Tag

Career Management Archives - Page 2 of 30 - How to be Awesome at Your Job

986: The New Rules for Achieving in the Modern World with Asheesh Advani

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Asheesh Advani discusses why the old rules of leadership no longer apply—and what to do differently today.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why our idea of achievement needs a rework 
  2. Why to befriend both older and younger people 
  3. An under-utilized tactic for dramatically accelerating your career learning 

About Asheesh

Asheesh Advani is the CEO of JA (Junior Achievement) Worldwide, one of the largest NGOs in the world dedicated to preparing youth for employment and entrepreneurship. During his leadership tenure, JA Worldwide has been selected annually as one of the top 10 social good organizations in the world and been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Advani is also an accomplished entrepreneur, having led two venture-backed businesses from start-up to acquisition. He is an in-demand speaker and regular contributor at major conferences, having served as a panelist or moderator at the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, the Young Presidents Organization, and Fortune 500 corporate gatherings.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

  • Jenni KayneUse the code AWESOME15 to get 15% off your order!

Asheesh Advani Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Asheesh, welcome.

Asheesh Advani
It’s great to be on the show.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to hear about your wisdom. Can you kick us off by sharing a particularly surprising or fascinating or counterintuitive bit you discovered while putting together your book, Modern Achievement?

Asheesh Advani
So, I’ve been at this, trying to make this a high-quality, very readable book for several months now, and I really thought I was writing it for a younger audience, aspiring leaders, people in their 20s and early 30s who are at the beginning of their career.

What I’ve learned, now that people have started to read the book, is when you write a book for a certain audience and another audience reads it, they actually find it less threatening or direct. So, like lessons that you read written for somebody else, you’re actually more likely to take them in. That was very counterintuitive. People who are like 50 and 60, and people who are even high school kids are coming up to me and said, “Oh, my God, I love this lesson” even though it was written for somebody who’s from a different age group, and that’s very counterintuitive.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that is fascinating. And you know what, I’ve lived that with my, I’ve got young kids, six, five, and one, and when we’re watching a show like, I don’t know, “Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood” or “Bluey” or something, it’s like, “This lesson isn’t for me, it’s for the kids, and yet that’s really pretty good.” It happens over and over again.

Asheesh Advani
And I’ll tell you, I’ve got twin boys who just graduated high school and just started university, and one of my motivations for writing this book, which is all about life lessons for aspiring leaders, is they don’t listen to me at all. My kids do not listen to me. So, I figured this is a way for me to convey all the things I want them to know, and they can read it at a time that makes sense for them, not make sense for me. And you are a parent too so I think you know what I’m talking about.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, so tell us, what’s sort of the big idea or core of thesis in your book, Modern Achievement?

Asheesh Advani
Well, most achievement books, historically, have been just written for a different age and different time. A young person graduating from high school or university today is, on average, going to have 20 different jobs at least, and potentially as many as seven different careers over the course of their working lives. That amount of change means the idea of achievement is also different.

So, most achievement books are written where you set a long-term goal, you write it down, you visualize it, and the universe helps it happen because you’ve been clear about it. But if you’re going to have that many jobs and that many different careers, the idea of achievement has to be not just about long-term goal attainment, but also about the process and the journey to achievement.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, could you give us an example of someone who’s perhaps made the switch or picked up this philosophy that’s more modern to their enrichment?

Asheesh Advani
Well, I think most young people are already starting to think this way. You know, one of the lessons in the book, for example, one of my favorites, actually, is make friends who are five to ten years older than you, and most young people tend to hang out with their peers who are their same age. So, you’ve got to be somewhat intentional.

If many of your career transitions are going to involve sort of networking, you have to be much more intentional about building these networks of people who will be one step ahead of you in your career, who can either promote you or help you, advise you, be mentors and role models, and that’s just an example of something which, at least, I’ve seen, there are young people already doing, and we share some of the stories because Junior Achievement, I don’t know if you know too much about JA but…

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I volunteered back in the day at Bain, and I just gave someone like the World of Work, or World at Work chart to help them think through career stuff, so I’m a fan. I’m on board.

Asheesh Advani
Oh, my God. You’re a fan. I love it. I love it. I didn’t know that when we agreed to do this. That’s awesome. So, yeah, so Junior Achievement has been around for over 100 years now, it’s an amazing organization. I’ve been in my role as CEO of JA Worldwide now for about nine years, and I’ve seen us become more global, really spread this way of thinking, being optimistic and being intentional about your career development to parts of the world where young people are hungry for this, really hungry for this knowledge.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, understood. And that point about high-achieving folks hanging out with folks who are older than them is really resonating. I was just chatting yesterday with my buddy, Justin, who’s fantastic, and he is in our men’s group, and he is the youngest and all of us are five to ten, maybe a little more, years older than him. And yet, it is totally working for him because, sure enough, he is finding himself in career situations where he is widely recognized as a high performer. He’s doing great.

And part of that is he is just internalizing the wisdom and pro tips of people working in their jobs who have been working there longer, and they just share all the little tidbits they’ve learned and how they think about things, and he’s just getting those quicker and faster than others who are only hanging out with people their age.

Asheesh Advani
Well, when I wrote that lesson in the book, and I should mention the book is co-authored with Marshall Goldsmith, so we really collaborated on this, and Marshall is a celebrated leadership thinker and knows much more than me. He came back and said, “Asheesh, it’s not just about young people having these role models and friends that they can learn from, but it’s also people older looking sort of back and saying, ‘Other people five to ten years younger than me, who can help me with my next phase,’” because people are just living longer and having longer working lives. So, we adapted the life lesson to actually be both five to ten years older and five to ten years younger. And I’m not sure if you felt that you’ve learned from your friend, Justin, you said his name is?

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely, I sure have.

Asheesh Advani
So, I think it really works. It works both ways. It really does.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s good. Well, so then, I’m curious, you had a little tidbit in your book copy, “Classic books on achievement, like those by Napoleon Hill, Brian Tracy, and Stephen Covey, were written for a much different world. Today’s young leaders need a fresh approach for achieving success in their lives and careers.”

And so, I hear you in terms of we’ve got a different environment associated with, hey, more job switches, etc. I’m curious, if you think anything, let’s just pick on Stephen Covey, shall we? I’m curious if there’s any particular messages from Stephen Covey, like maybe there’s one of them seven habits that needs to be revamped or thought about differently in our environment today?

Asheesh Advani

Well, to be honest, I don’t remember all of the seven habits from Stephen Covey and which one I would adapt or change. I will say that in Napoleon Hill, particularly, at that moment in time, there was clearly the beginning of this idea of a job for life, right? The idea of the college you get into and the first job that you have will determine your path.

And, certainly, when I went to university, now well over 20 years ago, it really did feel that way. Like, everybody wanted that job in investment banking or consulting, which would give them a career path, which would then lead to the next good thing, which led to the next good thing, and getting into that one college got you the job in investment banking or consulting or law or medicine or whatever you were going to do.

And the reality is, today, that is just no longer the case. So, I don’t know, to answer your question, if Stephen Covey had anything that was directly as linear as what I saw in Napoleon Hill’s books. But the job market of today, and I really say this for all the parents, obsessing over what college your kid gets into and obsessing over the first job that they have is just no longer as needed as maybe 20 years ago when that’s where everyone’s head was.

Pete Mockaitis

You know, it’s funny, Asheesh, you mentioned your first job out of college having huge impact. I remember that was the exact thought process I went through when I thought, “Okay, what job do I want out of college? I want to have some skills and some network to do any number of things.” So, strategy consulting is what I want, and it worked out. I was at Bain for some time right out of college, and I thought that it has served me well.

And so, I guess back in the day, that was 2006 that I graduated from college and did that, and it seems like that was swell for me. Are you thinking now it makes less of an impact if we get that start at a top consulting firm or bank or Google or wherever is hot, fresh out of college now? And can you share the underlying evidence for that?

Asheesh Advani

Well, I will say that it’s always important to surround yourself with people who push you. It’s always important to surround yourself with opportunities that are sort of focused on giving you expansive knowledge, not just narrow and deep knowledge, particularly early in your career. So, I think consulting jobs are great. I started my career in strategy consulting as well so I know exactly what the motivation was for that job and exactly what some of the things, at least, I got out of it.

I will say today the linear path of, “Okay, I’m going to go to a top consulting firm, then go get a top MBA, then go into either an industry or a related field,” that path is fundamentally different today. Just to give you one data point, which I think drives this home. If you believe the World Economic Forum Future of Jobs data analysis, over 40% of our skills every five years will need to be re-learned or re-skilled, partly because of AI.

So, 40%, and even if you believe that number is too high, because the way they got that data was through surveys, so it’s possible that when you ask people, particularly during the hype of AI, they may over-exaggerate that number. So, let’s assume it’s half that number. Let’s assume that one-fifth of our skills, 20% of our skills, have to be re-learned or re-skilled in a different way every five years. That is a shockingly high number.

That means that you’re going to have to effectively reinvent yourself many times over the course of your career. So, the job to really have is one which encourages you to always be curious and be willing to learn new things.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, so then, here and now, let’s say we’ve got listeners, they’re in the middle of their careers, maybe the early side, maybe right in the middle, what are some of the top strategies and tactics that are implied by this new environment and your perspective on modern achievement?

Asheesh Advani

Well, so we’ve structured the book to have 30 lessons, and the lessons are organized into three sections: fixed, flexible, and freestyle. Some fixed lessons, like, for example, writing down your intentions and goals, have been around ever since the Stephen Covey and Napoleon Hill days, and we put that in the classic fixed section. So, these are things that don’t change based on time and place.

Flexible are things that do change based on time and place. So, for example, when you’re in your 30s or whether you work in a different type of organization versus small versus large, one of those might be how to manage your burn rate. So, one of the points I make in the book is to keep your burn rate low because it gives you lots of optionality. In a world of this much change, there may be times that you actually want to, for example, pursue an entrepreneurial path.

I’ll tell you one story. I’m a tech entrepreneur by background before I joined Junior Achievement, and I remember interviewing a senior executive for a role at one of the tech companies that I ran, and he really wanted to work with us, he really wanted to work with us, but he built up a cost structure that required him to not be able to take a job for less than $350,000 base salary.

Because he had, like, kids in private school, he was paying for his country club memberships, and other things that were really hard for him to let go of, and that dramatically limited his options for what he could do next. So, it made it impossible for him to accept, or actually we didn’t make him the offer because we said it’s just unsustainable over the long run.

So, I tell you that story because I think a lot of mid-career professionals are just surrounding themselves with peers that increase their burn rate through peer pressure, and that limits your options in an age where you’re going to have 20 jobs and seven careers.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And so, just to be clear, we’re talking about burn rate. This is the rate at which we burn through our own personal cash to live our life in terms of the food we eat, and the house we live in, and our recurring expenses.

Asheesh Advani

It’s entrepreneur speak for recurring expenses. I tell the story in the book as well of when I was in college, we did a magazine article asking recent graduates about their expenses and their salary and their bonus. It was, I think, one of the most popular articles we ever wrote…

Pete Mockaitis

Sounds good, people’s money.

Asheesh Advani

…because nobody knew anything about this. Everybody was aspiring for these jobs because of vague reputational goals, and they had no idea what it actually meant with regards to salary, bonus, and expenses. And the top, top graduates we interviewed had these amazing jobs at all the best banks and consulting firms, but they were not saving any money because they basically built up an expense side to keep up with the Joneses and were spending a lot on apartments and entertainment and travel.

So, it’s important to think about that in terms of the choices you make and the environments you surround yourself with.

Pete Mockaitis

You know, Asheesh, it’s funny, you’re bringing me, we’re talking about the back in the day, I’m thinking about my consulting time. I remember one time I was taking a bus to a party and my colleagues at Bain were kind of teasing me, they said, “You know we make a lot of money, right?” And I said, “Yes, thank you. I’m aware that for a 23-year-old, this salary is great. But I also have some plans associated with perhaps starting my own business in a couple of years, so I would like to have that flexibility, those options.”

And it’s so funny how that happens little by little, things get locked in, and then you do, you have fewer options. And it’s funny, when you said he couldn’t take that job, I guess I think about maybe words rather literally, it’s like, “Well, he could,” but he has to say, “Hey, honey, we’re pulling the kids out of private school and going to public school. We’re selling this house and getting a much smaller, not as nice house.”

And so, it might be impractical, but it’s sort of like, “Well, how badly do you want it?” And in practice, we’re rarely able to turn on a dime. Like, “Let’s change all the circumstances of our life quite quickly because of a cool opportunity. And the children and the family as a whole has gotten rather accustomed to how things have been, and they will probably not appreciate it being yanked away from them.”

Asheesh Advani

It feels like you’re going backwards at times, when, in reality, you’re just creating more options for yourself.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s a great tip right there. Very practical, “Watch your burn rate. What are your recurring expenses?” And, hopefully, you’ve got a nice healthy buffer with some savings and some growing savings so you’ve got more options to do cool things, as you’re making career choices. Any other top strategies, tactics that are super handy for modern leaders?

Asheesh Advani

Well, one thing, is this idea of going meta. Going meta means stepping back and looking at yourself as if somebody else were looking at you. And in education theory now, teachers tell students to actually reflect on what they’ve learned, to write down, literally write down at the end of a lecture, what they learned.

We didn’t do that when we were in school. We didn’t take a step back and actually have to reflect on what we’d learned, and applying that to your life, I think, is very powerful. Things like mindfulness, in many ways, allow you to have a step back, and a lot of people don’t do it.

A lot of people do it at milestones like birthdays, anniversaries, and maybe when you write your annual resolutions. But regularly, being reflective, it’s actually very empowering to say, “Hey, I just went through this, this project was just done, or this initiative was just started and finished,” and taking a step back for a second and saying, “Okay, what did I actually learn from this?” and writing it down.

Pete Mockaitis

I love that. And so, now I’m thinking about our episode with B.J. Fogg with habits and sort of triggers or prompts. It sounds like, in this context, the trigger or the prompt is whenever you finish a thing, “Let’s reflect about that thing and be finished.”

Asheesh Advani

Well, I love Marshall’s book, Triggers. I know that’s a little bit of a different concept, but you’re absolutely right, this idea of pausing, reflecting at the end of a project. What Marshall tends to put in his books, particularly the Triggers book, is the way you ask a question is so important. So, he, for example, had me participate in a group which he calls LPR, Life Plan Review Group, where the way we asked ourselves questions had such an impact on our mindset.

So, for example, we asked ourselves questions every week over the course of a summer, “Have I done my best to …?” dot, dot, dot. And it changes the accountability from, “Geez, I’m trying to do this project,” “I want to be better at tennis,” “I want to be a better father,” “I want to be better at work,” from, “Oh, did this go right?” “Did I win the game in tennis?” “Did I do well at work on the project?” to, “Have I done my best to become good at tennis this week?” “Have I done my best to be a good father this week?” So powerful to just change the framing, it makes it all about your own personal efforts, not what the results are.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, that’s good. That’s good. Well, so I’m also curious, are there some things that you recommend we stop doing? Is there stuff that’s outdated that we should just forget about and stop doing because it’s no good anymore?

Asheesh Advani

Well, I’d say you are certainly well aware of the debate right now about technology and social media. One thing I recommend in the book is to connect beyond the screen. We spend so much of our time on Zoom calls. In fact, there’s all this great research now about how white-collar workers end up spending more time in meetings than ever in history, partly because Zoom calls have made that so easy.

And I recommend, in one of the chapters and one of the lessons, to connect with people beyond the screen and really be intentional about that. Another thing which I think is a big change is, I mentioned fixed and flexible. The third section of the book is freestyle. So, the framework is fixed, flexible, freestyle. I mentioned fixed are classic lessons, flexible change based on time and place. Freestyle are lessons and your reaction to rules are created by you based on your own unique strengths.

And at JA, we’ve introduced this framework to the organization, where there are fixed things that are global, flexible things that vary based on time and place, such as in Europe versus Africa, and freestyle things, which are truly determined by the organizations and staff on the ground in every geography that we operate in because we’re in 118 countries. And I do think there’s something very empowering and powerful about creating your own rules and having much more agency in some of the choices that you make.

And when we asked the young people to tell us about some of these rules, some people, like some young people talked about the importance of embracing your inexperience and cluelessness, or the importance of really experiencing a different path relative to what your friends are doing. So, we got some really good insights from young people who shared their own story with us.

Pete Mockaitis

And I think that’s a pretty handy framework in general as you think about your policies, your rules, “Is this fixed? Is it flexible? Is it freestyle? Is this always everywhere for everyone? Is it under these sorts of circumstances? Or is it totally individualized?” That’s useful in and of itself in terms of, as you think about a rule, a guideline, a policy, how ironclad and locked in is it. It’s just a useful way to think about stuff?

To follow up on your point with regard to social media, and meetings, and Zoom, is your suggestion that we do less of it and how?

Asheesh Advani

So, the how gets complicated because it depends on which organization you are part of and what role you have. If you’re a leader and you’ve got some degree of control over these or if you’re not yet a leader and you really have to participate because of where you are in your career. One recommendation I would have is to create protected time for yourself.

And I think that no matter what role you have, whether you have a leadership role or whether you don’t have full control over your calendar, I think you have the ability to protect time, and you can use that time for in-person meetings, you can use that time to actually get writing done if you’ve got the kind of role that it involves writing or producing.

But a lot of, I think, particularly young leaders are scared to block off time on their calendar for things that matter to them, and I do think in the world of 20 jobs and seven careers, where you’ve got to really invest in your own personal development, that’s important.

Pete Mockaitis

Now when you say scared to block off time, what are some of the underlying concerns there?

Asheesh Advani

Well, I think there’s this general feeling when you’re early in your career that you want to be in the meeting, that being in the meeting allows you to get knowledge, allows you to build relationships, keeps you connected. And they’re definitely, I would say, particularly for aspiring leader personalities, a desire to be in the action.

But that comes with some trade-offs, and you have to realize that it’s sometimes okay to not be in every meeting, and it’s okay to really own the project that you own, and make sure it goes well and spend that other time you’d otherwise be in these meetings where you get to hear and learn, really investing in your personal development and investing in other things that are important to you.

Pete Mockaitis

And when we do that investing in personal development, what do you find to be some of the most high-yield possible activities that we can do?

Asheesh Advani

Well, I mean, there’s such a wide range. Right now, I would say there’s both skillset things where you learn new skills, everything from obviously all the AI things that are coming out, through to mindset-oriented activities. And the mindset-oriented activities, I think, are very powerful. I’ll give you one example.

So, I asked somebody on one of our boards if I could job-shadow him for a day, and everyone can do this because almost everybody says yes if asked. It’s such a compliment to be asked to have somebody, basically, follow you around for a day and learn from you.

Pete Mockaitis

I’m imagining saying, “If you want, it’s going to be super boring, dude.”

Asheesh Advani

Well, because we’re all on Zoom calls that’s why it feels super boring. But I will say, certainly, and I did this before the pandemic, so, yes, the world has changed on this dimension. But, in fact, this particular person still goes in the office every day, so I guess it hasn’t changed for him. And I learned so much from spending the day with him.

I learned how he interacts with people, I learned new frameworks, he’s a CEO of a large organization, so I learned how he communicates and I really got to see the nuance of how he manages different types of people. I still talk about it because it’s happened, what, seven years ago now but it’s so powerful that I did that. We actually have a program at JA where we do job shadows where young people are allowed to shadow executives for a day and encouraged to do it as a career development exercise.

And we even have this amazing program called “Leaders for a Day” where some of the top students get to actually follow, like, world leaders for a day. And we get them in front of either politicians or CEOs or people who are very, very prominent who agree to do it, and it’s transformational because it allows, it opens up your mind to things you just didn’t know existed that you could achieve.

For a person who’s looking for a way to invest in their personal development beyond just reading great books and listening to great podcasts, I do think doing something experiential, like a job shadow, is transformational.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, and it’s so intriguing, this job shadow is one version is a job that you think you might want to do, or someone who’s more senior than you to get a sense for “What does that look like? Or what do those skills look like?” I’m also thinking it might be interesting even to pick a job of something that it would just be good for you to learn even though it might not be super senior.

For example, I’m thinking if you feel uncomfortable with conflict, it might be interesting to shadow a police officer as he’s doing a day of evictions, or a collections agency, like something, like, “What would be one of the most contentious, unpleasant, conflict-driven things, jobs? Let’s go shadow that.” And that may well be a harrowing experience that could also give you some real growth.

Asheesh Advani

I love that idea. I mean, we think of job shadow very much about mindset shift, exposing people to things they didn’t know existed, but you could absolutely apply it to skillsets as well, conflict resolution skillsets. We’ve got amazing lawyers, for example, who, all day, spend their time negotiating, and negotiation skills are sorely lacking for a lot of young people who haven’t had to do it. So, I love your idea of applying job shadows to skillsets. I might steal that wonderful idea.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, steal away. Tell me if it’s any good. This is just theoretical off the top of my head. That’s great. And so, when you say, when you ask, most people say yes. I would say, first, I guess I’m a little surprised by that. I think some people might say that that feels kind of intrusive, or “I kind of need my quiet, alone, introvert time, please.” How do you recommend framing this request?

Asheesh Advani

I mean, obviously, if you ask for a full day of somebody’s time, they may immediately go to one or two meetings which are personal in nature or confidential in nature, and they may decline based on knowing those are in their calendar. So, you need to phrase it based on, “And of course, if there’s any part of the day you don’t want me to shadow you, I’m happy to step away and do my own work.” So, really, it’s picking the two or three meetings that they feel very comfortable including you in.

But I think the power of it, honestly, is people feeling like you’re learning from them. And, of course, this is what happens. Actually, this is something I should definitely share. When we do these job shadows, we do it at scale, we do it in over 80 countries around the world, of course, the young people who shadow the executives get so much out of it, but the executives almost universally say they learned two things.

One, they learn from looking at their own job through somebody else’s eyes, so they love that. And the second is they actually learn almost like in a reverse mentoring way from the perspective of somebody who’s just has a different set of life experiences. So, when you’re asking the person who you want to shadow, I would encourage you to use a language which just makes them feel it truly is mutual, not just completely one way.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I guess I’m thinking some of the most powerful job-shadowing action, as I imagine the day, would be right after the meeting in terms of like, “Hey, I noticed you said this in that moment. What were you thinking about there?”

Asheesh Advani

Oh, I love that.

Pete Mockaitis

And they say, “Oh, yeah, well, I noticed that person felt seemed really concerned so I wanted to proactively make sure that we address their concerns by blah blah blah blah blah,” you know, whatever. So, that’s my intuition about how that would be most amazing.

Asheesh Advani

No, your intuition is spot on. In fact, we actually have this exercise called “I noticed.” We do it occasionally at work. We do it really often in a learning group I’m part of through the Young Presidents Organization, YPO. And in our YPO forum, we do an “I noticed” round after somebody has presented, and we all go around and literally just talk about what we noticed. It’s very powerful.

I’ve used it at work now and then. You can’t use it after every meeting. That takes up too long. But for certain types of meetings, people who are the presenters love getting the kind of input, and it doesn’t have to be, “Geez, I noticed you messed up the slide.” It’s usually, actually, “I noticed a connection to something you said three weeks ago,” or, “I noticed something I’m working on, that ties into something that you’re working on.” And it’s very powerful to make time for the “I noticed” for the right setting.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s great. Well, Asheesh, tell me anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Asheesh Advani

Well, there’s another lesson which I’m very proud of, which is learn to balance simplicity and complexity. I think for aspiring leaders, it’s a nuance, but it’s so important, which is if you become really great at taking complex things and making them simple, it is such a powerful skill. And I know this from at least my job because I ran two technology companies, and to be able to take things that are otherwise actually pretty hard to do and not brag about the fact that they were hard to do, but talk about how simple they are in terms of the benefit they create for whoever the user is, that’s where the power comes. So, we made it a life lesson and put it in this book as well.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, that’s super. And I think, often people don’t care, it sounds harsh, but they don’t, about sort of the underlying complexity and all that you had to go through, unless it’s really a caring mentor type figure who’s invested in your career and your development and your process. But for the most part, I’m thinking about customers or senior executives just sort of want to know, “So what’s the benefit? And how is this new and different and better now? Okay, understood. Thank you.”

Asheesh Advani

Well, we’re so busy showing the world how smart we are, we sometimes forget that that’s really not what it’s about. It’s about genuinely creating value for other people. And so, how do we become better, particularly, certainly when you’re communicating with boards and customers and stakeholders, where they, as you said, they don’t really care about the how, they just care about the true benefit, how do we put our ego aside a little bit and leave it for somebody else to learn, frankly, about all the hard work that was behind what we created? And that’s really hard for a lot of people.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Asheesh Advani

So, one of my favorite quotes, I’ve reframed in the book, is, “Success is moving from failure to failure with no loss of enthusiasm.”

Pete Mockaitis

I like it. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Asheesh Advani

So, we put in the book, “Life is moving from mess to mess with no loss of confidence.”

Asheesh Advani

So, the Minnesota Twin Study is one of the classic studies. I’ve got identical twins, so I’ve got a particular interest in nature versus nurture. And I think we, particularly in America, feel so strongly that so much of what is possible, comes down to our own efforts. It’s kind of humbling to actually read the Twin Study and see so much of what happens is actually nature and not nurture, which I think you can interpret as disempowering, but I don’t view it that way at all. I view it as something which is the reality of what science tells us, and we’ve got to work with what science tells us.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And a favorite book?

Asheesh Advani

It’s called The Magic of Thinking Big, and David Schwartz. And one of the nice things about this book is it tells you that the amount of effort it takes to add a zero or two on any goal is so little compared to the amount of effort you’re going to do without the zeroes. So, you may as well have the zeroes because you can just make a bigger impact.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate; you hear folks quote back to you often?

Asheesh Advani

Well, the sad truth of it is I’ve now use the word “double-click” so often people tease me about it.

Pete Mockaitis

I think there was just an article about that in, was it the New York Times or Wall Street Journal?

Asheesh Advani

Yes, I know, it’s awful. Let’s be appropriately self-deprecating here and take the blame. I’ve fallen into the abyss of using double-click and I can’t get out of the habit.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, while we’re here, when you say double-click, do you specifically mean to go deeper upon and expand on a topic or matter?

Asheesh Advani

Yes. Yes.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, I actually kind of like that in terms of I’m imagining the window is expanding, and so in some ways, my visual brain responds nicely to that, it’s like, “Okay, I’m actually imagining a program expanding with the whole animation.” So, I’m there.

Asheesh Advani

Well, we both started our career in consulting, so I think we’ve fallen into the trap of agreeing with each other about phrases, but for the rest of the world, apparently double-click, for whatever reason, brings up negative metaphors.

Pete Mockaitis

As long as the synergies are highly impactful, Asheesh, I think it’s okay.

Asheesh Advani

As long as you have a good two-by-two matrix to show how to get to the top quadrant, you’re good.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Asheesh Advani

So, JAWorldwide.org is our organizational website, and ModernAchievement.com is the book’s website.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Asheesh Advani

Well, I will say one of the ways that you can make a huge impact in the world and feel really positive is to find a young person and say something positive to them to encourage them to pursue either a career or a dream that they want to. It’s so powerful for young people to hear from people in their mid-career or late career that they can be successful. So, you’ve got that power, and use it.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Asheesh, thank you. I wish you much modern achievement.

Asheesh Advani

Thank you. This was awesome.

984: Building Skills Better in an AI-Driven World with Matt Beane

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Matt Beane reveals how the quest to optimize productivity is harming our learning and growth–and what you can do about it.

You’ll Learn

  1. The trillion-dollar problem with trying to optimize everything 
  2. How to modify ChatGPT to help you learn better 
  3. Three counterintuitive ways to learn better and faster 

About Matt

Matt Beane does field research on work involving robots and AI to uncover systematic positive exceptions that we can use across the broader world of work. His award-winning research has been published in top management journals such as Administrative Science Quarterly and Harvard Business Review, and he has spoken on the TED stage. He also took a two-year hiatus from his PhD at MIT’s Sloan School of Management to help found and fund Humatics, a full-stack IoT startup. In 2012 he was selected as a Human-Robot Interaction Pioneer, and in 2021 was named to the Thinkers50 Radar list. 

Beane is an assistant professor in the Technology Management department at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a Digital Fellow with Stanford’s Digital Economy Lab and MIT’s Initiative on the Digital Economy. When he’s not studying intelligent technologies and learning, he enjoys playing guitar; his morning coffee ritual with his wife, Kristen; and reading science fiction—a lot of science fiction. He lives in Santa Barbara, California. 

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

  • Jenni KayneUse the code AWESOME15 to get 15% off your order!

Matt Beane Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Matt, welcome.

Matt Beane
My pleasure. I’m delighted to be here. Thanks for the invite.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to learn how I can save human ability in an age of intelligent machines.

Matt Beane
I think we all should be, and I’ve been trying to be excited for a good long while now. So glad to be here and chat about it.

Pete Mockaitis
Perfect. Well, kick us off, you know, there’s a lot of chatter about AI all the time. Can you maybe tell us something that is surprising, counterintuitive, kind of over- or underappreciated in the field since you really know what’s going on and the rest of us are just parroting the Wall Street Journal and New York Times?

Matt Beane
So, the core, the middle third of The Skill Code, the book, talks about a threat that I discovered initially in robotic surgeries. I was studying how you learn how to do that thing and how that’s different from how you learn how to do the good old-fashioned method of surgery, one way or another, and dear listener, trust me, I’m not going to get any more graphic than that.

But the short story there that I found really, really fast, standing in operating rooms at the top teaching hospitals around the world, is that intelligent technology in that case, AI-enabled robots, the AI there was very mild compared to what we’re all dealing with now, but it was there, that that was fantastic in many ways for productivity, for quality. A surgeon said it was like bumper bowling compared to traditional surgery, and it’s really true, actually.

When I’m in the operating room, it’s pretty amazing, especially when somebody’s really good at it. And novices, residents, would show up, help set up the robot, help attach it to a patient. They get a little bit of hands-on experience, and then they just sit down and watch for a four-and-a-half-hour procedure they’d be lucky to get 15 minutes of time on task because the robot allowed that surgeon to do the whole job themselves.

And that right there, I’ve spent the next nine and a half years looking into whether or not this is a generalizable problem and, dear reader, it is. That’s the whole point of the book. This is cutting across all sectors of the economy that I could find. I’ve been across more than 30 different kinds of occupations, different technologies, organizations, and so on now.

It turns out that we are needlessly, I think in many cases, sacrificing novice involvement in the work on the altar of productivity. That’s the basic deal that we’re striking right now, whether it’s with generative AI, whether it’s with robotics, many different kinds of technology now. And the short reason as to why is that that tech allows that expert to just do more, better, faster, some combination of those things, and part of the way you get there is you need less help.

Novices are, by definition, slower and make more mistakes, and they take coordination costs, mentoring and so on. It takes effort, time, attention. And so, in the short run, organizations love that deal, experts love that deal because, even if it’s a 5%, 8% productivity increase, you’re in more control. Experts love using their expertise. So, it’s attempting short-run target, and that’s the sort of hidden problem in the economy right now.

The best analysis I’ve been able to do, I think that is literally a trillion-dollar problem for the economy, it’s just that it shows up with a lag. You’re only going to find out a little later when those novices aren’t ready for duty.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, Matt, there are so many, so many ways we can go with this. First, I think it’s beautiful in that.

You’re highlighting something that I’m really not hearing anywhere else. It’s, like, we are missing out on the opportunity for novices, apprentices, to do the initial helper, low-skill work, because at the moment, that’s kind of what AI is okay at. Like, I will say, “Hey, AI, give me 20 potential titles for this podcast episode.”

Matt Beane
You got it.

Pete Mockaitis
They’re still not as good as my team, just saying. Thanks, team. You’re awesome. But it does give me a little spark. It’s like, “Okay, that’s a good phrase. I’ll take that phrase and work that into something else that we got. Okay.”

Matt Beane
Yep, and that translates into, not always, but often the default deal is a little bit less struggle for that person who is trying to give you that feedstock. A little bit less complexity they have to deal with. In the lingo of the book, this is the skill code that’s up front. There’s three basic components to healthy skill development.

One of them is challenge, “Are you working close to but not at the bounds of your ability?” You do that, you’re literally sweating, you’re not doing as well as you could, but that’s where we learn mostly. It’s uncomfortable. It’s not fun. The middle one’s complexity, which is, “Are you not just getting a task done, but are you engaging with the broader universe of tasks you’re embedded in?” The other people’s jobs around you, the other technologies, asking broader questions, not just focused. That’s going sort of broad where a challenge is more deep.

And then human connection, human relationships, warm bonds of trust and respect between human beings. Those three things, you take that subtle, small, in your case, “just help me along a little bit” deal, which by the way is a much nicer version of what’s generally going on out there. You’ll just do it yourself in many cases if you can. Then all three of those things take a hit, but not for you. It’s for that next person trying to work up the chain.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. And now you say this is a trillion-dollar problem. I’m curious what industries or professions do you think it’s going to hit the most hard? And, selfishly, are there any sort of market investment opportunities we should be exploiting, Matt? That’s what it’s all about, right?

Matt Beane
Yep. I’ll give you the one I care about most, which is to say there’s a huge potential upside here, yeah. So, you can sort of short the market. There are plenty of places where you should expect things to be more readily automatable with these technologies faster. And this fits in, I’ve got a piece in Harvard Business Review coming out in two or three weeks, or maybe a month on this.

Anything that is remote work right now means you don’t have to use your body to do it. In other words, it’s “Receive some information, process that information, communicate about that process, and send a changed work product off,” but it’s all digital. That’s a lot more straightforward for these kinds of technologies to handle, especially if it doesn’t involve multimodal data, just like text.

Some folks will lose their jobs there and that’s a serious issue for those affected. We should care about it. But they’re going to see, most folks are going to see a ton of job change. Like, what it means to do my job is going to radically change for that person who could entirely be remote versus somebody who has to show up and use their body for something. So you can go looking there, and you can look in places in the economy where the exposure to these technologies and the potential upside of using them is really high and concentrated in a job. A colleague of mine, Daniel Rock, who’s at Wharton, he recently, with co-authors at OpenAI, published a paper that maps this exposure across the economy. And if you want to make a smart bet about where there’s going to be the most change, look at those places.

The upside, though, is the one that I wrote the back third of the book about, basically, which is we like to romanticize this master-apprenticeship relation as if it’s somehow the peak of what humans can do in terms of transferring and developing skill, and we’ve relied on it for literally 160,000 years, so it ain’t broke exactly, but it can suck. And could it be better?

I think I’m very convinced, I’m trying to build technology like this now, that we can use the very technology that’s part of the insult to build new systems that, in fact, make that connection richer, better, more flexible than it ever was before, so that skill development functions better and from now forward than it ever could have in all of human history.

Companies that try to figure that out, reconfigure their systems so that just by using it, you’re nudged towards healthier skill and you get your productivity, that company’s going to kill. I mean, that’s such a great story. So, anyway, I think there’s opportunities in both directions.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that sounds really cool. Could you paint a picture for what that looks like? And is that happening somewhere right now?

Matt Beane
It’s funny, you should ask, only a few folks have asked. I am now CEO of a startup called SkillBench. In about a month, we’re going to come out and put up a stealthy website or whatever. But we are building a technology that helps an organization see this joint optimization problem based on rich data from inside their own firm.

Like, think of those as two dimensions. You’ve got productivity that comes out of AI, like, “How much juice are we getting out of this stuff?” By the way, it’s going to be less than you expect. We can show you that.

Pete Mockaitis
I think that’s my vibe, yeah, impression.

Matt Beane
Yeah, but it’s not none, and sometimes it will be negative, but seeing what that is, is actually not trivial. But we frame it as a joint optimization problem, and we get data that will help you show, “Fine, you get plus one utils productivity-wise out of implementing AI. You’ve bought your 20,000 licenses like everybody else. What’s the simultaneous interdependent effect of that on the human capital, the people who repeatedly have to do that job that now involves AI? Are they getting up-skilled or down-skilled? Are they more or less motivated? And are they more or less connected with each other?”

You know, these kinds of things, we’re building a tool to automatically help organizations just get a live dashboard of that so that they can figure out, “Do we like the trade-off that we’re making?” In some places they will, and that’s fine, right? Sometimes it’s the right thing to do to sacrifice building human capital for sake of a giant productivity gain, if you’ve got one. But right now, you just said it, I think, earlier, maybe three, four minutes ago.

It’s not a problem you’d ever really heard of that this is a joint optimization problem. There’s this trade space between how much productivity boon are we getting out of this thing. Oh, but that’s also interrelated with what happens to the humans that are left in that job after we change that job. Sometimes it’s great, sometimes it’s up in both territories, in both categories.

But it’s like driving with no rear-view mirror. Organizations are not in the habit of gathering data on that second one at all, or interrelating them two together. So just getting a window on what the heck is going on in that trade space is what we’re doing. But there are numerous firms out there trying to build technology to use AI, for instance, to make better, high-quality, briefer matches between an expert and a novice on a specific project.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Can you zoom into a particular industry, like how we’d see that in practice?

Matt Beane
A good instance is in chip design, one firm that I recently got some data on. Basically, when you’re trying to lay out a new chip, the state of the art in the last, say, 10 years or so is you’re going to use automated software to sort of do this optimization problem of mapping out where all the different components go on that chip.

And so, increasingly, over those last 10 years, basically that junior engineer, who would have been sort of sleeves rolled up over a diagram and doing math that contributes upwards to that senior engineer, who’s doing the block diagram and laying things out, they’re just going to have less opportunity to play in that interaction of designing that chip. They might do some isolated analysis, and actually, the dynamic’s very similar in investment banking.

Well, it turns out that that is not true for all chip projects, for all types of components at all phases of the game. So, in fact, if somebody is a junior engineer, and they’re working on power optimization, that part of the problem, like, “How do I make sure there’s the right amount of power going to this certain amount of the chip?” maybe the chip that they’re currently working on, they would just lose out on that opportunity.

But, in fact, there’s somebody in a fab in Jakarta right now who is working on a chip that could use a little manual help because it’s an ASIC, for instance, which is just a custom piece of silicon as opposed to something you’d produce, mass produce. Well, in the world that we inhabited before this kind of information was available, no human could know that for this one- or two-week window, there’s a senior engineer in Jakarta who could use the help of a junior engineer in upstate New York.

But now you can get that real time work data and say, “Hey, no, this is not done. The capabilities here are underbaked.” But there are firms that have realized, “Oh, this is some sort of problem I got to manage, and maybe there’s a way to make better sort of work-related matches as opposed to just matches across a hierarchy.” That’s the old school way of doing it, that many firms are still deploying, and that’s not bad, but it’s just very coarse.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I hear you. And with regard to, when you mentioned these things, like surgery, investment banking, chip making, which by the way, I read the book The Chip War. Extreme ultraviolet lithography is the most complicated thing I’ve ever heard of, and it blew my mind, which is actually a shoutout.

Matt Beane
It is pretty incredible, yes.

Pete Mockaitis
Book recommendation there. But that really does paint a picture in terms of, at the at the highest level, yeah, there are some expertise that’s pretty high stakes – life or death, millions or billions of dollars, huge factory waste or safety matters – that, “Yeah, we’re going to be super careful associated with having a senior person and then a novice apprentice kind of learning under them and doing some work as they’re developing those skills.”

And, yes, it does seem kind of spooky that we could find ourselves in a place where those lesser experienced people don’t have the opportunity to do that thing anymore. And so, I’m curious, if some of us are already starting to find ourselves in that position, what should we do?

Matt Beane
First of all, in order to take effective action to address this problem, you got to know what an effective solution looks like. Like, “What would it look like if things were good for me, or the people that report to me, or the people that are in my profession, for building skill?”

There hasn’t really been a lot of proliferation of different views about what skill is, how you build it, and so on, and big theories that, sort of, “First, you do this, then you do this, then you do this, then you do that.” And I just realized this book was not going to be able to do that. Like, there are too many different ways of working now, different technologies and so on, different modalities of interacting.

But the raw ingredients, sort of like, and I use a DNA metaphor, that’s what’s on the cover of the book, if I could give you the amino acids of skill development, and they’re going to show up in different combinations in your setting, they’re going to show up in different sequences, different emphases. But for each one of those three things – the challenge, the complexity, the connection – I give you a 10-point checklist in the book.

You can immediately go look at your work scenario and say, “All right, how healthy is challenge for me? How am I doing on this, like, 10-point quiz? How healthy is complexity? How healthy is connection? And if it’s not great, then I, at least, know how and why it might change, because each one of those items is a specific set of interactions.”

For instance, in challenge, your challenge is healthiest when you have an expert nearby who can help you deal with the frustration that comes with not performing at your best. You can struggle on your own. You can get really far. A lot of autodidacts have shown us, like, you don’t really necessarily need someone to build skill but you need them to get superb progress towards skill.

And if you have an expert around who can help frame the difficulty you’re embedded in, in a broader context, like you want to be able to hit a fastball at major league speeds, well, the first goal is, “Why don’t you just try to even make contact? Like, forget about a fair ball. Get up and try to do that, and then you hit a foul ball, and instead of going, ‘Good job, dummy. That’s a foul ball,’ they can say, ‘Okay, you can hit a foul ball in the major leagues. Tomorrow we’re going to work on…’” right? They can sort of help you put that in context.

So, that’s just one tiny little micro example. That, I hope, the first three chapters can help anyone, in any role, in any job, look at that situation and say, “Is it healthy or is it not?” The next move that’s peppered throughout the book is, “Okay, assume in some cases, in some part of your life, in some part of your organization, this has been good or is currently great, what is it that is allowing for things to work well over there that’s not working well over here?”

Like, “The job I had last year, I was learning so much. Now, not so much.” What was happening back then that you could port? Or if you’re a manager in an organization, “Fine, skill development’s great over here. Why is it?” Because the job rotation program is so annoying. It turns out that rotating people through different jobs, no one likes that, and it is incredibly beneficial for your skills and career development. It gets you engaged with that complexity thing I was talking about in the middle of those three Cs.

So, lots of notes, angry notes, like, “I have to rotate through yet another function.” It’s like, “Yeah, you do.” And the job of the leader then is to say, “This is actually really critical for your career and it is no fun. So, I’m right there with you on it and we’re definitely doubling down on that,” that kind of thing.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, understood. So, it’s not so much, necessarily, that the wise expert mentor person has to be pouring forth, necessarily, expert nuanced insight wisdom, so much as they just have a bit of a broad perspective associated with, “Yeah, this sucks, it’s uncomfortable, it’s unpleasant in these ways, and also it’s useful.” And just that, in and of itself, is a huge value because the learner is able to then persist through the frustrations and rock and roll.

Matt Beane
Yep. And then, you know, I mean, technologists, people who are building these technologies that are currently enabling all this new potential productivity, and in some cases actual, they have a big choice about like how do they want to design their tech, how do they want to sell it. There are ways of doing that, the default ways, that will appeal to this monetary productivity-oriented logic that’s deeply embedded in business and firms, and they can win. And yet that doesn’t have to be that way.

I have a post on my Substack called “Don’t Let AI Dumb You Down.” And in the back third of that post, there are specific changes you can make to ChatGPT through its custom settings to have it nudge you towards more skill while you’re getting productivity out of it. It’s very straightforward. The interface is available, but that takes every single user doing that for themselves. That’s no way for the human species to win.

Like, OpenAI or Anthropic or Google, if they just made a few tweaks to that UX, anybody at the end of the day would be mildly annoyed, maybe more, by the technology because it keeps asking, “Do you know any other human beings you could connect with about this skill, rather than just me?” And it’s like, “No, I don’t want to debrief this interaction.” “No, I don’t want a harder version.” “No, I don’t want to try it myself.”

But if that’s the option, how many people, if it was turned on by default, would turn it off? Some, but a whole bunch of other folks, millions probably, would just know more about musicology at the end of the week for having used ChatGPT, or have made connections with other human beings in their local area.

This happens to me. Like, I am now connected to a rocket enthusiasts club in the Santa Barbara area because we all like to watch the rocket launches out of Vandenberg Air Force Base, and I just went into ChatGPT, asking for some code to predict when they were going to land the boosters back here in Santa Barbara. And because I had configured it that way, it said, “Is there any other human being locally you might connect with about that?” I’m like, “Oh, yeah, good one.” So, the tech, just so much power in the hands of the folks rolling this tech out, so it’s such easy changes.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s really intriguing, this notion of these little nudges and how just transformational their impact can be. Like, 401k savings, it’s like, “Well, the default is this much is deployed into your 401k savings.” And people say, “Okay,” which is wild. You know, it’s like, “This is your money.” It’s like, “All right, sure, 8%, cool. Oh, you said, okay, nine? All right, nine, sure.” It’s like, “Whatever.” Like, most people just sort of roll with that default, and that’s interesting.

It’s funny, I have a calorie-tracking app, and I just changed the default to like, “Just assume that I burn fewer calories naturally.” Like, the threshold at which it turns green versus red is now different. And I know, I know I set it up to do that, and yet it does nudge me, it’s like, “Okay, maybe I’ll have a healthier snack so I can stay green because I want it.”

And so, that’s really clever how if we’re engaging frequently with ChatGPT or some of these things, if we can make the default setting to be one that nudges us in positive ways, we will benefit. And it’s funny, it’s sort of like, “Yes, I know talking to other people is generally a cool thing,” but it doesn’t occur to you in the moment. Likewise, it’s like, “Yes, I know I could look at the manual to figure this out.” I was like, “But, actually, yeah, maybe I will. I’d do that.” Because it said it, I was like, “Yeah, actually, maybe I’ll learn something else if I get the whole PDF manual of this appliance that’s giving me trouble right now.”

Matt Beane
Exactly. And, in fact, to the opposite, I lay out in the book, like there’s many cases where we grab for the manual and that hurts your skill development. It turns out that with, and in the book, I cite the research on this, that reading the manuals can be hazardous to your health of your skill. Basically, folks do it too soon, too early. We front load all kinds of explicit knowledge and learning into school, into work, formal training classes, checklists, SOPs, all this kind of stuff, when it’s generally better to get the minimally sufficient amount of explicit information and then just dive in the pool.

And then, after you’ve had a good struggle and a stroke and managed to get heaving and scuffing up to the edge of the pool, then somebody could say, “You want to learn a little bit about strokes now?” Humans are better at learning that way. So, a system like this, if you asked for the PDF, it could say, “You’re a little early in trying to deal with it. How about you just try a little harder? It’d probably be better for you.” I mean, it wouldn’t do that, because people would say, “No, go to hell, give me the PDF.”

But there are ways of doing that where, if you, as the user, specify, “Here’s my trade zone between getting my productivity,” and it’s like your 401k contribution. By the way, the returns on your skill are much better than the returns you will get by putting money in a 401k. So, if you set that slider, “So today I want to be pretty darn annoyed and learn a lot,” or, “I want to be not annoyed at all and not learn anything,” that’s your choice. But the technologists can make that available to people is the point. Like, that’s just a huge missed market opportunity, from my point of view.

Pete Mockaitis
And you say we can go ahead and do it ourselves. Is there a magic copy-pasted thing you recommend we shove in there? Or how do we get it done?

Matt Beane
Yes. I boiled down the entire book into two short paragraphs that I dumped into the custom instructions in ChatGPT, and that is in the bottom third of that post on my Substack. Substack is called WildWorldofWork.org, and the post is called “Don’t Let AI Dumb You Down.” I can send the URL after we’re done. But, yeah, the literal contents of those boxes, even as of today, I keep updating it whenever I make changes, is sitting right there.

Pete Mockaitis
All right, cool. And so, that’s nudged you to go meet some rocket people and has some other good impacts on your life as well?

Matt Beane
Yes, absolutely. And, you know, if I I’m perfectly candid, and most of the time, the thing says, “Hey, if you want more challenge, what about this? If you want more complexity, what about this? And how about some human connection?” And I wave it off 90% of the time, 94% of the time something. I could go get the data. And it’s always there though and I don’t not notice it.

And, by the way, what I have put together is the most basic ham-fisted, ridiculously coarse approach to this problem so it’s helped me. Yes, I have, for instance, I’ve learned a bunch more about coding because it itself suggested that I leave, you may have seen this yourself if you’re doing the sort of work where ChatGPT, or Claude, is generating code. You can turn a radio button on where you can watch that code getting written.

And it writes it at reasonable, it’s like 2x human speed or something, 2.5x, which is like listening to a podcast, you can track. And so, I’ve learned some stuff about coding just by watching, too. Like, I wasn’t ever a professional coder. I took some classes in graduate school. It had been 10 years for me or so since I’d tried to write any code to do anything, and now, kind of casually use code to solve problems. But you don’t learn anything about that if you just let the machine do its thing and take the output.

So, leaving that window open is a way where I just am like, it’s like pair coding, by the way, the best learning about how to code comes from sitting physically side-by-side with somebody where they’re coding and you’re watching and you’re chatting through the problem, that kind of thing. The best coders at Google are pair coding, side-by-side.

Anyway, this is all just one guy’s semi-random, I mean, fine, I wrote a book on the topic, and I know some stuff, but, come on, the world can do better than one guy. Like, we have to take wholesale effort. We have a huge opportunity to nudge all of humanity in a healthier direction on skill while getting crazy cool new things out of AI.

Pete Mockaitis
And it makes you wonder kind of about everything that we allow to be done for us, and like, “Is this trade-off worth it? And is it worth it every time? The dishwasher washes my dishes. Thank you, dishwasher.” But, in some ways, it can be kind of mindful, cathartic, Zen-like, just hot soapy water, physically cleaning some stuff, and sometimes that’s the right answer.

Likewise, the calculator or the GPS or anything that does anything for us, yeah, it productively accomplishes that thing faster. Cool. Thanks. But there may very well be times and places when I’d say, “No, no, autopilot. I want the control.” And it is enriching me in a skills development kind of a way and some other ways because I have wrest back control.

Matt Beane
Yes, exactly right. And it’s not obvious where you win by giving up the tech and in what ways you give it up. There are other cases, by the way, let’s be real clear, where by using the tech in its fullest capacity, you are going to build ridiculously more skill than you would have otherwise. So, in fact, there’s a win-win there where you were like just stabbing for productivity, and because you get to skip some stuff that is actually repetitive, annoying, you get to deal with the cool complex parts of the problem.

And so, we don’t pay a price at all. In fact, you learn a whole bunch more, “Oh, but maybe I’m sacrificing that novice’s involvement. Gosh, darn it, there’s no free lunches there.” So, it’s not just an optimization problem for me, Matt Beane, or you, Pete. It’s like, “I’m winning, but what about the people around me? What about the people who want to come up the ranks?”

It’s really, that’s a tall order to ask any one expert to be looking out for their own results and seeing that, in fact, if they don’t actively do something to support that novice, that person is out to sea. Whereas, in the past, to cycle, I skipped way past it in the beginning, like the traditional mode of doing surgery is a lot like doing lots of kind of work, which is, if you and I were doing it and you’re my mentor, there are four hands required for that job.

Like, somebody’s holding that patient open while the other person is doing something inside of them and that takes four hands. So, I can be at the shallow end of the pool, so to speak, if you decide I’m not really ready, but I’m not doing nothing. I’m on task the whole time. And so, that radical shift is the difference.

Like, that kind of shift as we’ve used new technologies to automate small parts of the work, the calculator for instance in accounting, that wasn’t such an extensive chunk of the work that the junior accountant was left hung out to dry. In minor ways, but that they were making up for by other forms of involvement. That’s the intensity and the pace of the change is really the main thing.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, if we could maybe think outside of AI entirely, when it comes to acquiring skills, we’ve laid out some of these fundamentals, the challenge, the complexity of the human connection, are there any particularly underrated do’s and don’ts you think that make a world of difference as we’re trying to develop skills?

Matt Beane
So, number one, when you are not performing at your best, when you are not having fun, and you are struggling to the point where you might be sweating and really can’t hear if somebody’s talking to you, like, you’re totally focused, that’s the domain where you’re appropriately challenged and will be learning the most.

So, it’s not a space that, you know, the minute you tell this to anybody, you’re like, “Yeah, there was that time where I kind of got a years’ worth of learning in four hours because everything was riding on me doing a good job. I did not do a great job, but, hey, I did it, and now I know how I can handle that situation, right?”

So that challenge, we, in many ways, have unintentionally created a sort of, the world of work has become a bit of a padded playground a little bit on this front. Like, being uncomfortable and real struggle is a status threat, like, you don’t look like you’re doing so hot, and so maybe you’re going to avoid doing that in front of people when you want to maintain an impression kind of thing. Or there are policies that will literally keep you away from challenge and so on.

Anyway, challenge is no fun, and it is absolutely necessary, and an expert, by the way, can really help you eat a lot more challenge than you could on your own. So having somebody there who can, if you can throw a flag to ask for help, or who can give you some key guidance at key points, there’s ways of amplifying, you know, eating even more of it. That’s one.

The second sort of counterintuitive one has to do with the complexity bit, which is getting your job done faster because of technology allows you, unintentionally, to skip by a whole bunch of collateral work and understanding that’s necessary for you to not have fragile or brittle skill. So, I did some research in warehousing, for instance, recently, and the people who really were good managers of their area were good because they knew about things like seasonality in the business. They knew about different vendors that they were using for staffing.

They knew about the technology, like the taping machine, and why that thing is rickety and how to shim it so that it doesn’t shake the packages too much as they go through. These are not things that you should be paying attention to in your job, but these people not only tried to get good at being a manager of a small group, but they wanted to understand more and more of the different jobs, different work, other skills that were connected to it so that when a shock came, for them, it was like, “Oh yeah, it’s wintertime, big jackets come through the building. We got this. Here’s what we do.”

And, usually, the way to do that is do not, first, go to the rulebook, do not, first, try to explain to a newbie in detail everything to expect. Give them the least information they need to get out on the field and try. So that’s kind of the opposite. Corporate training is show up. What’s the first thing you do? New employee orientation and training.

And that just front loads a bunch of concepts and knowledge into people’s heads that usually is just going to melt away, and then, at worst, they’re going to be clutching the rulebook while they’re out there for the first week trying to do whatever, instead of just trying to pay attention, do a good job and learn.

And the last one is that we write off human relationships as if they are somehow unconnected to how we build skill, and in particular, like trust and respect between human beings, when, in fact, it’s the main event. Like, number one, nobody’s going to give you a chance to build skill unless they trust and respect you, at least a little bit. So, if you’re not earning that, you don’t get to play. So, there’s an access bit.

But the other part is motivation. Like, I can point to the places in my career, but, also, it’s clear in the research. The reason you’re motivated to build that skill is because usually there’s somebody around whose trust and respect you want to earn, like you have a manager or an expert you work with, and you want to do a good job and you want them to recognize and see it, and say, “Hey, that was good.” Or, you know, “That was good, chef, and don’t do that again,” right?

You’re getting real feedback from somebody and you want a better chance to do something cooler next time, and so you’re going to work extra hard. You’re going to get up early in the morning to do a good job because of that human connection, not because of some, like, “I want to be competent,” abstract goal. Those are things that are important, of course, but like, un-divorce human relationships from your skill, like, they’re bound together.

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

Matt Beane
I’ll go for one that has been oriented my career for a long time, which is “The future’s already here. It’s just not evenly distributed.” People attribute that to William Gibson, a famous sci-fi writer, and he, it turns out, fun cocktail party fact, does not remember saying that, and thinks he never said it.

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

Matt Beane
The Milgram experiments with people’s willingness to obey an authority figure and administer potentially lethal shocks to somebody across a divide.

Obviously, that study has been debunked in a number of ways and so on. But seeing that as a 12-year-old kid, the video, I was just shown that in a class, woke me up to you can do research about this stuff, and, “Dear, God, people will do what for what reason?” Like, that just really just woke me up intellectually in a way that few pieces of research since have done.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Matt Beane
Well, the one I tend to go off about still, a couple years after reading about it, is one called There Is No Antimemetics Division by an author with no vowels in it, QNTM. They prefer to remain anonymous. I’ll leave it at that, because that book will, if you are into sci-fi at all, that will literally melt the head off your body. It is incredibly creative. It’s fantastic.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Matt Beane
That’s got to be sitting in the morning, almost every single morning, with my wife having coffee before the day starts. That’s sort of a sacrosanct thing that she and I have established over the last, like, 15 years.

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

Matt Beane
Yeah, “We’re sacrificing learning on the altar of productivity.” It’s one that I came out with for my TED Talk, and that’s one that I hear back a fair number of times, yeah.

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

Matt Beane
MattBeane.com. M-A-T-T-B-E-A-N-E.com. That will get you access to the book. It’ll also get you access to the Substack that I mentioned before. If you want the latest rulings coming out of my brain, that’ll take you to Twitter or X, whatever you want to call it, but it’s all there, sort of a central hub.

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

Matt Beane
Yeah. So, just figure out for yourself what kind of deal you’re making with AI around productivity, and what it might be costing you or others around you in terms of skill. It could be great, bully for you, and then your job is to help other people figure that out, but it probably isn’t. Go take a second look.

Pete Mockaitis
All right, Matt, thank you. I wish you all the best.

Matt Beane
Thank you very much. I appreciated the opportunity.

972: Amy Edmondson on How to Fail Well

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Amy Edmondson shares how to minimize unproductive failures and maximize intelligent ones.

You’ll Learn

  1. What separates good failure from bad failure 
  2. The surprisingly simple tool that prevents many failures 
  3. How to stay motivated in the face of failure 

About Amy

Amy C. Edmondson is the Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at the Harvard Business School. Her work explores teaming – the dynamic forms of collaboration needed in environments characterized by uncertainty and ambiguity. She has also studied the role of psychological safety in teamwork and innovation. Before her academic career, she was Director of Research at Pecos River Learning Centers, where she worked with founder and CEO Larry Wilson to design change programs in large companies. In the early 1980s, she worked as Chief Engineer for architect/inventor Buckminster Fuller, and innovation in the built environment remains an area of enduring interest and passion.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You Sponsors!

Amy Edmondson Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Amy, welcome back.

Amy Edmondson
Great to be back.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I am super excited to hear your wisdom and talk about failing well. And I’d like it if you could kick us off with one of your favorite failures, personally or professionally?

Amy Edmondson
My favorite failure has to be the time, as a second year PhD student, I had a hypothesis that better teams would have lower medication error rates. I finally got the data after six months of data collection, put it all together, ran the numbers, and, alas, I had failed. My hypothesis was not only not supported, it was 180 degrees wrong.

In other words, the data suggested that better teams measured by a validated team survey instrument had higher error rates, not lower. So, that was just, you know, my dreams of publishing a paper evaporated in a moment as I looked at the screen, and I felt quite despondent about it. So, that was a failure, right? There was no question about it. But of course, it’s a favorite because, ultimately, it pointed me in the direction of a success.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, tell us about how that unfolded.

Amy Edmondson
Well as I tried to figure out what this might mean, “What does it mean when a valid team survey assessment data suggests that these are really better teams, they’re better led, they’re more engaged, they have higher quality relationships? What does it mean when those kinds of teams appear to have higher error rates than their counterparts?”

And it suddenly occurred to me, and what I later thought of as a blinding flash of the obvious, that maybe the better teams aren’t making more mistakes. Maybe they’re more willing to report them, maybe they’re less likely to cover them up, to keep them secret, to shove them under the rug. And the more I thought about that, the more possible, even likely, that became. And, of course, it’s hard to talk about mistakes at work. It’s hard to admit you’ve done something wrong. It’s hard to ask for help when you don’t know quite what to do.

And because of that, what I increasingly started talking about, interpersonally risky nature of those behaviors, it would, in fact, be, at least, it could explain the unexpected findings. It could be an alternative explanation, that the dependent variable, the error rates, was actually a faulty measure. It was a measure that was subject to reporting bias. And just having that insight, of course, wasn’t enough to prove it or to do anything else with it, but it led me down a path of trying to understand whether teams, in fact, have different interpersonal climates, especially around something fraught like error.

And if so, would that affect their learning behaviors? And if so, would that affect their performance? And so, that led me down a road of doing a very different kind of research, which was to sort of explore those possibilities. Later, I called that interpersonal climate, with the input of a peer reviewer on a paper, psychological safety. And so, that was sort of the birthplace of a, then, thriving research program on team psychological safety, which turns out to be a very powerful predictor of team performance in a variety of industry contexts.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s right. Psychological safety is huge, and you are the queen of it, and thank you for sharing those insights with us in our last conversation. So, yeah, now let’s dig into some of the goodies you shared in your latest book, Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well. Any particularly striking, surprising, counterintuitive discoveries that you made along the way and put forward in this book?

Amy Edmondson
Yes, you know, the failure I just described was what I do call in the book an intelligent failure, and it’s intelligent because, and in research there’s many intelligent failures if you’re doing it right, which is that you are pursuing a goal of developing new knowledge. It’s in new territory. We don’t yet know what will happen. You’ve got a hypothesis, like you’ve done your homework to find out what we know, what we don’t know, and you have a good idea about what might work, and the failure is no bigger than it has to be.

You don’t spend your whole research budget on one experiment. You sort of do it thoughtfully so that you can learn in a reasonably efficient way. And so, science is full of intelligent failures, of course. But I think the surprising thing that I learned through all of this research is that, as human beings, we respond similarly to intelligent failures as to what I’ll call basic and complex failures, the preventable kind, meaning our emotional reactions are similarly negative and unhelpful.

As I started telling my story of my research failure as a second-year graduate student, the emotions I felt were downright catastrophic. I was starting to envision I’ll have to drop out of graduate school, I’m no good at this, I failed, you know, crazy stuff, which is just factually wrong-headed, but that’s where your brain goes. A failure is always disappointing, and when you have one, you can easily, or at least I can, spiral into unhelpful, unhealthy thinking.

And so, I think an opening surprise or insight is that, even though some failures logically are wonderfully helpful in making progress in new territory, we are vulnerable to having an emotional reaction to them that, then, precludes us from learning what we need to learn from them.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that is huge, and I want to dig into that in some real detail. But first, could you maybe make the grand case associated with failure being okay, or the main thesis, or the takeaway from Right Kind of Wrong?

Amy Edmondson
Yeah, so it’s not actually as simple as “Failure is okay.” It is as simple as intelligent failure is not only okay, it’s praiseworthy. If you are willing to take risks, and we all must be in order to make progress in our lives and in our jobs, if you’re willing to take risks in new territory, you will face some failures along the way, otherwise, they weren’t risks. If everything you try just goes perfectly, you’re probably not stretching very much, and that’s not a way to be awesome at your job.

So, those are the kinds, you know, the intelligent failures in new territory are indeed the kinds we’ve got to sort of develop the muscles to welcome them, and be not only not despondent about them but actually genuinely delighted by the opportunity to learn and sometimes pivot. But it is equally a book about pulling together what we know about the best practices for preventing preventable failures. One kind of failure I identify is a basic failure, which has a single cause, usually human error, or deviation from the process or protocol or recipe, and those are theoretically and practically preventable.

And so, for instance, in a new job, if you are looking around and you’re not quite sure what to do, and you don’t feel comfortable asking someone, and then you do it wrong and it leads to a failure, that’s a basic failure, and those we aren’t so excited about. It’s a book about failure but it’s really a book about success because the idea is, “Let’s do everything we can to execute well in known territory and to explore well in new territory.”

Pete Mockaitis
Well said. Well said. Well, let’s continue this typology or categorization here. We’ve got basic failure, a deviation from the recipe. My wife and I, we joke about this all the time. She’s like, whenever I cook something, and she said, “Wow, that was great. What’d you do?” And I said, “I did exactly what the recipe told me to do, because I have learned from many, many basic failures, that whenever I think I know better, or this is no big deal, how about I do this little twist, it almost always ends poorly,” unless sure enough, I’ve done the recipe many times, and I thought “Okay, I know how this works. I’m going to put a little extra of this in there because I know that I like this.” And it usually works out okay in those circumstances, so I like the word recipe in there.

Amy Edmondson
ecome an expert in it, and then you’re in a good position to experiment.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, we’ve got our basic failures. And then what else?

Amy Edmondson
Complex failures. So, complex failures are quite simply the perfect storms that bother us and show up in our lives and our organizations. They are the failures that are caused by a handful of factors coming together in just the wrong way, any one of which on its own would not lead to a failure, but the fact of their coming together. Let’s say you accidentally set your alarm clock for p.m. rather than a.m. I’ve done that.

So, maybe you wake up a little late but you still can get to that important meeting on time, but not if you also hadn’t realized your gas tank was hovering on empty and there was a tractor-trailer accident on the highway, five little things happen, none of which on their own would have led you to be late for this important meeting, but they all came together to lead to this complex failure.

Our lives are complex, our world is complex, so complex failures are kind of on the rise, which is depressing. But I think the silver lining of complex failures is that all you really have to do is catch and correct one of the things. Now, some of them are external. There was nothing you could have done about the tractor-trailer, except if it was a really important meeting, you leave a lot of buffers in there. So, then you would have taken extra care to have set the alarm accurately.

But the beauty of them, I mean, the bad news about them is that they’re sort of everywhere and they can just happen when we’re not really at our very best. The good news is, when we’re vigilant, we can catch and correct, and if you sort of catch and correct any one of the factors, you usually can dodge the failure.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And talking about the emotional piece, those are the situations, when you can feel it progressively melting down, that just drive you bonkers.

Amy Edmondson
Yeah, likewise, you sort of see it in slow motion heading your way, and maybe it’s too late to change it, but maybe there’s still time, or at least you can put in a plan B. You can make that phone call and explain and maybe reschedule.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And we have additional categories?

Amy Edmondson
Nope, just the three: intelligent, basic, and complex. And there’s a bright red line drawn between intelligent and the other two because the intelligent ones are the ones that we need to have more of, we need to welcome, we need to just force ourselves to like them. And the other two, we need to kind of sit up straight, pay attention, and try to prevent as many as possible.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, I was going to ask, sit up straight, pay attention, that doesn’t sound hard.

Amy Edmondson
No. That doesn’t sound…yeah, that’s not complete, is it?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Are there some basic protocols, or checklists, or things you recommend to help us prevent those?

Amy Edmondson
Yeah, absolutely. And as I start talking about these things, the worry I always feel is they sound so basic, they sound so simple, and they are. And, unfortunately, they need to be used with intent. So, a checklist, for example, it’s a brilliant tool. It helps us remember to do some of the right things, when maybe it’s just a little complicated, and it would be easy to miss something, turning the anti-icing on, for example, taking off on a wintry storm day, and so we have these structures and tools to help us do the right thing.

But if you have those tools and structures in your life, or in your organization, but you’re using them, roughly speaking, in your sleep, just not really paying attention, not using them with intent, then they don’t help at all, right? If you’re sort of going through the motions of using a checklist but you’re really not paying attention, and you have just a habit of check, check, check, check, check, without your brain in the game, they won’t work. So, no tool is good enough on its own to overcome kind of the vagaries of human nature and lack of discipline.

Pete Mockaitis
And when you talk about good enough, I’m thinking about some people think that they are too good for the checklist.

Amy Edmondson
But that’s another point, isn’t it?

Pete Mockaitis
A Checklist Manifesto, or something, talk about surgeons or whatever, who were reluctant to lower themselves to simply be in checklists.

Amy Edmondson
Right, and that’s because they had the wrong mental model. So, even the wonderful Atul Gawande, who wrote the book, The Checklist Manifesto, I remember hearing him interviewed on NPR, and it was so brilliant because he was asked by the interviewer, “You’re a Harvard surgeon, and so on, a beautiful writer, do you use a checklist yourself in the operating room?”

And he said, “Well, in writing this book, I knew I’d be asked that question, so, of course I had to force myself to use them, even though,” he claimed honestly, “I didn’t think I needed it, right? That’s sort of for mere mortals, but not for me.” I mean, he didn’t say it that way, but it’s exactly, as your question, put it. And so, he said, “And I discovered something.”

He says, “Never does a week go by that that checklist, that I forced myself to use because people like you would be asking me this question, never does a week go by where that thing doesn’t save my process in some way. So, in other words, it turns out I am mortal. I am vulnerable to making mistakes and this very simple, simple tool, this checklist, has saved me on numerous occasions.”

Pete Mockaitis
And I’m curious, as we think about professionals and basic failures, what are some basic failures you see over and over and over again that might be well-suited to a checklist or some sort of a tool along those lines?

Amy Edmondson
If we all think about our experiences as customers, or as patients, just on ordinary annual checkups or something, trying to get the schedule, or trying to, you know, there’s so many organizations that don’t work as well as they should, that you can look around and say, “This could be better with just a tiny bit of scaffolding to allow the recurring, repeating activities to be a bit more programmatic, a bit more supported.” And I know that’s very abstract, right?

Pete Mockaitis
But no, I think that’s a huge tool right there in terms of, you know, it’s funny when we instituted this, when I’m making courses, I have someone, his name is Ian – shoutout to Ian – and we’ve given him the title of Neutral Ambassador of Learning. And the idea is that Ian had nothing to do with producing any of the materials anywhere around the chain, but his role is to step into what we’ve created, and be that first observer, that first voice, and tell us, “All right Ian, what’s wrong? What chapter title was off, wrong? Which bits of the content seemed incomplete or confusing?”

And it’s fantastic! He surfaces all sorts of things, like, “Oh, we were so close that we didn’t even notice.” But with every customer experience kind of a situation, you’d think it’s like, “You know, if you actually tried to fill out this form yourself once, that you’re making us fill out thousands of times, you’d realize that I need more than an inch and a half to write an address. You’d know it on your form.”

Or, that, “Maybe there might be a means by which you can take my name and birth date from one medical form and auto-populate that into the nine other medical forms I have to go through, to have this doctor’s appointment.”

Amy Edmondson
Because if you can do that, you are reducing the likelihood of error, of just simple human error… You probably won’t screw up your birth date. Although sometimes, on my birthday, I screw up my birthday every year because I just automatically write, once I’ve started with my birthday, the year follows naturally.

And so, there I am writing a year from many, many decades ago in the form, when it’s like, “Oh.” It’s just a simple brain malfunction. Right, you write the actual birth date, but yes. So, now I’m thinking, “What are the failures that could’ve been avoided with a simple checklist or making the thing a bit more programmatic?” For instance, in the world of podcasts, I have been on at least one where there was a failure to press record. It’s not catastrophic, nobody dies, but, boy, it can feel almost catastrophic.

Pete Mockaitis
That happened to me once. I felt so embarrassed.

Amy Edmondson
So bad, where you’ve spent all this wonderful time and energy, and then, “Oops. Oops.” It was great for us but the rest of the world would not hear this one, and doing it a second time is just not…but that is one of those errors, by the way, that you learn from and rarely do it a second time. But it is certainly possible to never do it the first time also.

Pete Mockaitis
And I love it, in the software now, we’re on Riverside, and I believe it does this too, it’ll now tell you. If we’re chit-chatting for too long without record, a notification will come up, “Notice, you’re not actually recording now.” So, that’s cool though.

Amy Edmondson
Which is good! Which is good, right? It’s sort of a little check. It’s a check that’s built into the system.

Pete Mockaitis
I dig it. Okay. So, then let’s talk about these intelligent failures. You say there are a few criteria that we need to check in order to say that something is an intelligent failure before we could just give ourselves credit, and say, “Oh, that was an intelligent failure. It’s okay.”

Amy Edmondson
Yes. So, first and foremost, it’s in pursuit of a goal. I’m not against just messing about, playing with resources, but that’s another category of activity. That’s play. But if something is an intelligent failure, it is the case that you are pursuing a goal, whether that is a better recipe, or a life partner, or an innovation in your job at work, but it’s something that you’re hoping to accomplish and improve, and it’s arguably in new territory.

It’s not possible to just get the answer for what will happen off the internet. There’s no way to get the new knowledge you are trying to get to make this progress without trying it, without the experiment, and you have a hypothesis where you’ve done enough thinking and homework to have a good sense that this might work, “I know it’s not a slam dunk, but it might work.”

And then, finally, fourth criterion is the failure, if it happens, is no bigger than necessary. It’s just as big as it has to be to give us the new knowledge that we need. And I always say there’s sort of a bonus fifth criterion, which is you take the time to learn from it. And so, those four criteria – pursuit of a goal, new territory, done your homework, no bigger than necessary – can apply to all sorts of realms. They can apply to a blind date. They can apply to improving that cookie recipe. They can apply to an assignment in your job.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s great. Well, now, Amy, I’d love it if you could give us some fun examples of taking this mindset and approach, and doing it with gusto. What came to mind for me was I’m thinking about Tony Hsieh’s Zappos story, is that one of the first things he had to test was, “Are folks even willing to buy shoes online?” This was back in the day. He didn’t know yet. So, he partnered with a shoe store and said, “Hey, here’s the deal. I’d put a photograph of the shoes in the store, and every time I sell one online, I’ll come here and buy it from you, and then ship it to them.” And so, that’s wildly inefficient from, like, a profit perspective.

Amy Edmondson
Right, but it’s brilliant. It’s brilliant.

Pete Mockaitis
But from learning, yes. It nails it.

Amy Edmondson
Because imagine, I mean, compare that little experiment, expensive experiment, but compare that to setting up a whole warehouse and filling it with shoes of all sizes, and then sort of waiting and hoping. I mean, since we don’t know if customers will buy them online in the first place, what if they don’t? Well, we have just spent tens of thousands of dollars filling up our little warehouse here with shoes, and it failed. That’s not so good. Whereas with him, if it had failed, then all he would’ve lost was a little bit of his time, and maybe he would’ve disappointed this nice shoe store, but no harm done, really, right? So, it’s a beautiful example.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. Well, so please, give us some more. As we’re thinking about professionals who want to have more intelligent failures more often, any cool tales that illustrate how this could be done well in practice?

Amy Edmondson
One of the intelligent failures, and it’s not professional, it’s personal, that I love, intelligent failure stories, is my high school friend, Laura, who in her 40s, decided she wanted to learn how to play ice hockey, which is kind of crazy if you think about it, but, anyway.

Well, she lived in New Hampshire, so she thought it was really one of the things that people around her did all the time, and so it seemed like a good social activity and so on. And I think, it almost goes without saying, that her first forays onto the ice were failures, and it was intelligent because, again, she had a goal to join this league, to have some fun. She had done as much as you can do. She’d skated as a child, but in figure skates, not hockey skates. She knew enough to know that she sort of liked sliding around on the ice, and she didn’t try to join the Bruins or anything. She joins this sort of local women’s league.

And certainly, those first few weeks would not have made her a very valuable team member but she got better and really fell in love with the sport, and it remained an important part of her life now. So, that’s where someone is willing to take the risk of doing something new that might not go well. It’s not new territory for the world, but it was certainly new territory for her in her life.

I suppose in business, you bring up Tony and Zappos, but earlier than that, Amazon, obviously buying books online is not as challenging as selling shoes online, but really, “Would enough people go? Could you make it? Could you make a company work out of that?” And, of course, we later understand that Jeff Bezos had much bigger dreams in mind, but he didn’t start with, “Okay, I’m going to become the retailer of everything,” and assume that’s going to work.

He started with, “Well, let’s see if we can sort of create a little bookstore online, and drum up some enthusiastic customers, and then let’s see if we can extend some of those customers into buying other things. And then let’s see if other customers, who maybe don’t buy books that often, will come and buy other things because our operations are now so good.” So, that would be another story of one risk at a time.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. And then let’s talk about this emotional piece. When we hit a failure, we can think, “I’m no good at this,” and we’d have an emotional reaction that prevents us from doing the learning, doing the persisting, doing the optimal response that keeps us moving forward. Boy, in the heat of battle, Amy, how do we address this stuff?

Amy Edmondson
So, this is why I spend some time in the book talking about becoming more self-aware and really more self-reflective and able to pause our unhelpful, unhealthy thinking and redirect it. So, I described my unhealthy, unhelpful thinking in response to my research failure years ago, and I had to learn, and we all have to learn, to kind of talk ourselves away from the wildly emotional and really inaccurate response to the disappointment of failure and rethink it, and sort of reframe it.

Reframe it from “Oh, this is awful. I’m going to have to drop out of my PhD program,” to, “Oh, this is disappointing. I wonder what it might mean?” Now, that’s a shift, or it’s a major cognitive shift, but it’s not unheard of. It doesn’t seem impossible to our listeners, I imagine, that you can practice and then learn to catch yourself, and correct your exaggerated thinking, and turn it into more scientific thinking that brings cooler, more logical thoughts, that also cool the hot emotions.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Could you give us an example of that in practice?

Amy Edmondson
Well, I guess an example in practice is I’m going to go back to this really important meeting, maybe it’s a job interview, and I experienced that little complex failure and I’m really unprofessionally late. I show up late. In fact, I show up so late that they’ve moved on to the next candidate. And my sort of human being’s response might be, “This is awful. I’m not going to get the job. This is the end of my life. No one’s going to hire me, and I’m going to starve to death.” Well, no, right?

So, that’s what the psychiatrist, who I talk about in the book, Maxie Maultsby, would call awfulizing or catastrophizing something that is, indeed, not great, not a great performance, but not the end of the world. And so, once you recognize that, that little emotion taking hold, that kind of your amygdala gets hooked and, says, “This is just terrible,” you pause, and you say, “No.” You force yourself to say, “This is inconvenient.”

That’s my favorite word, right? It’s inconvenient. Because, yep, it’s inconvenient, and it’s not the end of the world. And either it’s, “I’ll make amends, I’ll make an apology, maybe get a second chance,” or, “I will definitely not do this again for my next interview.” You figure out. It’s a shift from a backwards-facing, highly emotional, “This is terrible,” to a forward-facing, “Okay, that wasn’t ideal. What will I do differently next time?”

And this is how we continuously cool our emotions down, but we also force ourselves to keep learning, keep getting more thoughtful, keep getting more disciplined and wiser, and, ultimately, more creative as well, because we’re more willing to take risks because we know that the downside of the risks won’t be catastrophic.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. That’s good. And if we’re having trouble even beginning to think clearly and rationally and calmly about the matter, any other pro tips? Is it sleep? Is it walking? Is it cold water? Is it any of that?

Amy Edmondson
Oh, yeah, all of the above, depending on what you like. So, I would say you start with the proverbial and the real deep breath. That deep breath will interrupt the automaticity of the thinking. But, for me, certainly one of the things that I habitually have relied upon is go for a run. If I’m really stuck on something, and I just change the scenery, literally by put some running clothes on and go for a run, it completely changes how I’m thinking. It seems to put things more in perspective, and so exercise, that’s one, but anything that interrupts.

You could have a checklist of questions to ask yourself. It could be along the lines of, “Okay, what truly are the consequences of this? And what did I learn? And why is this now something that I’m able to put to use going forward?”

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

Amy Edmondson
So we’ve just been talking about sort of self-awareness, self-reflection, self-discipline. Another key domain is context awareness. Be more mindful and thoughtful when you’re in a dangerous context. I know that’s obvious, but it’s truly violated all the time. People don’t put their safety equipment on when they should have, or they text and drive.

So, develop a habit of thinking quickly and clearly about the context, “What are the stakes here? What are the risks? Financial? Reputational? Safety? And what’s the uncertainty?” And act accordingly. Have lots of fun experimenting when the stakes are low. Be very, very thoughtful and vigilant when the stakes are high.

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

Amy Edmondson
One of my very favorite quotes is Viktor Frankl, which is, “Between stimulus and response, there is a space. And in that space lies our opportunity to choose. And in that choice lies our freedom.”

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

Amy Edmondson
I think my favorite bit of research is in the research on the fundamental attribution error by Lee Ross at Stanford, where they show in some sort of laboratory experiments that we are relentlessly willing to attribute others’ shortcomings to their own personality defects or character defects. But our own, we will very quickly and naturally see the situational forces at work. So, once we know that we’re likely to do that, once we truly internalize the idea that we will spontaneously do that, then we can step onto the road of becoming a better person, and giving others the same benefit of the doubt we often give ourselves.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Amy Edmondson
I have many long-standing favorite books, but I’m in the middle of one that right now is becoming a favorite book, which is The Road to Character by David Brooks.

Pete Mockaitis
And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks; they retweet it, they Kindle book highlight it, an Amy Edmondson bit of wisdom?

Amy Edmondson
Choose learning over knowing, and it’s an active choice. We have to choose it because our habitual cognitive response is to feel like we know, feel like we see reality. We have to get curious. We have to choose learning over knowing.

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

Amy Edmondson
I guess AmyCEdmondson.com.

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

Amy Edmondson
Yes, take more risks.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Amy, thank you. This has been lots of fun once again. And I wish you many delightful failures.

Amy Edmondson
Thank you. And you, too.

965: Why Your Boss Isn’t Advocating for You…and What to Do About it with Dr. Nicholas Pearce

By | Podcasts | One Comment

 

Dr. Nicholas Pearce reveals the hidden reason why many high-performers don’t advance—and provides candid solutions.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The harsh truth behind why many don’t advance
  2. Why even a great mentor is no substitute for a sponsor
  3. How to find support if you aren’t being supported

About Nicholas

Dr. Nicholas Pearce is a Chicago native and vocational multihyphenate who has committed his life to creating social impact at the intersection of the academy, the church, and the marketplace. He is an award-winning organizational behavior professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, Founder & CEO of The Vocati Group, a boutique management consultancy, and a respected faith leader. He is also the author of the bestselling book, THE PURPOSE PATH: A Guide to Pursuing Your Authentic Life’s Work.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

Dr. Nicholas Pearce Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Nicholas, welcome.

Nicholas Pearce
Thanks, Pete. Good to be with you.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to be chatting with you. You have so much wisdom in so many domains, but my producers originally found you from your phenomenal Harvard Business Review article called What to Do When Your Boss Won’t Advocate for You. And it sounds like you struck a nerve with this one, Nicholas. What’s the scoop here?

Nicholas Pearce
I think this is something that a lot of people struggle with. People long to have great mentors and great managers who are invested in their success and care about them as humans. But if there’s something that we learned during the pandemic is that a lot of leaders don’t care about the humanity in us. They view us as not human beings, but as human doings.

And for those who have managers who don’t really care about them, don’t care about their forward progress, or won’t bring their name up in rooms that they’re not able to occupy, it creates a challenge to figure out how to navigate your career and your life forward when you recognize you’re lacking that sponsorship.

Pete Mockaitis
Ooh, Nicholas, coming strong right out of the gate. I love it. So, they don’t care about our humanity. That’s a strong sentence and yet it seems accurate. It’s not that they wish us harm actively, but it’s just kind of like, you know, at the end of the day, you are a means to producing a thing, and that’s a fairly prevalent attitude. If you had to hazard a guess, what percent of managers do you think fall in the humanity-affirming versus humanity-eh column?

Nicholas Pearce
That’s a hard number to guess at, but I can tell you that most corporations, based on how they are structured, tend to look at people as products, even the language of human resources or human capital. Human capital was, I guess, designed to be something of a more humane way of saying HR, but when you think about human capital, putting human capital alongside physical capital or financial capital, these are resources that are under the control of the organization for the organization’s purposes, not things that have lives of their own to be valued.

So, putting people in the thing column, I think it’s very, very common. And, unfortunately, most folks who have been in the working world for any amount of time know that while HR may sound like they exist for the people, most HR departments exist to shield an organization from lawsuit. So, HR typically is not really there for you. HR is there for the company.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Telling it like it is. So, just for funsies, is there a language that you prefer to use when it comes to organizations and people, like, the people department or learning and development? Like, what are the terms you like to use?

Nicholas Pearce
I love the concept of people and culture. Having an executive leader who is primarily responsible for the development and wellbeing of the people in the organization and the stewardship of a healthy culture, I think that language works well. I think learning and development, as you mentioned, Pete is great because it focuses on the value added to the people and their development. Anything that does not make it sound like the organization owns or controls assets. That type of language, I think, has its own limitations.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, Nicholas, I just love where you’re rolling. And I know, in your background, you are both a business school professor and a pastor. And it’s really beautiful to kind of see how the thinking interplays here in terms of just even the words we use, we can find irksome or even dangerous.

Nicholas Pearce
That’s exactly right. I think words have power and words should be used with intention. And I think the words that our organizations and corporations have used over the years are reflective of the desired intention. And as we begin to deconstruct some of those harmful ways of thinking and being in workplace life, we have the opportunity to refresh not only our perspectives, but our language as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, lovely. All right. And we’re just getting started talking about advocacy. So, we’re going to say this word a lot. Maybe since we’re talking words, could you give us some definition? When we talk about having a boss or someone advocate for you at work or advocacy, generally speaking, within work, what do we mean by that? You said speaking up for someone when they’re not in the room, that’s something, got a ring to it. Are there any other dimensions of that you’d highlight?

Nicholas Pearce
Absolutely. So, I think about advocacy as the act of sponsorship, and I juxtapose sponsorship against mentorship. So let me describe the two and contrast them. Mentorship is having that person who will coach you, who will pull you aside and say, “Hey, I like what you did there. Maybe a little bit more of this next time, a little bit less of that.”

Maybe they’re going out to coffee with you once every couple of weeks or every four weeks or every quarter. They’re there to help you navigate. They’re there to invest in your development. They care about you as a human. They care about your performance. They’re trying to invest in making you a better you.

Sponsorship is altogether separate. Sponsorship is not so much about making the direct investment of time in giving feedback, and having lunch regularly, and having coffee, and giving micro corrective feedback. Sponsors are people who are opportunity creators. They are career accelerators and catalysts of opportunity. These are individuals who are bringing your name up when you’re not in the room. And as is often said, 80% of what is said about you is said when you’re not in the room.

So, for many people, especially women, people of color, and others who tend to be excluded from a lot of opportunities in many work environments, they tend to be over-mentored, “We’ll give you a coach, we’ll give you feedback, we’re going to make you a better you,” under the guise that the reason you have not ascended is because you need to be made better.

But what they really need are sponsors, people who are willing to say, “Hey, did we consider giving Nicholas that opportunity? Did we consider giving Jane that promotion? What are the reasons why we’re holding her back? Are we saying she lacks ‘seasoning’? What exactly do we mean by that? Does she need to add paprika and stir? Like, what are we saying?”

The people who are willing to do the blocking and tackling to make sure that organizational politics or bias don’t derail your career, those are your sponsors. And so, many people are over-mentored, but under-sponsored. And so, the whole concept of advocacy speaks to an individual using their credibility, their capital on you to advance you and your career.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, so then can you tell us, it’s like, “Okay, boys, it’s really important that we have people speaking up for us when we’re not in the room,” how would we even know the extent to which this is or is not happening since we’re not in those rooms?

Nicholas Pearce
Absolutely. You can tell, one, what your boss is saying to you offline. Do you and your manager have a relationship where feedback flows naturally and continuously? Or are you in a situation where your feedback comes mostly in the form of a formal annual or semi-annual review process during which you get blindsided with feedback that sounds off-base? If so, that could be a warning sign that your boss is not going to bat for you when you’re not in the room.

Do you and your boss enjoy a collaborative relationship? Or do you feel like your boss is competing with you? If your boss competes with you, because perhaps they view you as a threat to their advancement, or as a threat to their supremacy, they’re probably not advocating for you.

If you’ve been in a role for three or five years, and there’s never been a conversation about what your future looks like, I mean, let’s be for real, Pete, if you’ve been in a role a year or two, and there hasn’t even been a conversation about what your future looks like, that may be an indication that your boss doesn’t care what your future looks like, and that they’re certainly not advocating for you and for it at tables that you may not even know exist in the organization.

Pete Mockaitis
Nicholas, I love what you’re saying in that it’s very candid and blunt, and I think some of us don’t even want to entertain the belief that this harshness, reality is present when we’re hearing a lot of nice things.

Nicholas Pearce
Absolutely. I have been in spaces personally and have coached leaders, and employees, students of mine who had all the raw ingredients, I mean, had all the learning, all the degrees, all the certifications, all the skills, all the receipts in terms of high performance, and yet found themselves stuck. And what happens for many people is that it’s the ultimate gaslighting. You’re left to wonder, “What did I do wrong? What did I not do right? Is it me? What am I lacking? What do I need to change? Am I too much? Am I too little? Do I need to turn up, turn down? What is it that’s wrong with me?”

And a lot of us wind up falling into cycles of anxiety and depression because we have been trained at a certain level to believe that the problem is always us. And what I’ve discovered is that there are a lot of people who are incredibly gifted and incredible contributors and collaborators who just run into managers and bosses who don’t know how to lead, or don’t know how to be humane, or are insecure.

And because this continues to do incredible damage to people in an era and a season where mental health needs are already at their highest, I feel at some level, Pete, that the truth will set the people free. And to release themselves from the fear or the feeling that they are not enough and to, perhaps, sometimes release their boss from the expectation that they will be a good advocate when perhaps they don’t want to be or don’t know how to be.

Now, I do have to rush and add this, that if you’re just a chronic underperformer, these words don’t apply to you. Like, you need to do better, right? But if you find yourself consistently meeting or exceeding expectations, you’re knocking the ball out of the park, so to speak, on a consistent basis, everyone can see your brilliance and your promise but your boss, maybe it’s not you. It might just be them. And they’re not perfect people. They’re people, they’re not perfect, but it is your life.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m wondering, if folks find themselves in this position, they might feel kind of stuck. Could you maybe give us a bit of hope, a bit of inspiration, a story of someone who saw a transformation in this department in terms of advocacy wasn’t happening and then it kicked off and good things unfolded?

Nicholas Pearce
Absolutely. One of my coaching clients had this very scenario happen, where the boss was really great in terms of giving mentorship and guidance and coaching and feedback, very warm relationship, their families got together on weekends. I mean, it seemed like a really healthy relationship on one level, but they recognized that, at a certain level, the boss really appreciated them being in that role. Because, let’s just say they got their TPS reports in on time every time, and the concept of losing that individual to another team or to a higher level, perhaps in a different business unit, would create issues for that boss.

And so, that boss, at a level, was conspiring to suboptimize that individual by being nice, being kind, keeping them happy, but not giving them the growth opportunities that they deserved and needed to continue to fulfill their potential. So, this individual had the conversation with their boss and said, “Hey, I really enjoy being on your team. Help me see what future could look like. Help me see what next can be.” And that opened up a healthy conversation where the boss kind of came clean and said, “I knew this day would come. And I’ve really enjoyed having you on the team.”

And they kind of came clean about how there were opportunities that existed in the organization and they were waiting on that individual to come forward to raise their hand and say, “Hey, I actually do want to grow. I don’t just want more money. I don’t just want autonomy. I don’t just want flex hours. I actually want to grow. I want to be able to be my best and become even better at a higher level in the organization.”

And so, that conversation actually opened the door for the boss to advocate because the foundational relationship was in place, high performance was already acknowledged, and so this was just an invitation to the boss to move from mentor to sponsor.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. Understood. And I like what you say there. It’s not necessarily evil. Like, they have warm feelings about, it’s like, “No, this person is so amazing. I feel so blessed,” and delighted to have them on their team, but it’s just a little bit of selfishness, which we all are subject to. It’s like, “This is so amazing. I don’t want this person to ever leave.”

But, again, you know that it’s a finite clock. When there’s someone amazing in a role, it’s, like, it’s only a matter of time before they go to a bigger role. And I think this is the way of all things. I think we had a handyman who was awesome and someone said, “Oh, he probably should increase his rates.” And I said, “Inevitably he will.”

Nicholas Pearce
That’s right.

Pete Mockaitis
“Because we are aware of his awesomeness.”

Nicholas Pearce
Exactly. We don’t want to be the ones to tell him that, or we’re happy to tell him as long as he keeps our rate unchanged, right? But this is exactly it. This happens a lot, you know, Pete. It happens in the nonprofit sector a ton, where you have long-serving executive directors or CEOs or presidents, they’ll be in the seat for 25, 30, 40 years. And they’ll have a talented person underneath them in the organization, who everybody within a mile can see has CEO or executive director capability. But that CEO recognizes, “I’m 55, and I have no intention to retire anytime soon.”

“So, because there’s only one CEO at a time, and I intend to sit in this seat for another 10 to 15 years, I have a choice to make. Either I invest in you becoming the very best you can be, which means losing you, or I continue to suboptimize you to make you question whether you have what it takes to be in my seat. But because I’m not ready to give up my seat to you at this time, now I’m not advocating for you. I’m not bringing your name up in the marketplace because I could lose you, and you fulfill an important part on this team. I value more what you produce than who you are.”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Nicholas, you are just touching on exactly, I think, some eye-opening stuff for a lot of people, like, “What’s wrong with me?” It’s like, “Oh, this is what’s really going on under the surface. Understood.” So, lay it on us, if we find ourselves in such a position, what do we do about it?

Nicholas Pearce
Well, one very practical thing that we can all do is to look for advocacy elsewhere. Your boss may not be the only advocate you can get in your organization. Ideally, you’d have a direct supervisor who could go to bat for you because they know your work most closely, but there are other influencers who can give you the boost you need. There could be someone in the organization that is even more high ranking than your boss.

Maybe an ally who might bring your name up. Maybe it’s someone you met in the context of an employee resource group. Maybe it’s someone who you met at the company holiday party. Maybe it’s someone you ran into at a company-wide task force. Maybe it’s someone who, when the time came for the company’s intramural softball team to form, they were the person you rode to the games with. Who knows? But there are other people who can speak to you and can perhaps be an accomplice, a co-conspirator, if you will, in advancing your cause and advancing your career.

Another really helpful thing, and this is something that’s hard for a lot of us, is to build our networks outside of our organizations. For many of us, we may be socialized to feel that is disloyal or underhanded or somehow strategic in the most nefarious sense, but I believe that, what I call 360 -degree advocacy, is a gift that we should all take advantage of. We’ve got advocates above us. We’ve got advocates beside us who are our peers. And we can also have advocates in our direct reports.

Not underestimating the value of people beyond your boss in your organization can be helpful, but also people outside of your immediate workplace who may be LinkedIn connections, or are part of professional associations, or alumni groups, or other civic and community service outlets. Those individuals can speak to your promise as well and may be able to help create opportunities for you outside the organization.

And sometimes, as the saying goes, folks won’t miss the water until the well runs dry. And sometimes you give people the gift of goodbye, and it doesn’t have to be messy. It can just be an investment in self. Investing in yourself and your future does not have to be self-ish, right? Because at the end of the day, let’s face it, Pete, if someone lets you sit on the bench for 10 years and they never advocate for you, that’s 10 years of your life that are down the drain.

And they’re not going to come to you at the end of those 10 years and say, “You know what, Pete, I’m sorry you wasted your entire 30s.” It’s going to be on you to make up for that lost time. And an apology is not going to do it. You owe it to yourself. I was having a conversation with a group of executives who are whining and complaining about Millennials and Gen Z being disloyal. And I said, “Listen, y’all can complain and moan about that all day long until you recognize that companies aren’t loyal like they used to be. Unless you’re giving Gen Z a pension, which you’re not, the company’s already said, ‘Ah, we’re not really loyal to you.’”

If you say in your HR policies, that in order for a 401k or 403b to be fully vested, an individual has to work there three years, you’re telling them from the outset, “We’re investing in you, sort of. Until you’ve been here a while, we’re going to claw back part of the money we’ve invested in your retirement.” So, all of these are signals to individuals that companies aren’t loyal. And so, if companies aren’t going to be loyal to their people, how can you expect people to be loyal to their companies in the way that they were 75 years ago. The rules of the game have changed. And so, it’s not about being disloyal or selfish. It’s just about being smart.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that absolutely resonates. And that was kind of my philosophy when I started my career, it’s like, “I don’t think I can count on any employer long-term ever.” So, it felt kind of mercenary. It was like, “What can I do to make sure I have skills to do anything?” And I was like, “Strategy consulting seems like a good choice out of undergrad.”

And so, and I think it was serving well with developing some skills and some network and some savings to then go do entrepreneurial things. But, Nicholas, I got to hear, when you dropped these truth bombs on these executives whining about the Millennials, how did they reply?

Nicholas Pearce
Oh, they got it immediately. I said, “Listen, all of the participation trophies and all that stuff is cool when it’s your kid or your grandbaby out there on the soccer field getting the little trophy because they put their cleats on the right feet. But when they become your employee, all the participation trophy stuff, where you’re getting rewarded for effort, that goes out the window. It goes out the window.”

And so, recognize, that it was not the Millennials and Gen Z that made participation trophies. It was the uncles and aunts and moms and dads and coaches who could not handle walking away without a shiny object because they showed up and tried their best, and the participation trophy industry was born, but Millennials didn’t demand it. It was the world into which they came of age. They understood it as an expectation. And if Gen X and Baby Boomers had not put participation trophies in the lexicon, Millennials would not expect them in the workplace.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. Okay. So, we’re getting a lot of good contexts from all over here. So, build the network outside the organization. Any other top tips you’d recommend? If we find ourselves not having that advocacy, what else should we do?

Nicholas Pearce
Absolutely. One of the most common cliches that I have heard that I actually believe has truth underneath it is that sometimes rejection can be protection and redirection.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. It rhymes too.

Nicholas Pearce
And so, if you find your manager not advocating for you, it could very well be an intentionally closed door that is designed to push you in the direction of purpose. This is something that I talk about a fair amount in my book which is entitled The Purpose Path: A Guide to Pursuing Your Authentic Life’s Work. And what I find is that, in many cases, the adversity that we may face, whether personally from a health perspective or otherwise, or even professionally in terms of doors that are slammed shut in our faces, sometimes that adversity is actually the grist of discovering purpose.

Oftentimes, people think that the purpose that we have in life is to just be happy. And I’m not the happiness police. I’m not anti-happiness, Pete. However, I have discovered that, oftentimes, it is those painful circumstances that push us into a place where we discover purpose that we would never have discovered before. And so, while many of us want to organize our lives around the avoidance of pain, if we avoid pain, we actually may be avoiding purpose.

Now, I’m not saying we should be trying to attract pain. Hear me clearly. All I’m saying is that sometimes when a boss doesn’t advocate, when a door closes, it could be a catalyst that is pushing you toward purpose and protecting you from calamity that you had no clue was coming your way. So, really embracing the moment in a different way and reframing it as not so much, “This is a flaw in me,” but perhaps more, “This is giving me an opportunity to reflect, to retool, to perhaps even take a break and rest and really think about how I connect my soul with my role.”

“Maybe I was just doing a job, earning a nine to five paycheck, doing the things, paying down my student loans, making the moves, doing the things. But now I actually want there to be meaning in my work. Yeah, I’ve got skills. Yeah, I work for the big shiny company with the stock options and all of the trinkets. But now I actually want to do something with my life that matters. I want to have purpose in my work. I want to connect my soul with my role.” And maybe that closed door was the catalyst to get you to see that purpose is calling.

Pete Mockaitis
That was well said. Well said. Well, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about a few of your favorite things?

Nicholas Pearce
Sure. I think that as much as we often think about what happens when others don’t advocate for us, I think that it’s important that we recognize our responsibility to advocate for others. Oftentimes, it’s very easy to think about what your boss is or is not doing for you, and you’re absorbed in what’s happening over your head, and you’re thinking that you are the main character in the organization story, and you are not.

Many of us don’t advocate for others because we’ve never been advocated for. And while that may be understandable, I don’t think that’s a valid excuse. We have to be intentional about lifting as we climb, not having the crabs-in-a-barrel mentality where only one of us can be advocated for at a time, “And if it’s not me, that means you win and I lose.” I think this zero-sum game mentality, this fixed-pie thinking is eroding the fabric of society.

And so, I think for as many people who may be attracted to our conversation today, because they find themselves in spaces where they weren’t getting advocated for, perhaps being the leader you wish you had can be a very important part of your life’s work and your own personal scorecard in terms of how you evaluate your leadership.

Pete Mockaitis
Right on. And now, could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Nicholas Pearce
“Weeping may endure for the night, but joy comes in the morning.”

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

Nicholas Pearce
A favorite bit of research that I love talking about is this vintage study that was conducted by Kathy Phillips, Katie Liljenquist, and Maggie Neale. They’ve done this study looking at the power of diversity to help teams win. And the science on this from over 20 years ago is quite clear, that diverse teams can outperform homogenous teams when the task calls for creativity, innovation, information-sharing, and tackling complexity. This is a well-stated, well-worn vintage research finding. It is not a part of the recent DEI movement. This is pure science from back in the before times that many organizations know about but haven’t really embraced.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Nicholas Pearce
Necessary Endings by Henry Cloud.

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

Nicholas Pearce
Sabbath.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Nicholas Pearce
Favorite habit is prayer for me. It’s time to really refocus.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks; you hear them quoted back to you often?

Nicholas Pearce
Yeah, oftentimes, it’s really in the space of this purpose conversation that we started to explore a little bit toward the end. And it is the fact that you owe it to yourself to live a life on purpose. You were created with a purpose. You have a reason for being. And you owe it to yourself to discover that and to do something about it.

A lot of people say that they are reflecting or meditating or praying for purpose because they need clarity on what their purpose is. And for some people, that is truly the case. But there’s a significant percentage of people who I think are probably with us today, Pete, who don’t need further clarity. They need more courage. And once they acknowledge the fact that they’ve got the clarity they need already, the missing ingredient is courage, now it’s their move.

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

Nicholas Pearce
NicholasPearce.org is a great place. You can connect with me on LinkedIn, social media, Facebook @napphd. I also have a TED Talk that folks have been enjoying entitled, “Don’t Ask Me What I Do.” So, any of those spaces will be great to connect.

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

Nicholas Pearce
Be the change you want to see. If you feel like you’re not getting advocated for, advocate for someone else. If you had a terrible onboarding experience, make someone else’s onboarding a little softer. If you feel like it’s time for you to pivot from a job, don’t be messy on the way out the door. Embrace the gift of the lessons you learned in the previous season and take the high road and walk out with grace, not looking at that past experience as time wasted, but looking at yourself perhaps as an alum of that organization or institution, and always seeking to do your best, no matter where you find yourself.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And, Nicholas, this has been fantastic. I wish you much good advocacy and purpose.

Nicholas Pearce
Thanks, Pete. Likewise.

962: Marshall Goldsmith Giving Away All His Knowledge through AI

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Marshall Goldsmith unveils his latest (free!) innovation in the field of artificial intelligence: MarshallGoldsmith.Ai.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why Marshall put all of his leadership knowledge inside a bot
  2. Where AI excels and where it falls short 
  3. Crucial considerations before using–and making–AI bots 

 About Marshall

Dr. Marshall Goldsmith is the only two time Thinkers50 #1 leadership thinker in the world. He has been recognized as the #1 executive coach in the world for over a decade. He is the #1 New York Times best selling author of books that have sold over 3 million copies including What Got You Here Won’t Get You There, MOJO, Triggers and The Earned Life. He is the only living author that has 2 books recognized by Amazon.com as the Best Leader and Success books of all time. He has over 1.5 million followers on LinkedIn alone.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

Marshall Goldsmith Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Marshall, welcome back.

Marshall Goldsmith

Very good to see you again. Thank you for inviting me.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, it’s good to see you again. I’m seeing a familiar backdrop. I remember you invited me to your home last time, and that was super cool. But I think this joke maybe has already been done before, Marshall, but if you’ll forgive me, I have to ask. Is it actually you, the human being Marshall Goldsmith, I’m speaking to?

Marshall Goldsmith

This is indeed me, the human Marshall version.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Okay. Because I’ve used the Marshall Bot, the AI situation that we’re talking about, and I didn’t think it could do a video of your face yet. Is that accurate?

Marshall Goldsmith

That is coming.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay.

Marshall Goldsmith

Now, the sequence of events is text first, then voice, then video, then video and multi languages, and then, ultimately, the metaverse.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, yeah. You have a very clear pathway but let’s back way up to the beginning. So, all right, Marshall, we got a MarshallGoldsmith.ai. What’s the story here? What’s that about? Why? Tell us everything.

Marshall Goldsmith

I’ve always wanted to give away all that I know to as many people as I can. And I’ve done a pretty good job of it, yet I’ve tried to figure out some technology to make this work. I have pretty much 20 years of abject failures to my credit. I tried things like interactive videos, you know, $3,000 clunky boxes that weighed a ton and didn’t work. I mean, I have tried so many things with nothing but failure until the last year.

So, just in the last year, in hindsight, by the way, we had a whole group of people trying to figure out how to do this. It was really like having a hundred monkeys in a room waiting to type the Gettysburg Address. It wasn’t going to happen. We tried and failed. It wasn’t going to happen. So, what happened is now, after the advent of this new technology, it is mind-blowing. And not only is what I thought it would be, it’s about a hundred times better than I thought it would be.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, cool. Well, so the technology to, as I’ve experienced it, I go to MarshallGoldsmith.ai, which all listeners can do right now. I can type in some questions or things and it will give me a response. And I can even play your voice, to hear your voice doing that response. So, that’s kind of fun. And so, tell me, how does this differ from, say, ChatGPT?

Marshall Goldsmith

Well, a couple of ways. First, everything that is a computer bot is biased. Let me give you what I mean by that. Let’s say you ask a question, “What is leadership?” A simple question, but there are 30 different definitions. My old mentor, Dr. Paul Hersey taught me, he said, “Look, always use an operational definition. Never say it’s the right definition. Just say it’s your definition. There are many ways you can find words. Don’t get into semantic contests.”

Well, when you use Marshall Bot, it’s my definition, so at least you know whose opinion you’re getting.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So, duly noted, fair enough. Every AI bot will be biased in one way or another. With the Marshall Goldsmith.ai, we know it is biased in all the ways Marshall Goldsmith is biased.

Marshall Goldsmith

And my bot has no political opinions. No political opinion, no medical advice, and no financial advice. So, mine is programmed just to give you advice about people issues or things I may know something about. Anything else that’s outside of my bailiwick, boom, it doesn’t talk about.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I actually really appreciated that. I’ve asked it several questions and it says, “I apologize, apologize.” It double apologizes. Maybe that’s a quirk or a bug, “But this question is outside of my expertise. As an executive coach, I am only able to answer questions related to my life teachings and books.”

I was really having fun with it. It was like, “Hey, who calls you every day with those questions? And what are they?” It’s like, “My friend Jim Moore asked me these daily questions.” Okay, cool. It’s like, “Hey, did your daughter win Survivor?” “Well, my daughter, Dr. Kelly Goldsmith, was a contestant. She got far but didn’t quite win.” It was like, “Okay. All right. This is sure enough.”

Marshall Goldsmith

Ask it. Ask it why I wear a green T-shirt every day.

Pete Mockaitis

You know, I remember looking at your closet, there’s like a dozen green shirts.

Marshall Goldsmith

“Why do you wear a green polo shirt every day?” ask it that, “Why do you wear a green polo shirt?”

Pete Mockaitis

Let’s do it. Let’s do it. And, guys, you can have the same fun at home at MarshallGoldsmith.ai. Marshall Bot is thinking, ellipsis, “The New Yorker Magazine wrote a story. Larissa MacFarquhar noted you always wear a green polo shirt. You didn’t do that, but that’s what you remembered. Now they expect it from you.” Okay, that’s fun. Well, so we got a thing. Maybe we got a thing, it’s different in that the training dataset is not the whole internet, it’s just your stuff, like your books, your blogs, your articles. This is what it was built off of. I don’t know, am I in there? Is the interview? Like, I interviewed you, would our source material be there?

Marshall Goldsmith

Answer is I don’t know. Let me tell you, though, what it does do that I had not planned and only started doing like a month or two ago. My daughter wanted to trick it, so she said, “Aha, how is utilitarian philosophy related to your coaching?” I don’t know what utilitarian philosophy is. It gave this brilliant answer.

You can ask it, “How is Islamic philosophy, Buddhist philosophy anything related to my coaching?” it’ll answer it. So, what it does is it actually does peruse the internet, yet it puts everything through the filter of what it knows about me. Then it answers it in my voice in a way that is pretty much 100% what I would say. And, by the way, in about five seconds. This is mind blowing. This is not, by the way, what I expected. It’s way better than what I expected.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Cool. And I see that the tech platform underlying this is from a company Fractal.ai. Do we know, what are they working with? Do they have their own model? Or is it Gemini? Or is it…?

Marshall Goldsmith

I don’t know. Let me tell you, I’ve been a very unusual sequence of characteristics that makes this possible. Not too many people have their own sophisticated AI computer bots. So, this is reasonably unusual, number one. Why? For four reasons. One, I got a lot of followers. So, I’ve got 1.5 million followers on LinkedIn. Well, you give away everything you know, if you don’t have any followers, guess what? No one cares. You give away. Nobody cares.

Number two, I’ve got a lot of content. You really need a lot of content to make this work. If you have a tiny amount of content, it’s not really worth it. Number three, I’m willing to give it away. So, not too many people have a lot of followers, a lot of content and want to give it away. And then, number four, I’ve got some nice people at Fractal that are writing big checks to pay for it.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, okay. Cool. So, you part with zero dollars in order to have this capability.

Marshall Goldsmith

Zero.

Pete Mockaitis

There you go. Cool.

Marshall Goldsmith

On the other hand, I don’t charge anything. And they don’t charge anything. Now, let me tell you another thing I love about this. There isn’t some trick door. See, normally when you get something for free, it’s like, “Well, yes, you can get this for free. Yeah, if you spend just a little bit more, you go through the magic door and you get…” you know, there’s always upsell. What I love about this is there is no upsell. The only trick is there isn’t a trick. It’s actually free. You’ve been using it, right? It’s free.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, so then tell me, in terms of if a person just wants to get some value from this, and it’s just, “Hey, I got a question about leadership, whatever. I’m just going to drop by MarshallGoldsmith.ai, and then just ask it.” And that’s sort of how you envision it being used? That’s that.

Marshall Goldsmith

Anyone in the world that wants to. Ultimately, by the way, ultimately in multiple languages.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. Okay. Cool. All right.

Marshall Goldsmith

It’s not there yet, but ultimately the goal is video and multiple languages.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, so now as compared to, if someone were to straight up hire you as a client, you are their executive coach, and so you’ve got many famous CEOs from across the years who have been your clients.

Marshall Goldsmith

Either, number one, they’ve got to be running a huge nonprofit that does good or, number two, they’re writing a nasty check.

Pete Mockaitis

Certainly. So, right there, we got some savings and better access, so there’s some advantages. But how would you compare/contrast the experience one would have, having you, the human being, coach extraordinaire, Marshall Goldsmith, versus MarshallGoldsmith.ai?

Marshall Goldsmith

MarshallGoldsmith.ai is an information and knowledge bot. It’s not really a coaching bot as such. It’s information and it’s knowledge through the prism of me. That’s really what it is. Now, when I coach people, yeah, you’ve seen me, I just give people crap all the time, you know, I make fun, I’m a terrible coach. Although I get ranked number one coach in the world, God knows why.

But anyway, I always give people a hard time, joking around with them, having fun. I mean, the bot is a bot. It doesn’t tell jokes too much and it doesn’t have some wacky personality, and so it’s probably not as funny as me, and it also doesn’t ask questions as much as me. What it does is it’s not really designed to be a coaching bot. It’s designed to be an information and knowledge sharing bot.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Understood. So, in a way, it’s going to give me something that’s a little bit more customized and on target above and beyond to, say, a Google search, better than Google searching your archives of stuff. I’m getting better…

Marshall Goldsmith

And better. Number one, better, and, two, it’s a pain in the butt. Let me give you some real examples. And as, you know, I can always mention names of my clients. One of my clients is Dr. Patrick Friis. Now, Dr. Patrick, I am a volunteer for him because he’s running the Rady Children’s Hospital. I don’t charge him lots of money, so little kids get…little kids don’t get health care. That’s kind of tacky. So, his is all free, but he’s merging with another children’s hospital, so they can have one of America’s largest children’s hospitals, right?

He asked me, “What’s it like to be a co-CEO? What’s good about it? What’s challenging about it? What ideas do you have?” But that’s a hard question. There really aren’t many co-CEOs. Now I’ve met a few. Some are very successful, like KKR. Most aren’t, right? Most aren’t. And I asked Marshall Bot. The thing had a brilliant answer. No offense to me, it was a much…I agreed with it all, but it was more detailed and thoughtful than my answer.

Then he said, “Well, that’s really good. How about this issue of setting boundaries? That seems very important with the other co-CEO.” Boom! He goes into great detail about that. It was amazing. Then he asked me anything I’d like to add to it. Well, I kind of threw in a little something. I think he tried to make me feel good, “Oh, Marshall, your comment is good. Your comment is good.” I don’t think I added very much. I mean, I think, really, if you had a contest, it versus me, it wasn’t close. Its answer was way better than my answer.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. So, when it comes to digging up relevant information, it can do that way quickly and way thoughtfully. When it comes to having a rich two-way back-and-forth question dialogue leading somewhere, it just doesn’t have that capability.

Marshall Goldsmith

That’s not what it does. For example, it’s not going to look at you and say, “Okay, why are you sending that for? You know, why are you trying to show off?” I fine my clients $20 every time they start a sentence with no, but, or however, right? So, I talk to them, and my client said, “But, Marshall…” I said, “That’s free. If I ever talk to you again, you say no, but, or however, I’ll fine you $20.” He said, “But, Marshall, 20.” “No, 40. No, no, no, 60, 80, 100. We lost $420 an hour and a half. At the end of the hour and a half, we said, thank you. I had no idea.

I was talking with another client who’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars, right? Hundreds of millions. He’s 53 years old. He’s good-looking, healthy, got a nice wife and three good kids. He’s not happy. You know what I told him? “Raise your right hand, repeat after me. My name is Joe and I’m an idiot.” I said, “You’re an idiot. What is wrong with you? If 99% of the world were listening, they’d be like, ‘What a fool!’ And they’re exactly right. You’re an idiot.” You know what he said? “Thank you.” Marshall Bot is not going to do that.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Understood. So, we got a clear distinction there. So, then, well, I’m curious, thinking broadly about this AI stuff, do you imagine there will be other bot implementations of knowledge bases kind of on the scene emerging in the future?

Marshall Goldsmith

Oh, yeah. I would imagine pretty much everybody’s going to have to do this. I mean, every corporation is going to have to do this. They’re going to have to have their own AI bot of sorts. And I’ll tell you one thing I know that they don’t know. They don’t know how hard it is. I’ve put hundreds of hours into this thing already. This is a lot of work. And it’s easy to do. It’s hard to do right.

Pete Mockaitis

Now the hundreds of hours, I mean, are we counting the time, like writing all those books that you wrote that go into it? Or are we talking about on top of that?

Marshall Goldsmith

On top of that.

Pete Mockaitis

What does that consist of? Like, what were you doing to make that come to fruition?

Marshall Goldsmith

Give it feedback.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. You’re like, “No.”

Marshall Goldsmith

Marshall Bot, I can change the answers. I ask it a question; it gives an answer. Parts I like, I keep; the parts I don’t like, I get rid of. Now, let’s say, if you ask it a question, but maybe it doesn’t have an answer, like somebody asked me, “How is your coaching related to, oh, I think Nietzsche’s philosophy or something?” Well, it didn’t know.

All I have to do then is go to ChatGPT, and say, “How’s my coaching philosophy related to that?” and then it gives an answer because it knows who I am, “How’s Marshall Goldsmith’s coaching philosophy related to that?” It’ll give an answer. On the other hand, I don’t always like all the answer. So, the part I like, I use that to teach my bot. The part I don’t like, I just get rid of. So, I’m using the other bots to train my bot.

Pete Mockaitis

Alrighty. And so, now that you’ve been through hundreds of hours of this, it sounds like you’re pleased with what it’s outputting. Do you still have to say, “Hmm, not quite right? I got to tweak this some more” from time to time?

Marshall Goldsmith

I would see this as a never-ending project. This is legacy for me. I’m 75. I’m going to be dead anyway. I’m just giving everything away. What am I saving it up for, right? I’m just giving everything away to people. My goal is just do a little good here. So, this, to me is, as long as they’re willing to support this, I plan on doing this as long as I can.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, do you have any pro tips on asking questions effectively? Or, I guess, the kids might call it prompt engineering to get excellent output.

Marshall Goldsmith

That is hugely important, because, for example, you might ask it a question, and you think, “Well, gee, I really wish it elaborated on point B.” You just need to learn to ask it to elaborate on point B.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, sure.

Marshall Goldsmith

But if you don’t know that, you don’t know it. So, prompt engineering is very important. and sometimes you do need to be patient. Like, I recently did a test, and somebody did it and they didn’t get exactly what they wanted. I just re-did the wording just a little bit, they got exactly what they wanted. So, sometimes you do, it’s like anything else that’s new, you have to tinker around with it a little bit.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And tell me more, any other top best practices, worst practices, do’s and don’ts for asking bots questions well?

Marshall Goldsmith

Here’s the problem. Let’s say, “Why don’t people do what they know they should do?” Well, often the idea is they don’t understand it. That’s seldom the case.

If you look at my research, I did a research study called “Leadership is a Contact Sport” with 86,000 people. Anyone’s interested, send me an email, Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com and I’ll send it to you.

Eighty-six thousand people. The problem is the theory. They all went to exactly the same course. And then I measured, “How much follow-up did you do after the course?” The people that did no follow-up might as well have been watching sitcoms. It was a total and complete waste of time. And the people that did lots of follow-up got a lot better, “Well, you know, I learned.” No one got better because they went to the course. You got to do something.

Well, the advantage the coach has is the coach reminds you to actually do something, follows up with you, and make sure you’re doing something as opposed to just knowing a theory. From a theory point of view, I can tell you, in terms of if you’re a coach or advisor, do not compete with Marshall Bot. You’re not going to win. Look, I got to rank number one coach and number one leadership thinker in the world. I can tell you. I cannot even get close to competing with this thing. Well, no offense to the rest of the world, if I can’t get close, you can’t either.

Pete Mockaitis

Got you. You can’t come close to competing with it in terms of offering good content answers.

Marshall Goldsmith

Exactly, knowledge. I mean, you can’t get into a knowledge contest with this thing, you’re not going to win.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s got to like the AIs who can crush it in chess or Jeopardy, the knowledge contests. Well said.

Marshall Goldsmith

You can’t beat it.

Pete Mockaitis

As opposed to the accountability emotion stuff because a lot of times, in my experience, a great coach, part of what they bring to the table is just their observation. It’s like, “Hey, I see that you seem to like your energy just kind of dropped there. What’s going on there?” And then you surface something.

Marshall Goldsmith

I’ll give you another one. One person, the first time I met him, he’s introducing himself, so I’m taking notes. After an hour, I said, “Well, I’m now going to read you six times, in the past hour, when you pointed out to me how smart you were. Six.” I read them all back to him, and he was so embarrassed, he goes, “Oh.” I said, “Oh, you’re really not an ass. You’re a really nice guy. You just spend a lot of time proving how smart you are.” This guy had an MD and a PhD. His whole life was proving how smart he is. So, it’s just hard to stop. Well, the computer bot can’t do that.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, I’m curious, so if listeners are thinking, “Wow, I or my team or my organization needs to make our own bot,” can you offer some pro tips, some do’s and don’ts for the creation of your own bot?

Marshall Goldsmith

First, don’t. Don’t assume that technology people can do this for you. It doesn’t matter how good they are. They cannot do this for you. I’ve learned as human beings ask questions in a thousand different ways, and you got to sit there and give this thing feedback. And if your customers are asking it a question, you got to make sure that it’s a good answer.

Let’s say you go to ChatGPT, you say, “All right, what awards have Marshall Goldsmith won?” A simple question. I’ll say, “Give me 20.” Well, 10 of them, I’ve actually won. Five of them are awards I didn’t win. And then the next five, they’re not even awards. It just makes it up. Then I say, “Okay, give me 20 more.” Then it makes everything up. It just starts making stuff up.

Well, you can’t have a business, say you’re in a hospital, you can’t have something representing you making up stuff. You got to have somebody check to make sure this stuff, is it sane here, so it’s not giving you crazy advice. Well, I mean, it might be mildly humorous if ChatGPT or Gemini does that crazy stuff. It’s not mildly humorous if it’s your hospital.

Pete Mockaitis

Absolutely. And so, it seems like, in certain contexts, you might just have to have a human right there intercepting everything. It’s like, “Ooh, that sounds good. That sounds not good.”

Marshall Goldsmith

Well, you need to train it.

Pete Mockaitis

Right. Well, upfront training, and then maybe even real-time interposition.

Marshall Goldsmith

Oh, yeah. You’ve got to ask it question after question. I would say after X number of months, you probably don’t have to have a human there because after, say, six months, most of the questions that are going to be asked have been asked I’ll give an example, “How is humor related to your coaching?” Okay, I never wrote about that. It gave a great answer. The potential of this is amazing.

On the other hand, it’s hard work to do right because humans do not ask questions as you want them to. They kind of ask whatever question they feel like asking.

And also, you got to watch it because people will try to trick the bot, just like you did. They’ll try to get it to talk about politics, or controversial things, or stuff it shouldn’t talk about. Well, you can’t do that in a hospital setting. You just can’t do that, or in a medical setting, or in a corporate setting. You can’t have this thing making mistakes.

From my experience, you got to have to have real content experts do the training, not technology people. Because if you get technology people only, that’s when it goes off the rails because they don’t understand the customer.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, that’s good. All right. Well, Marshall, let’s have some fun with this. I was going to ask about your favorite things, but I might ask Marshall Bot each of the favorite-things questions, and then have you comment on the extent to whether that was accurate.

Marshall Goldsmith

It may or may not have any idea how to answer these questions.

Pete Mockaitis

We’ll say, “Can you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?” I’ll give you the Marshall Bot answer and then you can give me your answer.

Marshall Goldsmith

Okay, I’ll be curious. Yeah, mine would be “What got you here won’t get you there.”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Marshall Bot says, “Successful people become great leaders when they learn to shift the focus from themselves to others.”

Marshall Goldsmith

By the way, equally good.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And can you tell us about a favorite book?

Marshall Goldsmith

Favorite book, yes. Favorite book, “Old Path, White Clouds” by Thich Nhat Hanh. Second favorite book, “The Wizard of Oz.”

Pete Mockaitis

“Old Path, White Clouds” it is. All right. Okay. Let’s say, can you share with me a favorite study or experiment or piece of research?

Marshall Goldsmith

Well, I don’t know if I’d call it a favorite, but one I quote all the time is the marshmallow research. And I quote that, talking about what you should and shouldn’t do. I’m not sure Marshall Bot would interpret the same question as the way I did, but see what it says.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s right.

Marshall Goldsmith

It might say “Leadership is a Contact Sport,” by the way.

Pete Mockaitis

It said you used a series of six active questions that participants answered every day for 10 working days.

Marshall Goldsmith

Yeah, that one. That’s a good study, too. Yeah, it’s from the magazine Dialogue.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, now I got to know. What were those questions or what happened?

Marshall Goldsmith

Oh, well, here’s what happened. Every day, I have people answer six active questions. My daughter, Kelly, taught me about active questions. They all begin with the phrase, “Did I do my best today?” So, everything, like employee engagement is a passive question, “Do you have clear goals? Do you have meaningful work?” Nothing wrong with it. But then it gets people talking what’s wrong with them. Nobody says, “What’s wrong with me?”

The active questions say, “Did I do my best?” so you can’t blame someone else. So, the six questions are, number one, “Every day, did I do my best to set clear goals?” Number two, “Every day, did I do my best to make progress or achieving the goals I set?” Number three, “Every day, did I do my best to be happy?” Number four, “Every day, did I do my best to find meaning?” Number five, “Did I do my best to build positive relationships? And did I do my best to be fully engaged?”

So, rather than blame everybody else for your lack of engagement and meaning in life, you start blaming yourself. You take some responsibility. People that ask themselves these questions every day, huge, get better at almost everything.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Thank you. And now can you name a favorite tool you use that helps you be awesome at your job?

Marshall Goldsmith

I would guess if you have to say something, it would be customized 360 feedback.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Marshall Bot says, “Feed forward.”

Marshall Goldsmith

There you go. Even better. I told you Marshall Bot is better than me. That was a better answer than my answer.

Pete Mockaitis

And how about a favorite habit, something you do that helps you be awesome at your job?

Marshall Goldsmith

Daily questions.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Marshall Bot said feed forward again. All right, sure. And then I ask about a resonant nugget, a quote of yours that really connects, resonates with folks, and they repeat it back often, Kindle book highlight it, retweet it, etc. What’s a Marshall original gem that you’re known for?

Marshall Goldsmith

“To help others get better, start with yourself,” or, “What got you here won’t get you there,” of course.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Yeah. We’ve got something similar, “One of the most important actions or things that a leader can do is lead by example. If you want everyone else to be passionate, committed, dedicated and motivated, you go first.”

Marshall Goldsmith

Very similar principle.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And if folks want to learn more or get in touch with you, where should they find you?

Marshall Goldsmith

Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com. And to get to Marshall Bot, it’s all free. Just MarshallGoldsmith.ai.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Cool. And then I would say, do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at the job?

Marshall Goldsmith

If anybody asked Marshall Bot 500 questions within the next five days, send me an email and I’ll personally spend a half hour time coaching you.

Pete Mockaitis
Now there is a challenge.

Marshall Goldsmith

Now the record so far on that challenge, one person did ask a thousand questions. But whatever date you air, five days after that, if somebody sends me a note, say, at Marshall@MarshallGoldsmith.com, and says, “I asked Marshall Bot 500 questions within the five days,” I’ll spend an hour just talking with him.

Pete Mockaitis

All right.

Marshall Goldsmith

That way, it’s also great for me because I learn out their experience. See, that’s another way I’m learning. I challenge people to do this, and the ones that ask a lot of questions, and we talk. And, obviously, they’re very serious, they want put in that much time.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, beautiful. All right. Well, Marshall, this has been fun. Thank you. And I look forward to having more enjoyable conversations with Marshall Bot.

Marshall Goldsmith

Thank you so much. Greatly appreciate you inviting me to talk with you.