you up to?” and then the relationship deepens. But you definitely want to respect people where it’s like, “Oh, you make that introduction, but you can recognize they prefer to be left alone.” You can get that vibe, and I think the background and negotiation and body language can help too because you pay attention to the person’s feet and the orientation of the feet.

So, if their feet are staying square with you, they want to stay engaged in the conversation. If I say see the feet start to shift in the other direction, I recognize they want to leave, and then I say, “Hey, well, listen, let me let you get back to the workout. I just wanted to introduce myself. I hope you have a great day,” and then that’s it. And then you just build from there.

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

Kwame Christian
LinkedIn is the best place. So, if you want to connect, I post on LinkedIn every day. Of course, we have the podcast. The podcast comes out every day, and if you like cute children, follow me on Instagram. That’s another place I frequent, too.

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

Kwame Christian
Yeah, I would say start thinking about your decision-making process. What is it that really moves you to make decisions? Because a lot of times, you’ll be surprised. Because I used to think, I am a deep thinker, clearly, because of the conversation, but I didn’t recognize how much emotion was my emotions were swaying my decisions, and especially what emotions were swaying my decisions.

Because I often thought about negative emotions swaying decisions negatively, but a lot of my bad decisions were made because of the positive feelings I was feeling at the moment too. So, just start taking notice of the decisions that you’re making, and how you were thinking and feeling, especially feeling leading of that decision, and that’s how you can start to optimize decision-making so you can start to have a better life.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Kwame, this has been a treat once again. Keep on rocking.

Kwame Christian
Hey, my pleasure. Thanks for having me, buddy. Appreciate it.