Tag

KF #29. Demonstrates Self-Awareness Archives - Page 4 of 23 - How to be Awesome at Your Job

886: How to Become an Executive with Adam Bryant

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Adam Bryant shares powerful insights on how to get promoted and be successful as a leader.

You’ll Learn:

  1. What every aspiring leader should know about themselves
  2. How to get promoted without asking for a promotion
  3. The key ratio that positions you for advancement

About Adam

Adam Bryant is Senior Managing Director and Partner at the ExCo Group, where he works with hundreds of senior leaders and high-potential executives. As the creator and former author of the iconic “Corner Office” column in The New York Times, Bryant has mastered the art of distilling real-world lessons from his hundreds of interviews and turning them into practical tools, presentations, and exercises to help companies deepen their leadership benches and strengthen their teams. He also works with executive leadership teams to help drive their transformation strategies, based on a best-practices framework he developed for his widely praised book, THE CEO TEST: Master the Challenges That Make or Break All Leaders.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • BetterHelp. Make better decisions with online therapy. Get 10% off your first month at BetterHelp.com/awesome.

Adam Bryant Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Adam, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Adam Bryant
Thank you for the invitation, Pete. I’ve been looking forward to this.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, me, too. Me, too. Well, I’m excited to hear the wisdom you’ve collected in your book, The Leap to Leader: How Ambitious Managers Make the Jump to Leadership. But, first, we need to hear about you and ping-pong. What’s the story, training with a ping-pong coach?

Adam Bryant
Yeah, that’s a sentence that I never thought I would utter in my life, which is that I have a ping-pong coach. But we moved down to New Orleans a few years ago where my two daughters are, including now my son-in-law. And he was blessed with great hand-eye coordination for things like golf. And in the townhouse we have, my wife generously gave me the loft for my “office,” and I put that in air quotes. But I have my desk up there, I have a pool table, a foosball table, and a ping-pong table.

And I just got determined to get better at this, and I found a ping-pong coach in New Orleans, and I train with him a couple of days a week, and it’s pretty cool. At my age, I’d recently turned 60, but it’s cool to get better at something. And my son-in-law used to beat me pretty consistently. I now beat him, I’d say, a little more than half the time.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, congratulations. And I’m just imagining these training sessions with the ping-pong coach with sort of Rocky montage type music in the background, and he’s, like, screaming at you to push yourself to the very limits. Is that how it goes down?

Adam Bryant
Not so much, but he’s a good coach. He’s from Vietnam and there’s a word he’s taught me, which is “Cho-le” which means sort of, “Let’s go.” And when you hit a really good shot, you celebrate and yell, “Cho-le.” The other thing, you’re taking me down a rabbit hole, Pete, but the one thing that is very cool about the world of ping-pong is that when you hit a lucky shot, generally, you sort of put up your hand just to sort of signal to your opponent that you acknowledge it was a lucky shot.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s friendly.

Adam Bryant
I think it’s very refreshing compared to some sports, like soccer, where people always just, like, fake flopping and things like that, so.

Pete Mockaitis
Right. It’s like, “Yes, I know. I’m so amazing. Look at me, I can pull it off.” Well, so tell us, I imagine there’s a lot of practice you invested. Are there any sort of tips or principles for folks also looking to be awesome at ping-pong? What would you suggest for them?

Adam Bryant
Well, there’s kind of basement ping-pong where you’re just sort of flailing your arms, but to do it properly, it is, and I know this sounds silly, but it is an incredible workout because you basically have to be squatting very low and also be on your toes. And footwork is a huge part of it, so you got to be super agile on your feet while you’re squatting, while you’re on your toes, and to get yourself in a position to hit the shots. So, it’s one of those things, like a lot of things in life, from afar it looks pretty easy, but it is an incredible workout. I get the same calorie burn from that as like a Peloton workout, so.

Pete Mockaitis
No kidding. All right. Good to know. Well, so now onto…

Adam Bryant
Less important matters, how to be awesome at your ping-pong, right, Pete?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now for some insights which could have maybe an even greater transformational impact on people’s careers. So, you’ve interviewed over a thousand CEOs over your life and career. That’s pretty cool. Can you share with me any interesting themes associated with what’s kind of different about these people than others? And how do they generally get to become one?

Adam Bryant
And just to give you the context, so when I first started interviewing CEOs, it was for a series I created at the New York Times called Corner Office, which was based on a very simple what-if, which is, “What if I sat down with CEOs and never ask them a single question about their company?” which is how CEOs are usually interviewed, and just focus on the leadership lessons and early influences, and how they talk and think about the sort of universal challenges of leadership.

So, that was my initial focus. I, also, from the very start, embraced diversity in, literally, every sense of the word in the people I interviewed. And so, looking back now and kind of saying, “Well, what are the patterns?” I think one of the clear patterns that emerged is this skill, this habit of mind, to be able to simplify complexity. And, to me, it is one of the common threads.

I don’t think you can lead effectively if you don’t have that because I do think it’s a leader’s job to take the complexity of the world, their industry, what’s happening in their company, and it’s just one of those key leadership moments to be able to stand on a stage, whether it’s literal or virtual, and basically answer the kind of questions that little kids ask in the backseat, which is, “Where are we going? And how are we going to get there? And when are we going to get there?” And I know that sounds simple but simple is hard, and I just think it’s such an important skill. Because if you know how to simplify complexity, then you’re also going to be a good communicator.

So, to me, that’s like one of the core skills that you have to have. In terms of how they became CEOs, what’s been so refreshing and so what I’ve really enjoyed just hearing people’s past and their stories is that, yes, I met a few CEOs over the years, Pete, who just seem like from central casting, like they were the class president, they were the frat house president. There were just those kids who, from an early age, they said, “You’re going to be a CEO someday.”

And I met a few of those but I have to say they were kind of in a distinct minority. I met a lot of people who you just never would’ve guessed, like they were former elementary school teachers, they studied classical organ in college, just really unusual backgrounds, theater. And, suddenly, they’re, like not suddenly, but now they’re running a huge company.

And I have thought a lot about this because I think people are hungry for career advice, and I think part of the thing that they’re looking for is an answer to the question, “Am I on the right path? What is the right path? If I want to move up, if I want to get that CEO job, what is the right path?” And what I always tell people is there are some obvious directional things you have to do. Like, if you want to be a CEO of a really big company, you should get a job at a really big company at a young age.

So, once you check the obvious things, what I always tell people is that there is no right path. The most important path is the path that you are on. And the thing that really separates people that I find is whether they keep their eyes open, and they look around, and they’re always, it’s this kind of machine learning of whatever their experience is, and keeping their eyes open, they’re just always sort of sifting that experience, it’s like, “What am I learning? What am I noticing? Boy, that boss seems to be really effective. What is it that he or she does? That seems like a really bad boss. Why is that? This team is effective.”

And so, to me, it’s just that quality of keeping your eyes open. I often reflect on a saying that I heard from a college president named Ruth Simmons. And what she would tell students is that, “You should always be prepared at any moment of your life to learn the most important lesson of your life.” And I think it’s just a great sort of guide for your life just to keep your eyes open and learn, because there are lessons everywhere.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s powerful. And I think, a lot of times, in my own experience, that can come up in just the form of a wild idea in terms of, “I’m noticing this and I’m wondering that. And then, what do you know, and now this is a business. Well, how about that? That was interesting.”

Adam Bryant
Yeah. And, to me, like a lot of that comes from silence. Like, yes, there is that sort of habit of mind. And, as you just described, you’re always questioning, like, “Why is that?” And you see sort of like a seam or a gap in the world, it’s like, “Why is that there?” And it is that sort of curiosity, that relentless questioning. But I also think that a lot of that, making the most of the experience that you’ve had, processing it, looking for the patterns, probing it, it does require time for reflection.

And I think a lot of people, silence isn’t comfortable, and they pick up their phone, and they start scrolling or something. And so, I always tell people, it’s like, “You need to get comfortable with silence, and just to have those conversations with yourself so you can process what you’ve been learning.”

Pete Mockaitis
And when it comes to the simplifying complexity, could you give us an example of, “Here’s complexity and here’s, on the other side of a CEO simplification. See how that’s great?”

Adam Bryant
Yeah, sure. And I often use the example of Bob Iger, the CEO at Disney. So, the backstory before he became CEO at Disney, he was the internal candidate, and I think the board actually wanted an external candidate. So, he went on this campaign for the job, and he basically created this very simple, like, three-part plan, he said, “If you make me a CEO, these are the three things that I’m going to focus on.”

He said, “Great content.” You can say, “Well, that’s obvious, right? Like, you’re Disney.” But, “Second one was global expansion. So, we’re going to place those bets. We’re going to go into newer markets.” And you could say, “Well, that sounds obvious, too.” But the third one that he said is that, “We are going to embrace technology in all its forms. New technology. So, whatever new technology comes along, whether it’s streaming, even if it undermines our traditional business model in the short term, we are going to embrace it.”

And what’s been interesting is that, Pete, he has never ever wavered from those three things. If you read his book, The Ride of a Lifetime, which is a good book, there’s good insights, it’s not that sort of CEO victory lap kind of book, you can just sort of see, like the growth of the company. It’s, like, all along those three pillars. And he’s just relentless about communicating that.

Last time I checked, the second sentence of his bio on the corporate website referred to those three things, like, great content, global expansion, embracing new technology. And so, to me, that is a good little case study of what that looks like. Because, again, like it’s a sweet spot, you can look at that and say, “Well, isn’t that obvious?” And it’s like, “Well, actually, great content maybe yes, but the other two were very clear bets and clear paths.”

And the great thing about when you get it right, when you do simplify complexity as a leader, then it’s actually really great for morale because everybody kind of understands how you’re going to win, they understand how the work they are doing can contribute to the success of the company. And there’s this popular expression you’ve probably heard that culture eats strategy for breakfast. You hear it a lot at conferences. It’s always attributed to Peter Drucker. It turns out there’s no record that he ever said it, and I increasingly believe it’s wrong.

That you need to have that really clear strategy, that simplified complexity so that everybody can understand how they are helping the team win. And if you do that, I think that’s great for morale and culture.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, in the Disney example, the simplified version is great content, global market, embracing technology. What would be the complex version that a CEO who is floundering might put forward?

Adam Bryant
Listen, you’ve probably seen them yourself. I certainly have. A lot of companies pull together strategy decks, and they’re 40-slides long, and they use 8-point font. You can’t even read it from the back of the room. There’s lots of pyramids, and there are colors and cork screw arrows, and just too much. And it’s the kind of thing that they may make sense in the moment but the key thing is, like, “Do you remember them?”

And we all know all the neuroscience shows that most people can’t remember more than three or four things day to day. And you can have that really complicated strategy document but you have to pass the hallway test. So, you just imagine, if you pick some random person in the hallway and stop them, and said, “Do you know what our strategy is?” would they be able to echo it back to you? And that’s why it’s so crucial to be able to distill that strategy.

I interviewed one CEO and she had this great line. She referred to her father, who used to talk about cows, chickens, and taters. And she internalized that as just a reminder, it’s like, “Just use really simple everyday language. Keep it simple,” because there is this bias in the business world.

People like reaching for that $20-word, it makes things sound better and more formal and fancier and all those things. And it takes so much discipline to hit that sweet spot of simplifying complexity so people go, “Okay, I get it. I get how we’re going to win and I get how the work that I’m doing is helping the team win.”

Pete Mockaitis
So, even if those synergies are highly impactful, you don’t want to say it like that.

Adam Bryant
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Understood.

Adam Bryant
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, so thinking about, specifically, your book, The Leap to Leader, any particularly surprising or fascinating discoveries that you came across in the direct preparation of the book or in the background leading up to it?

Adam Bryant
Yes. So, look, I think writing books is a process of discovery. You sort of write books to figure out what you know and to really put a sharp point on things, and I will call out a few things. The first section of the book is called ‘Do you really want to lead?’ And I think it’s an important question that people should really ask themselves because there is this kind of like momentum that just happens, either personally or institutionally, within organizations where you just kind of get carried along.

And if you’re a high performer, it’s like, “Well, of course, you want to lead, of course you want to move into that management position, and then a leadership position.” And I think people really need to stop and spend some time, again, in silence. Spend some time with themselves to be really clear about why they want to lead others and whether they want to lead others, and not just be carried along by that sort of river of promotion into the bigger title.

Because I think, a lot of people, it’s like, “Of course, I want that job because there’s a bigger title and there’s more money with it.” Or, they may want to lead because they like the idea of having more power or whatever. And I just think that leadership is so hard, and a lot of people get into leadership positions, and they go, “Wow, like I had no idea it was this hard.”

You’re dealing with people’s problems, you’ve got fires you’re putting out every day, the day is kind of a three-shift day, you’re tossing and turning, staring at the ceiling at 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning. And so, you need to be very clear in your mind about why you want to lead. And so, just having that moment, I think, is really key.

Another insight I’ll share is this idea of how to be awesome at your job, and I’m sure you talk in big part of the audience of people who want to move up in their career. And one of the things that I came to appreciate is that, look, we’re always taught, “You got to have your elevator pitch ready.” People are told that early in their career, “Have your elevator pitch ready.”

And, to me, that generally means one of two things. One is your elevator pitch are like, “What are you working on?” In case you’re in the elevator with a CEO, “Hey, what are you working on?” you got to have that ready. And the second elevator pitch is, like, “Well, what do you want to do? Like, what are your career goals?” You got to have that elevator pitch ready.

And what I’ve come to really appreciate is that people don’t spend enough time on their third elevator pitch, which is that if somebody were to ask you, “Who are you as a leader?” what would you say to them? And you may go through your entire career, taking over new teams, and nobody will ever ask you that question, but what if they do? And, to me, that then raises a question, “Well, how do you answer that? Like, what does a good answer sound like?”

And, to me, it’s about being able to say, “Look, these are the three values that are really important to me,” and you don’t just stop at the words because there’s a lot of fridge-magnet poetry in the leadership field. There’s a lot of words that people just sort of toss around, they sound right and good. But I think when people reflect on and think about how they’re going to talk about their personal values, it’s not enough to just say these words, “These ideas are important to me.”

You then need to be able to back them up, and say, “These are the stories of how these became important to me. And this is why they’re important. And this is what it looks like in action. And this is how I found these values to be really important and effective for driving success in the teams that I’ve been part of.” Really bring those ideas to life.

I talk about it as like your personal leadership brand, like, “What do you stand for as a leader? And when you’re not in the room, like how would a direct report describe you to a job candidate?” So, you want to be clear about what you stand for. And I think, in this day and age, just in the last few years, there’s been so much more talk about humanity and transparency and vulnerability and authenticity, all these qualities that people want to see more in their leaders.

And I think being very clear about your personal values and being willing to share those, I think that helps with all those things because you want to take the mystery out of who you are as a boss, because you’re always being studied by your direct reports, they are trying to figure out who you are, like, “Are you moody? Like, are you happy?” They’re studying your body language.

And the more you can be sort of up front, and say, “Look, this is who I am. This is my personal values. This is what’s important to me,” then your direct reports can say, “Okay, I got that. Now, I need to spend less time trying to figure you out, and I could spend more time getting my job done.” And, to me, that’s success on a lot of levels.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, to that first point, “Why do you want to lead?” you say it’s very hard, and you need to have a good why in place as opposed to just, “Oh, well, hey, you know, I’m doing pretty well and I like winning and achieving, so that’s the next step. Let’s just go ahead and do it.” So, that’d be a lame or ineffective why, it’s almost no why. You’re just sort of going with the flow. What would be some rich articulations of effective whys for leading?

Adam Bryant
Yeah, look, the older I get, the more I like sentences that begin with, “There’s only two kinds of people, Pete,” and sometimes those work. But I do think there’s only two kinds of managers in the world, and only two kinds of leaders as well, but I think there’s this sort of framework. It’s not black or white. It’s not one or the other, but I think some managers and leaders are more selfless and some are more self-centered.

And I think, to me, the best leaders, the best managers, are selfless. They’re doing it because they want to help the team, the organization. They want to help their direct reports. And, to me, not that there’s a right answer, but I think really effective whys start there, that you believe in what the organization does, you can see the impact that the organization can have. And then you want to have impact as a leader, and I think that means elevating people, and making them better, and helping build their skills, and seeing trajectories for their career that maybe they didn’t even see for themselves.

I say in the book that leadership is complicated and it’s okay to have a complicated relationship with leadership, and I have, in my career. I’ve been in plenty of roles where I was the number two, and I was very happy in those roles. And I was in other roles where I was the leader. And, to me, it wasn’t about being number one. It sort of kept my ego in check.

And the thing that motivated me in all my management and leadership roles was I approached the job as a coach, “I am here, I’ve learned a few things in my career, and I want to share them with you. And I want you to achieve, like, wild success. I want to help you get better,” and that was my why in all those years.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’d love to get your take, having interviewed a thousand CEOs, and I guess it’s hard you can’t peer into their souls, but what’s your sense of roughly what proportion of leaders are selfless versus self-centered?

Adam Bryant
If I could take your question and maybe reframe it slightly, it’s like my understanding of their why, like, “Why are they doing this?” again, people are complicated so there’s, like, a thousand layers of motivations.

That said, I have noticed sort of patterns, and I put them into three or four broad categories, because I’ve always been curious in, like, “Why do you want this job?” One of the questions that I ask so many of the leaders that I interviewed, Pete, is like, “Where does your drive come from?” Because I’m curious about that because you need a certain amount of drive and stamina to do these big jobs. Like, on paper they’re kind of awful jobs. They’re just all-consuming, there’s a lot of responsibility, there’s a lot of weight on your back.

And so, as I’ve tried to probe that, the patterns that I’ve seen, the first one is they grew up with some kind of adversity and sometimes really tough adversity. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard really sad stories about growing up, and not just sort of financial straits but alcoholic parent, abusive parent. I’ve heard stories about growing up in a comfortable middle-class lifestyle, mom stayed at home, dad worked, and then he died at a young age, and there was no life insurance. And, suddenly, the family was kind of scrambling to just put food on the table and pay the electric bill.

And there was one time I interviewed two CEOs, back-to-back, and they said the exact same thing, told me the same life story that I just explained to you. So, they had that kind of trauma, that adversity at a young age, they know what it felt like to be out of control, and so that was a big part of their driving motivation. And, again, not to get sort of too shrink-y here but I think sometimes people, when they face a lot of adversity early in their life, they want to have a little bit more control. So, maybe that helps explain part of their drive.

I think another big category is some version of, like, the immigrant story, which is this idea of the first in your family to do X. And I think if you grow up and you’re always the first in your family to go to college, to do this, to do that, that you spend so much time kind of forging a new path that, ultimately, that just becomes, like, your comfort zone. And you need that kind of mindset as a leader, it’s like you’re always comfortable doing new things and dealing with new problems.

I put another category. Some people just like hit the parent lottery, like had a great family, maybe they’ve got an interesting blend of DNA strands where an entrepreneur parent and the other one was a psychologist, or there was an engineering parent married to…and the other parent was an artist, so you get that sort of interesting yin and yang, and just had sort of great messages and lessons growing up.

So, again, armchair psychology on my part. It probably wouldn’t stand up to peer review in a scientific journal, but those are the patterns I’ve seen.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now I’m curious, when it comes to the actual, let’s say, okay, we’ve got some great reasons, folks are raring to go, they want to become a leader executive, can you maybe start us with a story about someone who was not getting promoted, they wanted it, but then they made a switch in their approach and they pulled it off, they made the leap?

Adam Bryant
To me, a big part of making that leap, usually there’s a story under there where people explain, like, “What was that moment? What was that mindset shift?” and there’s a few that come to mind. There’s one executive I interviewed where she was moving up, and she hit this point where she realized she couldn’t do it all, and she needed to delegate. And she had the insight that she had to start giving away the stuff that she really liked to do and that she was really good at, so that she could then get to the next level.

And I can really relate to that because as people are moving up, we all have the things we’re really good, our strengths and weaknesses, and we tend to really like to do the things that we’re good at. But the point is if you want to get up to that top leadership position, at some point you have to start giving that stuff away, and letting other people do it.

There was another moment from another executive where she had become sort of a new CEO of a startup, and she was going to the chair of the board and sort of running key decisions past the board chair. And, at some point, the chairman just turned to her, and said, “Look, I can give you my advice but you need to realize, ultimately, this is your decision. And if you are wrong, we are going to fire you.”

And it was just that sort of moment of clarity, it’s like because when you are a leader, part of the mindset is it’s not about asking for permission anymore. To have that top job, you’ve got to own the accountability and you’ve got to own the outcomes of your decisions. And that’s a big part to me of making the leap to leader is being comfortable making decisions when the data isn’t there, because the higher you move up, like the decisions get harder, there’s less data, there’s more gray areas, there’s more unhappy people. Whether you go left or right, or up or down, you’re going to make some people unhappy.

And, to me, a big part of leadership is being willing to make decisions, to take the risks and own the outcomes, because, honestly, Pete, a lot of people aren’t comfortable doing that.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good to surface there. And I don’t know if there’s a recipe for how one gets comfortable doing that. Is there?

Adam Bryant
Well, I think it’s being aware of the fact that it is your job to make those hard decisions. I reflect on a conversation I had with one CEO, he was a first-time CEO, and he’s just feeling like, “Wow, like every day is kind of a hard day. These problems are coming to my desk, and I don’t really know what the answer is.” And the lightbulb went off for him where he realized, “This is my job. And, yes, it’d be nice to have the easy decisions come to you, but they generally get taken care of farther down in the organization.”

So, at some point, you have to make the shift, and realize what may seem like a burden is an opportunity. It is your job. There are no easy days. And you need to see those tough decisions as interesting puzzles, because I do feel like we’re in this, we’re just living through this breathtaking moment of change for all the obvious reasons since the start of the pandemic. But I do think managing people and leading people has gotten five to ten times harder.

And in our consulting work at my firm, The ExCo Group, we do see a lot of fast-rising executives who are kind of tapping out, and saying, “Look, I didn’t sign up for how hard this is.” And I think we are in this moment where it is kind of black or white, like we are not in this moment anymore where there’s some playbook for leadership and how to have these new conversations about compassion and remote work, and all these things. It’s like these are new and very hard problems for which there’s no clear answer.

And I think you need to do a gut check. It goes back to this idea of, “Do you really want to lead?” And you have to ask yourself, like, “Are you excited about this?” Because if you’re excited about it, and say to yourself, “What an amazing time to be managing and leading people where we’re figuring out the future of work, the future of leadership, and you have an opportunity to shape that and be a part of it. Wow, that’s really exciting.”

So, are you that kind of person or are you saying to yourself, “I just find all these problems just kind of overwhelming. Everything seems so hard. Just the lines are blurring between the personal and professional. Everybody is kind of trying to figure out this new world of work and expectations. And I just find this all exhausting and somewhat overwhelming”?

And you need to be honest with yourself because I do feel like we’re at this moment where you really have to look at yourself in the mirror, and say, “Leadership is getting harder. Managing is getting harder. Do you want to do this?”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, now to dig into a couple of your particular concepts in the book, I was intrigued by you’ve got a notion called the say-do ratio. What is that? And how do we perfect ours?

Adam Bryant
Sure. So, the third section of the book is called ‘How to get promoted without asking for a promotion?’ And it’s sort of this is in your sweet spot of how to be awesome at your job. How do you set yourself apart? Because if you are ambitious and you want to move up, the question at the core of that is, “Okay, how do you set yourself apart?”

And, to me, one of the easiest ways to do it is to have a great do-to-say ratio. And that comes from a CEO that I interviewed; a guy named Brett Wilson. When I first heard it, I kind of fell out of my chair but what it means is “What percentage of the things that you say you’re going to do, do you actually do?” And it’s about reliability, it’s about dependability, it’s about your reputation, it’s about trustworthiness.

And I think if you want to set yourself apart, if you just have this rule that whatever you say you’re going to do, that you follow through on. And if, for some reason, you can’t, you tell people, it’s like, “Hey, I know I promised you that but this happened. I need an extra day.” You’re just upfront about it rather than letting them discover that you missed the deadline. I think if you build a reputation as being super reliable and dependable, you can really set yourself apart.

And the beauty of this is that it is so easy to improve. Again, you got to be honest with yourself. Pete, your listeners need to ask themselves, “What is your do-to-say ratio? Is it really high? Or are there some things that you say you’re going to do that you don’t always follow through on? And the beauty of this, it’s like a really easy hack to improve your do-to-say ratio, which is just whenever you say you’re going to do something, just write it down. Make a note to yourself, your computer, or mostly on your phone. It doesn’t matter where, just keep a list somewhere.

And even in the small stuff, if you say, “Oh, I’m going to connect you with that person,” and you follow through on it, like if you do that consistently, people are going to start noticing things, like, “Wow, this person always does what they say they’re going to do.” And then that builds your reputation, and so you’re going to get more responsibility because people just know you’re that kind of person that’s going to own it and deliver it.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. You say that compartmentalization is a crucial art. What do you mean by that? And how do we get better at it?

Adam Bryant
Well, I think as you get higher in leadership positions, like the problems get harder, and as we discussed, the decisions get more difficult, you’re going to make mistakes, you’re going to be second-guessed, you’re going to be criticized, any decision you’re going to make is going to leave somebody unhappy just because of all the tradeoffs.

And so, I think a key skill of leadership is to be able to compartmentalize and to keep everything in perspective. Because if you’re not good at that, what does that look like? It means like you’re always beating yourself up for any wrong decisions, or you don’t take criticism well, you’re always worrying about the impact of your decisions on other people, you’re staring at the ceiling at 2:00 in the morning when you should be sleeping, and you’re just not going to be an effective leader.

And some people over-index the other way, Pete. I’ve certainly seen people who are so good at compartmentalizing, it basically means they have no empathy, like they just let everything roll off their back, and they don’t seem to appreciate the impact of their decisions on people. And maybe that’s not healthy either, but, to me, being able to compartmentalize to sort of acknowledge the challenges, but then sort of keep them in a box in your mind so that it’s like, “Okay, I’ve dealt with that, I’m thinking about that. I’m going to park this here and I’ll come back to it later.”

Pete Mockaitis
And if our compartmentalization art is not so artful and we do tend to ruminate and think about the thing that’s not so handy and we’d prefer to have it compartmentalized, how do we get better at it?

Adam Bryant
Part of it is to let go of perfection, because if things are chewing you up inside, it’s, first, you’re not going to be perfect and to give yourself a break. One of our mentors at my firm often shares this advice with startup founders and stuff, and it’s a great line. He says, “Look, if you talk to your friends the way you’re talking to yourself, you wouldn’t have any friends.”

And, to me, that’s a sort of a great point to keep in mind. It’s like you need to take care of yourself. And some people are very driven and they’re really performance-oriented and success-oriented. If something doesn’t go well, you could spend a lot of time beating yourself up, and you just need to let that go.

Another trap that people fall into is that we want to be liked. Like, who doesn’t? As a manager, as a leader, you want people to like you, and you need to let go of that as well, and shift from wanting people to like you to people respecting you. It doesn’t mean that it’s fine if they don’t like you because they’re not going to follow you, but just to worry less about whether people like you.

And I think if you just keep, for every decision you have to make, you can get chewed up about, “Well, is this the right thing to do? And it’s going to affect this person this way and have these consequences.” If you just run every decision that you face through a simple framework of, “What is the best for the company or for the organization that I’m running, or the team that I’m running?” like, that’s a way of sort of simplifying and clarifying.

And then you could probably sleep better at night, and say, “Look, I know there are some disruptions here. I know I’ve kind of created a blast zone, but I know this is the right decision for the organization,” that’s going to help you compartmentalize. So, I think those are a couple of specific strategies.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And how do you recommend we build our self-awareness muscle?

Adam Bryant
It starts with five words that I heard from a young CEO years ago, and it was one of those moments when she said it, it was kind of burned into my head. And the backstory was that she had a really rough childhood, very difficult relationship with her parents, they moved a lot, she was bullied at school, and she was sort of telling me about her life story.

And, at one point in the interview, I had said, “Well, you have such a positive attitude. Where does that come from?” And she said these five words, she said, “Reality is just source material.” And what she meant is that, “Look, there is the reality of the things we experience but it’s just a reminder that we are always creating narratives for ourselves. We are constantly sort of editing the films of our experience and focusing on certain things to tell ourselves good stories, bad stories.”

And, to me, that’s such an important insight because if you believe in the idea that reality is just source material, and that we’re always, in effect, telling ourselves stories, that it allows you to sort of step outside yourself a little bit and to ask yourself, like, “Wait a minute. What story am I telling myself about that experience? And is there another way to look at it?” And I think that helps guard against some of the traps that people fall into in the stories they tell themselves.

So, one of the common traps is the victim narrative, “Stuff is happening to me,” and you just start feeling like a victim when you should see everything as a learning opportunity. It reminds me of that expression I heard from one CEO, which is that, “Ninety-five percent of the worse stuff that happens to you winds up being the best stuff that happens to you because you really learn from those experiences. It builds your character, gives you a lot of wisdom about life.”

So, the victim narrative is one trap. The fairness or unfairness narrative is another trap. You can often feel like, in organizations, things aren’t fair. And it’s just a matter of, like, “Look, reality is what it is.” And if you really push yourself, it’s like, “Am I thinking about this in the most productive way? Am I seeing everything as an opportunity?”

Because, to me, that’s one of the things that really separates entrepreneurs. I’ve interviewed hundreds of entrepreneurs, and they are wired slightly differently. And I think one of the key ways is they don’t sort of dwell on bad news. It’s like everything is an opportunity, “What’s the plan B? What’s the plan C here?” and they just keep pushing forward. So, to me, those are a couple of the key things to keep in mind just to help build that self-awareness muscle.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And any thoughts on politics, office politics, networking, trickery?

Adam Bryant
Well, politics, there’s politics in every organization, especially the organizations that like to say, “We don’t have any politics.” And the one tip that I always keep in mind with politics is you really need to understand what the other person’s scoreboard is in their head for their own success. To me, that’s the secret to understanding office politics because, as much as companies like to say there’s a shared scoreboard and everybody is going to work together as a team, the reality is that everybody has got their own part of that.

And everybody is building their part of the business, and they tend to focus almost with blinders on about that. And so, to me, one of the ways to sort of help you navigate politics is always start by understanding what is the other person’s scoreboard. Because if you understand what is their scoreboard, then you’re much more likely to add clarity about how you can help them, and how you can kind of find a common ground. So, that’s my best insight about politics.

And I would also say about networking, I don’t know about you, Pete, but I’m an introvert. I don’t like the idea of networking. That’s sort of like, “There’s 20 people over there, just go mingle during drinks before a conference.” That makes me really uncomfortable, and I’m not good at it. But I think it’s important to build your network. And if you focus on, “Well, how do you build your network?” to me, the most effective way to do it is not just, “Hey, can we have a coffee? Or, do you want to grab a drink or something?”

To me, the most effective way is to do things with people, to build something together, just be on a committee with them to do some project together, maybe it’s outside your day job or something. But, to me, like that’s the way to sort of really cement those relationships. Whether it’s with colleagues internally or, like, maybe serving on a board, or part of an organization outside your company, but the way to build your lasting networks, so those relationships really last, is to do something with people rather than just share a coffee.

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

Adam Bryant
I’m over to you, Pete.

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

Adam Bryant
I mentioned the early one from Ruth Simmons about always be prepared at any point in your life to learn the most important lesson in your life. That’s one of my favorites. The other favorite is “Play in traffic.” And whenever people are asking me for career advice, I often mention that. And what it means is just, like, get out there and do stuff. Meet people. Get involved. Just start doing things. Play in traffic, and you’re going to build those connections that are going to lead to things.

And I think about that often because I think, sometimes, people when they’re first starting out their careers, they tend to have very specific ideas about their career plans, like, “By this age, I want to make this much money, I want to have this title,” and it’s sort of very linear. But that’s not how life works. Your career path is going to be shaped much more by the people you meet, the people you work with, people you connect with.

And so, you really just want to get out there and meet a lot of people in the context of work and doing things, so that’s why I love that expression – play in traffic.

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

Adam Bryant
There is a study about capuchin monkeys. And if your listeners look it up, capuchin monkeys fairness study, and it’s this great video about two monkeys in cages, and they’re fed like a cucumber versus a grape, and it’s sort of how the two monkeys react to getting either the grape or the cucumber. It’s just a powerful reminder of how, as human beings, one of our triggers is fairness. It’s a hilarious video.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Adam Bryant
I love In the Heart of the Sea. It’s a great book about whaling that got made into a movie. I love books about sort of adventure and resilience, and what people do, like, in really tough circumstances. I often go back to that.

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

Adam Bryant
I’ll probably say my recorders because I’ve done a thousand interviews, so that’s probably my Swiss Army knife. It all starts with that.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now I need to know. Recorders, we’re talking about, like, an external…?

Adam Bryant
Yeah, I’m a lot older than you, Pete. So, I grew up using external recorders.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, sure. Well, that’s handy when you’re out and about. Sure.

Adam Bryant
Exactly. I’m dating myself but, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
I have one as well, so. And a favorite habit?

Adam Bryant
Probably the best, but maybe not my favorite is just, like, exercising every day, like trying to go out for a run. And, to me, that’s how I kind of stay centered and blow off steam. I will share that I basically listen to the same playlist every time I go for a run. It’s not because I’m listening to the music. It’s I like to have music, but to me it’s just background noise. It’s kind of like a green screen that I can think against. So, I probably just overshared there.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, no, actually that’s perfect, and I would like to know a couple of the tracks on the playlist.

Adam Bryant
There’s Dave Matthews in there, there’s U2, John Legend. It’s a pretty eclectic mix, I have to say.

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

Adam Bryant
One thing, I’m sure, like an important insight for me, and it goes back to there’s a famous interview question that Peter Thiel, the entrepreneur who’s pretty famous for asking people, which is like, “What do you believe that 95% of the world disagrees with you on?” And I think it’s a great way to sort of getting that creative thinking and stuff.

And I have to say, like it was an important insight for me that I think the world has it completely wrong on in the following way, that the world tends to refer to children as young adults. And I think it’s backwards because I think adults are older children. And I think if we sort of all acknowledge that and recognize that, and that people bring their little red wagon of stuff into work, and we’re all motivated by a lot of the same things that kids are motivated by, like, “You want to go first. That’s not fair. Let me do myself,” all those reactions that kids have, adults have them, too.

So, I think it’s a good sort of unified field theory of understanding human behavior.

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

Adam Bryant
My personal website is AdamBryantBooks.com, and my firm is The ExCo Group, and our website is ExCoLeadership.com.

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

Adam Bryant
I think a huge underrated superpower of leadership is listening. I think most people are not that good at listening, and I think our devices are making it worse. But I just think if you want to be awesome at your job and separate yourself, I think it’s about being a good listener, and it’s a muscle that you can practice all day long in your personal life, your professional life. And, again, if the goal is to set yourself apart, I think being a good listener is one way to do it, plus you’re going to learn a lot more if you’re a good listener.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Adam, this has been a treat. I wish you much fun and many good leaps.

Adam Bryant
That’s great. I appreciate it. Thank you, Pete.

885: How to Build the Mental Fitness and Resilience of a Champion with Greg Harden

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Legendary coach Greg Harden shares the secrets of his world-famous athletes for conquering fear, fatigue, anxiety, and self-doubt.

You’ll Learn:

  1. How to master your response to any situation
  2. The secret to being a top performer
  3. The #1 subject for you to become an expert on

About Greg

Greg Harden is a Peak Performance Coach, motivational speaker, and executive consultant who is best known for his work with seven-time Super Bowl champion quarterback Tom Brady. He also worked with Heisman Trophy winner and Super Bowl MVP Desmond Howard, and twenty-three-time Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps.

He’s spent over 30 years building them at the University of Michigan, including 400 future professional athletes, 50 NFL first-round draft picks, and 120 Olympians from over 20 countries. He gained national recognition when 60 Minutes Sports profiled him as “Michigan’s Secret Weapon.”

Resources Mentioned

Greg Harden Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Greg, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Greg Harden
Oh, thank you for having me, sir.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to be chatting with you even though you are Michigan’s secret weapon, as in the Fighting Illini we didn’t like losing to Michigan.

Greg Harden
Well, the Fighting Illini.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s right.

Greg Harden
The always great competitors and most exciting.

Pete Mockaitis
Very much. Well, I’m so excited to get into your wisdom. Maybe, could you kick us off with a particularly memorable story for you in your career, coaching some of the greatest athletes ever?

Greg Harden
Wow. The thing that comes to my mind instantly is, “What’s the difference between all these mega stars and people who don’t make it?” And what we come up with over and over and over is not only were they hungry, they were humble. They were coachable. That made them coachable. They came in with a mindset that made it clear that they wanted to be the absolute best but, most importantly, they came and were able to surrender the ego enough to learn from others.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. That’s good. Can you think of a time that, I don’t know, Tom Brady or Michael Phelps or someone you worked with did just that that stood out?

Greg Harden
Tom Brady, I mean, Tom was really clear about what he wanted. He had watched what I had done and what we had done, Desmond Howard and I, and he was curious as to whether or not it could help him. And so, he walked in and he was kind of low in the depths chart, and made it real clear that he wanted to be a starter at Michigan, and I made it clear to him that, “I can’t help you be a starter at Michigan but I can help you understand that if no one else believes in you, you believe in yourself.” And he said, “Let’s start there.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. That’s cool. Wow. And so then, from there, how do we go from low in the depths to superstar?

Greg Harden
Well, what you do is you start by being a regular schmo who’s going to out-train and outwork everybody. We talk about his gifts, he can’t outrun you, he can’t outjump you, he can’t outlift you in the weight room but you couldn’t measure his heart, and you couldn’t measure his mind. His mental game was so strong, back in the day, you didn’t have all these fancy schmancy phones, we would have to kick him out of the training room where he was studying film all day long, like he was a coach. He had a coach’s mentality and he was a student of the game. He studied and studied and studied, and was more prepared than anyone could imagine when it was showtime.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Now, you’ve put together some of your learnings in your book Stay Sane in an Insane World: How to Control the Controllables and Thrive. Tell us, what’s the big idea here?

Greg Harden
Well, the big idea here is to teach people to become the world’s greatest expert on one subject – themselves. That’s the mission. The mission is to get people to be obsessed with something other than all the things they’re obsessed with. And what I’m asking them to do is focus just for a moment on becoming so critically conscious, so aware, so mindful that you’re able to look at what’s working in your life and what’s not working, to keep it that simple.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Could you give us an example?

Greg Harden
Well, if we’re talking about just trying to make your life work at your job, if your communication style is not working at your job, you need to be aware of it. If members of your team think that you’re arrogant and unapproachable, you need to be aware of it. You need to be so sophisticated that you are always examining how people are responding, you’re always examining how you come across and how others come across, and you’re studying everyone but, in order to really know Pete, I’ve got to know Greg. I’ve got to know me so well that I can read myself in different circumstances and situations and know when I need to shift, when I need to adapt, when I need to change.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Could you share with us a story of an example of someone who saw a real upgrade in that self-awareness?

Greg Harden
Desmond Howard, Heisman trophy winner, MVP of the Super Bowl. Desmond Howard was ready to leave the institution when he pulled me aside and asked if he could have a conversation. I said, “Sure, let’s talk.” He talked about how he was unhappy, how he came in as a running back, and he had been shifted to a wide receiver, and how he wasn’t getting any playing time, and he was frustrated, and he was being recruited hard by other people.

And I looked at him and I suggested that perhaps his press clippings from high school had nothing to do with what he was accomplishing here. I said, “What you need to do is understand that, right now if you leave, who cares?” I said, “If you leave now, you told me you were the guy in high school. Hell, I was the guy in high school.” Pete was the guy in high school.

Pete Mockaitis
I really was, yes.

Greg Harden
So, I said, “Son, you may have to examine what’s working and what’s not working between you and the staff. And what does the staff think about you?” I said, “If you liked, Desmond, I’ll go and chat with the people who are around you and ask them, ‘What’s working for this guy? And what does he need to improve on?'” He said, “Go ahead.”

So, I went and found out that they were totally unimpressed with his commitment to blocking. And back in the day, if you were a wide receiver, and you didn’t block, you weren’t getting on the field. They also thought that his attitude was pretty much, “I and me,” and the team was not the issue, and he believed that this was Desmond Howard University, and then they said, “No, it’s not going to work.”

So, I went back and told him, and he says, “Oh, I didn’t know I was coming across that way.” I said, “Yeah. Well, even though that’s not your intent, that’s been the results. So, let’s come up with a strategy that can change everything.” So, what I suggested to Desmond was that, “First off, you need to decide to be the best athlete on the team, not the best receiver, but the absolute best athlete on the team. You need to push yourself in areas that you hate. If you can give 100% a hundred percent of the time at stuff you don’t even like, what happens when you get to the stuff you love?”

Desmond was not someone who wanted to run. Desmond decided to run 10 to 15 miles extra per week while everyone else was doing something else. When he showed up in August for camp, he was the best-conditioned athlete. He was always in the top three of every event, every activity. He transformed himself. I suggested also that he needed to irritate or perhaps piss off the defensive coordinator. He said, “How do I do that?” I said, “At least once a week, try to knock somebody out and apologize afterwards.”

And I said, “You don’t like blocking? You better love blocking. You don’t like running? You better learn to love running. And convince yourself, con yourself, maneuver yourself into thinking differently and being passionate about everything you do, not just the things you like but the things that are required.”

Pete Mockaitis
Let’s talk about that. Con yourself into loving the things you hate. That sounds powerful, maybe dangerously powerful, but I want to know how I do it.

Greg Harden
Well, you practice, and train, and you rehearse. The keyword is practice, training, and rehearsing. When we talk about getting in shape, people understand practice, train, and rehearse. When we’re talking about mental fitness, the mental gain, you have to teach yourself that you can practice, train, and rehearse to upgrade in ways that you think, in ways that you operate, how you can generate passion.

For example, let’s talk about anxiety. Well, there’s a thin line between anxiety and excitement. Your body reacts pretty much the same. Your heart starts pounding so you’re sweating, and your breathing is impaired, “Am I anxious or am I excited?” So, what we begin to help people understand is that there’s a thin line between those emotions, and you can trigger and turn anxiety into excitement, and fear into passion.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. I like that. Now, I’m curious then, when we do need the turning into, if you’re conning yourself, is it just you’re telling yourself, “I’m excited”? Or, what are the steps or the how-to, the process?

Greg Harden
Well, you begin to start training yourself to notice when fear and self-doubt, when anxiety shows up, and you begin to track it, you begin to understand it as a predictable part of life. So, what we do is, the first thing we do is convince people that fear and self-doubt, that fear and anxiety are predictable, therefore, manageable. It’s part of being human. So, that’s the first order of business is to begin to get you to understand to stop being stunned when you’re anxious, stop being overwhelmed when you’re anxious, “I’m anxious. It makes sense to be anxious.” And, as a matter of fact, fear is predictable as all get out.

Because, think about this, you hear, “Be fearless. There’s nothing to be afraid of.” That’s total nonsense. Some of the greatest moments of my life, some of the greatest moments of your life and most of the people you know, they’re about to crap their pants before it. Am I right or wrong?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s funny. I’m thinking about when I proposed marriage to my bride, I was, like, probably shaking.

Greg Harden
Right. It’s so predictable but we need to learn how to embrace fear, how to embrace anxiety and recognize it and tell it, “Come on in,” and tell it you don’t have time right now but, “Hey, I expected you, I knew you’d be here, but I’ll get back with you later because, right now, I have something to do.” So, fear becomes manageable when we begin to anticipate it as being part of life.

Let’s take it further. So, then if I’m fearless, that means I’m courageous. Courage is not the absence of fear. Courage is facing fear. Where encouraged it doesn’t even exist unless we’re facing fear. So, yes, be courageous, face fear, grab it by the throat, laugh at it, anticipate it, and then move on because you’ve done it before. And we love being anxious and excited. Why would you go to an amusement park? No, why would you go to a carnival on the corner that’s been setup overnight and get on any of those rides?

Pete Mockaitis
Sure.

Greg Harden
You’re a brave and courageous person if you get on some of those carni rides, right? But think about this, you go to the big-time amusement park, you get on a ride called The Demon Drop, and you go up 10 stories, and some 19-year-old, smoking a cigarette, puts you in a coffin-like capsule, straps you in, closes the door, pulls a lever, and you plummet nine floors.

And then the hydraulic lift kicks in and it saves you, and of course, your stomach did go into your nasal passages before you got off and you screamed. Then you got off and say, “Let’s do that again.” We love fear. We have to begin to understand that fear is passion. It’s predictable as all get out, and part of life, and part of being human.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, we predict it, we welcome it in, and then say, “Well, hey, I’m a little busy right now, so I’m going to have to get back with you later.” That’s all there is to it.

Greg Harden
It’s not all that is to it, but if you train yourself and you repeat it over and over, because what we’re talking about is self-talk, “How do I talk to myself?” We talk to ourselves all the time, sometimes out loud, but that’s not the issue here, right? So, we begin to train ourselves to how we process, how we think about things. We anticipate we’re going to have some anxious moments, and we talk our way through it until we get so confident, it becomes a habit of facing fear, it becomes a habit of anticipating it and dismissing it, and getting back with it and understanding it and talking about it.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, now I’d love to get your take on the opposite end of emotion. So, when we’re fearful, anxious, or really hyped up, what happens when we’re just, “Ugh, waah, tired,” unmotivated, not feeling it? How do we play that game?

Greg Harden
Well, so you’ve heard me say it already, “Train to give 100% a hundred percent of the time.” That’s total insanity. You can’t give 100% a hundred percent of the time. But if it’s my default mode, if it’s what I fall back on, if it’s something that I’m committed to trying, I get to the point where, instead of being, yeah, your worst day can be 30%. Okay, you’re a good guy. You can make it all the way to 50. You’re tired, you’re broke down, you don’t want to do something.

But if your default mode is to give 100% in everything you do, your worst day will be better than the average person’s best day. That’s where we’re going. We’re going to a spot where, “I mean, I don’t feel like doing this,” and you do realize that some of your greatest performances, you were sick as a dog, you were worn out and tired, and you came through because you were relaxed.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Greg Harden
Am I right or wrong?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m actually thinking about, I don’t know, this is just so mundane as oppose to championship athletes, but I’m thinking about some of my greatest performances in, I don’t know, chess or Tetris, which really do push my brain kind of as fast or hard as it can be pushed at times. Yeah, sometimes the tuckered-out times did end up being the best, and I guess that’s the missing element because I was relaxed.

Greg Harden
Isn’t that something? I mean, sometimes you’re so tired, you’re too tired to be anxious. Some of the greatest moments, we’ve seen our heroes and heroines who are just broke down and worn out, “And I was sick and I threw up all this morning, but I’m going to give my best,” and their best ends up being a world record.

So, again, everyone else is trying to manipulate and maneuver you into doing, into buying, into performing. You have to be able to do it yourself. And you need to be able to convince yourself that, “I’m going to just absolutely do my best. I know I’m worn out. I know I’m tired. I know jetlag has set in, but opportunity knocks.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so, when we’re training ourselves to give 100% one hundred percent of the time, what does that training program consist of, just doing it again and again? Or, are there some key steps or conditioning protocols?

Greg Harden
Well, it’s kind of hard to describe it any other way than practicing. Now, this is a story that I think you’ll like. I’ve worked with a lot of megastars and people who are absolutely the best in law, in engineering, in medicine, boom, boom, boom. But I had this young man from the West Coast who was not a fake gangster. He was from a family, there’s a family business, grand daddy, cousins, uncles.

And he somehow, miraculously, turned into this outstanding athlete so he got a scholarship and he came to the university. And they warned me, “You’re going to have to work with this guy.” And I said, “Well, why did you recruit this guy?” They said, “You’ve got to see him play.” “All right.” Well, he was a really good athlete. He wasn’t the greatest in the world but he could perform and he could pull his weight, and he was a problem.

In the first few weeks, he was in my office because of this, and in the next few months, he was in my office because of that. Well, for several years, we worked together, and, lo and behold, for some odd reason, we bonded. For some odd reason, he started changing, “Okay, that’s nice,” and he was not getting in trouble. But, now, he’d come by my office, “G, what you doing?” “Waiting for you. That’s all I’m doing. I’m just sitting around, waiting for you.” And he’s, “Oh, you’re so silly.” We’d get together and we talk and talk.

So, one summer, he shows up at the office, “G, what you doing?” I said, “Well, I’m bored and that’s not good for you.” I said, “Come on, sit down.” I said, “We’ve been working for several years, and you know you’ve changed and I’m so proud of you. I’m so impressed with what you’ve done and how you’ve carried yourself in the last just few months. But we need to find something else to work on.” He said, “What’s that?”

I said, “People think you’re dumb as a box of rocks.” He said, “What?” And I said, “Yeah. And you don’t care, do you?” “Nope.” I said, “But you might be.” He said, “Hey, wait,” and he used some colorful language. I said, “I’m not saying that you are. I’m saying we don’t know.” I said, “Have you ever been a student?” He said, “No.” “But you still have to go to class. This is an institution where you actually have to go to class, you actually have to pass the classes. All you’re doing is trying to be eligible, right?” He said, “Yeah.”

I said, “But what if we had nothing else to work on, and we decided to work on you being a student involved in athletics?” He said, “Meh.” I said, “Here’s the deal. I’m not trying to get you to be a better student. I’m trying to get you to be a better person.” He said, “Go on.” I said, “This is what we’re going to do. We’re going to use academics to make you a better athlete.” He said, “This better be good.”

I said, “I want you to practice, train, and rehearse being a better student. I want you to do your studying. I want you to do your reading. I want you to anticipate that you’re going to have the tests and not wait till the last minute to figure it out. I want you to see if you can prove something to yourself, not to anyone else. This is not about anyone else. I need you to practice, train, and rehearse the mental discipline, the self-motivation, the self-control that it would take to become a student.”

“If you can train yourself to give 100% at academics, something you’re not even invested in, what could you do if you mastered your mind, mastered your own ability to process, to be disciplined, to be focused, to shut out the noise, to stop daydreaming, and to be focused like a laser beam on the task at hand? This is not about academics, son. This is not about athletics. It’s about what kind of man can we create that can take on the world at any level?” He says, “Whoa, you’re crazy.” “Yeah, but we got nothing else to work on.”

So, we worked and worked and talked about it, and, you know, “How are you doing? Are you studying? Are you reading?” boom, boom, boom. So, several months goes by, and I’m not thinking about it that much. At the end of the year, he walks into my office, “G, what you doing?” “Waiting on you.” He said, “Man, you’re not going to believe this. I’m on the dean’s list, fool.”

Pete Mockaitis
There you go.

Greg Harden
And we giggled and laughed and rolled on the floor, and people thought we’d lost our minds. But I’ve got a gangster from the West Coast, thrilled to have mastered his own mind to the point where he became a student involved in athletics. And it’s one of the greatest experiences I’ve ever had in my life.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s awesome, yes. Whew! Now, when you say practice, train, and rehearse, which you’ve said a few times, I’m curious, are there distinctions such that practicing is a different activity than training, is different than rehearsing? And how would you distinguish them?

Greg Harden
They’re all the same. And you know how our mind works. For some person, the word practice, it’s going to trigger. For another person, the word train is going to trigger, and rehearse. You’ve got to see them as a compilation, a formula that all leads to the same destination, and that’s being someone who’s disciplined enough to train their mind to commit to improve and maintain performance over time.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Now, you mentioned, in your book, controllables. What do you mean by those and how do we master them?

Greg Harden
There is an old serenity prayer, “God, guide me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to face the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.” All this is telling us is that there are some things we can control and there are some things we can’t control, and we have to be able to discern what the differences are.

And being able to control myself is the hardest. I can barely control myself, and I’m trying to control my boss? If we’re talking about being awesome at your job, I can’t control my boss’ personality or style. I can’t control their expectations, real or imagined. I can influence all that but what I can control is how I respond, how I react, how I play my role, how I manage what I do, how I tell the boss. I have to be so sophisticated.

When I talk about controlling the controllables, they’re just giving me some more to do. I’m going to go to my boss and I’m going to make it real clear, “We need to prioritize. You just asked me to do six things. Prior to that, you’d asked me to do three. We need to review these six and determine what’s going to be A, what’s going to be B, what’s going to be B2. And I need for you to be clear, boss, what is the priority because I have my idea but I need to get input from you.”

Now, how is that controlling the controllables? That’s all I can do. I have to make sure that I’m not set up to fail. And so, setting myself up not to fail, I’m going to be assertive enough to walk in, and say, “We need to make some decisions. I need your input, boss.” I can’t control the boss but I can control what I’m sharing, what I’m asking, and how I’m going to respond. Controlling the controllables is a critical piece of the puzzle and it’s in terms of staying sane in an insane world.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Thank you. Well, so now I’d love to get your view on we talked about humility, being coachable is huge in terms of a key mindset that unlocks all kinds of good things. Are there any other top mindset shifts you’d highlight for us?

Greg Harden
I would challenge anyone to, I mean, we know some people who are, like, the best friend you could have in life. You’ve had some friends that are some keepers, and maybe only one or two but you have some. But we sometimes notice that even those people who are really great at being a friend to everyone else are horrible at being a friend to themselves.

Your best friend in life should be you. So, introducing to people the whole idea of 4As, for example. The 4As are something that when everyone says every and all, they’re either going to say something profound or completely stupid. All people have 4As. The need for attention, the need for affection, the need for approval, and the need for acceptance. We’re always looking for attention, affection, approval, and acceptance.

I don’t know about you but I’ve made a complete fool of myself trying to get, pick one, and I’ve also risen to the top of my game seeking attention, affection, approval, and acceptance. But where we have to go when we’re training people to be the best version of themselves, at some point I’ve got to put the word self in front of those As.

And the simplest piece is to teach people self-love and self-acceptance. I’m glad that you’re able of loving and caring about everyone else but I need you to consider self-love and self-acceptance. Accepting yourself, flaws and all. Because if you’re good friends, your friends could be flawed, they can mess up, you think, “But you’re my friend. Okay, I forgive you. Let’s go.”

But we’re so hard on ourselves, sir. We are so difficult to please. And when we shift to being a peak performer or a top performer who wants to maintain it over time, I believe an X factor is self-love and self-acceptance. Imagine telling a 320-pound lineman the key assignment is self-love and self-acceptance.

So, one of the things that I would challenge anyone to do is not only give 100% a hundred percent of the time, but love yourself unconditionally, to learn how to do it. And if you can’t do it by yourself, thinking about it, and processing it, practicing, training, and rehearsing, get a consultant or a counsellor. Counsellors or consultants.

When we’re talking about business, I’m telling the CEO who wants to know, “How do you transfer all this to my industry?” I’m going to tell the CEO, “You’ve got to create formulas for people to be able to get the help that they need to transform themselves, to be able to dig deeper and get more out of themselves.”

So, I’m sorry, I get excited.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, no, I love it all. Well, now, Greg, I’d love it if we could zoom all the way inside your brain for specific self-talk approaches that might model this in practice. So, let’s go through a whole loop of, “I don’t feel like doing something. I’m bored. Now, I’m doing a thing and I’m scared, fearful, anxious. And then, oops, I just learned that I screwed it up, and now I’m beating myself up.” What would be the great self-talk arc of moving through these three phases and contrasted with the terrible self-talk arc moving through these three phases?

Greg Harden
Well, let’s think it all the way through, like, “I’m so stupid. I just always…” I have to catch myself, “Well, that was stupid perhaps but it doesn’t mean that I’m stupid.” So, what I ask people to do is to train themselves to not just stop at the first and second thought, but take it to the third, fourth, and fifth thought, “God, I’m so stupid.” “Okay, I’m not stupid. But that was stupid. Beating myself is not working. Oh, okay.”

You’ve got to have in your brain a couple of phrases, “Beating yourself up does not work. It’s ineffective.” So, you’ve heard someone say, “Beating yourself up doesn’t work.” I need you to take it to, “It’s ineffective.” Worrying does not work. It does not change the outcome. Beating myself up doesn’t work. Worrying doesn’t work. I caught myself.

So, what we teach people is to catch themselves when they’re in the middle of beating themselves up. I’ve had people have a notebook where every time they catch themselves in negative self-talk, they jot it down. They even jot down what was happening at the time, what triggered it. And they end up finding out that if they are diligent, they do a lot more often than they thought.

So, the mission is to get people to, ultimately, eliminate but that’s a stretch. We need to reduce how often and how long we beat ourselves up. We’ve got to reduce it and telescope it, and get it down. But we get it down by being critically conscious, mindful, and aware of how often I do it, and I catch myself. So, your brain gets all the way to, when I catch myself, then I beat myself up for catching myself, “Oh, God, I’m doing it again. I’m so stupid.”

And so, we catch ourselves, and then we commit, once again, to retraining the way that we think. The commitment has to be there. People always talk about what they want to do but you’ve got to not just dream big. You’ve got to believe big in order to become big.

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

Greg Harden
Become the world’s greatest expert on you. And sometimes you will have to get input from others. You’ve been to some good schools, you’ve done some really good things, and you’re an international player, right? B school, boom, boom, boom. Anyone that’s been near the B school has heard of SWOT analysis – strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to our organization.

What are the things that are working, not working? What are the opportunities we need to exploit? What are the threats to us becoming world class? I have the audacity to take SWOT analysis and give it to individuals. I’ll ask you to do a SWOT analysis on yourself. And if you don’t like the word weaknesses, let’s say challenges, SCOT analysis.

And so, I’ll have someone do a SWOT analysis on themselves, and then we’ll review it. Some people are really good at identifying strengths and horrible at identifying weaknesses. Some folks, all they can see is weaknesses and are limited at seeing strengths. I will then ask them to get two to three people who they love, who loves them, who they trust, who will not take advantage and abuse any power that you give them, and ask them to do a SWOT analysis.

Then, we’ll have a review of what you’ve written, what several other people who care about you have written, and see if there are some congruencies, if they can see things that you cannot see or have not seen, that’s reinforcing the changes that need to be made. So, critical self-assessment is an artform that people must practice, train, and rehearse, getting better at being able to not really good at criticizing themselves but really doing a self-assessment is what we’re trying to get people to.

And so, I guess I get excited just thinking about, “How do you teach somebody to become the world’s greatest expert and then daring them to pursue self-love and self-acceptance?”

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

Greg Harden
“No one can make you feel inferior without your permission.” Eleanor Roosevelt.

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

Greg Harden
Carol Dweck’s Mindset is filled with research, and she can talk like a human being and not like just a scientist.

Pete Mockaitis
And that sounds like a favorite book. Any other favorite books?

Greg Harden
Viktor Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning. That was like a bible to me. When I was really young and dumb, I would have a New Testament in one pocket and Viktor Frankl in another pocket, and would walk around talking smack because I’m grounded.

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

Greg Harden
Identifying self-defeating attitudes and behaviors.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite thing you share that people quote back to you often that really resonates with them?

Greg Harden
Well, your self-worth and self-esteem must not be based on external forces. How I feel about me should not be based on performance.

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

Greg Harden
GregHarden.com.

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

Greg Harden
Commit without question or pause, to giving everything you’ve got every chance you get. Give it 100% a hundred percent of the time as your default mode. And if that’s your default mode, your worst day will be better than the average person’s best day.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Greg, this has been a treat. Thank you and keep on rocking.

Greg Harden
My man, most enjoyable. Thank you so much for your time.

884: How to Beat Distraction and Make Every Moment More Fulfilling with Dr. Cassie Holmes

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Cassie Holmes shares powerful strategies for finding more meaning and fulfillment from your hours.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why more time doesn’t make us more happy
  2. Two tricks to make drudgery feel more enjoyable
  3. How to keep distractions from hijacking your attention

About Cassie

Cassie Holmes is a professor at UCLA’s Anderson School of Management, an award-winning teacher and researcher on time and happiness, and author of Happier Hour: How to Beat Distraction, Expand Your Time, and Focus on What Matters Most.

Happier Hour was selected as a Forbes Must-Read and a Next Big Idea Club Must-Read for 2022, as well as an Amazon Best Business Book of 2022. It’s also been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the Today Show, CBS Mornings, and much other media.

Holmes’s academic research has been widely published in lead academic journals and featured in such outlets as The Economist, The New York Times, The Atlantic, and more. The course that she developed and now teaches, Applying the Science of Happiness to Life Design, is among UCLA’s most popular for MBAs. Prior to joining UCLA, Cassie was a tenured faculty member at Wharton, and she has a Ph.D. from Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business and a B.A. from Columbia.

Resources Mentioned

Cassie Holmes Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Cassie, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Cassie Holmes
Hi, Pete. Thanks so much for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. Well, I’m excited to talk about the wisdom in your latest work here, Happier Hour: How to Beat Distraction, Expand Your Time, and Focus on What Matters Most. I understand you had some happy hours, hopefully, recently on vacation. What’s the story here?

Cassie Holmes
Well, getting back from the fourth of July weekend, we had a great time up in Carmel Valley with good friends back from our business school days and their kids and our kids. And we picked up our kids from sleepaway camp. This is their first time away, and they were dirty but happy, and it was just fun to be outside in the sunshine with live music and yummy food and friends. What better than that?

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that does sound great. I was just going to ask, what are some themes associated with your happiest hours? And maybe you’ve already listed a few. Any other key ingredients?

Cassie Holmes
Yeah, we’ll pick up on some of these, probably many times during our conversation because they’re sort of goes back to those simple things of those relationships with the people that we love, noticing those simple moments and making the most of them. And so, yeah, it’s people.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Makes sense, people. I hear you. So, tell us, as you’re putting together and researching Happier Hour, any particularly surprising or counterintuitive discoveries you made on the journey?

Cassie Holmes
Yes. So, I think that what Happier Hour is, it’s sort of me pulling together my entire career of research on how we think about and spend our time for greater happiness and joy in our lives. And what’s interesting about that is that my relationship with time actually started off as not very happy at all. In fact, I felt, for me, for my own personal happiness, time proved to be this single biggest barrier.

And I share a story that I used to open the book which I think many can relate to and very much motivated my research agenda since, as well as writing the book to help others by applying what I found in my research to their lives, is that it was this day earlier in my career when I was still an assistant professor living in Philly. I was at Wharton at the time, and I traveled up to New York to give a talk that day.

And I was sandwiched between back-to-back meetings and then I’m rushing from those meetings, then to this networking dinner, and then rushing to catch the very last train that would get me home to my four-month-old and my husband asleep in Philly. And I made the train that night, but I remember it so vividly, I was absolutely exhausted.

And I was like, “I don’t know if I can keep up between the pressures of work, wanting to be a good partner, wanting to be a good parent, wanting to be a good friend, the never-ending piles of chores.” There simply were not enough hours in the day to get that all done, let alone to do any of it, while, let alone to enjoy any of it along the way.

And that feeling, which now in my research what we’ve been sort of unpacking, is what we referred to as time poverty. It’s this acute feeling of having too much to do and not enough time to do it. And it’s a really bad feeling in my experience of that on the train that night. I actually considered quitting. I considered quitting my entire sort of career that I worked so hard for, thinking that, “If only I had a whole lot more time, then I would be happier.”

But before I sort of marched into my boss’ office, and like, “I quit.” And before telling my husband, “We need to pack up our house. We’re moving to the beach,” where this relaxing existence that I was daydreaming about would occur, I was like, “Is it true? Is it true that people who have a whole lot more time are, in fact, happier?” And I recognize this is an empirical question and, one, as a social psychologist, that I could test and should test.

And so, I did, and I recruited a couple of my favorite collaborators, Hal Hershfield and Marissa Sharif, and we looked at, “What’s the relationship between the amount of discretionary time people have and their happiness?” And what we found across our studies, including our analyses of the American Time Use Survey data that looks at, for tens of thousands of working as well as non-working Americans, how they spent a regular day, and we could calculate how much time they spent on discretionary activities and relate that to their happiness.

And what we found was, to answer your question, a surprising finding, was this surprising pattern of results, which was basically an upside-down U shape. And this is interesting because…

Cassie Holmes
What it means is that happiness goes down on both ends of the spectrum. So, yes, people with too little time are less happy, those time poor amongst us. But what was also interesting was that other side, and that surprising side was that there is such a thing as having too much time, that we found that those with a whole lot of discretionary time were also less happy.

And, then digging into the data, they’re unhappy for different reasons, and we can talk about that, but I think it’s absolutely surprising and an important finding for us to keep in mind, in those sorts of hurried days where we do feel time poor, it sort of cautions us away from quitting, and tells us that, in fact, for greater happiness, it’s not about necessarily having a whole lot more time available to spend however you want. In fact, it’s actually how you invest the time that you have available.

And that’s actually then what propelled my research agenda since, it’s, “How do we invest hours of our days so that we feel more satisfied in our days, so that we feel joy along the way, so that, looking back at the end of the week, even if we’re busy, we feel fulfilled as opposed to just having an overly full schedule?”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Cassie, there’s so much good stuff in here. Oh, we’re going to have fun digging into this.

Cassie Holmes
Where do we start?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Cassie, I don’t know if this surprises you but I’ve actually been on the Bureau of Labor Statistics, American Time Use survey numerous times.

Cassie Holmes
Oh, great.

Pete Mockaitis
For my own fun. That’s right. I’ve researched things for fun. And so, first, let’s just confirm that this is legit, if I may, because you’ll know this so much better than I. Because when I’m up in there, I am surprised at certain numbers, like, “How is that even possible?” Like, the average amount, hours per day for civilian population, spent on housework is 0.57 hours.
So, can you maybe, first of all, for the sliver of the audience who has nerdly crawled all over the American Time Use Survey, can you confirm that it is more or less valid and legit and share why I see some numbers that I find hard to believe?

Cassie Holmes
Yeah, it’s a great question, and when you do dig into the data, and I actually would say, even before you dig in, if you’re not digging in, if you’re just looking sort of at that first glance at averages and some of the maxes and means of the various variables, that’s where you’re like, “Well, what the heck? How is it possible?” For instance, in some of our analyses of the amount of discretionary time people have that they are spending 20 hours of discretionary time, which discretionary time are spending on activities that people want to do.

And so, I’m like, “Well, when do they sleep? They only have four hours of sleep and there are chores.” And for many of us, it’s more than 0.5 hours. So, what I would say is that this is based off of data averaging across a whole bunch of people, and it’s sort of capturing a particular day. And what you need to do is look at, “What are the patterns?” like, the overall patterns so that you’re not relying on one weirdo who has literally, I don’t know, watched TV for 20 hours in a row, discretionary activity, and slept only four hours and not done anything else.

It’s you’re looking at, “All right, what are some actual interactions and moderations? And who is feeling these particular ways? And how are they spending their time?” Now, what we wanted to make sure is that, so that we’re not sort of relying on any one idiosyncratic person and/or relying so heavily on just averages, looking at, “Okay, if we cut up the data in different ways, how does this pattern play out?”

But what’s so interesting is this pattern, this such thing, or this finding that there’s too little or too much that is bad and that is associated with less happiness, is quite telling.

And going to how we even calculate, “What does it mean to spend time on discretionary activities?” We didn’t want to rely on our own idiosyncrasies of, “What are activities that people want to do?” versus obligatory activities, activities that folks have to do. And so, what we did is that we took all activities from the American Time Use Survey, so it’s like 139 activities, and we presented them to a sample of 500 individuals, and we asked them, “Is this a discretionary activity? Is it something that you want to do?” and we said that we would count any activity that more than 90% agreed was discretionary.

And those activities that more than 90% identified as discretionary included passive leisure, so this is watching TV, relaxing. It is also, though, includes active leisure, like playing sports, engaging in a hobby, exercise. It also includes spending time with family and friends. So, this is what we calculate for each individual. Now we’re getting into the weeds. You have me start talking about data which people never ask about.

But actually, interestingly, this pattern emerges, this negative quadratic relationship, also when we use the sort of 75% of people agree, so it is robust. This having too little time is bad, and digging into the data for why with additional studies, the answer is that, for those who are time poor this is no surprise, it is heightened feelings of stress. How could it be that other side of the spectrum, how could having a whole lot of hours in the day to spend exactly how you want it be associated with less happiness?

And what we found is that we are driven to be somewhat productive. We are averse to being idle. And so, when we spend all the hours of our days, day in and day out, this isn’t vacation, with nothing to show for, it undermines our sense of purpose. And from that, we feel less productive. And without that sense of purpose, we feel less satisfied.

And what’s interesting is that we saw, as additional sort of evidence to this role of purpose and wanting to be somewhat productive with the time that we spend, we found that those who actually engage in discretionary activities that they are “productive and worthwhile” like exercise, like engaging in an enriching hobby, actually, like investing in relationships, spending time with family and friends. You don’t see the too-much-time effect. It’s actually the too-much-time effect is driven by spending a whole lot of those hours in the day in ways that are discretionary, things that you want to do, but it’s more of that passive leisure.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s interesting. So, folks who are spending tons of discretionary time can break the rules of the upside-down U if that discretionary time is high quality, family, friends, hobbies instead of Netflix binging.

Cassie Holmes
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Cool. And then, also a quick data clarification, how are we measuring “happy”?

Cassie Holmes
Yes. So, with the American Time Use Survey, it’s people reporting their…I think, it was on a five-point scale of how satisfied they are with life.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, lay it on us then, on the upside-down U, what is the magic sweet spot that puts us in the top happy spot we want to be? How much discretionary activity time?

Cassie Holmes
Well, we find that, and I don’t want to sort of hang my hat on these exact numbers, but in the American Time Use Survey data, we found that between two and five hours of discretionary time is that sweet spot, that is those with less than approximately two hours of discretionary time in the day, they were less happy because of those heightened feelings of stress. Those with more than approximately five hours of discretionary time in the day were also less happy because of a lacking sense of purpose.

But I would say that what is more, I think, the bigger takeaway here is that it is not so much about how much available time you have or how much discretionary time you have, it’s really when you’re engaging in activities that feel worthwhile. And they can feel worthwhile from different sources. They can feel worthwhile because they bring you joy. They can feel worthwhile because they give you that sense that you are being productive and contributing. They can feel worthwhile when rightly placed because they are rejuvenating and relaxing.

So, it’s about identifying for yourself what are those worthwhile ways of spending, but also when you’re spending that time, how you are engaged? What is your mindset? And that very high level is the answer here. And then I would love to talk about some of the strategies for folks to identify for themselves, “Okay, what are those worthwhile activities?” for you so we’re not relying on averages across people, or even averages across a particular example of any type of activity, but also some strategies that, when you’re spending that time, how do you make the most of it, how do you make it so that those hours that you’re spending are, in fact, heavier.

And yet another sort of answer for you. You asked me, whether it’s some surprising findings, perhaps even the most surprising. I think one was that too much time is a thing, and that having a whole lot more time isn’t necessarily better. But another is that there is incredible amount of happiness available to us in the time that we’re already spending but so often we’re missing and not noticing it.

And so, the extraordinary happiness that can come from ordinary moments, if you’re paying attention, if we are engaged in the activity in that time in such a way to make the most of it, can be so, so powerful.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yes, that’s beautiful. Let’s do exactly that. First, let’s talk about worthwhile. How do we get really clear on what is worthwhile and not worthwhile for us individually?

Cassie Holmes
Yeah. So, the research tracks people’s time, so how you’re spending your time over the course of the day, and whether you’re feeling across the day, so researchers can pull out, on average, whether those activities that tend to be associated with the most positive emotion, what are those activities that tend to be associated with the most negative emotion.

That research points to our happiest activities being social connection. So, whether intimately or physically, as well as spending time with family and friends. Our least happy activities tend to be commuting, work, and housework, which is a bummer because those three activities together comprise a bulk of our work week. But, again, as I said before, those are based off of averages.

So, the average person as well as the average example of any one of those activities, but, of course, within your work hours, there are some activities that are going to be more fulfilling and worthwhile, and others that are aren’t. So, what I encourage folks to do is to track your own time over the course of a week, writing down in those super simple PDF sheet that you can download from my website, if helpful.

Basically, for every half hour, writing down, “What are you doing? What’s the activity?” and being more specific than just working or socializing. If you’re working, what is the work task? If you’re socializing, whom are you with and what are you doing? And, as importantly, rating, as you’re coming out of that half hour, coming out of that activity, on a ten-point scale, how happy are you? And not the sort of, “Oh, it was just enjoyable.”

When people are rating their happiness, it is picking up on how satisfied you feel, how worthwhile was it. And so, while, admittedly, it is tedious to track your time over the course of the week, it’s totally worth it because you have this fantastic personalized dataset that you can look for yourself, looking across your activities or your rating sheet, your time tracker, you can see what are those activities that got your highest ratings.

And what’s as helpful is not just looking at the particular activities that are sort of your highest ratings versus your lowest ratings, but what are some commonalities among them? So, you might find, for instance, like when I did this, I found for myself it wasn’t socializing per se that was necessarily fun. For me, it was one-on-one time whether with a friend, whether with a family member, as opposed to the whole group going out.

Also, I found in my work hours, actually going on a coffee walk with a colleague as we’re talking about research, that is super fun time versus the group lunches at work, or the group dinners at home, or cocktail parties. And so, I found that, for me, actually, one-on-one time was very worthwhile. And by tracking your time, you can identify, “Okay, what are the sources of fulfillment and joy in the way you spend your time?”

You can also see just how much time you’re spending on your various activities so you can pull out, “Holy cow, I had no idea that I was spending X amount of time on said activity that is not fun, and, in many cases, not necessary.” And this is, for those of us who are time poor, it’s very helpful to, like, “Okay, this is time that I can reclaim and reallocate.”

Can I share an analogy to highlight just how important this is?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, sure.

Cassie Holmes
Okay. Because our time is limited, and there’s an analogy that I love and I continue to touch back on in my own time spending decisions as well as I actually teach a course to our MBAs and executive MBAs at UCLA that is pulling the research together, Applying the Science of Happiness to Life Design is what the course is called.

And in the first day of the course, I share this short film which shows this analogy so well. And in the film, a professor walks into his classroom, and on the desk in front of the class, he puts a large jar. And then into the jar, he pours golf balls, and then he asked his students, “Is the jar full?” The students nod their head because it looks full, but nope. Then he pours pebbles into the jar, and the pebbles fill the spaces between the golf balls up to the top. He asked his students again, “Is the jar full?” the students nod their head, “Yes, it looks full.” But nope.

Then he pours sand into the jar, and the sand fills all the spaces between the golf balls, between the pebbles up to the top, “Is the jar full?” By this point, the students were like laughing, and, “Yes, the jar looks full.” But, no, there was one more step. He pulls out two bottles of beer, he opens one, pours it into the jar, he opens the other, and then he goes and sort of perches himself on the front of the desk, and he explains, and he takes a sip of the beer.

And he explains, “This jar represents the time of your life. The golf balls are those things that really matter to you, your relationships with your family, your friendships, the work that you do that is so in line with your purpose and your goals that feels really worthwhile. The pebbles are the other important things in your life, like your job, your house. The sand is everything else. The sand is all of that stuff that fills your time without you even thinking about, like, unintentionally, without you even choosing it.”

And what’s really important to know is that, had he poured the sand into the jar first, all of the golf balls would not have fit. That’s to say that if we let our time get filled, it absolutely will get filled but not necessarily with the stuff that matters to you. And so, what you need to do is put your golf balls into your time jar first, into your schedule of the week. Put those activities that are so worthwhile, those activities that do connect you with these people that are so important to you.

The work hours, like the work project or tasks that is so important to you and as fulfilling and will sort of propel you forward in what matters to you, put those into your schedule first because sand will absolutely fill everything else, but at least this way, at the end of the week, even if you were busy, you can look back and feel fulfilled because you’ve invested in those things that matter to you.

So, what the time tracking exercise does is it allows you to identify what are your golf balls, what are those things that you can put and should and must from a sense of satisfaction and offsetting burnout and a sense of fulfillment and happiness, is you have to put those into your schedule and protect time for them. Others won’t do that for you. You need to take the responsibility for that. And then, yes, this other stuff will fill in.

My sand is email. Others, when I have my students do this, their sand is whether it’s social media or meetings that are not all that necessary, but it’s so important that our weeks don’t just get filled with sand and keeping us busy but not necessarily spending our time on those things that matter. And then one of the students was like, “Professor, what’s the deal with the beer?” And I was like, “I’m so glad you asked.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yes, I wanted to ask. Glad you went here.

Cassie Holmes
Yup. And the beer goes to show that no matter how busy you feel, how full your schedule is, you always have time for a drink with a friend. So, whether it’s beer or soda, it’s just to make this point that, absolutely, amidst the busyness of our lives, it’s those people that we do and can and must sort of make time for.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. Thank you. Well, I also have to hear about, when you talked about how we engage with things in our mindset can improve anything and everything, maybe even…

Cassie Holmes
No, overstatement but not, actually.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, even the commuting and the work and the housework, even if you’re only spending 0.57 hours on that housework, like the “average American.”

Cassie Holmes
I agree with you. Who is that lucky person?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m putting my hat on those lots of zeroes from folks who are traveling, like, “Hey, I don’t have to clean my hotel room.

Cassie Holmes
It’s also averaging. Yes, there’s a lot of zeroes because this is picking up the American Time Use Survey data. It’s picking up on a day, and you might be catching people, whether they’re on a holiday or on the day that they’re not doing housework.

But, that aside, there are, of course, ideally, sure we would spend all of our days and our entire schedule on golf balls, but that’s not the reality, right? We do have work to do. And there are strategies to make these times that are less fun more fun.

Bundling is a super easy one. So, this is taking from some of the motivation research by Katy Milkman and her colleagues, and it’s such a simple idea that is so effective is taking an activity you don’t want to do, like commuting, and bundle it with an activity that you do want to do so that that time itself feels more fun.

Like, commuting. Instead of sitting in the car and, like, mindlessly flipping through radio stations, if instead you turn on the How to be Awesome at Your Job podcast.

Pete Mockaitis
There we go, Cassie. Well-played. Thank you.

Cassie Holmes
Yup. Then, all of a sudden, that time in the car feels more worthwhile. Or, one of my readers, she reached out, she’s like, the bundling strategy was so awesome because her husband, all of a sudden, ironing was his favorite activity of the week because, what he did, Saturday afternoon, he would set up the ironing board in front of the TV, and that was when he watched sports. So, it was bundling the chore of ironing with watching sports. And then, all of a sudden, that time was his sort of delectable time that he got to watch sports and nobody got to bother him about it.

There’s also bundling during our work hours. So, I talked about social connection is so important for happiness. For many Americans, a lot of their hours spent working are not particularly happy. And figuring out, “Okay, how can we bundle social connection into our work days?” And this is so important. Gallup has a funny question in their poll, which asks, “Do you have a best friend at work?” And I say it’s funny because it sounds like something my fourth grader would ask, like, “Do you have a best friend?”

But it is so predictive. And I’m sure the numbers aren’t too far off, but pre-pandemic, only two out of 10 Americans said that they had a best friend at work. Those who did were more than twice more engaged in their jobs. They’re better performers on their jobs. They’re more satisfied at work. And job satisfaction is a very big predictor of overall life satisfaction.

If we can infuse friendship into our work hours, then that is, like, I’m framing it as bundling, but then that work itself becomes more fun, you look forward to the work day because you get to see your friend. When you are sort of confronted with challenges in work, which, of course, we all are, you have that person that you can rely on and sort of find that social support. So, it’s like wins are more fun and losses are less painful when you have friendship in the workplace. So, that’s one way.

Another is identifying your purpose. So, I know it sounds so lofty but, actually, in the book. So, Happier Hour, as I mentioned, I teach this course Applying the Science of Happiness to Life Design, and each week I give my students an experiential assignment so that they can apply these empirical findings to their own lives and feel the benefits of it. And every time I’ve taught the course, I see significant boosts in the sense of meaning, happiness, a sense of connection, a sense of accomplishment.

And in Happier Hours, since not everyone can take my course at UCLA, is I share those assignments as exercises in the book so that readers can apply them. So, the time tracking exercise is one. There’s another exercise that helps you identify your purpose, and it’s called the Five Whys Exercise. And so, what it is it’s you asking yourself, like, “Okay, what do you do for your job? Why do you do that?” And then your answer for that, you ask yourself, “But why is that important?”

And once you ask yourself why, five layers into really why you do the work that you do, what it uncovers for you as an individual is what really motivates you, “What is your purpose? Like, what is your why?” And the reason that this is so helpful is because it makes even those un-fun parts of your job more fun because you feel better because they feel more worthwhile, you know why you’re doing it.

So, when I did this exercise, I found it so helpful because it helped me identify my own purpose. So, what is my job? I’m a business school professor. Why does one do that? Well, to create knowledge through research and disseminate knowledge through teaching. And then I ask myself, “But why is that important?” And then my answer to that, why is that, and what I uncovered is that, for me, the purpose of my work is to create knowledge about what makes people happy, and to disseminate knowledge about what makes people happy.

This is helpful for a couple of reasons with respect to time, is that it helps me filter out what are those activities, work activities, that I should be saying yes to or should be saying no to if it’s something that is in line with helping me create knowledge about what makes people happy or disseminate knowledge about what makes people happy, then I will do it. Like, joining you and our time today, this is about disseminating knowledge about what makes people happy.

But not only does it help me decide what activities to spend my time on, it makes even un-fun work activities more palatable and more fun because I know the why of it. So, email, I do not like. That feels like sand. It can absorb my entire work day, work week, and I feel like I got nothing accomplished. But when I’m like, “Okay, actually, email with a research collaborator, that’s about creating knowledge about what makes people happy. Emails with my students, oh, that’s about disseminating knowledge about what makes people happy.”

So, all of a sudden, that particular activity of email feels better because I know the why of it.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, with the five whys, so you lay it on your purposes to discover and disseminate knowledge about what makes people happy. And I don’t know if we landed there from the third or the fourth why.

Cassie Holmes
That’s the fifth one.

Pete Mockaitis
So, I guess, if I may, what happens if I say why again to that? Why does that matter?

Cassie Holmes
Because I want to spread happiness. And, for me, that’s really important. And what’s really helpful about this exercise is that what you identify for your purpose, it is unique to you. It doesn’t have to align with other people’s notions of what is the sort of ultimate worthwhile metric of success, which is so helpful because this idea of what success means, there are so many dimensions that go into it, and there will always be individuals who are doing better than you on one of those dimensions, but those are things that might not actually even matter to you.

So, what this, by identifying your own purpose, that’s what you should use when you see a gap between what you’re doing and what you aspire towards, that should be the motivator. When you actually see that you’re making progress, it’s so much more fulfilling compared to what we generally do is rely on social comparison, and like, “How am I doing in life?” or, “How am I doing in my job?” By looking at how you’re doing compared to others, which through social comparison, it’s one of the cognitive biases, or, in this case, our cognitive tendencies, our psychological tendencies that can really serve to undermine our happiness.

Now, if your question of like, “Well, why is spreading happiness important?” then I can tell you my seventh why of pointing to research that shows that happiness, while some might think as sort of this frivolous or even selfish pursuit, research shows that when you feel happier, when you take care of your emotional wellbeing, it allows you to show up better for those around you in the work that you do.

Being happier has positive consequences across our domains of life. Study shows that it makes us perform better in the office. So, when we are made to feel happier, it makes us more creative, we become more adaptive in our problem-solving, we’re more collaborative. Happy employees are more engaged, they’re more likely to show up at work, they’re less likely to call in sick. And so, it helps in not only you in your work but organizations.

It also helps us in our interpersonal relationships. When we feel happier, we like others more, we are liked by others, it makes us nicer, and there’s even work that shows that when we feel happier, it has positive health benefits, too, that we’re more likely to stick to our treatment routines, we have higher thresholds for pain, we react better to physiological stressors. Happier people live longer.

And so, by helping people be happier, based off of the research not just by opinion, based off of the research, then it allows them to not only feel happier, which is such a wonderful outcome, but also it allows them to show up better within their organizations and within their family, so it’s sort of spreading this goodness. So, that’s, like, my eighth why.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s cool. Well, I guess what I’m driving at with the whys is that all sounds super awesome. But just to illustrate the technique, I will say, and why do all those things matter, Cassie?

Cassie Holmes
I felt very satisfied with my fifth layer. But, yes, it’s really helpful because when individuals do this, it uncovers for them what drives them in their work. And, oftentimes, that first layer of why is your job description, or it can be some people are like, “Well, it’s to make money.” It’s like, “Well, why is that particular job the way that you’re looking to make money?” Or, it can even help uncover what’s really driving you in wanting financial security. If it’s like ultimately to make it so that your kids are less stressed, or if you’re going in the job description route, like, “Well, why does that matter to you?”

So often, in just two layers more of whys, folks identify for themselves, like, “Oh, the thing that actually matters to me is this.” And in recognizing that, that can help you figure out, all right, what are those work projects that you want to take on because they are going to help propel you in your particular direction that is “success” for you and are in line with your goals and values.

One of the most painful ways, actually, in the time tracking exercise when people are looking across those least happy activities of theirs, what the dimensions, the sources of the unhappiness, a common one is a waste of time. That is, like, you spent your time on something that just felt meaningless and unnecessary. Those are the same things but they show up.

And so, in the workplace, for example, those meetings that are like, “Oh, my gosh, that was such a waste of an hour,” those are the work hours that bring those averages way down because it’s like, “Ugh, my time is precious.” All of our time is precious. The hours of our days sum up to the years of our lives, so how we spend our hours is how we spend our lives. And when those hours are wasted, that’s the thing that’s sort of a soul sucking.

And so, whether during the work day or even outside of work, the social media often gets picked up as the sort of like people reflect back, it’s like, “Oh, my gosh, that felt such a waste and it felt not good.” And this isn’t someone else being like, “You shouldn’t be on social media, or you shouldn’t spend 10 hours a night watching TV.” This is in their own ratings.

And what’s interesting is also in the time tracking, like one student in the reflection piece afterwards, they’re like, “I thought an activity that would be really fun was actually less fun than it was.” So, they thought that TV was their happy time, but they realized that after that first hour, all subsequent hours were actually quite unhappy.

And then there were these activities that they dreaded, that in their ratings, they actually got nines and tens, like socializing. This person dreaded socializing. This person dreaded exercising. But then, in coming out of these activities, they’re actually, apparently, according to their own ratings, actually made them feel really great and fulfilled and is worth the time even when we feel like they don’t have a lot of it.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely, that is powerful when we have those surprises come up. And I’m thinking about Dr. David Burns’ Feeling Good. There’s a lot of exercises along those lines which, “Hey, surprise, this thing you were procrastinating wasn’t that horrible, was it? Hmm, how about that?” Or, “Surprise, exercise and socializing is amazing.”

Cassie Holmes
What I think that would be yet another helpful strategy in terms of where, as I mentioned, so like we want to not only identify and spend our time on those activities that are worthwhile, but also how when we are engaging in those activities make them worthwhile because a whole lot of the time we’re distracted.

So, research shows that we are distracted, not thinking about what we are currently doing, almost 47% of the time, that is almost half of the time. And so, in this research, what they did was they would ping people over the course of their day, and ask, “What are you doing?” as well as “What are you thinking about? Are you thinking about what you’re currently doing? Or are you thinking about something else? And how happy are you?”

And, as I mentioned, people are not thinking about what they’re doing a whole lot of the time. More than half of the time, or almost half of the time, they are not thinking about what they’re currently doing. And also, what was interesting is that people are less happy when their mind is wandering than when they are engaged in their activity.

And so, if you’re thinking about, like, “Oh, my gosh, we’re just at this so much of the time.” And if you’re spending time on the golf ball, on something that matters to you, but you’re missing it because your mind is somewhere else, like planning for what’s next or stressing about what’s next, then you’re missing that moment and the time that you’re spending.

One of the big sources, a huge source of distractions are our cellphones. These are these very handy devices that allow us to get so much done, and by being able to constantly do other things and be aware of what other people are doing on social media, because you’re like, “Oh, my gosh,” at every moment, there are other things that you could and maybe should be doing, it draws us out of the moment.

And so, something that is very effective is actually carving out time as no-phone zones, as in putting the phone away, out of sight, which makes it more out of mind so that you can be more engaged in what you’re doing. This helps during the work day, like for that important work that you’re doing, that needs your deep thinking.

Put your phone on silent away. Close out of emails so that you don’t get those interruptions that are pulling you out of the moment, that are keeping you from getting into flow, that flow state where you’re so engaged in what you’re doing you lose sense of time, and that’s when you’re most creative, that’s when you’re at your best. But it’s not just during the work day, it’s like on in the evenings when you’re with your family, or weekends, us carving out, putting your phones away, making them no-phone zones so that when you’re spending that time, your mind isn’t somewhere else.

So often, something I mentioned earlier is another really important and perhaps surprising finding is that a lot of our happiest moments are in very ordinary activities. So, even if you forget time tracking, just reflecting, thinking back over the last two weeks, when did you feel the most joy? So often when I ask people to reflect, their joyful activities are so mundane. One of my most joyful activities is my weekly coffee date with my seven-year-old daughter.

And this started when she was really little, borne out of a very functional routine on my way of dropping her at her preschool, before going into the office, I wanted caffeine. And so, we would stop at the local coffee shop, and it was just 30 minutes that was time for the two of us. She got her hot chocolate, I have my flat white, we munch on croissants, and we’re chatting. It’s like the two of us together.

And this routine, we turned into this treasured ritual. And we actually went, today is Thursday, we went this morning. Four years later, we still do this. And it’s just 30 minutes but it’s so powerful in affecting how satisfied I am and how happy I feel in my days. And what’s interesting is often though happiness comes out of these ordinary moments, so often we miss them because we’re distracted or because we’re subject to hedonic adaptation, that is our tendency to get used to things over time.

When we do the same thing again and again, we are with the same person over and over, we stop noticing them so much. They don’t have as strong of an emotional impact on us. Now, it’s good that we adapt in the face of negative experiences and activities because it makes us more resilient, but it’s bad when we adapt to the good stuff because we stop noticing, because it leads us to miss out on the joy that’s right there in the time we’re spending.

And I share a couple in Happier Hour a couple of exercises or strategies to help offset hedonic adaptations so that we do continue to find joy in our joys in life, and one of them is counting times left. Because, so often, because these are everyday experiences, we assume they will continue to happen every day just in the way that they are, but that’s not true. Time passes and our circumstances change.

And so, in counting times left, first identify this activity that brings you joy, then calculate, “How many times have you done this in your life thus far?” So, for my coffee days with my daughter, Lita, we’ve done it for over a bunch of years now. And then counting that as well as during my maternity leave where every day I would bundle it up and go to the coffee shop for sanity. I calculated we’ve gone on about 400 coffee days together so far.

Then the next step is, calculate, “How many times do you have left in your life to do this, accounting for factors that will change in your circumstances?” And if your joyful activity involves someone else, accounting for factors that will change in their circumstances. And so, I calculate it, so Lita is now seven. When she’s 12, I suspect she’ll probably rather go to the coffee shop with her friends instead of me. And then she’s going to go off to college, and then she’s going to go live in New York, wherever it is. I calculate we have about 230 coffee dates together left.

And then the last step in this exercise is calculate, of your total times, what percentage do you have left. I realize that Lita and I have 36% of our coffee dates together left. That’s way less than half and she’s only seven years old. Now, what’s the effect of this? It is, at first, you’re like, “Meh, sad.” But the positive effect far outweighs any initial sadness because what it does is it motivates me to make the time. This is a golf ball, I put it in my schedule. I am not taking meetings before 9:00 o’clock on Thursday mornings. Actually, it’s summer so we could do it on Thursday now that she’s not in preschool anymore and school starts earlier. It’s moved to Saturday mornings, in general.

But it makes me make the time. No matter how busy the week seems, that we spend this half hour together. We prioritize it. Also, it affects how I engage during that time because, knowing that this time is precious, knowing that these dates, these minutes that we have together are, in fact, limited in this sort of lovely connecting way, I’m like my phone is away. So, this is a no-phone zone.

And, also, that sort of constant to-do list that runs in my mind, always thinking about planning for what’s next gets quieted because I’m like, “This is the time that matters, not what’s happening next.” I draw my attention back to the here and now so that I don’t miss it.

And, as I said, from the outset, it is those connections, those relationships that are so crucial to our happiness, whether it’s having a best friend at work, or having those people in our lives whom we love and who we feel loved by, that it absolutely makes it feel worthwhile.

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

Cassie Holmes
I love the quote by Abraham Lincoln, or he’s said to have quoted, “People are about as happy as they make up their minds to be,” because what I think that shows is that happiness is a choice, and if we’re intentional with how we spend our time, we can choose to be happier.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Cassie Holmes
Well, my own book, Happier Hour but also, I love reading fiction. And there’s a book called The Hours by Michael Cunningham, which references the life and work of Virginia Woolf, but it’s actually I love the novel because it picks up on sort of what I said today where there’s so much life that is lived in those moments, lived within the hours of our days that color our sense of satisfaction and purpose and the story of our lives.

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

Cassie Holmes
I would point them to my website, CassieMHolmes.com, and there is where my research is, you can find more information about my book Happier Hour. And then I am on LinkedIn, so you can connect with me and follow me on LinkedIn. I’m not on other social media because, in my time tracking, I found that wasn’t fun time for me.

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

Cassie Holmes
I would say identify those hours or those activities within your day that bring you that sense of purpose and joy, and invest in those times wholly and protect time for those times.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Cassie, this has been a treat. Thank you. I wish you many happier hours.

Cassie Holmes
Thank you so much for having me, Pete. This was fun.

881: How to Find Focus, Fight Distraction, and Boost Your Attention Span with Dr. Gloria Mark

By | Podcasts | One Comment

 

Dr. Gloria Mark shares her science-based solutions for overcoming distractions and finding more flow. 

You’ll Learn:

  1. The biggest hurdle for your attention span
  2. What drains your attention span tank–and how to refuel it
  3. How to design your day to maximize productivity

About Gloria

Dr. Gloria Mark has published over 150 papers in the top journals and conferences in the fields of human-computer interactions (HCI) and Computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) and is author of the book Multitasking in the Digital Age. Her work on multitasking has appeared in outlets like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, NPR, The Atlantic, the BBC, and many others. Her newest book, Attention Span: Find Focus and Fight Distraction, is out now.

She is the Chancellor Professor of Informatics at the University of California, Irvine. She received her PhD from Columbia University in psychology. She has been a visiting senior researcher at Microsoft Research since 2012. Her primary research interest is in understanding the impact of digital media on people’s lives and she is best known for her work in studying people’s multitasking, mood and behavior while using digital media in real world environments.

Resources Mentioned

Gloria Mark Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Gloria, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Gloria Mark
Thank you for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m so excited to talk about your book Attention Span: Find Focus and Fight Distraction. But, first, I want to hear a little bit about how you did not start your career in the science research professor world but rather in the art world. What’s the story here and how did you make the switch?

Gloria Mark
That’s right. I have a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree, I studied art, never thought I would be doing anything except art. Graduated from art school and then I discovered the hard reality of making a living as an artist. Now, it turns out that I was also good at math and science, and I also found those topics interesting. So, I made the switch into a science field but there is a story there.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, do tell.

Gloria Mark
Yeah, I was originally just going to do a terminal master’s degree in biostatistics because you could get really good jobs.

Pete Mockaitis
It sounds like a good job field.

Gloria Mark
So, I thought that’s a relatively easy thing for me to do. But while I was at the University of Michigan, I applied for a job as a research assistant because I needed a job, and I walked into the office of Dr. Manfred Kochen. And he asked me, can I code? No. Do I know network theory? No. Do I know Fuzzy Set Theory? Nope. And I started to walk out, and he said, “Wait a minute. Stop. What can you do?” And I said, “I can paint.” And he said, “Well, come back in.” And he said before he got his Ph.D. in math at MIT, he studied art at The Art Student League in New York. And we talked about art for the next two hours.

And then he said, “Do you think you could do research on the discovery process of artists?” And I was very young and naïve and bold, and I said, “Of course, I could.” And that’s how I began to study cognitive psychology, and before I knew it, I ended up getting a Ph.D. in psychology, and that’s what I’ve been working on since.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s really cool. That’s really cool. And I’m excited to hear your insights and wisdom gained from a career spent in this domain, particularly in the zone of attention, and us humans and how we pay attention, and can do that better, and distraction and that stuff. Could you share any particularly surprising or counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made about attention over the course of your career?

Gloria Mark
Oh, I’ve made a number of surprising discoveries. Maybe one of the most surprising things was actually how short our attention spans are.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Lay it on us. I’ve heard about goldfish. Let’s get this straight, the straight info from the source.

Gloria Mark
Yeah, the goldfish result is not exactly correct, so that shouldn’t be our starting point. So, when I first started tracking attention, and I’ve been studying this empirically, so using methods like computer logging techniques. We actually started studying this using stopwatches where we would shadow people and click the stopwatch every time they switch their attention. When we first started doing this 20 years ago, attention averaged about two and a half minutes on any screen. I was astounded at the time.

Pete Mockaitis
Too big, too small.

Gloria Mark
Yeah, I couldn’t believe it was that short. We continued tracking attention. Around 2012, we found it to average 75 seconds, and in the last few years, it’s averaged 47 seconds. And also, others have replicated the result. And so, again, these are all done with objective measures. We’re not asking people to self-report how short their attention span is or how long it is, but we’re actually measuring the length of time people’s attention is on any screen, computer or phone.

Pete Mockaitis
So, I’m intrigued here, look, I’m the sort of guy who, though not a researcher, will frequently want to read the full text of the scientific journal article and be frustrated I can’t get it for free online.

Anyway, all that’s to say I’m actually very interested in the details of how you conduct this research. What are you observing on the screen? And what are we seeing was two and half minutes, and now is 47 seconds?

Gloria Mark
Yeah. So, let me back up a little bit and say that most psychologists tend to bring people into a laboratory to study them. So, they create this simulated environment, this model of the world inside of a laboratory, and then they perform tests. But I thought that if we’re studying attention on our devices, it’s so much important to study what people do in the course of their everyday lives. Like, why should we pull people out of their environment? So, let’s go to where people are.

So, I created what I call living laboratories, where I used a variety of different kinds of sensors. So, these are measures that are not obtrusive. They don’t interfere with how you do work, such as computer logging techniques that will log the length of time a screen is in the foreground, and it’ll log that in the background.

We have people use wearable devices. We’ve had people wear heart rate monitors. We have had people use wrist wearables to get measures of stress. And we’ve had people wear these cameras that are called SenseCams, very lightweight cameras, you wear around your neck that can record photos. They take continuous photos so that you can then detect who people are speaking to. Are they having a face-to-face conversation? Or, are they rather online?

We sync together all these measures in real time so that we create a fairly comprehensive picture of what people are doing on their devices when they’re at work or if they’re at home. Most of the time, we’ve done this in the workplace.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Now, that’s intriguing. So, we’re putting together a picture based on logging in the background what’s happening on the machines, as well as the photos. And so, I’m thinking, we had Dr. Amishi Jha on the show earlier, and she talked about the SART, the sustained attention response test. It sounds like maybe that’s the main difference in terms of constructing a laboratory in which you come on in.

And so, what I’ve heard is like those results are actually somewhat stable over time. Like, hey, by that measure of attention span, it looks like it’s about the same. However, you’re telling me – was it in vivo, what’s the right word, science-y?

Gloria Mark
In vivo, that’s right.

Pete Mockaitis
In vivo, yeah, got it. Feeling good. In vivo, we see a substantial decline from 2.5 minutes to 47 seconds. Is that a fair state of play under the two different ways of looking at things?

Gloria Mark
Yes, that’s right, because, don’t forget, when people are using their devices, think of everything that’s happening in their environment. So, they’re trying to stay focused on their tasks, they’re dealing with email, they have this urge to check social media, they have people interrupting their office, they’re experiencing stress, some of it might be chronic stress.

You’ve got career trajectories that people are worried about. Someone might’ve had a conflict in the workplace. So many things are going on and it’s just not possible to simulate all of that inside of a laboratory. And laboratory research is great if there’s a particular thing you want to test in an ideal kind of environment. So, something where you won’t have variables that can affect the thing that you’re trying to study, then it’s great for that. But if we’re talking about what really happens with attention in the real world when people are at work, this is what we see.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, the human capacity to pay attention is relatively the same as it’s been for decades but the real-life experience of how we pay attention has declined dramatically. Like, the vast majority of attention span has been decimated. It sounds like two-thirds reduction there. And so, when did we have two and a half minutes? And when did we have 47 seconds? What’s the rough timeline history for us?

Gloria Mark
Yeah. So, we started doing the research in 2003. It was first published in 2004. That was two and a half minutes. The 47 seconds, this is not just my work. Again, it’s been replicated by others through the pandemic. So, the last study that was done actually was published in 2020, and we find the estimates ranging from 44 seconds to 50 seconds, and 47 seconds is the average of those studies.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Now, Gloria, this seems like a big deal for our species, can you contextualize this for us? What does this mean? What is the implication of living lives this way?

Gloria Mark
Yeah, there are a lot of implications. First of all, this kind of fast attention shifting, it’s associated with stress, and we know that, and that’s been documented. We know in laboratory settings, when people are performing, when they’re multitasking, we know that their blood pressure rises, both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. There’s a physiological marker in the body that indicates that people are stressed.

In my research, when we measure stress in vivo in the real world, we see a very strong correlation between fast shifting of attention and stress going up, and that’s measured by heart rate monitors. We’ve also used wearables to measure heart rate.

Pete Mockaitis
And, if I may, is the physiological marker something like cortisol or heart rate variability, or what are we looking at?

Gloria Mark
It’s a more complicated marker, and it’s probably not something that listeners have heard of.

Pete Mockaitis
Gloria, I might very well get my blood tested for it. So, lay it on us.

Gloria Mark
So, we know that fast shifting of attention leads to the decreased secretion of immunoglobulin A reactivity, and that’s known as a marker of stress.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, the fast attention shifting is associated with increased stress. Well, then this kind of makes me think of maybe a little bit of a reinforcing loop. Might the increased stress also impact the way we can pay attention?

Gloria Mark
Absolutely. When we’re stressed, we’re not making the best use of our attentional resources. Absolutely. And it’s harder to focus. Another impact of this fast attention switching is that it leads to what’s called a switch cost. And a switch cost is the extra amount of time that it takes for you to reorient to a new task when you switch. So, it’s not like you can immediately switch to a new task, dive in and get focused right away, but it takes some time for you to get into this new task.

And the best way that I can explain it is by using a metaphor. Imagine that you’ve got a whiteboard inside of your mind, and every time you’re switching tasks, you’re erasing the mental model of the task that you just did, and you’re rewriting a new mental model for the new task. And just like in the real world, when you erase a whiteboard, sometimes you can’t erase it completely and it leaves a residue. And that can also happen in our mind.

And so, imagine you’re reading the news, and you read about some horrific catastrophe, and then you try to go back to work, and that stays with you. Or, you’ve just had an email and discovered that the deadline is a lot sooner than you thought it would be. That stays with you and it affects your ability to focus on the next task, leaves a residue.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, the task switching, leave a residue, we increase stress. What are some of the other implications?

Gloria Mark
Well, another really bad implication is that switching attention so fast leads to errors. So, we know, again, from laboratory research, decades of laboratory research, people make more errors when they’re switching their attention between different tasks. There was a study done with physicians not too long ago, where they observed physicians when they multitask.

So, they shifted their attentions, they’re continually being interrupted by nurses, by other physicians, patient queries, and they made, out of over 200 different prescriptions that they wrote, they made roughly like 80% to 90% errors in the prescribing. And some of those were very serious errors in terms of writing the wrong drug or the wrong dosage.

Pete Mockaitis
So, 80% of the prescriptions were wrong?

Gloria Mark
Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
In a highly distracted, interrupted condition.

Gloria Mark
Do you want me to tell you the exact number?

Pete Mockaitis
Please.

Gloria Mark
So, in 2018, there was a study done of physicians, looking at the effects of them multitasking, which is shifting their attention rapidly. And physicians, of course, are distracted pretty often. They’re distracted by nurses, by other doctors, patients. And in this study, it was found that out of 239 prescriptions that the physicians wrote, 208 of them showed errors.

And most of these errors were just incomplete prescriptions but 12 of those were really severe in the sense of writing the wrong drug or the wrong dosage. So, there can be very serious consequences to multitasking. Let me also point out that people think multitasking can lead us to perform better. The idea of multitasking, of doing two things at the same time, is a myth. Humans cannot perform two things at the same time. What we are doing is shifting our attention rapidly between different tasks. And that’s what we picked up when we studied people’s attention on screens.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, with these prescriptions in the interrupted condition, the good majority of them were errors, most of those inconsequential, so I guess that’s nice. And then in the uninterrupted condition, do physicians get it right, I mean, 99 plus percent of the time?

Gloria Mark
So, this study was done in situ, which means in the real world, and so they didn’t have a condition where physicians were not interrupted.

Pete Mockaitis
They’re never not distracted.

Gloria Mark
Right. So, they couldn’t really compare what physicians do if they’re in a perfectly peaceful environment without distractions.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, increased stress, switching costs, residue. And then maybe can you show us the light on the other side? Maybe is there a cool story of someone who improved their attention span and saw cool results?

Gloria Mark
Well, there are cases. So, there are ways that we can regain agency over our attention. And people very often will tell me that some of the techniques that we’ve discovered do work for people, and they’ve been able to focus better. It’s really important to consider that when you’re shifting your attention so fast, it affects our wellbeing. It leads to higher stress. And as you pointed out, we get into this cycle where, if we get more stressed, it becomes even harder to focus.

And so, people have reported the benefits, for example, of being able to take, really, significant breaks. Also, the benefits of becoming aware of when you’re starting to feel immensely tired, and taking a break, pulling back to replenish. Because by doing less, by pulling back, we can actually do more and we can be more effective.

Pete Mockaitis
And when you say significant break, what does that mean in terms of length or approach, like what you’re doing?

Gloria Mark
Yeah. So, first of all, let me talk about when is a good time to take a break. So, it turns out that people are not able to have extensive nonstop focus. And if you search the internet, you’ll see a lot of sayings that advertise, “Use this technique and you’ll have nonstop focus,” “Ten hours of nonstop focus,” “Hours of nonstop focus.” It’s just not humanly possible. Why? Because people have a limited capacity of attentional resources. You can think of it as a tank.

We start our day with a tank of attentional resources, things we do over the day drain our resources. Focusing drains our resources. Shifting our attention very rapidly, that also drains our resources because of the switch costs that we talked about and because of the stress. And so, we have this limited capacity for attention.

What can we do to optimize our attention? Well, we can take breaks. Now, first of all, starting your day with really good quality sleep gives you a jumpstart on your attention, and you can start your day with a full tank of resources, or nearly full tank. So, you would be in really good shape to start your day off with a good night’s sleep.

Now, people tend to have a peak of focus around mid-morning. Most people, for them, it’s 10:00 or 11:00 in the morning but it depends on your chrono type. So, if you’re an early type, your peak focus will be much earlier. If you’re a late type, your peak focus will be later. People tend to have a second peak in the afternoon, usually mid-afternoon between 2:00 and 3:00. Again, it depends on your chrono type, if you’re an early type or late type.

Now, it’s important to understand when your peak focus time is, and you plan your breaks around that peak focus time. So, you want to make sure that you’re really well-rested and that you’re alert before it’s time for you to really dive into doing that hard work. And after working for a while, it’s really important to probe yourself and understand whether you’re starting to become mentally exhausted. And if you are, it’s time for a break.

Now, you can take quick breaks, 10-minute breaks. Those would be very useful. The best break of all that we know from research is to walk outside for 20 minutes in nature, and that’s the best replenishment that we can have for our attentional resources. I realize that not everyone can do it. If it’s the middle of winter and you’re living in the northeast, you may not be able to simply walk outside in nature.

I live in California, so, of course, it’s a lot easier for me to do that year-round. So, if you can’t go outside, you can at least move around. Take a walk, move around, make sure you’re focusing on things at a distance. You don’t want to be walking around using your smartphone, checking your email. Really detach, pull away, and make sure you have really one, two, or three significant breaks a day like that. And make sure that you plan those breaks around the time that you’re really starting to feel that your mental resources are getting exhausted.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. There we go. So, pay attention to chrono types when you’re feeling alert and when you’re not, and then take those significant breaks. We don’t have unlimited attention. To the sleep point, can you tell me, does it matter a lot or a little if, let’s say, an ideal amount of sleep for a person is seven and a half hours but, on a given night, shucks, they only got 6.2 hours? Is that a little deal or a big deal?

Gloria Mark
So, one night of poor sleep is not going to make that much of a difference. What will make a difference, if you consecutively acquire what’s called sleep debt. And sleep debt, it’s like if you keep removing money from your bank account and you’ve got more expenses that you have to pay than you have money for, that’s debt. And same thing happens with sleep debt.

And we’ve done in our research, we found that as sleep debt accumulates, people have a harder and harder time paying attention. So, if you’re looking at sleep debt accumulating over a week, you see people’s attention spans getting lower and lower over the course of the week. So, it’s really important not to let sleep debt accumulate.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And I’d also like to get your view in terms of the amount of attention resources we have. We can’t do for 10 hours straight, like this is not possible even with whatever miracle supplement is being sold. Roughly, what is reasonable? If we are well-rested and we’re going to attend to something for as long as is reasonably humanly possible, what kind of time ranges are we talking about here?

Gloria Mark
So, I think two hours. If you can get two hours of focus at a stretch, that’s pretty good. That’s really good. It depends on a number of things. It depends how intrinsically motivated you are. If you’re really motivated in what you’re doing, you’ll be able to spend longer time. Time will seem like it’s flying by. If you’re less intrinsically motivated, it’s going to be more work for you to try to stay focused.

But think about two hours, but don’t despair. If you can only get 30 minutes of focus, that’s fine as long as you make sure you take a break, get yourself replenished, and then you can go back and try it in 30-minute segments. And so much of it depends on the nature of the work as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And then by focusing, if there were an exercise, so we talked about the rest portion of this, sleep well, take breaks, watch when you’re sharpest in terms of attention based on your chrono type, are there any sort of exercises or practices we could do to bring us? If we’re on the 47-second world, what could bring us back to a two-and-a-half-minute world?

Gloria Mark
So, I practice what I call meta-awareness as an exercise. And this actually comes from mindfulness, which you’ve probably heard of, many of your listeners have heard of. During the pandemic, my university offered a course in mindfulness, and I find it very, very helpful for helping me relax, helping me fall asleep.

But I also realized that when I’m on my devices, I can also use a similar kind of technique. I’ve adapted it for the way we use our devices, which is learning to become aware of the present because that’s what mindfulness is about. It teaches you how to focus on the present.

So many of things we do when we’re on our devices are unconscious. So, I look at my phone and I have an urge to grab it, or I have this unconscious desire to switch to social media, or to switch to news. I’m a news junkie. I read a lot of news. Meta-awareness is probing yourself to become aware of these urges and to recognize them.

And so, I’ve learned to be able to recognize when I have this urge to switch screens, and I can reflect on it, and I can ask myself, “Why do I have this urge to go to social media?” It’s usually because I’m bored or because I’m procrastinating. And once I become aware of this urge, I can make this unconscious action conscious. I can bring it to my conscious attention. I can come up with a plan.

And my plan is usually of the form, “Gloria, spend 30 more minutes on this task and then you can be rewarded and go and check the news.” And so, learning to probe yourself is so valuable, and it’s really a way to gain mastery over your attention, and to be able to be intentional and to make decisions about where you want to be able to focus and for how long.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, then we become aware of the urge and the causes and make a plan. That’s great. Any other key interventions that are great for improving our attention span and abilities?

Gloria Mark
Yeah, another very valuable technique is to practice what’s called forethought. And forethought is imagining how your current actions will affect your future self. And what makes the most sense for me is to imagine how my current actions are going to affect myself later in the day, say, at 7:00 p.m. And if you’re a person who can easily spend 30 minutes to an hour on social media, or surfing the web, first, visualize your end of the day and where you want to be.

And I’m betting you want to feel rewarded and you want to feel peaceful, you want to feel fulfilled. And imagine yourself sitting on the couch, reading your favorite book, watching your favorite show, drinking a glass of wine. And the more concrete that visualization is, the more powerful of a tool it is to get you to stay on track in the present.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, if I may on the forethought. So, the approach there is to visualize ourselves in a future moment wherein we have successfully completed the things that we wanted to attend to. And so, it sounds like this isn’t so much your dramatic final victory, you’re being hoisted, or Gatorades being doused on you, but rather, “Hey, I finished this day and I accomplished the things I wanted to in this day, and I can feel a quiet pride satisfaction, kind of whatever flavor of goodness,” is there for you at the other end of the effort.

Gloria Mark
That’s right. And we shouldn’t undermine this experience at the end of the day because that’s pretty valuable. Having a day where you feel fulfilled and having the luxury of being able to relax at the end of the day, that’s quite powerful.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Beautiful. And you have another.

Gloria Mark
Yes. So, attention is goal-directed, and that’s something that a lot of people don’t realize. We pay attention according to what our goals are. So, if my goal is I want to finish writing an article, I’m going to be writing that article. That’s where my attention is. If my goal is I want to relieve boredom, then I’m probably going to be playing a game or going on social media. And so, it’s so important to stay aware of what our goals are.

I did research with colleagues at Microsoft Research, and they developed a very simple chatbot that asks people two very simple questions at the beginning of each day. The first question is, “What is your task-goal for the day? What do you want to accomplish today?” The second question was, “How do you want to feel by the end of the day?” So, that’s an emotional goal.

So, at the beginning of each day, people were reminded of their task-goal and their emotional goal. And the result was that people stayed on track more effectively after being asked those questions. But what we also discovered was that these effects don’t last very long. It might last one hour or a few hours. And the reason they don’t last so long is goals slip from our minds. They can slip so easily.

And so, what I’ve learned is that it’s really important to keep reinforcing our goals. So, whatever it takes, if you have to write goals on a Post-it Note and make sure it’s in your field of view, or put it on your phone where you can see that goal. So, don’t let our goals slip from our minds, is the message.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, you mentioned Microsoft and research, so I’ve got to ask you, the attention expert. I had read a study, I think it was done with Microsoft folks, and it said when they were distracted, they shifted their attention from one thing. It took them an average of 24 minutes to return to the thing they were doing. I’d love it if you could share. Is that true or accurate? Is there nuance to it? And is that just the way all of us have to be or can we shorten that?

Gloria Mark
So, first of all, there is something that’s not accurate. The study was not done at Microsoft Research, but the study was my study.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. We’re setting the record straight. Here we are, Gloria.

Gloria Mark
Yes, but you’d be surprised how factoids can change.

Pete Mockaitis
Let’s do it.

Gloria Mark
Yeah. So, this was a study that I did, and this was with a graduate student of mine, Victor Gonzales, and this was done at various tech companies, so financial analysis companies, software companies. And it turns out that if you look at people’s attention spent on a task, not just on a screen, like you can switch screens very rapidly, every 47 seconds from email, to Word doc, to Excel, to Google Search.

But if you look at the level of a task, how long do people spend on any task? And granted, they might be switching their attention within that task. For example, I write papers for a living, and I might have my attention on a Word doc, and then I’m switching to read an article, and then I’m switching to look up something on the web, and I’m switching, switching, switching, but it’s all the same task.

So, we might ask, “Maybe it’s not so bad to be interrupted if your attention stays within the same framework of a single task.” Well, it turns out that if you’re interrupted from any particular task, there’s a pattern that we find in the data. And what happens is that people’s attention is then switched to another task.

They work on that, and then another, and then another. And then they start to work on a fourth task, and then go back and pick up the original interrupted task. That’s a 25 and a half-minute gap on average. People spend, on average, 10 and a half minutes on a task before switching to something else. That’s a big switch, to really switch to a completely different task.

Now, what happens? I was describing, they switch, and switch again, and switch again, and switch again. These are cognitive shifts in our minds. We’re not just shifting doing one single thing for 25 and a half minutes, and then coming back, but our attention keeps getting diverted. And so, let’s go back and think about that tank of mental resources, our limited precious mental resources.

They’re just draining because it requires effort to have to keep reorienting to these new tasks and trying to understand, “Okay, what am I doing now? Where did I leave off?” and so on. So, it’s a lot of effort that’s involved but it’s 25 and a half minutes on average to go back to an interrupted task.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And so, during those 25 and a half minutes, they’re not just fiddling around on Facebook. They’re doing other tasks in the interim, yet there is a cost of that attention switching. And so, Gloria, can you share with us what is misrepresented when this research is shared in factoid format in popular media?

Gloria Mark
So, a lot of people, first of all, they’re not aware that we’re talking at the level of a task, so they tend to think of, I mean, we’re interrupted all the time. If I’m doing email, I can get interrupted, or I can get interrupted from Facebook, for that matter. But they tend to think that there’s just some single thing that’s going on but in between, and people are coming back to that original task, so there’s a lot of things.

Pete Mockaitis
Got you. When, really, it’s a multi-step journey. Okay. And it sounds like that is what we observe but it certainly doesn’t have to be the norm. If I’m, say, working in a home office, I get a knock on the door from my wife, she says, “Can you take care of the spider or this very heavy thing?” it is entirely possible for me to do the thing, return within two minutes, and return to my task in far less than 25 and a half minutes, but I have utilized some of my attention resource tank in executing those switches.

Gloria Mark
That’s right, yeah. And, of course, if it’s a minor interruption, like taking care of a spider, assuming you’re not afraid of spiders, then you should be able to come right back and pick up your task without too much of an effort.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, as I’m thinking about that scenario, I’ll tell you, this is a quirk of me. I don’t know, I think I’m also easily hypnotized. I remember the stage hypnotist in college picked me out probably for a reason. And sometimes I’ll get really kind of mesmerized in the work I’m doing, and it’s really fun. It’s a groove and a flow, and I’m thinking about, “The implication of this, but what about that? But then what about this?” like several layers of implication, cause and effect.

And, Gloria, do you know if this, in the attention research literature, is this a personality domain that people can vary on? And does it mean anything? Or, is this just some whole another thing I got going on?

Gloria Mark
There are individual differences in people’s ability to be engaged in something. And, yes, some people can be…it’s more easy for them to get deeply absorbed in something than others. There’s actually a test you can do.
So, there is a scale that you can use, it’s called the Tellegen Absorption Scale. And this has been shown to measure traits of absorption. And some people have this uncanny ability to be very deeply absorbed in things. For example, when people read mystery, some people can become so absorbed in reading the mystery that they actually hear the footsteps on the stairs. They can visualize the imagery a lot better than others. So, you might be one of these individuals who scores at the extremes on the Tellegen Absorption Scale.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Gloria, tell us, are there any other key tools, tactics, interventions, things people who want to be awesome at their job should know or do to improve their ability to pay attention?

Gloria Mark
Yeah. So, it’s about how you plan your day. So, most of us, we’ve been brought up with the idea that you create a schedule for your day, and most people will write down the tasks that they have to do, and they’ll assign a time to doing it. That’s the way most of us, it’s how we’ve been brought up. It’s what we do. But I’d like to turn that around and talk about designing your day.

So, rather than scheduling tasks with a time, think back to when I was talking about that people have natural rhythms of attention. There are certain times of the day when people are at their peak focus, and other times when they’re in valleys, their focus is not great. Think about your unique times of peak focus and design your day so that you’d leverage those times to do tasks that are the hardest, that require the most creativity because you will do your best.

So, rather than creating these artificial schedules that ignore our attentional capacities, think instead of your personal rhythm and when you function best. And so, if I have, say, to work on a paper, I might plan the times to work on the paper for mid-morning for me, mid-afternoon for me, and then, of course, I have other things to do. I have to write emails, do what I call subordinate work, filling out forms, things like that. I will do those when I have these valleys of attention because it doesn’t require that much effort.

So, design your day, and also design your day with what I call empty space. There is a Japanese expression that’s called “yohaku no bi” which refers to the beauty of empty space. And I came up with this idea from when I was an artist. Because when I was an artist, I learned about the concept of negative space. It’s this space that surrounds a figure, and it’s as important as the figure itself. It’s what makes the figure shine. It’s what makes it vibrant and gives it energy.

And when you design your day, make sure you design empty space into your day, time that you can use for contemplation, meditation, for going for a walk, doing rote activity. And rote activity could be things like knitting. Some person talked about how he loves to just throw a ball against the screen. That serves to relax him and helps him de-stress. There’s a lot of things you can do during that time of empty space.

And think about what helps you the most. What I like to do is I do exercise, and I love to go outside and do exercise during that time. It really helps replenish me. So, yeah, don’t pack your day but give your work a chance to breathe so that you can really come back and do your best.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, Gloria, now I’d love to hear about your favorite things. Could you share a favorite quote with us?

Gloria Mark
Well, I actually have two favorite quotes, and it’s really hard for me to decide which one I like better, so I’ll share both. The first one is by Louis Pasteur, “Chance favors the prepared mind.” And I love that quote. It’s something that’s just benefited me in my whole life. If you have radar for opportunities, and an opportunity comes along, you can pounce on it and grab it.

The second quote comes from an art teacher of mine, and it’s “To have the courage to fail.” And I love this quote because so much of the time we do things that are safe, and we know that they’ll be successful because they’re safe. We’re not taking risks. But if you can have the courage to take that risk, knowing that it’s likely that you will fail, you have the chance to make a great discovery. So, that’s why I like those.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite study?

Gloria Mark
Yeah, there is a study done by French scientists, where they had people do hard tasks over a six-hour period. And most of the times when people go into laboratory studies, they’ll do a task for an hour, and they’ll do a hard task and then they’ll take some measurement of how stressed they are or how many hours they made. This was done over six hours.

And what these researchers found was that as people got more exhausted, they became more easily distracted. And so, they were asked questions periodically, “Would you rather have a monetary reward now or would you rather wait, and then you can get even a higher reward? So, take $10 now, if you wait 30 minutes, we’ll give you $15.”

Over the course of the day doing hard tasks for a six-hour period, people became less and less likely to delay gratification and more likely to just grab that money at the time. So, they lost the ability of self-control. And when you lose the ability of self-control, that’s when we become more distracted.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Gloria Mark
I always go back to Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning. It’s such a powerful book, and it just shows how, if people have purpose, if people have goals, that can really help us perform best in our lives. And it’s just a very powerful message.

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

Gloria Mark
Well, the idea of probing myself is a tool that I’ve learned to constantly probe myself, to ask myself, “Do I feel exhausted? Is it time for a break? Why do I have an urge to switch my attention?” And it’s become second nature, it’s like a muscle that I’ve developed. And I find it to be a very important tool, and it’s very powerful, and it’s very effective for keeping me on task.

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

Gloria Mark
It’s the idea that we have limited attentional resources, and people don’t realize that. People realize that our attention is infinite, we can do so many things, and not worry about consequences. We do have limited mental attentional resources, and we have to pick and choose what we pay attention to.

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

Gloria Mark
Well, you could go to my website www.GloriaMark.com. Everything that I spoke about today in the episode, you can find in my book. It’s called Attention Span: A Groundbreaking Way to Restore Balance, Happiness and Productivity. And this describes my 20-plus years of research into studying attention with our devices. You can also find me on Twitter @GloriaMark_PhD and also on LinkedIn.

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

Gloria Mark
Final call to action is to gain agency over your attention. So, be a master of your tools, your computers, phones, tablets. Don’t let your tools be the master over you.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Gloria, thank you. This has been a treat. I wish you much luck and pleasant attention.

Gloria Mark
Thank you so much for having me.

880: How to Thrive and Succeed as a Middle Manager with Bill Schaninger

By | Podcasts | One Comment

 

Bill Schaninger explains why middle managers are critical to an organization’s success—and shares powerful principles for better leading.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why middle managers are often underappreciated
  2. The number one thing middle managers should be doing
  3. The simple secret to retaining top talent

About Bill

Bill Schaninger is a senior partner in McKinsey’s Philadelphia office. He advises CEOs, government ministers, and senior executives on organizational health and improvement. He is McKinsey’s expert on the power of culture, values, and leadership in improving business outcomes. He holds an MS and PhD in management from Auburn University and an MBA and Bachelor of Business Administration from Moravian College. He is a coauthor of Beyond Performance 2.0. 

 

Resources Mentioned

Bill Schaninger Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Bill, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Bill Schaninger

Hey, thank you for having me.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I’m super excited to dig into your wisdom of your latest book here, Power to the Middle: Why Managers Hold the Keys to the Future of Work. But, first, I got to hear, you’re freshly retired, how is that going for you?

Bill Schaninger

You know, one, it’s pretty awesome. That’s for sure. I do definitely have more degrees of flexibility in my daily calendar than I’ve had ever. It’s still a little strange. If I count all the way back to when I was working at KidsPeace, which is a residential psychiatric treatment center, through to my time in grad school, then joining McKinsey in 2000, it’s been a long run since I’ve had this much flexibility. So, that part is wonderful and awesome.

But now, because, I guess like most things happen when you’re not expecting, I’ve had a run of really interesting things pop up and opportunities, and I just thought maybe I was going to retire, form an LLC, and set up a website, a media kit, and just do some speeches and tour the book, I’m still going to do that, but I’ve had some really interesting opportunities present themselves to me that I’m working through right now. And so, maybe they’ll be an additional chapter that I didn’t quite count on.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, now I’d love to hear a bit about your latest, Power to the Middle. Any particularly fascinating insights that you found in your research there?

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, for sure. Look, everybody who writes a book always wants to come out with why does the book now matter.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, absolutely. It’s like the first third of every business book.

Bill Schaninger

Exactly right.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s like, “Dude, I already bought your book. We could just get to the goods.”

Bill Schaninger

“Yeah, now more than ever.” Like, we used to joke, particularly in the dotcom era, right when I joined McKinsey, it seemed like, particularly against the Y2K stuff and then the war for talent stuff, it was like everything literally led with, “Now more than ever.” And I don’t think that’s the case but what I do think that’s interesting is we’ve had this pretty amazing confluence of things that maybe would’ve been difficult to predict.

Who would’ve guessed a global pandemic was coming? Maybe Dr. Fauci and his colleagues who do infectious diseases said, “Yeah, that was likely, dummy.” But I certainly didn’t know it was going to impact us to that scale. But just prior to that, we’d had that massive run around what was being called future work, which was the impact of automation. Now, we’re seeing the next tranche of that in generative AI. And, at the same time, underneath that, we had a group of people who, when they said, “You can’t come to work because it’s unsafe,” and then we’re working from home, a few months into it, said, “And you know what, I might not come back to work.”

And so, that, the big shifts that we saw in the work, the nature of the work, how it was done, where it was done, when it was done, the workforce, the composition of it, the skillsets required in it, and the workplace, what’s the point of having a workplace, do we need an office, all those things have come around and come right to the fore here in the last 18 months.

And then the good news is we know the answer to a lot of it is the role of the middle manager. That is the good news. Who knows how the work is changing? And what’s going to go back to how it was? And what’s always going to be different going forward? Probably the manager responsible for the work getting done. Who’s going to know what workers can do, and what kind of flexibility we have, and where they need to be redeployed or upskilled? Probably the manager who those people work for.

Who creates an environment that people actually want to come back to, actually want to feel part of that’s really attractive? Again, probably the people leaders who are there. So, that’s the good news. We know the answer. The bad news? We have systemically beaten these roles up, made them the source of derision and mockery, and signal to them that their job is actually administrivia and bureaucracy and meetings, and not the very thing we desperately need them to do, which is be good leaders.

And so, that’s the conundrum. We know the answer but we also know the is the problem. And so, a good portion of this book is saying, “How do we really dig back into the nature of these roles, the people in these roles, and how we give them a fighting chance to be successful?”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, understood. Well, so I’d love to get a sense for the mockery. Tell us, paint a picture there.

Bill Schaninger

Well, look, I’m 53, and so I’m clearly Gen X. In my lifetime, we had “Wall Street” come out, and Gordon Gekko was supposed to be an antihero, he’s supposed to be a villain.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, greed is good, that guy.

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, greed is good, “Wake up, bud. It’s time to make real money.” That guy was beloved, not reviled. And so, for many of us in the ‘80s, our parents, who believed that they would have cradled the great employment, were fired. Fired from Bethlehem Steel, fired from Mack Trucks, fired from Fuller Company, fired from Lucent. Just to name a few. US Steel, whatever, pick large institution we would’ve all known and loved. GM for certain, Ford, Chrysler.

Well, I’m belaboring that because for the people of the Gen X era, we saw this massive transition of it’s no longer esteemed to be a middle manager at fill-in-the-blank big company because, in many cases, a lot of those jobs went away.

And then you ran that through the ‘90s where it was the run up of, “Oh, now it’s going to be Y2K and the dotcom era, and the fixation on A-talents,” and the people in the middle were treated almost as a disembodied member of the machine. You had office space, you had your TPS reports, “Who moved my stapler?” you had Dilbert as the cartoon. There’s cartoons or cartoons, you know, animation, it was making a mockery of the mindless dolt that was in the middle manager job, someone to be avoided, mocked, endured, and not someone who teaches you the ropes, someone who helps you understand how to get work done, someone who makes sure that you know that you have people around you who care about you.

That, to me, is the kind of the mark where it was no longer viewed as being part of an institution, was something to be respected. And instead, these roles started being viewed as negative. And so, for those who did have talent, then it becomes like, “Well, how quickly can I get in and out of these roles?” So, that would be one, for sure, which is just, at some point, we decided these weren’t respected roles anymore.

The second around the same time, certainly in the late ‘80s, early ‘90s, we started getting re-engineering, restructuring, rightsizing, downsizing.

Pete Mockaitis

Rationalizing.

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, right. Exactly. All those are code for, “We’re going to give you more people than you can possibly lead. Maybe you can keep an eye on them. And, really, you’re just there to keep a lid on it and pay attention to the bad actors.” And so, in that case, we’ve given them spans that they can’t possibly lead. And the idea of like six by six, and with apologies to my former competitors, I’m sorry, it is absurd to think that every leadership job can magically have these many numbers of direct reports, and some kind of axiom. It doesn’t work that way.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, a six by six means each manager would have six direct reports, and there are six layers between the CEO and the front, frontliners.

Bill Schaninger

Right. And that’s just absurd. Nothing in life is that simple. Nothing in life is that axiomatic. If you’re a general counsel and you happen to be wonderful at IP law, you’re probably still going to want to really manhandle some of those IP cases but you might grow a few assistant GCs who are good at contracts, who are good at labor, who are good at comp. And then you’ll figure out somebody who’s good at saying what we’re going to send to outside counsel, that kind of stuff.

But, in that case, because there’s a bunch of different disciplines and you’re still carrying a little bit of your own work, you might have a relatively small span of control. If you’re running a call center or an outside salesforce, where the work that everyone does is the same, and you have relatively similar levels of skills, well, okay, in that case, maybe you can have a bigger span because you’re getting an economy of scale and scope.

It’s just saying that the nature of the work, the nature of the unit, the nature of what the leader does themselves should drive span. If you go to a place where you really have real variability in your workforce, and some of those workers are really going to need coaching and development and help, you cannot have a span where you can’t possibly give them the help that they need. So, that, to me, is setting the manager up for failure. It’s not just that you’re setting the manager up for failure, you’re setting the unit up for failure. And you will likely have cultural implications, almost like a negative contagion.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, let’s zoom right in and say you are, in fact, a manager in the middle, and you are facing some of these challenges, what the heck do you do? Are there any top best practices that are really transformative?

Bill Schaninger

We think so. For sure, we spent a lot of time looking and seeing what people were asked to do. The vast majority of time, they were being asked to attend meetings, feed the beast, if you will with administrivia, where they were spending time on planning of some form.

Pete Mockaitis

Meeting about the meeting about the meeting.

Bill Schaninger

That’s right, “We’re going to plan for a process to think about doing some work.” When, really, I’d say job one here is look at the role itself, “What are the jobs to be done?” If the jobs to be done aren’t starting with leading the organization that you’re responsible for, it’s wrong. Job one should be lead the people you’re responsible for, and then all the other stuff comes on.

And, actually, God forbid, you allow some slack. As a bit of a side point here, I think we’ve taken our approach to working capital from a financial working capital standpoint, where we try to really lean it out. We certainly apply that to supply chains, and I think we’ve applied it to people, human capital as well. Like, if a unit sends someone to training, everybody else is going to pick up slack. God forbid someone gets sick, or has a baby, or has something that was unexpected happen in their life, the unit runs down complement.

We’ve just gone through COVID where, in many cases, people were used to running at 65%, 70%, 75% complement, not the full stack. That means it’s been a long time since we actually had a full complement of employees that allowed people to do things like get trained, not be as productive as they might be because they’re brand new.

And so, it ends up creating a situation where managers are like, “I can only have people who are experienced, who can hit the ground running, and magically are perfectly performing from day one.” That never happens, it disappoints everyone, and everyone is under stress from the get because they’re struggling just to keep their nose above water.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that is so true, and, in a way, kind of tragic for, not to globalize too much, but I’ll just say it, humanity in terms of what we, as a species, are capable of is severely diminished if there’s an attitude of, “I don’t want to do any investing in the people to make them better and capable. I want them fully formed and ready to go.” One, yeah, good luck. There’s very limited supply of such people. And, two, it’s the aggregate learning, growth, development for workers as a whole is severely diminished, and that’s just a bummer.

Bill Schaninger

Oh, 100%. Just think about the human condition at work where you’re supposed to know everything immediately. No, that’s just not how it works. So much of our time has been to become aware of something, you learn about it, it’s broken up into constituent pieces, you had to practice it a little bit, like the actual idea of developing a skill. What happened to that?

What happened to somebody who was decent standing behind you, hand on the shoulders, saying, “Hey, okay, we’re going to push it here a little bit but we’re not going to let you run off the cliff, all right? Yeah, we’re going to challenge you but we’re going to make sure you’re okay.” That sort of stuff requires time and attention, and should be job one. So, you see the first thing we do, “Job one. Do your job. Lead.”

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I want to dig deep. So, that’s job one and it’s often not done, some folks may not actually have a clear picture of what constitutes leading the people. So, lay it on us, Bill, what is that kind of stuff?

Bill Schaninger

Well, the next one then, for sure, is look at the work that everyone’s doing that’s in your charge. If you were to take the job and break it down into its activity level, automation eliminates very few jobs in their entirety. Automation does, however, eliminate, or could eliminate, a lot of tasks. So, if you were doing old-school cost-cutting, what’s the first thing you’d look at? Demand reduction. Could we look at all the work and say, well, let’s just turn down the volume?” Maybe.

“Could we look at some of the activities and just stop doing it?” Maybe. “Could we tech automate it? Maybe. “Could we reduce variability by not allowing everyone to have their own forms and their own time of the month, get to more of a standard?” Maybe. Okay, so when you do all those maybes, you find out what still needs to be done, and then you give what you should be done to technology, or you give what should be done to automation, or maybe even some out to a vendor who can just offshore it or nearshore it, and do it for you. You will still have something left.

The ability to pull a job apart into its activity pieces, its task components, automate, reduce variability, reduce volume. You have what’s left. Put that back together. Now you look at it, and say, “Okay, is that enough? Is that enough to be a meaningful job? Could people see the purpose of that job, how it fits in with the overall purpose? Can we bolt some things onto it and make a new and more interesting and exciting job that also often happens to line up with what our employees want to do?” That idea of, instead of just being a job eliminator but a job re-imaginer, huge idea and a huge skill. And the person best suited to do it is the manager.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s right because you’ve got to be pretty up close to see what is happening.

Bill Schaninger
Yeah, in the weeds. You’ve got to be in the mud with them, you know what I mean?

Pete Mockaitis

That’s true. And I think about, hey, I’ve got a team supporting my podcast, and they’re great. Thank you, team. And there are times, we go into it, it’s like, “All right, straight up, there’s a paper shuffle there on minute 8-and-20 seconds in. What are the options do we have available to eliminate that?” And then, sure enough, that sparks some things, like, “Oh, I guess there’s a thousand-dollar piece of software that can make that easier, but when we do it hundreds of thousands of times, that becomes well worth it in terms of the time that we’re saving.” Great.

And so, it’d be quite possible to be completely unaware of that forever, like no one is going to probably mention it, and yet that makes a world of difference. So, I’d love it, Bill, if you could give us an example of, okay, here’s an example of a job, a manager, and a deconstruction, and then a reconstruction, and how that can look, sound, and feel in practice?

Bill Schaninger

Well, just look at someone who, let’s say, produces reports, like classic FP&A, financial performance analysis.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So, like budgeting and how do we do on the budget.

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, and particularly the end of the month, we’re going to close the month. Say, okay, first one is, “Are we asking people to go out and get 10 different streams of data coming in or can that be hardwired, it just comes in, you don’t need to pull it, it’s pushed in?” That would be one. You can say, “Okay, the format, are we going to go to a consistent format and/or have it setup with a data scientist and transforms you need to get a common format?” That would be two.

“Then the forms and reports that are put out, are we going to have one version or multiple versions? Are we going to allow people to call for a mid-month data?” “No, I’d like mine on the 21st,” “I like mine on the 15th,” “Or will we go to a common model? What about the analyses on variance that we’re going to run on it? Are we going to control for the same factors, control for just the business?” Just basic things like that, all of it which is like, “How often does it happen? To what standard? How many people have to be involved? How much can be automated and made pushed? And how much is it just actually also become a little bit of self-serve?

So, that answers all the reporting questions. And we have that happen time and again, particularly when you’re looking at the effectiveness and efficiency of a finance unit. But what if you were to say, “Well, what about actual analysis? What explains variability across units? What explains variability across customer segments or product groups?” Well, now that’s pretty cool, that’s actual setting out a question, “Why do we make more in one region than another?”

I was doing some really neat work with a burger fast-food joint that that we all know, and they had all these interesting pulls of data, and we’re sitting around with managers and store managers who are going, “Well, we think that GM matters.” “Okay, we have 50 stores here that’s signed up to be guinea pigs, let’s look. Hey, look at that. Actually, after about 18 months, it seems to tail off on the impact. Okay, so what have we learned? We learned that it’s really an important environment to have those managers learning for the first 18 months, two years after that, kind of flat.”

What about hiring? Vacancies are a real problem. Got it. What about hiring part two? Stars, but you know what, you need at least one star in every shift. You don’t load them up for certain shifts and leave other shifts exposed. Length of shift. Actually, we used to think that we were doing people a solid by having them work eight ten-hour shifts so they could avoid the trips in on the bus, but we’re seeing here, anytime somebody works for more than four hours, they start making some mistakes. And after six hours, they make a huge number of mistakes.

Now, why am I belaboring that? That was a group of managers who ran stores, sitting there, and instead of just being, like, protectors of the status quo or guardians of the data that nobody get access to, first, they started with, “How can we routinized and get rid of all the nonsense and bureaucracy around reporting so we could spend our time exploring and understanding variability in performance because who would know it better than us?”

And that, to me, was a big shift, where you get managers, they didn’t have to be data scientists, they didn’t have to be data engineers, but they needed to know enough about the system of production, of performance, of activity, and say, “Well, how could we understand the differences there?”

Pete Mockaitis

You know, Bill, you’re really bringing me some flashbacks here. I’m thinking of that little 25-year-old Pete Mockaitis, senior associate consultant at Bain, and much of our job was, “Let’s just get all the data to finally start making some sense,” as opposed to, “Oh, you can’t trust that because of this, you can’t trust that because of this. Oh, you got to clean it, make it a flat file. Oh, we got to cross reference that, we got to exclude that.” So, it’s like all this stuff, all this stuff.

Bill Schaninger

The storage and the flat file. I remember once saying to someone, “If you just let us run org lab, here’s what you’re going to get. We’re going to tell you exactly the size, shape, and cost of your organization. And the good news is the flat file you get back will be better than the one you gave because we would’ve fixed it.”

Pete Mockaitis

That’s right. And for those not in the know, I’ll just tell you, a flat file is a spreadsheet that has all the columns and all rows and no gaps such that nothing silly breaks when you’re jumping around it, and you can pivot table, etc.

Bill Schaninger

In a world of dismay, it’s like, “Just know that somewhere in that, the nesting and the hierarchy of roles are articulated in columns and/or the cost of the person in that job is articulated in another column.”

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. So, I remember there was all that work, and it wasn’t really fun. I actually made a rap song, “Mo Data, Mo Problems” and performed it. But I remember, for me, it was extremely exciting. My heart started thumping, it’s like, “Okay, finally, we’ve got the pristine real true data, and I’m about to push the button that makes the chart that shows us a thing. Is our hypothesis…?”

Bill Schaninger

Just being able to move to understanding, right, Pete? Listen, if you accept that there’s a little bit of, “We have to clean it,” now think about this because the modern data people are going, “No, Bill, you don’t need to clean it anymore. We can automate all of that,” because then you go from a common poll, common source, so you’re creating a common lake. And then the way in which, whether it’s through an API or something else, there’s just a push. It actually fits.

So, there’s a little bit of work can mean, “We don’t need people doing that manually anymore.” All the people are like, “Oh, I’ve got to run the reports,” which often meant they were doing stupid bridge documents for somebody wouldn’t give up their architecture to something else. All that’s saying is there’s a lot of work we ask people to do, it’s dumb and a pain in the ass. Often, it’s completely untransparent how much it costs and it’s there for the whim for a leader.

Pete Mockaitis

Yes, and then once that’s done, things get really fun and interesting.

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, because then you can actually answer questions, like, “Gee, why do some engineering teams do better than others?” “Well, I don’t know. That one’s trying to go across seven times zones.” That doesn’t work.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. So, I like that notion in that it’s not just about quantity of work, hours, dollars, but finding what is suitable for a person to do, and what is meaningful, rich, has some purpose, and fits together. And then, all told, is that a full job in terms of…

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, because you may want to add some things that make it a full job. The idea of disaggregating and then reaggregating, it is really like a job architect. And then taking into account the person in front of you, not the FTE, not the widget maker, not the disembodied robot – the person. And so then, you think about second, just in my list but maybe not importance, is know enough about your employee, the person, to know what matters to them, to understand what role work has in their life’s purpose.

Naina Dhingra and I wrote an article a couple of years ago, saying, “Help your employees find purpose—or watch them leave” that did incredibly well in terms of really resonating and people downloading it. But a good portion of it was just you have three circles here on the purpose front. The biggest circle, the outside one, is the person’s life purpose. The middle circle, which will vary in size, is the purpose that vocation serves, and the inside circle, the smallest, is what you, the company, are providing in terms of vocation.

It’s so arrogant for companies to think that they are the entirety of that person’s purpose but this is what COVID did. COVID said to people, “Well, we’re not going to drive two hours to work anymore, or 90 minutes, and we’re not going to all magically turn up by 9:00.” When that was taken out, now you had people at home, particularly moms, let’s just stick with moms for a second. You’re a mom, you’re a teacher, you’re a caregiver, you’re an employee, you’re a partner or a spouse, maybe you’re looking after a sick mom or a sick dad or aunt or uncle, whoever. That role-stacking forced a bit of a reckoning on everyone, to say, “What actually freaking matters to me? What do I really want to do with my life?”

And now it’s no wonder that we continue to have people saying, about on any given time, like 40% are thinking of leaving, many of them have already left one or two jobs, a fair number of them said, “Hey, by the way, I’ll leave even if I don’t have no job on hand.” And then there was always this group that thought that that was going to go away. It’s not going away because we’ve had a reckoning force to say, “Is where I’m spending my time worth it? Because now, actually, I’m seeing at the end of the day, I could be around my kids. I can feed my kids breakfast. I could see them when they come home from school.”

The rise of the nonlinear work day, in many cases, is people recognizing that life matters a lot, a lot, and we have to come to grips with that. Now, who is best to facilitate that? The boss. The manager. People don’t leave companies; they leave bosses. When people are saying, “I don’t feel supported,” it’s because they don’t feel supported by the boss. The environment is crappy because of the boss. “I don’t have flexibility,” usually because of the boss. Not always. Sometimes there are some strange policy stuff going on. Mostly it’s because of the boss.

So, this, to me, is like this is not just kumbaya, or go fix your spans, or, “Oh, gee, woe is me,” you’re being contrarian by saying don’t fire your middle managers. No, we’re saying this is actually essential to creating a healthy organization that people want to be part of and stay at, and it’s no longer a nice to have. You literally cannot get the work done that delivers your plan if you don’t invest in the people who are running the joint.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So, let’s continue this lead the people. We’ve deconstructed jobs, we figured out what really belongs for a human to do that is a job and then is the right size for a person, so that’s one big chunk of the management.

Bill Schaninger

The purpose part, I think, will be second, you know what I mean.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, yeah, I was going to go there next. So, how does one help people find their purpose?

Bill Schaninger

Well, you’d probably start by asking…

Pete Mockaitis

“So, what’s your purpose, Bill?”

Bill Schaninger

If you say to people, like, we wrote an instrument, which is kind of like a purpose finder, and here’s the interesting thing. In general, the younger you are and the less people that you’re responsible for taking care of the harder time you have in giving specifics about what your purpose is. Now, you might be able to say, “I just need to make a difference in the world.” Okay. Maybe it has to do with healthcare or social justice or education. Okay. “Well, what might that look like if you were doing it?” “Oh, I don’t know, I’m kind of counting on you to help me figure that out. You’re the employer.”

So, there is something here around you can have a nebulous idea that’s incredibly high beta, “I need to believe that the place I’m joining is consistent with having purpose in the world.” That’s pretty high for the youngsters. As employees get a little older or, in particular, have a mouth to feed, whether that’s through a baby, an adoption, someone they care for, whatever, it starts needing to get super specific because time now is not fungible.

Time is, “I’ve got a certain amount of time for my family, a certain amount of time for me, a certain amount of time for work. Now I can start getting incredibly going, yes, it’s not just about healthcare. I’m passionate about making a difference in cold chain for vaccines.” “Okay, got it.” “I’m passionate about making sure that housing is available to students so that they don’t have to be so transient.” “Got it.” So, workers are at different places about their ability to express what their purpose is and the extent to which vocation hits that.

The conduit from the company, which doesn’t have corpus to the boss which does, that’s the big deal. Does the boss understand enough, buy into, or are they a good representation of why the company exists, how it’s going to have impact or make money, and how they’re going to run the place? And can they translate that into what it means for the person in a particular role?

And that’s a skill, that’s a real skill. It also means that the bosses that are disenfranchised don’t feel engaged themselves, feel hard done by, etc. or really, they were just a good individual contributor who really never wanted to be bosses anyway. All those people are real risk points for the organization.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, that’s good stuff.

Bill Schaninger

That makes sense?

Pete Mockaitis

I got you, yeah. And I’m curious, are there any particular practices that you endorse with regard to one-on-ones, check ins, etc.?

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, no, 100%. Look, I think a lot of bosses have been raised, and I think COVID really gave us some real practice in, let’s say, agita about this. At a point at which you saw more and more employees raising their hands, saying, “I’m depressed,” “I’m anxious,” “I’m struggling with alcohol or drug use,” “I’m just really lonely,” some leaders naturally were more about the human condition, “I’m just going to look out after this person. I worry about them because I care about the person.”

Others are like, “Ooh, I can’t talk about that. I’m the boss. HR has told me I shouldn’t ask about mental health.” There was something here saying not playing like you’re a psychiatrist, not offering psychiatric advice, but just caring for one human to a next. I think that came much higher on the list of job one, two, or three.

Show the employee that they matter as a person first, an employee second. If you do that, if the person standing in front of you knows that you care about them, then the question, “Hey, what really matters to you about this? Everybody has choice, everybody decides where they’re going to go to work, what matters to you? What are you trying to get done here?”

For some people, it’s as simple as, “I love my family. I want to be interested in what I’m doing but this is I’m paying bills here. Job one for me is being a provider.” “Got it.” Other people might be, “It’s not just enough to make a check. I need to make a difference in the community I live in. I’m from here, I grew up here,” whatever. You just ask. Ask and prime the pump a little bit, and, more often than not, you will get way more than you can work with.

But once you know it, the mere act of asking gets you credit, and then being thoughtful to work with the person, and say, “You can reframe what we asked you to do, and you could see how that’s really pretty consistent with what matters to you. See if that helps.” It requires time. You know who can’t do that? People who are on the phone and on Zooms 12 hours a day.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s true. That’s true. All right, Bill, so much good stuff. I wanted to also get your take on sort of office politics sorts of things. This is unpleasant for many people in the middle and, yet, it seems that it’s pretty necessary to do well in order to flourish in many environments. How do we think about this?

Bill Schaninger

Oh, it sucks. That’s the technical term. No, listen, politics or the nature of politics exist anytime there’s more than one human doing something. Two people, one is trying to influence the other. Three people, there’s a power dynamic that’s shifting between the three. You get any groups of people, there will be a political environment just by the mere nature of classic psychosocial behavior. So, that’s going to happen.

As soon as you can accept that, “Oh, it should be eradicated,” that’s absurd. That’s not how it works. There’s always influencing, particularly non-power-based influencing. Okay, given that though, what people are really saying is, “I’m trying to figure out how it works around here, and this political stuff is often untransparent. It feels like a black box. I don’t feel like I’m plugged into or someone else is plugged into.”

One way to do it is be really thoughtful about things like, “What are we collectively trying to do? What does that mean for us individually?” Good role clarity goes a long way towards leading this. What am I asking to do? What good looks like? By when? With whom? What can you decide on your own? What do you have to bring back to me? Good, good, good role clarity for any task reduces a lot of the need that people are trying to figure out what the hell is going on, where politics take root. So, a boss that’s really good at role clarity, really good at showing how it fits in with the overall picture, really helpful.

Second, transparency. Don’t force junior people to solve the disputes of more senior people always. If two bosses or two or three more senior people are giving someone trying to do work very different messages, then all you have to teach the junior person to do is send an email or call or have a meeting with the three people, and say, “You have told me A. You’ve told me J. You’ve told me Z. I need some help on figuring out how those things either relate together or which one we’re picking.” Don’t force junior people to solve the disagreements of senior people.

And the last one, transparency, particularly around performance. If you don’t want people guessing, trying to read the tea leaves, don’t force them to read the tea leaves. Check in with them regularly, not in a formal, “Oh, we’re going to fill out a form.” Good coaching. Could you imagine sending your child to piano lessons, and the piano instructor never actually provided any feedback to how your child was playing? Okay, well, that’s the nonsense that people get at work. The boss literally doesn’t tell them how they’re doing, right?

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah. I’m thinking we had Kim Scott, talking about radical candor, and just those notions of it’s not kind to withhold information about how people are performing, and then they get fired and they had no idea. And then we had an employment lawyer who said that for wrongful termination suits, it is always the plaintiffs, those who had been terminated, who introduce the evidence of the performance reviews in the courtroom, or the negotiation. It is never on the other side. It’s sort of like, “Well, according to all these official reports, it says I met expectations every six months, time after time after time.”

Bill Schaninger

Imagine, if you just said to people…Long, long, long ago when I was at the residential psychiatric treatment center, and I had a team, I don’t know, of six, seven, or eight, I would keep little 3×5 cards for each employee, and I would jot things down, pros and cons, then I want to make sure I turn to one each week, we chat, I go, “Hey, that was great, that was great, that was great. This is coming. Can we work on this? How are you doing on X?” whatever.

So, that then when the evaluation was due, a semi-annual, it was a summation and a synthesis with a heavier emphasis on go-forward planning, and no one was surprised ever. The essence of performance management is the management part, it’s the coaching part, it’s the feedback part. So, where politics breed is when the person doesn’t know where they stand, and they’re desperately trying to figure that out and get a hook into something they can trust. You can fight back the influence of a politics just by creating an environment that people can trust where they stand and know how they’re doing.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, that makes sense, that a clear role and it doesn’t mean if someone is doing something it doesn’t mean, “I’ve lost standing,” or, “I’ve gained standing.” It’s like, “No, that’s just what they do, and that’s what I do.”

Bill Schaninger

Exactly right.

Pete Mockaitis

“Okay. And then I know how well I’m doing, and so there we go. No need to worry. I will just keep on trucking.”

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, you got it.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

I just think maybe one of the most important things to remember always, particularly out of the tech sector but other places, you see these other things, “Oh, no one needs managers. Let’s fire all the managers.” What a load of crap. Give me a break. If you put 15 really well-intended people in a room, but you didn’t let them know what the other 15 people were doing, and you say, “Hey, yeah, we’d like to get from New York to L.A. Go,” you’re not getting the same answers from those 15 people. You’re not.

Why would you think that in an exercise that requires cohesion, collaboration, coordination, maybe some consistency, why would you think that they didn’t need to be led? This idea of, “Oh, people are smart, they’re well-intended,” no. You know who says that? People who really want to be their own boss. Great. Go be a vendor. If you’re going to join an organization, then suborn your own needs to something of a greater good. The greater good has to take primacy. That’s the whole point of joining something. You’re intentionally doing it and that needs to be led or you don’t deliver on it.

So, honestly, I’m pretty aggressive in my rebuke of that because I think that sounds like people who really want the freedom of the gig economy, particularly that we saw in tech, and someone else’s capital to play with, and I don’t think you get both.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

Yes, it’s from the song “Freewill,” “If you choose not to decide, you still made a choice.” Geddy Lee, he is a poet. But the idea is so much of work is everyone knows everything, everyone knows who’s struggling, everyone knows who’s a bad boss, everyone knows clients that really aren’t worth serving, and so many people just kick the can down the road. They’ll speak about it in hush tones but they won’t actually raise it.

And I’m not sure about the rhetoric around radical candor but I do think candor, that helps. Calling it like you see it, that helps. So much of our risks and our approaches to risk is counsel the first line of defense, which is people. You know when that’s not working? When no one actually bothers to tell you what’s going on. And the decision to not tell someone is a choice, and I think those things come back and bite us all the time. So, for me, if you choose not to decide, you still made a choice. Holding back information ought to be treated as anything else. It’s still a choice, and it ought to have consequences, I might add.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

I was just thinking of the prison experiments the other day, and even in times where they’ve tried to replicate it, and they’ve had varying degrees of success or whatever, people taking on role identity, people assuming role identity, the importance of the cultural contagion, many, many people, they really just want to be part of something bigger. They want to be part of a group. They want to belong. They want to have affinity.

But once they’re in that group, if not managed well, the normative influence of that group, the culture, may take you into places not great. And so, I think, for leaders, the most important thing you can do is help shape, not just by talking about it, but by behaving that way, by reinforcing it, by looking at who you pick to be leaders themselves. What does it mean to be us? What really matters?

And I think there, you can count on the fact that the powerful nature of a group and the need to belong can be an incredible force for good or a force for bad. I would say, when you see things like bullying, septic workplaces, that kind of stuff. It cuts both ways but it can be managed truly for the good. And, again, who best to help manage that but the middle managers, the workplace leaders.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And a favorite book?

Bill Schaninger

Well, this one, of course. Obviously, I’m proud of this one. I, for a long time, a lot just because of where I’ve grown up here in Lehigh Valley, that people who worked their whole lives and really invested in a company and wanted just to do a good job of leading people, and leading from the middle, I feel like they’ve been given a short trip. But if you look at things like principals, people who run medical centers, doctors, there are these roles that just matters so much in our daily lives. People who run the DMV center. These are middle managers by definition.

Everywhere we look, if someone who neither makes a strategic choice or is actually doing the work but is critical to a service being delivered, a person being connected to, touched, etc. I really do think it’s the most important thing we can do right now as institutions by acknowledging who gets the joy and the responsibility of leading people. And I think we should take it seriously as such.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

This format, podcast, I love it. I’ve been doing it a couple years here at McKinsey quite a bit, and I certainly, in my retired life, I’m pretty sure I’m going to start my own. And I want a format just to be able to go a little bit deeper on some topics. I think one thing that’s really hurt us, I’m about to riff, but one thing I think that really hurt us is the lack of depth to talk about the structure of a problem, the nuance of a problem, the fact that there’s usually multiple facets to it. Very few things in the human condition are simple. Most of the time there’s a couple things going on. I think podcasts really lend themselves to a little bit deeper exploration.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And a favorite habit?

Bill Schaninger

I like taking calls in cars. I think, at some point, we spend so much time on Zooms or calls or whatever. Zooms, in particular, not Zoom the product, it’s video conferencing, whatever. It’s a little emotionally taxing, and sometimes, for me, I was a doodler as a kid and so I’ll build Lego now to help focus. Sometimes I just need to get out of the space, get my head out of the space and think differently. And driving while taking calls, I love doing it and I will most certainly continue doing it. I think it actually brings a little bit more of me to the call.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, the two most important questions you can say is, “How are we going to make money? And how are we going to run the place?” And anybody who’s in any kind of positional leadership should be able to answer that on a dime, not in a trite manner, but in the manner that makes it clear to the person in front of them what that means for them.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

Bill.Schaninger@gmail.com and Bill Schaninger, PhD on LinkedIn. And then I have a website being setup, and it’ll be up, I don’t know, two, three weeks so I’ll be able to, soon, have a link there on LinkedIn.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Bill Schaninger

Yeah, just remember that if you’ve been given the charge to lead people, it is an awesome responsibility and really, really what a gift to actually be able to influence more than just yourself. Long ago, when I was first given a unit to be responsible for at the residential psychiatric treatment center, the person who hired me walked me out, and said, “Do you see that building up there? It’s yours. All the kids in there, it’s yours. All the employees, yours. Everything that happens there, whether you’re here or not, yours. Do you understand? It’s yours.”

And that so resonated with me, and I wasn’t the seniormost person, not even close. But it was this idea of it only ever works when people really internalize what it’s really about, and their own personal obligation beyond their own success. And then you have a chance of actually doing something special. Otherwise, you’re probably just surviving it.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Bill, thank you. This has been a treat. I wish you much luck and fun and power to the middle.

Bill Schaninger

Thank you. Really appreciate it.