Tag

KF #19. Cultivates Innovation

245: Getting into Flow…Repeatedly with Steven Kotler

By Podcasts No Comments

 

 

Steven Kotler says: "Flow follows focus."

Author and researcher Steven Kotler lays out the pathways to the optimal state of consciousness called flow.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The golden rule of flow
  2. How to find flow using psychological and neurobiological triggers
  3. How to take breaks without interrupting your flow

About Steven 

Steven Kotler is a New York Times bestselling author, an award-winning journalist and the cofounder/director of research for the Flow Genome Project. He is one of the world’s leading experts on ultimate human performance.

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Pete Mockaitis
Steven, thanks so much for joining us here on the How to be Awesome at Your Job podcast.

Steven Kotler
Pete, it’s my pleasure.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, first things first, I got to know how you broke 82 bones.

Steven Kotler
It’s actually 83, but so, you know, I’ve spent essentially my entire career asking the same question which is, “How do people do the impossible? How do you level up your game like never before?” And I came to that question through a really weird door. I walked into the door of journalism and I became a journalist in the early 1990s, and back then action sports, so surfing, skiing, rock climbing, snowboarding and the like were really hot topics, and back then if you could write and ski, or write and rock climb, or write and surf there was work.

Couldn’t do any of those things super well but I really needed the work so I lied to my editors and I was sort of lucky enough to spend the better portion of a decade chasing professional extreme athletes around mountains and across oceans, and when you’re not a professional athlete you spend all your time chasing professional athletes around mountains and across oceans you break a lot of things.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Steven Kotler
Which is how I ended up breaking 83 bones along the way.

Pete Mockaitis
So, I’m curious, now how many different bone-breaking episodes was it that accumulatively totaled 83?

Steven Kotler
Okay. So, when I was 16 years old I skied off a cliff in Switzerland and split my patella. Two weeks later after I got home out of the hospital I was in a car wreck and split my other patella. From that point on my legs did not fold properly, so when I started chasing professional athletes around mountains and across oceans, every time I impact that create a micro fracture into my legs.

So, when I had about 67 micro fractures they all turned into a major fracture. So, 67 of those happened over a really long period of time but they all kind of happened at once. It’s a very funny thing to go to your doctor’s office, the doctor looks at you, he holds up your X-ray and says, “All right, so how did you get here?” And I said, “Well, you know, I parked my car and I walked.” He said, “No, you didn’t. Don’t lie to me. You can’t walk. Look at your X-ray. How did you get here?” And I said, “Well, I walked.” And he said, “No, no, you’re lying to me. You can’t walk. Look at your X-ray,” which was pretty funny.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s a whole other subject. So, you only have basic mobility and capability to deal with pain. How do you like live your life with that?

Steven Kotler
It’s really funny because people ask me that all the time. And I’m 50, I still spend, you know, I still ski about 50 days a year, I still chase professional athletes around mountains, I mountain bike another 30 days a year. I’m really active. I have almost no pain. And I credit a lot of it to Ashtanga yoga. I mean, I’ve lived through ways, I’ve done a lot of stuff but I found that as long as I continue to do Ashtanga yoga I have almost no pain.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, that’s a little bonus tip we weren’t expecting. Thank you. Cool. Well, now can you share with us a little bit, what’s the Flow Genome Project about and your research there?

Steven Kotler
Absolutely. So, at the Flow Genome Project we study ultimate human performance, right? We study what does it take to be your best where it matters most. And we’re a research and training organization. And on the training side we work with everybody from kind of the US Special Forces, the Navy Seals and such, through kind of elite action adventure sports athletes and like professional athletes to companies like Google or Ameritrade, we spend a lot of time on Wall Street to average individuals.

And on the research side, we’re the largest, I think the largest, open source research project into ultimate human performance in the world. And kind of at the heart of all the work we do is the state of consciousness known to researchers as flow. So, you may know flow by other names. We call it when we’re in higher, being in the zone or being on conscious, flow is the technical term. And it’s defined as an optimal state of consciousness where we feel our best and perform our best.

And, most specifically, it refers to any of those moments kind of wrapped attention and total absorption. When you’re so focused on the task and have everything else just vanishes. Actually awareness will emerge, your sense of self disappear, time will pass strangely, it’ll slow down or it’ll speed up, and throughout all aspects of performance – mental and physical – go through the roof. So, flow is sort of the source code, the signature of ultimate human performance, and pretty much any domain you study, and so that’s at the heart of the work we do.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, that’s so good. So, now you’re bringing me back to memories of reading Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s book Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, I think, was the subtitle. And so, I remember a chart that stayed with me forever with regard to one of the keys to getting into flow is that the task is not too easy, then you’re just bored, and the task is not too hard, then you’re just overwhelmed and stressed, but that the task is just right with regard to having a bit of challenge that requires a little more attention, and focus, and absorption in order for you to execute it.

Now, in your most recent research, does that hold true? And what are the most kind of essential other core ingredients to reaching that flow as often as possible?

Steven Kotler
So, you are absolutely correct, you’re talking about what’s known as the challenge skills balance.

Pete Mockaitis
All right.

Steven Kotler
And you are absolutely correct in your description. Emotionally we say flow shows up not on but very near the midpoint between boredom, not enough stimulation or not paying attention, and anxiety while way too much, right? In between is this sweet spot of what’s called the flow channel, or if you speak physiology, it’s the Yerkes-Dodson curve. Nonetheless that is still, so what we were talking about is a flow trigger, a pre-condition that leads to more flow.

When Csikszentmihalyi did his original work, these weren’t really well identified. It’s 20 years later and we now know there are 20 different triggers for flow. There are probably way more but we’ve identified 20 triggers for flow, 10 that produce individual flow with you and I would be like low in a flow state. And then there’s shared collective version of flow state known as group flow, that it shows up very commonly at work.

If you’ve ever taken part in a great brainstorming session, or you’ve sung at a church choir, or played in the band, or seen a fourth quarter comeback in football, or if you happen to see what the Patriots did to the Falcons last year in the fourth quarter – perfect example of what group flow looks like.

So, we got 10 triggers on each side, and the challenge skills balance is obviously, one of them is actually – it’s funny that you remember it, it’s a good one to remember – it’s often called the golden rule of flow. A lot of people thought about as the most important of flow triggers.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so it’s the only one I know, and you got 19 more for us. So, how would you like to tackle this? In terms of I’m interested in the ones that are the most powerful, the most easily accessed by the greatest number of people. That’s probably the great magnitude right there.

Steven Kotler
Yeah, so let me give you a quick-and-dirty overview of some of this stuff.

Pete Mockaitis
All right.

Steven Kotler
So, the first thing you got to know is the most obvious, is that flow follows focus, right? The state only shows up when all our attention is focused on the right here right now, so that’s what these triggers really do. They drive attention into the present moment.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, if I could hit that, when we say flow follows focus, a corollary to that then is that you focus first and then flow comes as opposed to you hope that flow shows up and then you’re able to focus. Is that fair?

Steven Kotler
Okay. So, when we work with organizations, the first thing I always tell people is if they can’t hang a sign on their door that says, “Bleep off, I’m flowing,” they’re in trouble. And the reason is you need intense focus and uninterrupted concentration for flow. And the research actually shows 90- to 120-minute blocks of uninterrupted concentration are the best, and that if you’re doing something really creative you may need to stretch that out even up to like four hour blocks a couple times a week.

So, if you are running an organization or working in an organization where the – which is very, very typical these days – messages have to be responded due in 15 minutes, an email within an hour, those are horrific working conditions, terrible working conditions because you are literally blocking the very state of consciousness, the very kind of focus you need to perform at your best.

And let me just put some numbers around the boost you get from flow. I can go into the research, behind all this stuff that you won’t, but you have to understand the upside we’re talking about is McKinsey did a 10-year study, if a topic that’s good, it was reported being 500% more productive in a flow. It’s a huge boost.

Research done by Milo organization, done at Harvard, done at bunch of other places, have found that creativity spikes 400% to 700% when in flow. Research done by the Department of Defense found that learning goes up 470% in flow, so these are huge, huge spikes in cognitive performance. So, it’s really worth kind of trying to alter your working conditions to produce them because the benefits are significant.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, that is so striking. I got to speak up on behalf of any skeptics in the audience, like, “Whoa, how are they measuring a 500% bump in productivity or creativity or learning?” Do you have a sense for the score?

Steven Kotler
Yeah, so they’re measuring in lots of different ways. And it’s funny, because we’re relaunching that. We want a better look at the productivity so we’re relaunching a flow in business success. I think it’s February with Deloitte to take a better look at it. So, for example, learning is a really easy one that I can speak to. They basically take – they were working with people from the military snipers. The military knows how long it takes to train a sniper up for performance, right? There’s really clear records on that.

So, they were working with a team at the Advanced Brain Monitoring in Carlsbad, California, so one of the other thing that’s starting to happen now is that all the stuff that we’re talking about are psychological hacks, but we’re starting to get technological with this. We understand the neuroscience of flow, we understand what’s going on under the hood, and we can steer people using technology toward flow states, so that’s what they did.

They used EEG technology, they recorded expert brain waves, expert archers’ brain waves in flow shooting at a target, then they used that and used neuro feedback with novice marksmen to train them up until they shot at an expert level using their own feedbacks, so trying to get their brain waves into the same state so the flow the experts were in.

But if you search, by the way, Chris Berka, Advanced Brain Monitoring Head, you will find her TED Talk on this work and you actually can see video, and I think it literally took like two days to train people up to shoot like experts. It was frightening.

Pete Mockaitis
That is so wild. Can I get my hands on a neuro feedback machine?

Steven Kotler
Of course, you can. There’s everything from like super friendly easy like places to start like the MUSE headset, all the way up to some really crazy stuff. The Transformative Tech Market which is what this all sits in is exploding right now. I mean, all kinds, there’s a revolution going on right now in consciousness. And a lot of it, there’s a really good reason for this which is one of the things that we’ve discovered is that there are certain skills that are absolutely critical to thrive in the 21st century, and the list vary but accelerated learning is on most lists, creativity tops everybody’s list, cooperation, collaboration, communication. And we’re horrible at training up these skills.

Creativity is a really funny one. We got to take part in the Red Bull Creativity Project, it’s the largest meta analyses of creativity ever conducted, like 30,000 studies reviewed. And they learned on the end two things. One, creativity is the most important thing that we need to thrive in the current century, and we suck at training people to be more creative. And the reason is we keep trying to train up skillsets, and what we really need to be doing is training up states of mind, right?

All of these so-called skills are amplified by altering our consciousness. That’s how we’re wired to do this. That’s what the biology tells us, so we’re just now starting to figure that stuff out, but it’s spreading really quickly. And the Transformative Tech Movement is helping it spread.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s so cool. Now, in your book Stealing Fire you sort of lay out kind of four sets of forces, and technology is one of them. And so, why don’t we round that one out and then you can share with us some of the triggers that fall into the other three categories.

Steven Kotler
For sure. So, what we’re basically trying to figure out, what was driving all this acceleration in this whole field, right? Like why was it exploding? Why are we seeing really weird things like 44% of American companies rolling out mindfulness training programs? Yoga is now over a billion-dollar industry. Everyone micro-dosing with psychedelics is on the cover of The Economist. Really strange things are going on in this world right now and we want to know what was driving it.

What we’re seeing is that four forces are all essentially accelerating exponentially, right? They’re moving very, very, very, very quickly and they’re driving us forward, and their psychology, neurobiology, technology and pharmacology. And the thinking with psychology and neurobiology, since what we’re talking about is kind of altered states of consciousness here, we now have the tools to kind of map and measure what’s going on in our brains and our bodies when we’re experiencing the inexplicable.

Pharmacology is giving us access to these states nearly on demand, and technology is also giving us access to those states nearly on demand but they’re also taking it wild, right? So, all four of these forces are kind of spreading these things out. And we did a calculation, so we called it the altered states economy. And we, basically, looked at how much time and money and effort people spent chasing peak states of consciousness like flow, and we looked at it globally and we looked at a lot of different categories, adding things up.

And I’ll give you a more detailed breakdown if you wanted. But we came up, the number we came up which was $4 trillion, it’s like 1/16th of the global economy is spent chasing these kind of states. And some of that is really sloppy, right? Some of this is not a healthy approach to these kinds of things, but a lot of it is, and it’s interesting and growing.

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, okay. Well, so then, let’s get into it. So, what are some things that we can do here, now, today to tap into some extra flow?

Steven Kotler
So, let’s just walk through a handful of the triggers and I’m going to talk about. So, there are a bunch of triggers and a bunch of different categories, but there’s three triggers in the psychological category, and you talked about one of them already which is the challenge-skills balance. So, that is unbelievably critical, of course.

Two other ones, immediate feedback is another flow trigger. And so, for example, I studied action of action adventure sports athletes who are very good at getting into flow, and one of the reasons is when you’re performing in the mountains, on the oceans, whatever, it’s a living environment. You’re getting immediate feedback, right? You either set your ski edge on the top of that slide, a face that slide to the bottom.

Well, the same is true everywhere. And the reason this is important, flow follows focus, so if you have immediate feedback you don’t have to pull your attention out of the present moment to course correct. You don’t have to wonder, “Am I doing a good job?” You know because the feedback is immediate. So, what this looks like organizationally is interesting.

And so, if you work for an organization or run an organization where you’re getting quarterly feedback or quarterly yearly progress reports or that kind of stuff, well, that sucks. That’s not enough feedback to stay at all in flow. It’s terrible. So, where this works really well, companies that have kind of an agile methodology if you’re in the software business where there’s lots of rapid experimentation, small experiments, that’s really good. You’re getting lots of feedback that way.

I’ll tell you, so I’m a writer, and book editors are sort of editor in name alone these days. They’re so busy and the market is so taxed, they’re very talented, but they don’t do a ton of editing. So, I can’t write a book and have an editor weigh in three times and that’s it, like that doesn’t work for me. So, I have a guy in my staff who reads everything I write about twice a week for feedback.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Steven Kotler
And there’s something, like you can even take it one step further and figure out. So, I figured out in my writing that when I tend to believe that when I make errors, my writing is either arrogant, boring or confusing, so that’s really what’s he’s looking for. Is my writing arrogant, boring or confusing? And those three errors are tied to like I know why I make each of those errors. I just happen to make them all the time. That’s what I call the minimal feedback for flow.

And you can kind of figure this out for yourself with whatever your main task is, but what I tell people is that you can’t afford to hire somebody to give you that kind of feedback. Find a feedback buddy. Find somebody you can work with where you can get feedback from them all the time and speed up those feedback loops. That’s really helpful.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, so when you say the minimal feedback piece, you’re saying, “Okay. Hey, colleague, I don’t need you to masterfully critic it to perfection, but what I do need for you to do is make sure I’m not committing these three common errors that we can nip in the bud rather quickly.”

Steven Kotler
Yup, exactly. And, by the way, so this is not my exercise. This is Josh Waitzkin’s exercise but I kind of love it. One of the ways to dig out what those errors are is to ask yourself, “What did I believe three months ago that I know is not true today?” And ask yourself why did you make that error. What was missing in your logic?

And do this, obviously, like on your core tasks wherever you want the most feedback, so focus on that. And ask yourself, “With this task I’m on, what do I know now that I didn’t know then? And why did I make that mistake?” And if you do that repeatedly you’ll start to tease out exactly where your common errors are, where your blind spots are, and what kind of feedback you need.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Cool. And what’s the third psychological trigger?

Steven Kotler
Clear goals. And here we’re talking about goal setting in general first, so if you’re interested in hacking motivation, we learned in the ‘70s that setting just a high hard goal, a big goal is enough to boost motivation almost 25% in some cases. So, a huge spike in motivation simply by setting a high hard goal. Now, high hard goals are different than clear goals. Higher goals are these big and more of these things in the future, “I want to go to med school. I want to write a book.” That’s a high hard goal kind of thing, right?

Clear goals, flow follows focus, right? Clear goals mean, “I know what I’m doing right now and I know what I’m doing immediately afterwards, so I don’t have to pull my attention out to steer,” right? So, it’s interesting because clear goals are often really, really, really tiny. So, for example, when I set out, I try to write 700 words a day, right?

And if I’m stuck and the clear goal isn’t working, that’s too big of a goal, I will break it down and I’ll say, “Okay, I need to write 200 words that get at the emotion of this paragraph that I’m trying to get,” and really, really clear goals and I shrink them down.

Where this is really useful kind of for most people, I find, is most professionals. So, one of the things that we know is that most professionals will spend about 5% of their work life in flow without even knowing it. Like, McKinsey figured out that if you increased that 15 percentage points to 20% of your time, overall workplace performance would double.

Just to give you an idea of how imminently trainable this stuff is, three years ago we did a six-week joint learning exercise with Google where we took 80 Googlers, 70 Googlers from across the company, so coders, engineers, people in facilities, people in marketing, PR, you name it we had them, and we trained them out in four flow triggers and four kind of high-performance basics, like really basic stuff, sleep hygiene, didn’t get enough sleep at night, that kind of thing.

And over the course of six weeks they did about an hour’s worth of homework a day sort of spread out. We saw a 35% to 80% boost in flow. In fact, we have a flow fundamentals course, it’s a digitally-delivered six-week course available through the Flow Genome Project website. And we measure pre and post, and we’re seeing measuring seven different characteristics of flow, a 70% increase.

And the point is not that we are secret ninja experts at training people in flow, there are lots of people who do this, we think we’re very good at it, but there are a lot of other people who do it. The point is that this stuff is really easy to train. We just haven’t been paying attention to it. So, clear goals, know what you’re doing, know what you’re going to do next, make a to-do list and when you’re moving from one item to the next mind the gap.

That’s where most people get lost, right? You’ll finish one task and before you go to the next one you will do something that will pull your focus out of the present, like check your social media which is terrible because it produces an emotional reaction, and that’s exactly what you’re trying to avoid. You want the clear goals, “I know what I’m doing now. I know what I’m doing next,” and it works that way. So, that’s really useful.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Now, when it comes to the gap, I want to make sure we hit this. We talked to other peak performance folks who talk about full engagement and energy and attention and all that. So, before you mentioned some spaces of time such as 90 minutes to 120 minutes or even more, do you have a quick take on sort of rest, rejuvenation in terms of maybe it’s a quick breath or bathroom? Or what sort of counts as rejuvenation without breaking the flow?

Steven Kotler
Some people like a little bit of physical flex exercise, right? They’ll get up every 15 minutes and do three sun salutations which is just fine, that’ll work great. Three sun salutations are a little kind of Pomodoro set of some kind, or I really like – I don’t know if you know what box breathing is. It’s a mindfulness practice that the Navy Seals use.

You can just search box breathing online and learn, it’s very effective as a mindfulness technique. Anybody can learn it. But I can do kind of three cycles of box breathing and it takes maybe 90 seconds to two minutes to do depending on how slowly you’re breathing. And so, if I need to reset between tasks that’s what I’ll do.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Perfect. Got it. So, that’s the psychological triggers. Now how about some neurobiology triggers?

Steven Kotler
Well, so all these triggers are neurobiological.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, okay.

Steven Kotler
So, they do different things. So, for example, there are three environmental triggers: high consequences, deep environment and a rich environment, and I’ll talk about those in a moment. But most of these triggers drive neurobiologically, they trigger the release of norepinephrine and dopamine or both. These are performance-enhancing chemicals, they do a lot of different things in the brain and the body, but they’re also focusing chemicals so that’s why they’re so important here.

Some of the other things, so clear goals doesn’t appear to drive norepinephrine and dopamine but what it does appear to do is lower cortisol levels and keep the brain waves out of high beta and down in the alpha beta range which is where flow is. So, there’s different things underneath different triggers.

And let me just be really clear, there’s so much more research that need to be done here that everything I’m saying is true as far as we know but there’s a big but question mark after some of these stuff on triggers because it’s just really new information.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Steven Kotler
So, let’s go back to the other triggers. So, for example, a rich environment means lots of novelty, complexity and unpredictability in the environment. And I’ll give you the common example is, again, back at adventure sports for athletes, right? One of the reasons these folks had so much flow is they perform in living environments, right?

. . . in a minute-by-minute basis, the waves are always changing if you’re out in the ocean, so there’s lots of novelty, lots of complexity, lots of unpredictability. Those are all three things that the brain loves. It produces huge amounts of dopamine, drives a lot of focus, slides you right into flow.

You can also get at those architecturally, and my favorite example is Steve Jobs. So, when Steve Jobs was kind of redesigning Pixar he wanted more creativity in the building, he wanted more flow in the building, and he thought the problem was there wasn’t enough novelty, complexity and unpredictability because the staff was balkanized, right?

The producers were stagnant talking to producers, and the marketing people stay and talk to marketing people, and the cell animators stay and talk to the cell animators, and nobody was bumping into each other and so there’s no random spark of ideas. Not enough novelty, complexity and not enough creativity as a result.

So, when he redesigned Pixar he famously put a giant atrium in the center of the complex, and he put the only meeting rooms, message rooms, cafeteria and the only bathrooms in the entire building right off the atrium. You had to walk through the atrium to get to any of them.

So, what happened was people started bumping into each other and they started getting into random conversations, and suddenly novelty, complexity and unpredictability massively increased. You got a whole lot more dopamine flow between people, you got these little moments of brute flow, huge spikes in creativity and all those off spurts.

Pete Mockaitis
Excellent, yes. Cool. And so, what about the high consequences?

Steven Kotler
High consequences, this is obvious, right? Flow follows focus and consequences catch our attention, right? So, the obvious is physical risks. Again, action adventure sports athletes, lots of physical risks. But it’s interesting, we noticed that emotional risk, intellectual risk, creative risk, social risk all work really, really well. Social risk is a great example.

You would think from evolutionary perspective that like the number one fear in the world is something like getting eaten by a grizzly bear, but it’s not. It’s speaking in public, right? And the reason is your brain can’t actually tell the difference between social fear and physical fear. They’re processed by the exact same structures which makes no sense at all until you realized, you go back 300 years ago, and before if you got kicked out of your tribe, if you got exiled you couldn’t survive. Nobody could live on their own, so it was a capital crime, and so the brain treats it like a capital crime.

So, social risk is a really kind of great way to trigger flow as well, so risk is really useful. And once again, what does this look like organizationally or in your daily life? And I always said that like to play with the risk trigger, the companies you want to work for, the environment you want to design, something with that Silicon Valley fail-faster fail-forward motto. And you need the space to fail because you need the space to take risks. Without risks there’s not enough energy in the system to really drive flow.

So, again, this is where agile methodology makes a lot of sense, rapid experimentation makes a lot of sense, skunk works make a lot of sense if you’re trying to drive flow in innovation.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Cool. And now can you share some of the pharmacology triggers?

Steven Kotler
Advances in pharmacology are more kind of in the psychedelic realm and that’s slightly different from flow but what the research is showing – and this is sort of one of the things we talk about in Stealing Fire – is that in the neurobiological changes that show up in flow are not that different from the changes that show up in meditation or during psychedelic experiences or during so-called mystic experiences, trans states or contemplative states.

All these things are states of awe for that matter. All these things share a very similar underlying neurobiological signature. And so, what we’re seeing in neurobiology is kind of psychedelic research, is going gangbusters, right? I mean, we’re seeing absolutely amazing work being done in PTSD and trauma and anxiety. And the point here and where this gets interesting and probably let me just give you a couple examples to answer your question because it’s a long way around but it’s worth understanding.

So, why all this research matters, is we’re starting to get actions. And the best example is work done on posttraumatic stress disorder which is like the extreme end of the anxiety disorder spectrum. And pharmacologically we’ve learned back in the early 2000s through work done by Dr. Michael Mithoefer and the research came at MAPS that one to three doses of MDMAs – so, MDMA is sort of the pharmacological name for the street drug Ecstasy or Molly, whatever you call it. It’s an empath-delic type of psychedelic, it increases empathy.

But they found that one to three rounds of MDMA therapy, so that’s MDMA administered in a clinical setting with psychiatrists there and like eight hours of talk therapy, was enough to completely cure or significantly reduce symptoms of PTSD in victims of child abuse, sexual abuse and solders returning from combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. And it’s been about five years since that original study was done, six years at this point, and these people are still in remission, so that’s neat, right?

Then they redid that experiment at Camp Pendleton with a thousand soldiers, and this time they were like, “Okay, so psychedelics aren’t for everybody. Let’s use surfing,” which is a known trigger for flow states for a lot of reasons that we’ve been talking about, right? So, they used surfing and talk therapy, and they redid the whole thing, and they found that after five weeks of surfing and flow states and talk therapy they saw a significant reduction or a complete disappearance of PTSD.

Then they redid the study with meditation, a mantra meditation system, I believe. And they found that four weeks of daily meditation, 20 minutes a day, was enough to produce the same results. So, what all this is telling us is we have options. We have options like we’ve never had before and they’re coming from all directions and the research is accelerating everywhere.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, that’s so cool. Well, Steven, tell me is there anything else you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Steven Kotler
The other thing I want to mention, only because it’s new and it goes much deeper into individual ideas, is if you go to the Flow Genome Project Facebook page, which is literally www.facebook.com/flowgenome, every Monday at 5:00 o’clock Eastern Time, I do Monday On The Mind. It’s a half-hour deep dive into, you know, two weeks ago we did a half an hour on clear goals and really how to get into that and how to apply it in every situation, that sort of thing, so that might be interesting to people listening.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, cool. Thank you. Well, now can you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Steven Kotler
Margaret Atwood, “Everybody I know is an adult. Me, I’m just in disguise.”

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. Thank you. And how about a favorite book?

Steven Kotler
There’s a couple of them. How about I give you two?

Pete Mockaitis
Sure.

Steven Kotler
Song of the Dodo by David Quammen which is just amazing. If you really want to understand the environmental crisis this is the most amazing book on that. And my favorite book on consciousness ever is a book called The User Illusion by Tor Nørrentranders which is one of the smartest books ever written about consciousness.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. And how about a favorite tool?

Steven Kotler
Well, it’s got to be my skis.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And how about a favorite habit?

Steven Kotler
Oh, I get up a 4:00 a.m. is my favorite habit.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, I have to know, when do you go to sleep?

Steven Kotler
Depends, but early. Somewhere between 8:00 and 10:00 most nights.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And is there a particular nugget that you share in your writing or your speaking and working with folks that seems to really connect and resonate and get them quoting you back to yourself?

Steven Kotler
Well, what I said to you earlier that we keep trying to train up skills and what we really need to be training up is a state of mind seems to be a pretty good mantra for people these days. I hear that back a lot.

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

Steven Kotler
StevenKotler.com, FlowGenomeProject.com.

Pete Mockaitis
And do you have a final challenge or call to action you’d issue to folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Steven Kotler
Yeah. So, this is going back to the challenge skills balance, it’s the one thing we didn’t really cover. And so, you mentioned Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, so a couple of years ago he teamed with a Google mathematician and they did a back-of-the-envelope calculation trying to figure out, with the challenge skills balance, how much greater the challenge should be than your skillset, right? That was the question.

And the number they came up with was 4%. Four percent greater. Now, that was just a guess. We took that number into the Flow Genome Project and said, “Okay, let’s see what we can do with it.” And we’ve been running a number of amateur experiments, and beta tests, and just looking at it deeply for about four years now, and time and time again we’re finding that is exactly the case.

So, here’s the super interesting about this. Four percent is not much, right? You really are just a little bit harder. Now if you’re an underachiever, a little bit of an underachiever, you’re a little shy, you’re a little meeker, you’re a little along those lines, 4% is tricky because it is literally the line where you’re pushing on your comfort zone. You’re stepping outside your comfort zone but you’re right there.

For top performers their problem is the exact opposite. Their problem is they’ll blow by 4% without even noticing, they’ll take on challenges that are 10%, 20%, 40% greater than kind of – and by doing so, they’re locking themselves out of the very state they need to kind of meet those challenges. So, it’s a little bit harder every day.

But the interesting thing is when you spend time around the best of the best, what you really see is what they’ve internalized and what they do so well, is they understand that it’s 4% plus 4% plus 4% day after day, week after week, year after year for a career. That’s how you actually like really do the impossible.

Pete Mockaitis
That is so good. Well, Steven, thank you so much for taking this time and sharing. There’s, boy, a lot to chew on and I’m excited to get some more flow going into my life and work sessions, and I wish you much flow in all that you’re up to.

Steven Kotler
Thanks, man. I appreciate the time.

234: Sharper Critical Thinking for Better Solutions with Mike Figliuolo

By Podcasts No Comments

 

Mike Figliuolo says: "Before you say something... just stop and think."

Mike Figliuolo ponders on why critical thinking is becoming increasingly important and how to maximize your critical thinking skills.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why slowing down will help you better solve problems
  2. How to differentiate facts from judgments
  3. How to use the 5 “whys” and the 7 “so whats” to think more clearly about causes and effects

About Mike 

Mike Figliuolo is the Managing Director of thoughtLEADERS, a consulting and training firm that helps leaders think better. He’s authored numerous books on leadership, thinking, and communication.He graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point and served as a commissioned officer in the Army. He then joined McKinsey and Company as a management consultant. He later worked at Capital One Financial as Group Manager of Strategy & Analysis and as Director of Specialty Collections. He was responsible for ~$1B in collections, a $125MM budget and the performance of 150 employees. The initiatives his teams put in place delivered over $125MM in value.

Items Mentioned in this Show:

Pete Mockaitis
Mike, thanks so much for joining us here on the How to be Awesome at Your Job podcast.

Mike Figliuolo
It’s my pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me as a guest.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh yeah. Well, you’ve been on the list since Episode 3 with Victor Prince’s co-author, and now seemed like a fine time. So, I’m glad you made it happen.

Mike Figliuolo
Absolutely.

Pete Mockaitis
Now I understand you have a bit of a fondness for skydiving. What’s the backstory here?

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, not really, and that’s what’s funny about it. So, I was in the army, and I’ve always hated heights. My father used to laugh at me when we would go up on the roof to clean out the gutters and I’m looking like Spider-Man plastered to the roof, just worried about falling off. So when I was in the army, they have you go to military schools during your summers when you’re at West Point. And one of my summers I put in for a specific type of very ground-based training, and the Army and its wisdom decided that I would be much better off jumping out of airplanes. So, I went through Airborne School down at Fort Benning, Georgia, jumped out of a plane five times, got my airborne wings and have never done it since. So, cool experience; not necessarily something that I want to go through again.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, I totally misinterpreted that tidbit here. You’ve done it, but you didn’t enjoy it.

Mike Figliuolo
I mean, it was cool. It was cool. After the second jump you’re like, “Okay, I’m probably not going to die, so I may as well enjoy the view.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. I’ve done it once and I liked it. I could do it again. My wife isn’t a fan though of the idea.

Mike Figliuolo
It’s a little different when you’ve got on a rucksack and a simulated weapon and there’s eight of you going out the plane one after the other after the other and you got a static line yanking you around. And you’re only about a thousand feet up and you’re trying to hit that patch of really rough dirt below in the Fort Benning sun. So, you probably had a little bit more of a pleasurable experience.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, it was. It was kind of cool, and the breeze falling through…

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, we didn’t have that, no.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, tell us a little bit about your company thoughtLEADERS.

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, we are a leadership development and training firm. We work mostly with large corporates like Google, Abbott, Discover Financial, the Federal Reserve, and we teach topics of leadership, communications, problem-solving, decision-making. I like to say we teach all the topics that everybody needs that nobody ever teaches you.

We have a really strong bias toward heavy hands-on application in the classroom, and the thing that I hold up as different about us is we’re all business people. We’re not academicians, we’re not career facilitators; we’re business people up on the podium. So, we understand the participants’ challenges and we’re able to help them bridge from our tools and frameworks to their reality, which then increases the likelihood that they apply our methods.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, excellent. So now, I kind of re-thought of you when I was checking out your LinkedIn learning course Critical Thinking, and I was digging in, enjoying it. And so I’d like to get your take on just the importance of critical thinking in the hierarchy of professional skills. I thought I had seen it somewhere in some report that it was like the top thing professionals need, but I couldn’t relocate it when I tried to Google and prep for today. So maybe you can orient us to that.

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah. So I believe part of it came out of a New York Times article that was based upon a report that LinkedIn actually put together. And LinkedIn went through people’s profiles, they looked at who got new jobs and what were the skills that they had either explicitly stated on their LinkedIn profile or that they could deduce from the person’s background. And critical thinking was one of the top ones, if not the top one on that list.

So, as I look around the importance of critical thinking increases every day, and reason for that is, the speed with which we’re making decisions is so incredible that if you don’t pause and really think through something, you’re going to create a bigger problem. You may have thought you solved the problem, but you just created an issue that is exponentially larger.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, it can either spiral or you can end up solving a problem and then solving it again and solving it again and solving it again, and it ends up being really wasteful and inefficient. And when you’re operating in a world where you need to be moving fast, you don’t have time to be wrong, which means you need to slow down and make sure that you’re right.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, you can take it to the world of construction – when you’re finishing a basement or an attic you’re always taught, “Measure twice, cut once”, and that’s deliberately slowing down, making sure you’re thinking about what you’re doing, and then you take action and the action is correct; rather than, “Measure once, cut once, because I’m really busy and I’ve got to move. Oh look, I just cut the two-by-four on the wrong side of the line and now it’s too short. And now I’ve got to cut another one and another one, and there’s waste involved.”

So just by slowing down, looking at what you’re trying to solve, assess the situation properly, come up with a solution and think through the impacts of that solution if you implement it, and then implement – the likelihood of doing something bad in that cycle, because you short circuit it, goes down dramatically.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
That’s exactly where I was going to go. I don’t think it’s just politics; I think things have started moving so fast and people have so much information overload, that they’re trying to react to everything coming at them as quickly as they’re able, whether it’s an email or a text or a tweet or whatever it is, it requires an immediate reaction. Or they think it requires an immediate reaction – let me rephrase – they think it does. So, they react immediately without thinking it through.

And I’ll just use the examples – how many times have you seen an article go flying by on Facebook and it has some provocative headline, and all of a sudden you look at the comments and it’s clear that everybody’s getting all vitriolic or offering their perspective? And you realize 95% of those people didn’t even read the article, right? And it’s just we’re not stopping and thinking critically. Or we do read the article and we don’t step back and say, “Well, hang on a minute. Let’s look at who wrote this article, let’s look at if that person has an agenda, let’s understand how they’re trying to position the information, what information are they not sharing with us in order to influence me to do something.”

I had this conversation with a student, a graduate student, who was saying, “Well, I’m going to move to Texas.” I’m like, “Okay. Well, but you live in Pennsylvania. Why are you excited to move to Texas? Do you have family there?” “Well no, no, not at all.” “Okay, why?” They’re like, “I want to get a job in Texas.” “What’s driving this?” “Well, I read this report, and Texas has this and Texas has that and Texas has that, and all these jobs and all this growth and all this stuff.” I’m like, “Okay, so who wrote the report?” “Oh, it was published by the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce.” “Hm, you think maybe there’s an agenda there? Maybe?” And I’m not saying it’s a biased report, but I’m just saying, stop and understand the circumstances of what you are assessing at that moment, and challenge it, challenge yourself.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, so I was an American Politics major at school actually, and you study a lot of the information that’s put out there and how it’s positioned. And one of the things I was always taught was, understand the difference between facts and judgment. So, when you’re reading an article, ask yourself, “Is this a fact or is it the author’s judgments or the newscaster’s judgment of that fact? Is it their assessment of what that fact means, their interpretation?”

So by taking whatever piece of information you’re looking at, first of all separate it into the facts and judgments. Then look at the facts first and say, “Okay, are these facts accurate? What was the source of them? What facts are not being included here that could be included that may be skewing the actual facts themselves?” And once you have your arms around what the fact base is and how it may or may not be biased, just with the data collection and data sharing, then you are much better qualified to assess the assessments of those facts and say, “Is this a fair judgment? This author is saying that this company is doing bad things. Okay, based on the facts, would a reasonable person draw the same conclusion, or are they just extrapolating from a single data point?”

So by challenging each of those sort of assertions or each of those assessments – that’s critical thinking. That’s asking those questions versus just saying, “Oh yeah, that’s a bad company, of course. They did this one bad thing and therefore they hate people.” It’s like, “Really?” If you separate it out and really question both sides of that pile of information, I think you end up being much savvier, in terms of the information you consume.

I don’t watch the news. I go online, I have certain news sources where I am pulling facts from and I’m trying to get as unbiased a set of facts as I possibly can, and then I’m forming my own assessment. “What does this mean?” And sometimes I’m challenging other people’s assessments or I’m asking the questions of, “What’s not here? What’s not being presented?”, but I’m not letting somebody else interpret the facts for me. That’s not happening.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
For me it ends up being, I’m looking at primary sources. You know what I like? I actually like a lot of the financial websites – places like MarketWatch or E-Trade or whatever. I’m reading business press releases – things about earnings or market research reports or whatever, because I want to get as close to primary facts as I possibly can. And when you go to financial sites, they tend to throw a little bit less assessment into the facts of what’s going on. It’s like, “Okay, here’s the new tax law, here’s what it means, here are the tax brackets, here’s how these deductions go away, here’s the average size of that deduction.” And they just give you the data.

And there may be a little bit of interpretation that goes there, there may be a little bit of bias, but that’s much less bias than if I go to CNN or Fox News, and it’s like, “And you get no deduction and you have to murder your first child.” It’s like, “Really?” It’s just so bombastic, because what people don’t understand is news media has become entertainment first and news second. And you need to understand that; you really need to understand what their agenda is. Their agenda is to attract eyeballs, which attracts advertisers, which attracts dollars. It’s really simple. And the way you attract the eyeballs is with very interesting content that I can consume and feeds my ingoing biases anyway, and tells me I’m right.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
I guess for me it’s a question of, what’s the impact of that item on your life and the world around you, and how much importance do you sort of ascribe to that impact? So for example, I just got this wonderful letter in the mail from my health insurance company, telling me that my premiums for next year have gone from $960 a month to $1,600 a month. So we’re talking, what is that, an 80% increase, something like that? So we’re talking about a big impact on me – I want to understand the facts, and I have wanted to understand the facts for the last several years, around what are the changes in Affordable Care Act, what are the marketplace dynamics, who’s moving into the market, out of the market, because I’m sitting there trying to figure out where is healthcare going. I’ve got three kids – what’s going to be the right plan for me, how do I adjust to this?

So I do invest time and energy in understanding that information, seeking out facts and making my own assessment, because it’s going to govern my thoughts on a topic that’s pretty large. It’ll drive my voting behaviors, it’ll drive if I decide to support a particular political candidate one way or the other. Now, let’s contrast that with something that I say it really isn’t important to me and I’m not going to be able to have a big impact on it, other than every first Tuesday in November. So, am I going to really worry about that issue? And if the answer is “No”, then I’m not going to give it any air time; I’ve got better stuff to do.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, I think it’s definitely the 5 “Why’s” and the 7 “So what’s”. So, the 5 “Why’s” – when you see something happen, ask “Why” five times. And by the time you get to the fourth or fifth “Why”, there’s an insight there, there’s a root cause there. The way that works is, we had a client where I learned the 5 “Why’s” the first time, and I was an analyst on the team, and my engagement manager asked me, “Mike, what analysis did you do this morning?” I said, “Well, here are the numbers I ran, and it looks like this one metric is going up.” And he said, “Okay. Well, why?” I said, “What do you mean ‘Why’?” He said, “Why is that metric going up?” And I stopped and I thought and I said, “Well, the client is probably doing this.” And he said, “Okay, why?” I said, “What do you mean ‘Why’?” He said, “Why is the client doing that?” And I stopped and I thought a little bit harder and I said, “Well, they’re probably doing that because of this.” And he said, “Okay, why?” I’m like, “Dude, what is with the ‘Why’s’?” And he said, “Mike, our job is to have insights for our clients. We have to understand the root causes of what’s going on, because once we do, then we can actually make recommendations that address the true problem that they’re facing.”

So at that moment I understood what the 5 “Why’s” were, and we continued to walk that back and understand what is driving this behavior. And it turns out we were initially solving for a symptom, and it was something about their compensation plan that was driving a dysfunctional behavior, which drove another dysfunctional behavior, which was driving the metric to go up. So by walking that backward, just stopping and seeing something happening – some event, some symptom – and then walking it back, versus just jumping in to solve the symptom, helps you solve a deeper-seated problem. So that’s the 5 “Why’s”.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, sure. So, let’s see. Let’s talk about my health insurance. Let’s have some fun with this one, not that that’s a raw wound that we’re opening right now. But okay, so my health insurance premium went from $960 a month to $1,600 a month. Okay, why? Why did that happen? Well, it’s because the insurer raised their rates across the entire population. Okay, why? Why did the insurer raise their rates? Well, either because their losses have been going up and they were paying out a lot more in claims last year than they thought, or because they want to be a lot more profitable and they’re just going to start gouging consumers.

Now I’m at a fork where I say, “Okay, which of those seems more likely?” And they’re probably not going to gouge, because it’s just bad business to do that; you’re not going to be able to survive long in that market. So it’s probably because their losses are going up. Okay, why is that happening? Well, it’s probably because the risk pool got adjusted a few years ago when there was a change in the law, in terms of who is eligible, whether they’re going to accept pre-existing conditions, and we put a whole bunch of people in the risk pool for getting insurance that didn’t have it previously. So now it’s just a riskier population and those costs are going up. Okay, why? Why did that happen? Well, we were trying to insure more Americans.

Okay, now I get it. Now I understand what the root cause was – I changed the eligibility population, and that has these downstream impacts, in terms of the cost of my policy. And then you’ve got to get to a point where you say, “Okay, what do I do about that? Is there something I can do to change the way that we’re handling the people in the risk pool? Well, personally, can I change that? No, but could it inform the way I think about Medicare, Medicaid legislation? Can it inform the political candidates that I decide to back or not back?” And then you’ve also got to step back and say, “Okay, how much is for the greater good?” kind of thing. And that’s just one of those things that you walk it back that far and you understand what really made this happen.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
I use a tool called a “logic map”, where you have a problem and then you look at what’s driving that problem, and then below that you say, “What are the drivers of that?”, and then below that you say, “What are the drivers of that?” And you just keep disaggregating that big problem into smaller ones. So for example, if my client’s company profits are down, that’s a really big problem; I can’t solve that in one fell swoop. So I break that down and say, “Well, what’s driving profits being being down? Well, it’s either revenues are down or costs are up, or some combination of those two.”

Okay well, those are still big problems – let me break those down. Well, if revenue’s down, it’s either prices are down or volume is down. And again, it might be a combination of those two. But that’s still a big problem. So I think the answer might be on the volume side, so let me break volume down. Well, volume is down either because current customers are buying less, or we’re not selling as many new customers. And all of a sudden I can start seeing some possible solutions emerge. I can get my arms around, current customers aren’t buying as much, so maybe I can go out and place some sales calls on my current customers, or I can go out and try and sell that one new customer along the way. So by breaking that big problem down and disaggregating it into its component parts, I can start seeing what the underlying issues are that are driving the big problem.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, a lot of folks hear about the 80/20, but they don’t know its origins. The 80/20 rule was first coined by a guy by the name of Vilfredo Pareto, who’s Italian, of course. And Pareto was a bit of an economist, and he noticed that in Italy, 80% of the land was owned by 20% of the people. And he said, “Well, that’s kind of interesting.” He was also a gardener, and he noticed that 80% of the peas in his garden came from 20% of the pods. And he said, “Well, that’s really interesting, that peas and real estate demonstrate the same behavior – that 20% of the causes drive 80% of the outcomes.” And he coined what’s called “the law of the vital few”, which is really getting you to focus on those 20% of the causes that are driving 80% of the effects.

And I had one situation where I was running a team, one of the people on my team had a portfolio of accounts he was responsible for – it was about 500,000 accounts. And he came to me one day and said, “Mike, you didn’t know I was doing this, but I built this awesome model that helps me totally predict behavior of some of the consumers in my portfolio.” I said, “Well, that’s really cool.” He said, “Yeah, and with that production I can take a differential action and I can have financial impact by treating those accounts differently.” I said, “That’s awesome.”

I said, “I have two questions. One, how many accounts in your portfolio demonstrate that behavior?” And he said, “Well, about 5,000.” I said, “Okay, second question. How many accounts are in your portfolio?” And he said, “About 500,000.” I said, “Hey, how about we focus on the other 495,000 accounts, because as cool as your model is, affecting 5,000 accounts will not have an impact on this business. So stop messing around with small stuff.” And his behavior building that model was a gross violation of the 80/20 rule.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
I think the first place to do it is your inbox. And you look at the hundreds of emails that pile up in there, and just think through how much time you’re giving each one and which of those are the important ones and which are the ones that just aren’t. And I look at my inbox and it’s probably blown up right now and I’m constantly getting stuff in there, and I used to get a lot of unsolicited emails from sales people, business development people – since I run my business they’re trying to sell me their solutions or whatever.

So I get these all the time. And I used to be a pretty polite guy; I’d be like, “Okay, they’re running a business. I know what it’s like to be an entrepreneur.” I would write them back and say, “No, not really interested. Thanks for your note.” And then they would write me back invariably and say, “Well, are you sure, ’cause this could really work?” And then I’d write back, “No, not really. Definitely not sure.” And I finally sat there and said, “What am I doing? You idiot, you idiot. You’re giving them all this time, and time is your most valuable resource. You didn’t invite them into your inbox, you’re spending time on that 80% of stuff that will drive zero impact.”

And I just one day vowed I’m going to change my behavior. If I didn’t invite you to my inbox and it’s not something that with a 10-second glance I look at your email and say it’s a fit for what I do, I delete it. And if it shows up again the next time, I then block your email address, because I don’t even want to deal with the two nanoseconds it takes for me to delete a message. So, where I encourage people to go is, go to your inbox and sort of filter that stuff and say, “Of the 100 messages in there, which are the 20 that actually matter, in terms of my job performance, in terms of team performance? And then what’s the 80% that isn’t going to have any real impact, and how many of those can I delete, how many of those can I just sort of mail it in with a quick response?” And just sort of re-prioritize your work.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
Well, my inbox is usually pretty manageable; I think right now I’ve got 30 emails in there total, and I’m freaking out a little bit because usually I’m under 15. And the way that I manage that is, I get to do one of three things when I get an email: I can read it and respond immediately; I can read it and delete it; or I can read it and act on it later if it’s something that’s big and meaningful.

And and you have to do it right when you read that email; you have to make one of those three choices, because there’s so much friction in our day of, I open an email, I look at it and I say, “Oh, I’ll get to this later.” And then later on I come back and I open it again and I go, “Oh, I’ll get to this later, I’ll get to this later.” And they keep piling up, and just the friction of opening and closing that email, and opening and closing it, will suck so much time out of your day. If instead you open it and say, “Okay, this is from Mike. I understand what he wants; I don’t need to answer this. Delete.” And you delete it in that moment – you’re going to be a lot more efficient, you’re going to actually save a lot of time.

Now, for folks that I coach – I do some executive coaching – and when they show me their inbox and there’s like 2,000 emails in there, the first thing we do is we stack it by name, and then we go in and find, “Okay, all of these from Mike – we don’t need those anymore. We highlight them all, we delete them.” After we do that by name and that deletion, then we go through and file ones that can be filed. So a lot of folks will have standard reports, and they’ll get that stack of emails from a report team. It’s like, “Okay, let’s highlight those all and and put them in the report folder, ’cause you don’t need them in your active inbox.”

Then we’ll sort by subject line, and we’ll go through. There’s that one thread with 30 messages in it – okay, let’s delete the other 29 in that thread so we’re down to one item in that thread. And usually just those two actions takes care of about 40 to 50% of the inbox, believe it or not, if somebody’s got a really clogged up inbox. And then from there, adopt the new behaviors of read and delete, read and respond, or read and do later, when you have a meaningful chunk of time to act on the request.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
I think that’s really a function of your role and your style, and how you prefer to consume information. I am a sort of “instant in, instant out” – that’s how my brain works really well. So my email is always open, and when something comes in, I’ll throw an eye to it, and it’ll be read and respond, read and delete, or read and do later, typically. And it’s not like I’m just sitting there glued to the screen all day waiting for emails to come in. If I’m working on something meaningful, like this podcast conversation, my inbox is closed right now. And I know there’s emails coming in. As soon as I get off, I’m going to tackle it and just sort of whack through the things that I can get out of there and know what I’ll do later on.

Other people function much better in chunks, so they may do three blocks of email during the day – they may do a morning block, a lunchtime block, and an end-of-day block. But again, it’s still going to be the same behavior that I encourage, which is read and delete, read and respond, read and do later. And read and do later is for something that you can’t respond to in that moment, like I would have to run an analysis for you. I’ll read it and do it later, I’ll put the analysis actually on my calendar and say, “I’m going to block this one hour to do this one email”, and then I will get it done when it comes up on the calendar.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
No, it’s not that simple. I wish it was, but it’s not.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
So, when you look at a solution, and let’s say I’m going to fix something, I should ask, “Okay, if I fix this, so what? What happens? What’s the implication?” And then if that implication comes to pass, “Okay, so what? What happens if that gets fixed?” And then if that changes, “Okay, so what?” And what it’s preventing is the issue of, you think you fixed something now, but you created a new problem in the future that you now have to deal with. And by the way, it’s a bigger problem than you originally started with.

A lot of times I do this – I’ve finished basements, I’ve finished attics, putting up framing and Sheetrock and wiring and everything, and I don’t always do the “So what’s”. So, at one point I was doing a built-in sort of very simple entertainment center, and I said, “Well, this is going to be hard to construct in place, so what I’ll do is I’ll build the frame on the floor and then I’ll just pick it up and put it in place, and then do all the finishing up there.”

So I build this giant frame on the floor, and then I go to put it in place, and I start tilting it up, and I forgot about a guy by the name of Pythagoras, who would have told me, “Hey, you idiot, the hypotenuse when you start tilting this thing up is going to mean that it will get jammed on the ceiling before you put it into place.” So Mike didn’t think about the “So what” if I build this on the floor and I need to stand up, so what happens? Well, that means I’m going to need to stand it up and it’s going to be at an angle. Okay, it’s an angle. So what? Oh, the ceiling height is lower than that angle, which means this is going to get stuck and I’m going to be sitting there beating it with a 5-pound sledge hammer for about 45 minutes to get it into place. So it’s just seeing what new problems you can end up creating if you solve the problem at hand.

Pete

Mike Figliuolo
It does. So The Elegant Pitch is all about how do you create a clear and compelling recommendation with the right facts, the right data, and do so in a way that your stakeholders will buy into it and approve your idea. So, it does require the critical thought to say, “What does my stakeholder want? What is my recommendation and how does it tie to their objectives, therefore what’s the right information that I’m going to need to bring to the table to create a persuasive case? What’s the right way for me to structure my argument? Do I talk about financials and operations and marketing, or do I talk about marketing first, and then operations and financials?”

And just thinking about the logic of what’s going to underpin your argument, and then how do you package and share that idea in a clear and compelling way. And the biggest tide of critical thinking is, with critical thinking you come up with your solution – you figured out what the real problem is and you generated a solution – but unless you actually get to implement that solution, then all that thinking is worthless. So, what The Elegant Pitch does is helps you understand once you have that really cool solution, how do you then make it into something that people will sign off on and give you the resources to implement.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, cool. Well tell me, Mike – is there anything else you want to make to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Mike Figliuolo
I just encourage folks to just pause. When you find yourself reading something, whether it’s in the workplace or on the news or anywhere – anytime you feel that reaction, just pause and say, “Okay, what’s really going on here?” And parse that and say, “What are the facts, and what are my assessments?” So you see a colleague do something in the workplace and we kind of blow up at it – “Joe is such a jerk and I can’t believe he did that” – it’s like, “Hang on, hang on a second.”

Let’s look at the facts of the situation. So, Joe did this. Joe left the printer cover open and therefore the printer wasn’t working.” That’s the fact of the matter. Now let’s draw an assessment from that; let’s come up with other possible causes of what’s going on. Maybe Joe didn’t notice that he left it open, maybe Joe meant to leave it open and he really is a jerk. But before we just jump off and say, “Joe is a jerk”, just stop, think about this for a second and separate fact from assessment, and really challenge those things.

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

Mike Figliuolo
For me, I go to Hemingway. And the quote is, “But man is not made for defeat. A man can be destroyed, but not defeated.” And that comes from The Old Man and the Sea, and I read it when I was in 8th grade and you’re not exactly the most cerebral person in the world when you’re a 15-year old boy; you’ve got other things on your mind. And I remember I read that quote and it resonated. And I finally figured it out several years later. The quote stuck with me constantly, and I finally figured out why it spoke to me. And what he’s saying is man is not made for defeat. Defeat as a choice, defeat is, “I give up. I’ve tried as hard as I can, and I just give up” – that’s defeat. Destruction is an external force, and that’s me fighting as hard as I can, as long as I can, and I just lose because the world has bested me and I’ve been destroyed.

And what Hemingway’s saying is man is not made for defeat; it’s not in our nature as human beings to give up, it’s not how we’re wired. A man can be destroyed, but not defeated. So anytime I’m sitting there and feeling like something’s going wrong in my life, something’s going wrong with the business, we just lost a big account – whatever it is. And you sit there and you want to throw your hands in the air, it’s like, “Hang on. A man is not made for defeat, so what are you going to do about this? How are you going to tackle this problem that is before you?” And it’s always helped me reorient my thinking during those most challenging moments.

Pete Mockaitis
Excellent, thank you. And how about a favorite book?

Mike Figliuolo
I can’t say any of mine, right? So I’m not allowed to say any of my books. Let’s see. One that I always go to is called The Obstacle is the Way, and it’s basically an exploration of stoicism as it was developed by Marcus Aurelius. Now, I know that sounds like some weighty stuff. The book is like 180 pages long; the first 90 is a study of what is stoicism and who are some famous stoics, and I’m not talking just about Greeks and Romans. He looks at business people, current business people who’ve taken a stoic approach to life as well.

And then the second half of the book is how can you apply the principles of stoicism to your life and be able to get through adversity, get over those obstacles that you face. And the reason the book resonated for me is when you go to West Point, which is where I did my undergrad, West Point is it an institution that sort of beats stoicism into you. It’s just daily adversity for four years and you best learn how to overcome those types of obstacles. So the book itself, The Obstacle is the Way, does a really nice job of capturing that school of thought, and then making it something that’s accessible and practical and applicable.

Pete Mockaitis
Excellent, thank you. And how about a favorite tool?

Mike Figliuolo
Are we talking hand tools?

Mike Figliuolo
Yeah, for me it’s always just been the good old hammer. I’m a simple guy at heart. I was a tank platoon leader; when something was broken, you got out the hammer, you got out the ranch, and you got out the baling wire, because it’s one of those three things that’s going to solve your problem. I guess where I’m going with that is, I like simple tools. The tools that we teach in classes, the frameworks that we use tend to be very simple – the 5 “Why’s”, the 7 “So what’s”, a logic map, because if a tool is simple and you understand how to use it, you’re going to use it more frequently and eventually get really, really good with it.

And if I give you a big, complex tool with a lot of different moving parts and it’s got to be plugged in and it’s got 18 steps before you can use it, you’re not going to use it. You’re not going to use it and you’re never going to build any sort of facility with it; you’re going to be frustrated by that tool because it’s so complex. So, for me, I think a hammer is a pretty good metaphor for how I think about learning and training and how we apply our craft in the classroom.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool, thank you. And how about a favorite habit?

Mike Figliuolo
A favorite habit. A favorite habit is getting up same time every day and hitting the same morning routine every day, on days where it’s possible. If I’m getting on a plane – okay, the routine’s out the window. But it’s get up, hit the desk, read the news, update the finances, clear out some of the email from the night before, shower, get changed, have the green tea, and then start in on the day. But just that routine in the morning kind of gets the body moving, gets the brain moving in a certain direction, and it generates that initial momentum for me, that carries through the rest of the day. If you want to mess me up on a given day, change my morning routine. Screw something up in that sequence and I’m just off. And it may be just that I’m obsessive about the way my world works – I don’t know, but that routine is something that I encourage people to find ’cause it gets you in that rhythm pretty quickly each day.

Mike Figliuolo
I go to personal conversations really, from coaching or from classrooms, and I think one of the biggest things that’s always had a pretty powerful impact on folks when I’ve shared it with them is when I hear somebody say, “Well, I have to do X, Y and Z.” I stop them and I say, “Hang on. You don’t have to. You choose to.” And it’s like, “What? No, I have to go to this meeting with my boss.” I say, “No, you don’t. You choose to go to the meeting with your boss, because you understand there are consequences and you are choosing not to accept a different set of consequences. But you don’t have to do anything.”

And just by reframing that and helping people understand, “I am making a choice here” versus being forced to do something, it all of a sudden allows people to regain control of their lives. When you look at somebody who says, “My life is out of control”, they basically outsourced the ability to make decisions to the world around them. And you’ll hear them say a lot, “Well, I have to do this, I have to do that, I have to do that”, and they’ve given up control, and therefore they feel out of control and it’s very disconcerting.

Just by that small change in, “Hey, I choose to be on this interview right now, I choose to not send my dogs to daycare when I’m going to be on the interview, and the consequences.” I’ve got a poodle looking at me scratching to get in the room, and I’ve got a Jack Russell playing with a tennis ball over here and I’m hoping both of them don’t bark. But that was a choice – I don’t have to have them in the house when I do this; I made a choice, and there’s consequences to every choice we make.

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

Mike Figliuolo
They should go to ThoughtLeadersLLC.com. And you can find my contact info there, and our blog is there, and we share a lot of great info on the blog on a pretty regular basis.

Pete Mockaitis
And do you have a final challenge or call to action you’d issue to folks seeking to be awesome at their jobs?

Mike Figliuolo
Stop and think. Just stop and think – before you say something, before you react, before you send that email where you’re upset, or you file that complaint, or you launch that new initiative – just stop and think. Think for like five minutes about the 5 “Why’s”, the 7 “So what’s”; think through what’s fact and what’s assessment. Just stop and think, because you’re going to get to a much better solution.

Mike Figliuolo
Great, thank you very much for having me.

210: How to Generate Many Creative Ideas with Tina Seelig

By Podcasts No Comments

 

 

Tina Seelig says: "if you change one word in the prompt of a question you can unlock a lot more solutions because the answer is always baked into the question."

Professor Tina Seelig talks about the critical components, principles, and tactics for bringing ideas into your imagination and out into the world.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The two requirements of imagination
  2. How to generate many new solutions via framing and reframing
  3. The argument for brainstorming

About Tina

Tina Seelig is Professor of the Practice in Stanford University’s Department of Management Science and Engineering, and is a faculty director of the Stanford Technology Ventures Program. She teaches courses in the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design (d.school) and leads three fellowship programs in the School of Engineering that are focused on creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Dr. Seelig earned her PhD in Neuroscience at Stanford Medical School, and has been a management consultant, entrepreneur, and author of 17 books, including Insight Out (2016), inGenius (2012), and What I Wish I Knew When I Was 20 (2009). She is the recipient of the Gordon Prize from the National Academy of Engineering, the Olympus Innovation Award, and the Silicon Valley Visionary Award.

Read More

198: Turning Great Ideas into Great Results with Mark Aramli

By Podcasts No Comments

Mark Aramli says: "The best idea doesn't always win. The best promoted idea usually wins."

BedJet inventor Mark Aramli talks about the essential next steps to turn an aha moment into real-world success.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The best time to work on your big ideas
  2. The “two pizza” rule for great collaborations
  3. A key strategy for convincing executives to buy-in

About Mark

Mark Aramli is the inventor and principal engineer for the patent-pending BedJet CCS. Mark’s first engineering role was at United Technologies, builder of the space suit for NASA. His engineering responsibilities included the space suit primary life support system (PLSS), specifically elements relating to heating, cooling and climactic comfort of the interior space suit environment for the astronauts.  

Read More

187: Increasing Creativity via Constraints with Drew Boyd

By Podcasts One Comment

 

 

Drew Boyd says: "Constraints are actually a necessary condition for creativity to occur."

Professor Drew Boyd invites us to think inside the box and to put constraints around our minds in order to be more creative and awesome at our jobs.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The 5 patterns responsible for the majority of innovation
  2. Why brainstorming is sub-optimal
  3. Why it’s better to think inside the box than outside the box

About Drew

Drew Boyd is a global leader in creativity and innovation, international public speaker, award-winning author and innovation blogger, and professor at the University of Cincinnati. He teaches teams, businesses and governments how to solve tough problems to create a culture of innovation and a flowing pipeline. Drew reframes the innovation process in a way that makes people more creative.

Read More