Tag

Leadership & Culture Archives - How to be Awesome at Your Job

1105: The Five Critical Roles of Every Winning Team with Mark Murphy

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Mark Murphy shares insights from his research on maximizing team effectiveness.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why you don’t want a team of all “team players”
  2. The simple trick for more decisive teams
  3. How to get your team to generate 3X more valuable ideas

About Mark

Mark Murphy is a New York Times bestselling author, Senior Contributor to Forbes, and Founder of Leadership IQ, a research and training firm. His latest book is TEAM PLAYERS: The Five Critical Roles You Need to Build A Winning Team. Mark’s previous bestselling books include: Hiring for Attitude, Hundred Percenters, HARD Goals, Managing Narcissists, Blamers, Dramatics and more. 

Mark leads one of the world’s largest databases of original leadership research, and his work has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Fortune, Forbes, Bloomberg, BusinessWeek, Harvard Business Review, and U.S. News & World Report. He’s been a featured guest on programs including CBS News Sunday Morning, ABC’s 20/20, Fox Business News, CNN International and NPR. 

Some of his most well-known research studies include “Why New Hires Fail,” “Are SMART Goals Dumb?,” “Why CEO’s Get Fired,” “High Performers Can Be Less Engaged,” and “Don’t Expect Layoff Survivors to Be Grateful.” Mark has conducted training for The United Nations, Harvard Business School, Microsoft, IBM, MasterCard, Merck, and thousands more.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

  • Strawberry.me. Claim your $50 credit and build momentum in your career with Strawberry.me/Awesome
  • Vanguard. Give your clients consistent results year in and year out with vanguard.com/AUDIO
  • Quince. Get free shipping and 365-day returns on your order with Quince.com/Awesome
  • Cashflow Podcasting. Explore launching (or outsourcing) your podcast with a free 10-minute call with Pete.

Mark Murphy Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Mark, welcome back!

Mark Murphy
Thank you for having me. I’m glad I got invited back.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, you know, well, it took seven years. What’s that? It’s almost like a biblical punishment. You were exiled for seven years, Mark. But now…

Mark Murphy
I had to go wander out there for a bit and I made my way back now.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about teamwork, team players. And could you maybe kick us off by sharing a particularly surprising, fascinating discovery you’ve made about teams in the seven years since we chatted last?

Mark Murphy
So, the biggest thing, one was not surprising, and that is there are plenty of people that find that the teams they’re on, that they’re forced to sit on every day, aren’t always great uses of their time. But the bigger issue was that, when we started studying this and we asked people, “Listen, is the team you sit on presently, is it actually taking advantage of your talents? Like, do you feel like you get to use your real abilities?”

And two thirds plus of people were like, “No, not really. Like, I’m forced to sit here. I have to go through, I’m part of the group and, you know, that’s good. But I don’t really get to use my strengths. I don’t get to do the thing that I am really well suited to.” And that led to the big kind of aha discovery about teams is that the most successful teams are teams that aren’t focused on trying to make everybody operate the same.

We have this kind of cliche definition of, “What is a team player?” Well, a team player, it’s usually like, they’re kind of outgoing, they’re very friendly, super agreeable, very conscientious, and they have high-end followership, they can get along, all that.

But it turns out that the best teams are more like a rock band, or a symphony orchestra, or an NFL team, or an NBA team. That is, if you look at an NFL team, you got some guys are like 350 pounds, you got others that are 220, some are six foot eight, some are five foot seven, some are really good at throwing a ball, some are good at catching a ball, some are good at pushing people, some are good at running fast.

There’s a weird mix of talents and abilities, and the best teams in business in the real world are ones that assemble sometimes weird seeming groups of people and let everybody do the thing that they’re really good at, rather than trying to stuff us all into a room and go, “We all got to act the same way. It’s all about cohesion. We can never say a cross word.”

Best teams are like, “Nah, no, no, this is, like, I need a center. I need a point guard. I need a forward. I need a shooting guard. I need a bunch of different talents. And y’all don’t have to look the same or act the same or think the same. In fact, it’s better if you don’t.” And that was kind of the big aha moment of this.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I like that a lot. And to your point about high agreeableness, well, we’re going to get there in a moment in terms of the five critical roles, one of them is a trailblazer. And, indeed, they don’t agree so much, and that’s super useful. And I think that’s just great to highlight right off the bat in terms of being a team player does conjure up images of what that’s “supposed to be.”

And I think I’ve even had moments in team conversations where it’s like, “Hmm, this doesn’t quite sound right to me, but I don’t want to cause trouble and I want to be a good team player. So maybe I’ll just keep quiet for now.” And, occasionally that’s the right move and, often, that’s the exact wrong move.

Mark Murphy
We just are releasing a new study next week on teams, and one of the findings was, we asked people, “Have you ever had an idea that you raised to the team and the team rejected out of hand?” And that was like nine out of 10 people. Or, “Have you had an idea that you were afraid to bring up to the group because you were afraid how people were going to react?” And that was, again, like, nine out of 10 people.

And it’s like, “How many brilliant ideas and innovations are we leaving on the table because people in the room were just afraid to say the thing that the emperor has no clothes, or there is a way better, faster way of doing this, or we are heading down a path that is going to waste all of our times?”

And if the idea of having a team is to get the best thinking possible out of all the people in the room, well, what good is that if we have people that are afraid to speak up because we told everybody, “You know, you got to go along to get along”? No. It kind of runs counter to what a team is supposed to be in the first place.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, we heard some of those messages before when it comes to the benefit or value of diversity is, “Hey, we get to have different people with different experiences and that’s great.” And so that’s why we can see some relationships between, mathematically, in research, associated with diverse teams and better outcomes. But my understanding is that you get none of the benefit of that diversity if folks don’t feel like they can, in fact, speak up and share from their unique different experiences.

Mark Murphy
That’s exactly the thing, is that you can even assemble a great diverse group, and all various kinds of diversity, you can have – racial diversity, gender diversity, cognitive diversity, take your pick. It doesn’t matter. But if there is not an environment where we are actively seeking out the input from those folks, or we are telling everybody, “Listen, this is what it takes to be a team player.”

And again, usually, whenever we use the word team player, we’re usually using it in a pejorative, like, “You need to be more of a team player, and here’s what that means.” And we’re trying to, like, sand off the edges of people. And, well, it’s like, “Listen, sometimes it’s the edges that give us the brilliant insight.”

So, if I’m not making it safe enough for you to actually come into this room and do what you do well, if you don’t get to come in here and use your strengths and leverage them, well, then, I’m not getting any of the advantages of having diversity.

And the other side of it is, one of the reasons that so many people, I mean, and every one of your listeners, I would venture to guess, has, at one point or another, sat on a team where they’re like, “Well, there’s an hour of my life I’m never getting back. And it’s like this is an absolute nightmare.”

And one of the reasons people will sometimes feel like that is, like, “I don’t know what I’m doing here because you’re asking me to either be something I’m not, or you’re ignoring the thing that I am. Like, I have this particular set of skills and talents. Let me use those skills and talents. And if you’re not going to let me use them, then I don’t know why I’m here.”

Pete Mockaitis
A particular set of skills. Shout out to Liam Neeson. Well, yeah, so your book, Team Players: The Five Critical Rules You Need to Build a Winning Team, whenever I hear a sort of a typology, like, the five, I have to grill you a bit, Mark. What is the underlying research that says, in fact, there are five and not nine and not three? And how do we know that there are five and that this is real as opposed to something that Mark slapped together because he’s got to get another book out?

Mark Murphy
Yeah, a great question and a very fair one. So, the way this all came about was we started looking at teams, really effective teams and really ineffective teams, let’s say nicely.

And we started to look at, “Okay, well, what are the functions that actually get fulfilled in this team? Like, is there a task function? Is there a decision-making function? Is there an interpersonal smoothing over function, kind of a diplomacy function. “Is there a brainstorming or an ideation, an innovation kind of function? Is there a tracking function like, know, to-do list, milestones, Gantt charts, that kind of stuff.”

And as we started to dissect the various functions, one thing that quickly became clear was that the best teams are pretty good at making decisions, and we didn’t even care at the moment who was making the decisions, just, “Do decisions get made? Okay, cool. Is there a tracking kind of function on this team? Like, do you have any mechanism for ensuring that to-do’s get met? Do you have any kind of a peacekeeping function? You know, is there anything where, when conflict arises or conversations get a little tense, etc.?”

And so, the first thing was we identified that there are five kinds of rough buckets. Now, you can cut these buckets more finely. At one point, we had these cut into like 13 different functions. And we looked at that and said, “Well, okay, probably half of those are like played by the same people. And so maybe 13 is a little much.”

And so, we threw some, not to go too deep into this, but through some K-means cluster analysis, we kind of distilled this down into five that were notably distinct from each other, kind of buckets of work. And then we started to look at, “Okay, who are the people on the team? And what roles are they actually filling?”

And that’s where we discovered that, most of the time, for example, there’s usually somebody on the team, and a really good team, who is capable of making a tough decision. Maybe the group can decide for themselves, they take a vote, “Poof. No fuss, no muss.” But when the rubber hits the road and there you get a sticking point, is there somebody in the group who’s willing to raise their hand and go, “Wait a minute, okay, we’ve debated this long enough. Here’s the path we’re taking, let’s just go.”

That role was often not the same person that was playing that kind of peacemaker sort of role. Because as you might imagine, to play that tougher decision-maker role is a different kind of personality than the person who is kind of smoothing over ruffled feathers and smoothing over hurt feelings and bringing people back into feeling safe and comfortable in the group. Those were very distinct personality types.

So that’s how we came up with the five. It really wasn’t about the people, initially, as much as it was, “What does a team actually have to do to be successful?” I mean, you can take any kind of team. If you can’t make a decision, hey, it’s not going to be a good team. If you can’t hit a deadline on time, not going to be a good team.

When things get really heated, if you don’t have a way to resolve conflict, team’s not going to work all that well. So that’s the origin of this.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so then, tell us a bit more about the subsequent research associated with the outcomes that teams that have these roles see better stuff than teams that don’t.

Mark Murphy
Then, once we had these five roles, and so the five roles are there’s the director, and that’s the person who makes those decisions when necessary. They’re not making every decision, but they’re capable of making that decision. There’s the achiever. This is the person that they don’t necessarily want to be in charge. They’re the person who’s like, “Give me a task. Let me go do some stuff, and I’ll be the worker bee. Okay, cool.”

There’s a stabilizer, and that’s like your to-do list Gantt chart calendar milestone person. Then you have your harmonizer. That’s like your peacekeeper. And then there’s the trailblazer, and that’s the person that, you know, will come up with the crazy innovative ideas, the out-of-the-box, even if it’s sometimes annoying and irritating, but they will shake things up a bit.

Now, when we had those roles, we then went back and started to look at, “Okay, the really effective teams versus the less effective teams.” And what we discovered was, number one, that the best teams, really, really good teams, if you ask somebody, “What’s the best team you’ve ever been on?” start there. And in 97% of those teams, all five roles were filled.

Then ask people, “Okay, well, what’s the worst team that you’re currently sitting on?” Okay, and look at those teams. And what you would find is only about 20% of those teams actually had all five roles filled. They were missing roles.

So, for example, if you think about a team that, when you go, “Hey, can your team, does it actually decide anything? Like, is it capable of just pulling the trigger and making a real decision?” and they say, “No,” well, nine times out of 10, that’s because that team doesn’t have a director. It doesn’t have somebody who is willing to ante up and say, “Even if this is unpopular, I will make that really hard decision.” Every team needs somebody.

Or, if you ask the team, “Hey, do you guys actually hit your deadlines? Like, when a team decides it’s going to do something, do you actually deliver that thing on time?” And people say, “Nah, not really.” Well, it’s usually because you don’t have that person, and every good office has one, it’s the person who keeps the calendar, and is like, “Hey, wait a minute, timeline here. We got a deadline to hit. Like, let’s move this along. Don’t forget the to-dos.” You need that kind of task master.

And when you find these lower-performing teams, the ones that kind of drive us all nuts, what we find is, overwhelmingly, they are missing at least one, sometimes two or three of the roles. And then on the other end of the spectrum, sometimes those teams had too many of one role. If you think about teams where the team is, like, always in a fight over what the decision is going to be and who’s going to get to make the decision, usually, it’s because you got, like, two or three or four directors.

You got like a bunch of people that all think they should be in charge of making the final decision. And then half your team meeting is spent with those people kind of fighting with each other over what it is we’re going to decide. And that becomes every bit as much of a nightmare as a team that can’t make a decision.

That’s basically it. Sometimes you will see in a team, like, “Yeah, we got 10 people who are great at keeping the calendar, but we got, like, nobody actually willing to roll up their sleeves and do the work. We just got 10 people who, you know, want to keep us on track, but nobody actually like doing stuff.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And when you mentioned the effective teams and the ineffective teams, what’s the data set?

Mark Murphy
So, this was across, we started with about 1200 teams that we looked at. It has since broadened out to now we’ve got over 100,000 people, and that’s spread across, now I think it’s broken 10,000 various teams. But the initial study, well, the very first pilot study was about 400 teams. Then it went up to about 1200, and then it just started scaling up from there.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yes, but like where do you find the teams and assess the performance?

Mark Murphy
So, the teams initially come from either our research or our survey clients or our training clients. And so, we start with pools of people there. So, we’re dealing with organizations, so 95% of them are business organizations. And I say business because some of those are not for profit. So, there’s hospitals, there’s libraries, there’s a few government organizations.

But then the majority are your classic kind of for-profit, but it runs the gamut from organizations that, our initial cutoff, was an organization had to have at least a little over 50 people, and then all the way up to organizations with tens of thousands. And we set that limit, usually in studies like this, initially, because if you have a company with three people or eight people, and that’s like the entirety of the company, there can be a lot of confounding factors when you’re looking at a team.

So, we usually don’t touch the really small companies until later in the process, just because it’s, you never really know exactly what you’re getting because they’re so variable from each other. But then once you have a model, that’s where you can start to get some of the smaller shops.

Pete Mockaitis
Alrighty. And so then, how do we know? Part of it, I guess, you just recognize immediately from these descriptions, “Oh, yep, that’s a director. Yep, that’s a stabilizer. Got it.” But how do you recommend we understand and assess the makeup of a team?

Mark Murphy
Simplest, easiest way is at your next team meeting, go, “Hey, folks. Let’s try a little something. Here are these five roles. I want everybody to jot down, ‘What role do you think others would say that I play?’ and we’ll just go around, okay?” So, I’m Mark, I’m going to ask, “Okay, what’s the role that I think others would say that I most typically play on this team?”

“Okay, Jane, what about you? Oh, Pete, what about you? What role would you say people are most likely to say you typically play. Frank?” and we just go around, and we each identify, “Okay, what’s the role that we are probably most typically playing?” That’s one.

Once you have a pretty good sense of that, if you look around the room, and you’re like, “Huh, everybody said that they’re the director. Huh, we might have a problem here.” That’s step one, is just see what kind of distribution of people you actually have.

The second thing then is, based on those descriptions, is go, “Okay, well, what role really feels like it’s one that I would want to play? And maybe I’m not currently playing it, but what’s a role that maybe I would like to try out?” So, if I’m somebody that I am always in the role of stabilizer, I’m the one who is always keeping track of the deadlines and the to-do list and nagging people to get their work in on time, blah blah blah.

And maybe I look at this and I go, “You know what, I would love to just be the achiever. I would love to not have to manage the to-do list for this group, and I would love if somebody would just give me an assignment and let me go make the PowerPoint presentation. Just let me go roll up my sleeves and do some work without having to manage all of the other to-do’s for this group.”

And sometimes what you’ll find is that the role that we’re currently being forced to play isn’t the one that we necessarily really want to play, but we’re, for whatever reason, sometimes there’s just nobody else to do it, but we’re kind of forced into it.

But if you know, “Here’s the role that I’m usually seen as playing. Here’s the role that I most commonly play in the team. And here’s the role that I would really love to play,” it’s not that you’re going to magically be able to instantly do 100% of the role you would love to do, because you might still be necessary in the role you’re doing.

But if you can start to bleed this out a little bit and merge those two and go, “You know, some days, I want to be the stabilizer, but some days, I want to be the achiever. Some days, I want to be the harmonizer. Or, some days, I want to try that trailblazer thing.” Cool. Now you have a way to kind of identify something about the work you’re doing that might be more interesting to you, something that might get you a little more excited to go to this team meeting.

If your team can come together and say, “Listen, let’s give each other a chance to actually make sure, A, all the roles are covered, but, B, if you want to try and do something a little different in this group, okay, cool, try it. And let’s see if we can make it work because, if we can get you doing something that gets you excited, you’re that much more likely to be invested in the group and committed and feel good about the job.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so let’s say we’ve done this good work, we’ve identified the roles where people are doing the roles that light them up, they’re feeling good about it, we’ve got a reasonable balance or mix on the team. Once that’s in play, what are some of the best and worst practices for really rocking and rolling together?

Mark Murphy
So, a couple of things, and these are going to, some of them are a little weird. So, number one, every group needs somebody to make decisions, yes. So, sounds like I’m advocating for some kind of hierarchy. But one of the things we discovered was that, in really good teams, there’s always somebody who makes the decision, but it’s not always the same somebody. And that was kind of the big aha moment.

So, if you think of it like this, you got a basketball team. You have your Hall of Fame, All-Star player. It’s three seconds left in the game. They’ve got the ball, but three defenders converge on them. They’re looking around, and they’re like, “Okay, I could try and shoot it, but there’s three defenders on me. This is going to go terribly.”

And so, they look around and they see that this guy on the other side of the court, who’s a good shooter, but is not a Hall of Fame, not an All-Star. And they pass them the ball, and they’re like, “You know what, you’re in the best position to take this last-second shot. You’re in charge. You take the shot. Because I got three other bodies draped on me. There’s no way, whatever I do, it’s going in. But there’s a chance that you could actually make the shot.”

That’s what we call an adaptive hierarchy. NASA, very famously implemented the idea of adaptive hierarchies. If there’s a rocket ship that is having problems and you got somebody on the team that’s, like, the expert in fuel cells and knows everything about rocket fuel, and they’re like, “Listen, all the rest of us are pretty good at trajectories and telemetry and all the rest, but we’re not the expert in rocket fuel.”

They go, “Okay, well, who should be in charge of decisions about the rocket fuel?” “I don’t know that person over there who’s the expert in rocket fuel. When it comes to fuel related issues, they’re in charge.”

But the thing that is cool, and this is one thing that makes groups really interesting when they’re really clicking, is that it’s not so much everybody gets a turn necessarily, because that’s not the idea. It’s that everybody who is the expert in that particular area, gets to take charge of that particular area they’re expert in.

So, it’s how you get a team that can always make decisions. They have a clear hierarchy, but it doesn’t feel rigid and like some, you know, royal family thing where I always have to bow and genuflect in front of so and so. No, it’s maybe today is my turn to be in charge of making this particular decision, because it’s an area that I’m really good at.

And so, that’s one big thing that you can do as a team that is trying this out for the first time is just go, “Let’s have whoever is most expert at this thing be in charge of making the decision for that thing. And tomorrow it’ll be somebody else. The day after that will be somebody else, but let’s rotate this a bit.”

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. And you also mentioned in the book the research showing that teams generate three times as many valuable ideas when the rules are each thinking independently before coming together. And can you dig into that a little bit and give us an example of that?

Mark Murphy
Yes, it’s, you know, one of the things that every team has tried at one point or another is brainstorming, right? So, you all sit in a room and you just start ideating. There’s no bad ideas and we’re just going to throw some stuff up on the whiteboard and just toss as many ideas out there as you possibly can. Okay, cool.

The problem is that a herding effect starts to take place. And sometimes it’s known as a conformity bias, is that, as people start throwing their ideas up on the wall, it starts to become clear that some of these ideas are more kind of mainstream than other ideas are. And what ends up happening is people start to coalesce around a very narrow set of ideas. And the crazy ones, which might hold your best thinking, kind of get pushed off to the side.

So, what researchers discovered was that you would get much better ideas, when they put people in a room and had them brainstorm, okay, that was level one. But when you told people, “Okay, we’re going to come into the room and we’re going to have a brainstorming session. But before we do that, you think by yourself for 10 minutes, just come up with your own brainstorming ideas for 10 minutes, then we’ll all come into the room together.”

And what they found was that the ideas got better, more innovative, even more profitable and valuable when people took 10 minutes of thinking by themselves before coming into the room to do the “brainstorming” because they were not filtering themselves when they were thinking alone.

And so, the next time you have a team meeting, one great thing to try is tell your group, “Listen, I want everybody to think about this alone. And I want you to come in with your ideas written down.” One reason for making everybody write down their ideas, or type them up, whatever, before coming into the meeting is that they can’t say, “Oh, I didn’t have any more ideas,” because you wrote them down.

So, this way, it really forces everybody to have their crazy, big innovation ideas, whatever, out of the box, and put it down on paper, and then come into the meeting room. Now you know that you are not going to get people who are afraid to speak up. You’re not going to get people that are filtering themselves and holding back their great ideas because they don’t want to seem like a weirdo. You get all those great crazy ideas and that’s where some of the best stuff comes from.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Mark, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention?

Mark Murphy
I think the one other thing to think about is that, and this is just a way of making teams more effective, is going back to something we talked about earlier, Pete, is the, “Listen, what role would you love to play on this team?” I think this one is really important because, one of the things that I found when we were doing this research, is that there are a lot of people who are like, “Listen, I’m kind of quiet. I’m more introverted. I’m not predisposed to love groups necessarily.”

But when we found that even the most introverted of people, when they got to play the role that they were really good at, they’re like, “Yeah, I love groups. This actually isn’t so bad. This isn’t as bad as I thought it was going to be at all,” just because they got to do the thing that really mattered to them. And it’s just such a simple thing, asking people, like, “What’s the role you’d like to try out in this group?”

Give it a shot because, if it gives somebody on your team that maybe didn’t love teams, the chance to actually enjoy working on a team, man, it can make all the difference in the world and it’s not that hard to do.

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

Mark Murphy
Well, the one that relates to teams, and it’s going to sound weird, Michael Jordan was walking off the court one day after practice in the late ‘90s, one of his assistant coaches, Tex Winters, hollers out to him, “Hey, Michael, there’s no I in team.” And Jordan looks back at him, and goes, “Yeah, but there is in win.”

Now, what Michael meant by that was, “Yeah, you know what? I’m the most important person.” But what he later came to find was that what that really means is that, “I have a role I have to play, but you know what? I got to be willing to pass the ball to the other I.”

So, when he learned to trust Scottie Pippen, when he learned to trust Dennis Rodman, when he learned to trust Steve Kerr, for example, to take the last-second shot, all of a sudden, the idea that there are a bunch of I’s on a team that really do make a team successful, you know what, yeah, they’re not technically an I in team, but there is a me.”

And my whole thing is, listen, find the me’s, allow the me’s on your team to be themselves. And you’re going to have one heck of a higher-performing team.

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

Mark Murphy
So, one that I quote in the book, but it’s just such a classic study, Solomon Asch in the ‘50s did this study, and this speaks to what you were asking me about with brainstorming, for example. So, there’s eight people sitting in a room, and these eight people have to look at a sheet of paper and there are lines drawn on the sheet of paper.

So, like maybe one line is like the length of your thumb, and then another line is like the length of your first finger. So, there’s clearly a big difference in the length of these lines, right? And so, the people in the room, they were all asked like, “Okay, well, which line is longer?” Now, seven of the eight people in the room were actors. Only one of the eight people was the actual subject of the study.

And so, the seven people would go, “Well, the thumb length line, that’s the longer one.” And the eighth guy in the room, or gal, would look and go, “What? Are you nuts? Like, that’s clearly, that’s the shorter line. That’s not the longer line. Like, anybody could see this.” But because the other seven were like, “Nope, that’s the longer line,” they started to doubt themselves, even though their eyes told them crystal clearly, which is the longer line.

Three quarters of the subjects in that study changed their answers at one time or another through the course of the study to conform with the group. Thirty percent of all of the answers, people knowingly gave the wrong answer because they wanted to fit in. That, I think, is such an important study to bear in mind.

And even though it’s 70, what, 75 years old now, it is still as relevant today as it was back then. Because if you really want to get some innovative thinking in your group, and you want a team to perform, the last thing you want is somebody in the room to lie to you just because they don’t want to look, to be the only one who is willing to tell you the truth. That is just absolute death for a team.

So just always kind of think of that, “If seven other people are saying something, how am I going to get that one person to speak up?”

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Mark Murphy
The one I love, still, is a book by Erich Fromm and it’s from 1940-41, somewhere in there, called Escape from Freedom.

And the book is basically an exploration about, “Why do, sometimes, people give up their freedom? Why do they not want to make decisions?” And it comes back to a lot of what we’re talking about here, is that sometimes, it can feel lonely to be the only person making this decision.

And while, you know, it’s, again, it’s what, 80-some odd years old now, there’s a lot of great wisdom in it. And while not everything in it is perfect, it does raise the question, I think, for every team leader is, “How am I taking this into account with my group? Am I making it okay for people to make decisions?”

Like, when we talk about adaptive hierarchies and rotating responsibility, all of this is to try and grow people that are more capable of making decisions so that I don’t have to do everything. I want people to have more freedom and autonomy. And to do that, I have to do some of these things.

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

Mark Murphy

So, there are a bunch. So, I’m going to give an AI answer and I’m going to give the either ChatGPT or Claude, but one of the things that we started doing with it was, so we have statisticians on our team that, when we create new studies, we’re running all of our statistics. But we started using ChatGPT and Claude, both of them, to model out different scenarios with our statistics, not just to get another set of eyes and error check it.

So, like when we, you know, “Let’s run the K-means cluster analysis and see how these groups come up.” But we can then run scenarios that, if we were doing it just like in SPSS or R or something, would take weeks. But now we can just throw it in and say, “Okay, here’s the model we developed. Here’s the statistical model. Here’s all of our data. Now, run this scenario this way. Now run it again this way.”

And so, we can model out a hundred different scenarios in a day, where it used to be, if we wanted to model out five different scenarios, it would take two weeks. And I know it’s kind of a weird use case, but one of the things that AI does exceptionally well is it will take an idea you’ve already developed, with data you already have, and allow you to play with, “What would happen if kind…?” of scenarios, “What would happen if these people weren’t in the study? What would happen if we had 10 more months that looked like this?” and just model out and do a little more scenario planning.

So, that’s one of my favorites, it’s a tool everybody has access to. It’s just, I don’t see as many people using it in that way, but it’s such a fun, cool use case for it.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Mark Murphy
One habit that I do try and maintain, even when I’m traveling, is just 30 minutes of showing up for some kind of exercise. Even if it is nothing more than squats and pushups and sit-ups in my hotel room, it is one habit that does help set the day on a more effective path. And it is sort of like, you know, when you hear retired military folks talk about making the bed.

It’s something over which I do have control and it is something over which I can do pretty much regardless of where I am or what part of the planet I happen to be traveling to. It’s even if it’s just, you know, 15 minutes of some pushups and then some squats and then even not good sit ups, whatever. It’s something. And it’s something you can check the box, and go, “You know what? That’s something done today.”

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

Mark Murphy
If you go to LeadershipIQ.com, there’s a Team Players section on the website. And one thing that I do encourage people to do is there’s a free quiz on there. It’s called, “What kind of team player are you?” Take the quiz and see what comes out. And then, listen, the thing is free, have your team take it, too, and see how you come out. There’s a bunch of different research studies and resources like that, but it literally takes less than five minutes. So, not that hard to do.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Beautiful. Mark, thank you.

Mark Murphy
Thanks again for having me. Hopefully, it won’t be seven years next time.

1088: How to Build Higher Performing Teams with Emotional Intelligence with Vanessa Druskat

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Vanessa Druskat reveals an overlooked key to unlocking your team’s performance: emotional intelligence.

You’ll Learn

  1. The number one skill leaders need to work on
  2. Why a team of stars doesn’t guarantee results—and what will
  3. Two easy practices that unlock greater performance

About Vanessa

Vanessa Druskat is an associate professor at the Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics at the University of New Hampshire. As an internationally recognized leadership and team performance expert, Vanessa Druskat advises leaders and teams at over a dozen Fortune 500 and Fortune Global 500 companies. Her best-selling Harvard Business Review article (with S. Wolff) on emotionally intelligent teams has been chosen six times for inclusion in collections of HBR’s most valued articles. She is the recipient of multiple research and teaching awards.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Vanessa Druskat Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Vanessa, welcome!

Vanessa Druskat
Thank you, Pete. It’s great to be here with you and your audience.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, yeah. I’m excited to be chatting about emotional intelligence today. And so, since we’re going to say the word a lot, I think it’d be helpful to do some defining upfront. It’s a popular term. What exactly do you mean when you say emotional intelligence?

Vanessa Druskat
I like to think of it as recognizing emotion and using it as data. So, we now know that we never turn our emotion off, and people around us don’t turn emotion off, and we send signals to one another through emotion.

And so, the question is whether or not we recognize it in ourselves and what it channels to others, and whether or not we recognize it in others. And then once we know it’s there, do we manage it? Do we think about it? That kind of thing. So, emotional intelligence is using it as data.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. And I think some people might be just sort of brush aside emotional intelligence like, “Well, yeah, of course, you know, I’m going to be respectful and not a jerk and try to listen to people and understand where they’re coming from.” So, am I doing it? Am I doing the things to be emotionally intelligent there, Vanessa? Or is there more to it?

Vanessa Druskat
Oh, a good one. Well, it’s not about just being nice. It is about fulfilling the goals in the moment. And, of course, I like to think of those goals as being humanistic in intent. So, for example, sometimes you have employees that just don’t listen to you unless you get harsh. You recognize their emotions, that they’re not affected by your feedback, and you got to get tougher with them. And so, you can read that in them and you modulate your emotion and get it tougher.

Let me give you an example. I tend to be very empathetic. And so, I have a lot of students, you know I’m a university professor, I have a lot of students who come and argue with me about their grades. One time, I had a student come and say, “I’m going to lose my scholarship if you don’t change my grades.” And in the back of my head, I was being very empathetic and thinking, “Oh, no, there goes her scholarship.” But I had to be fair. And she had many opportunities during the year to come talk to me, and I had said that to her.

So, anyway, point being that I had to manage my empathy in that case and think about the whole, all the other students whose grades I wasn’t going to change. So, anyway, it’s not just about being nice. It’s about thinking about, “What are your goals?” Fairness is always a goal for me and I override my empathy in order to become fair quite often.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, to your definition there, it’s, like, you’re recognizing your emotional instinct, like, “Oh, shucks, that sounds really tough for this person. I’d hate to put them in a tight spot. Oh, I really don’t want them to suffer.” So, you’re recognizing that empathetic emotion, and then you’re using it as data, it’s like, “So, therefore, I’m going to need to dig deep and kind of present something counter to what is sort of naturally would bubble up inside of me.”

Vanessa Druskat

Exactly. And another great example is nervousness, anxiety. So, I talk to a lot of leaders, especially since I work with MBAs. They’re just starting out in their career and they’re not feeling confident. And I have to coach them to turn their nervousness into excitement. So, if they recognize they’re nervous, it’s easier to work with it and to manage it. People don’t want to be led by a leader who doesn’t sound like they know where they’re going.

It’s a really key skill. We now know that emotional intelligence is the heart of social skills, interpersonal skills. We never used to know how to measure interpersonal skills. Now we do, because interpersonal skills, every interaction involves an exchange of emotion. And, by the way, if we want to merge into why do I study emotion in teams, it’s because teams are hotbeds of emotion.

Think about all the interactions that are going on at any time, “Who’s talking? Who’s not talking? Who’s saying things? How are they saying? How is that affecting me and my ideas?” And so, if you think about teamwork, it’s really a place or a situation in which you want to have an emotionally intelligent environment.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, certainly. And you say, “Now we can measure it.” Tell me how is this measured?

Vanessa Druskat
Well, there are several different measurements for emotional intelligence. I would say that there are probably four really great ones out there. You can Google it. You can go to the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. The acronym is CREIO, C-R-E-I-O. And we list all of them.

I’m on the exec board of that organization. We list all the assessments that are out there on that website. And you can take a look at critiques of them, pros and cons of all of them, but there are a lot of options now. There are self-assessments. It turns out self-assessments tend not to be so great.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I was going to say, if you were going to go there, I was going to challenge you. Because, I mean, I’ve taken some of these, like, “Yes, I strongly agree,” or, “I very frequently take into account the other emotions of the people on my team,” or, “Yes, I respect norms in my team.”

And so, it’s like, well, we’ve had Tasha Eurich on the show a couple of times talking about self-awareness and how people tend to be not as self-aware as they think that they are. And so, yeah, the self-assessment, I think, has some value, but also has plenty of potential to be wildly off for many folks. So, how is it done in practice then beyond the self-assessment?

Vanessa Druskat

Well, there are some scales that, first of all, ask others about how you come across, “Are you empathetic?” and various permutations of what that looks like. And then there are some that ask sort of deep questions, like, “What would you do in this circumstance?” And you have to make selections about how you would manage your emotions or help others manage their emotions or how emotionally aware you’d be. So, there’s a lot of good options out there.

But I got to tell you, you know, there’s also a lot of different ways of measuring IQ. And so, you know, and there’s a lot of disagreements. I’ve been in meetings with a bunch of IQ researchers, and they can’t agree on a definition. And it’s pretty well the same with emotional intelligence. I mean, we do tend to agree on the definition, but there are nuances.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, sure. Well, that’s interesting. And I guess I’m curious in terms of, if anyone is continuing to discount like, “Oh, yes, emotional intelligence, that’s just common sense. Of course, that’s a thing that we should just do as kind humans who are thinking through stuff.” What’s something that’s often overlooked or undervalued or counterintuitive? What’s some stuff that people think they know or understand about this emotional intelligence stuff that, in your experience, you realize, “Hmm, au contraire, many folks are quite mistaken here.”

Vanessa Druskat

All right, two things I’ll say. One is that they think this is a fad. They just think it’s another one of these things. But there has been so much research done on it. We now have meta-analyses, many of them. So basically, that’s studies of hundreds of studies. That train left the station a while ago. This really does predict leader effectiveness. It does predict the performance of your employees.

Let me give you an example for that, and then I’ll come back and say more about what people don’t realize. One of the things that we don’t think a lot about is how much we demonstrate care and respect to the people who work for us. It turns out that something like 50% to 70% of people don’t feel respected by their bosses.

Now, I don’t think any boss goes in assuming that they want to be disrespected. They just don’t know how they come across. And so, that’s the kind of thing that will turn off motivation or will turn off your ability to think clearly. I don’t know whether or not your audience realizes it, but we are emotional beings and our emotion affects our ability to think clearly.

So, when we’re nervous, we simply, our cognition is not as strong as it could be when we’re feeling what we consider homeostatic. A little bit of nervousness is good. It sharpens our focus. But overwhelming nervousness just destroys our ability to think.

And so, if you’re the kind of leader who comes across as disrespectful or skeptical or many different negatives that can be taken, any behavior, any nonverbal behaviors that you send to your workers can be construed in ways that reduce, not only reduce their ability to think and work well, but that turn off their motivation.

So, we’re more motivated when we feel we’re part of the picture, when we’re cared about, when we think we add value, when we know. One of my doctoral students, I write about this in my new book, The Emotionally Intelligent Team. One of my doctoral students did a study on which leaders sort of jumped on board to a huge organizational change that she was studying.

And she thought it’s going to be personality, it’s going to be all kinds of things. She was in the organization for a full year while they were going through the change, and so she did a whole bunch of data collection up front and then looked at who jumped on the change, what ended up happening. And the one question that threw out every other piece of data she collected was, “Do I feel respected and valued by my boss?”

And those who did, jumped on the change. They were more amenable to the change. They helped their leaders roll out the change. If you felt like you were replaceable, in the eyes of your boss, you were much more reticent about it. You were more defensive about the change. So, those little behaviors have huge consequences.

And so, coming back to your original question, which is, “What do people not know about emotional intelligence?” I think the people who don’t understand, haven’t bothered to look at it, don’t recognize that humans are emotional beings. There is so much neuroscience out there now. Neuroscientists are saying, “Look, we’ve got so much data. We have to change the way we operate in organizations.”

It’s crazy to go along and operate as usual because so much of the way people behave depends on their emotions, how they feel about being in the environment that they’re in. And so, you can’t just treat people as if they’re objects. You’re going to have motivation problems and you can do it for a while.

It’s kind of like the cheapest way to build a team is to have an enemy, going into battle, “We got an enemy. We got to beat them. Everybody’s going to.” The esprit de corps automatically comes. We’re wired that way. But you can’t do that more than once in a while. The tight deadline will motivate, but you burn people out, and that’s not your everyday motivation.

Everyday motivation comes from emotion. There’s no motivation without emotion. And it can be fear, or it can be a sense of belonging and a sense of social worth and contribution, which is what everybody wants. We get a high. We literally get a dopamine hit in our brains when we feel cared about and part of something, where people include us and value us. And it’s not that hard to create that if you know what you’re doing.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, so much good stuff. Now when you say in the research associated with change management, one question threw out everything, by that language, do you mean this one question was so predictive that all of the others were kind of inconsequential to consider?

Vanessa Druskat
Yes, everybody focuses on personality. Everybody wants to focus on personality. And I got to tell you, personality is not a great predictor of behavior in complex situations. People have said that for decades. We just like it. It sounds so clear. It’s intuitive, you know?

Personality is very easy to study. It’s very easy to blame. There are many other things that are harder to study, emotional intelligence being one of them.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, so feeling respected and valued, is the top and, apparently, most people don’t feel this. Could you share, like, what are some of the best practices or worst practices that are common? Because, in a way, it doesn’t seem like it should be that hard to respect and value people such that they are feeling respected and valued.

And yet, apparently most managers aren’t getting it done right now. So, what do you see are the top behaviors that you think folks need to start doing because they’ve overlooked it or stop doing, because they don’t realize how damaging it is?

Vanessa Druskat

Well, there’s two things I want to say there. One is I think that leaders need to start working on their emotional intelligence. When I look at what it requires to send those messages of respect and value, it often requires managing your own emotions, managing the point that you don’t feel respected.

So, what happens is that there’s a cascading effect that goes on in organizations. And we’ve long known that a lot of managers, a lot of leaders are kind of stuck in the middle, where they’re not getting the love, if you will, just call it love, from people above them. And yet they have to turn around and pass it on below. So that’s not easy.

And so, it really has to start at the top. But if it doesn’t, you don’t have to pass that kind of negativity down. And, in fact, when you do, your team won’t work as well as it could. And that really requires recognition, understanding, understanding self-awareness or yourself. So, for example, back to this idea of me being empathetic. I really fundamentally think it’s one of my biggest skills.

Well, I periodically do these EI assessments just because I use them so often. I want to know how I’m coming across. There was one point at which my colleagues all rated me about as low as you can get in empathy. And I thought, “What’s going on there?” And the reason was that I was so busy, I was running past them in the hallways. I was cutting off conversations. I wasn’t being my best self. And I had it in me. I just wasn’t demonstrating it. And I didn’t realize.

So, again, sometimes you don’t know how you come across. Leaders are often the last ones to know how they come across. And so those assessments can be really useful. But moving the conversation towards what my area of expertise is and what I wrote the book about, which is, “How do you build this into a team?”

Because what we don’t do well is teach leaders how to build good teams. And teams, what matters in teams is how team members interact with one another. Teamwork is not about how the leader interacts with each individual or each individual’s interpersonal skills that they never get to use in the team. Teamwork is about how we help our team members to interact with one another.

And because teams are really interactions, and as I mentioned earlier, they’re hotbeds of emotion because there are so many interactions, and so what you want to have in a team, what you want to build in a team, are expectations, routines, norms that helps team members interact effectively with one another.

So, just simply, do your team members listen to one another? Okay, probably not. The average team members, they don’t. They’re thinking about what they’re going to say. They’re not thinking about what the other person says because they’re trying to impress. They’re trying to compete. So that’s a norm. A norm is that when you make comments, you’re trying to impress others. You’re not really trying to add on to what others are saying.

And so, what you need to do is change the norms, change the routines, build an environment where the expectations that people have for one another are about listening, caring, building on one another’s ideas. And when you don’t do that, you get called out.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, tell us, how does one build that environment?

Vanessa Druskat
Yeah. Well, the first thing you got to do is you got to take a look at the norms that define how people interact in your team. So, every team has norms. And so, what are norms? Norms are, they’re our perceptions of how we’re supposed to act in this environment. So, every time we go into a new environment, we analyze what’s going on, we look at the people with status, and we figure out how things work around here.

And so, every environment, every team, differs a little bit. And so, what I’ve tried to figure out is, “What’s in the environment of those teams that are doing really well, that are surpassing their goals and performing at the top?”

And I tried to define those norms. Well, I haven’t tried. That’s what I’ve done. My colleagues and I have done that. And we’ve come up with this model of specific norms that build that environment. And so, I can lay out what those norms are for you. But the idea here is that you change expectations about how you’re supposed to behave.

And we usually don’t think about the norms, but behavior is not random. We always look to others. And so, what you want to have is not a team where everybody listens to the boss and everyone listens to the people they think are the smartest or the ones with the most social power in the room. But you want to have a team where everyone contributes and you’re not wasting talent in the room.

Because we know, we know, and we’ve known this for decades, that the more participation you have, the better your team’s performance. We’ve also known that you don’t have to have stars. You don’t have to have geniuses in your team. And, in fact, if you have a team of geniuses and stars and top performers, they won’t perform as well as a mediocre group that has norms that use the talent in the room.

Because, think about it, the stars are often each trying to show who’s smarter. And again, back to what I said earlier, they’re not building on one another’s ideas. They’re not listening. They’re not integrating. And that’s where teamwork really happens. That’s where we solve the complex problems. Every worthwhile innovation in the history of humankind has been developed by a team of people working together well.

People like to think that it’s Steve Jobs who developed the iPhone. No. Maybe you’ve heard the stories, but he didn’t want the iPhone. His team had to convince him. He used to take the iPhone and throw it against the wall when everybody, or the phones that people would give him. He always relied on his teams.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, let’s hear a few of these norms that make all the difference.

Vanessa Druskat

Sure. So, we have collapsed them into three different categories or buckets. The first one is about what we talked about earlier. And that’s really a focus on the individual and about getting to know people, building a sense of belonging and respect in the team, and building enough belonging that you can give one another feedback and people will take it. So, if people feel cared about, they’ll take feedback.

So, that’s the first cluster. And we consider that as just your launching pad. Because we’ve always known, and again we’ve known this for decades, that if you don’t take care of the individual, the individual is not engaged, and that’s especially true in a team. If you’re just doing your individual work, it’s fine. But if you’re supposed to share your information with others and build on their ideas, then you really need to feel part of that whole. So that’s the first cluster.

The second cluster, we call it, “How we learn and advance together.” And there are four norms in this cluster that get the team meeting together and talking about what’s working well, what needs to be changed, what’s coming down the pike, what are some things that the team needs to be looking out for. So, basically, being more proactive about changes and also being hopeful.

So, we talk about that as being allowing in the pessimism and also allowing in the optimism. Not toxic optimism, but really thinking about, “What are we doing we’re doing well? We want to keep doing that.” And, anyway, allowing all voices, you create a shared mental model for how we’re moving forward. There are no dumb questions. Everyone’s voice is included.

By the way, this is, again, what we see in the top performing team. So, I’m not making this up. These are all norms that we see over and over again. They get in the room together and anything goes and they’re pretty efficient with it. If you do this as a routine, if you do these things routinely, you’re not wasting a lot of time.

The third cluster of norms, there’s only two in that cluster, those are about reaching outside to your stakeholders. So, again, the highest performing teams have a sense of humility about their level of knowledge or what they know. And they recognize that there are people outside that can help them think more proactively, think about what’s coming down the pike, and also just think more innovatively.

And so, they reach out to stakeholders, they’ll invite their boss’s boss into a Zoom meeting or whatever, or Teams meeting, just for a 10-minute Q&A about, “How’s our work? How’s it affecting you? What’s keeping you up at night so we can link into that and know what’s coming down? What do you think we need to know right now?”

You bring that in, it changes that conversation that happens in the middle bucket. So, anyway, they reach out and bring people in, experts, and things like that. So those are the three buckets. Care for your individuals, make sure you’re aligned and you’re constantly assessing and anticipating what’s coming down. And everyone is involved.

And I want to say, I mentioned earlier the sense of respect and belonging that’s in that first bucket, but if you’re not included in these conversations about the future, you know you don’t really belong. It’s a fleeting kind of thing. And so, you really want to bring everybody into that. And then, finally, reaching out.

So, anyway, those are the three buckets of norms. We’ve taken them out on the road. We’ve helped leaders build them and improve their team performance, better decisions, more market share in their area, and things like that.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, could we zoom in on two specific norms and maybe let’s pick some norms that are extra transformative and extra easy to pull off and yet somewhat uncommon?

Vanessa Druskat
Sure. All right, I’m going to pick two, one in the first cluster it seems nobody ever wants to make time for, and then one in the second cluster, which is about aligning and learning together. The first cluster, the number one norm in the model is what we call “Understand team members,” understand your team members.

And so, this norm is about getting to know one another, “Who are you? What do you care about? How do you analyze problems? What are your skills? What are your weaknesses?” Personality surveys can help with that, but that’s just one of many things. What you need to do is you need to know how to pass information to one another.

You need to know how to speak to one another, “What does that person care about? What keeps them up at night? What are they excited about? What’s their busy season?” Let me give you a couple examples. I had a team that I worked with where one member, a team member said to the others, “You know, I don’t answer the phone.” And they were like, “What? Who doesn’t answer their phone?”

This is, by the way, a multicultural team, and so they were in many different locations, very high level, and it was a leadership team. And everybody in the team thought that the person was just a jerk. We stereotype people. And for one reason or another, the person just, who was an introvert and didn’t like talking on the phone.

So, anyway, we started peeling the layer of who that person was, and it enabled people to interact with him more fully. And guess what? He started sharing more information with them. And information is gold in a lot of organizations. And when everyone, we started peeling those onions of who we are, what we know, and what’s on your mind right now, I can say, “Well, Pete, if that’s on your mind, I got some ideas for you. That’s what’s worked in my division. This may work in your division.”

And so, when you peel the onion of who people are, it does a few things. A, you can’t belong if you don’t feel known and understood. And, B, it brings you more into the conversation. And, by the way, I mentioned Steve Jobs a while ago. He had a coach that coached his teams. And one of the number one thing that coach did was get people in the room talking about what he called trip reports, “What happened to you over the last week? Where were you? What did you notice? What did you see?”

And his motive was to help one another understand what was on this person’s mind, and to learn more about one another so that they could work together more effectively and they could feel more connected. So, anyway, that’s a norm. Nobody wants to waste the time to get to know one another, but I got to tell you, I’ve never seen a high-performing team where members don’t know one another.

Especially when the teams are remote or hybrid or dispersed in any way, there’s a psychological distance that people feel. And a lot of team members feel like they’re the only one who isn’t known, or, “Everybody else knows one another, just not me.” And that’s a recipe for disaster. So, anyway, let me stop there. That’s one norm. Do you want to ask any more about that, or I’ll move to the second one?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I guess I want to know then, when it comes to understanding team members, what are some of the behaviors, practices, the things teams do regularly that facilitates that?

Vanessa Druskat
Yes. Great question. The most obvious one that a lot of teams do and that really does work is something called check-ins at start of meetings.

Pete Mockaitis
We were just talking about check-ins at great depth with Bree Groff, and about how great they are.

Vanessa Druskat
Oh, cool. I’m glad. Bree, I know Bree. I’m glad that she talked about check-ins. Maybe a difference between what I would say, because I know her emphasis is on enjoying the workplace. What I would say is the questions need to be good ones. A lot of the teams that I work with, people don’t want to talk about their personal lives. But they will talk about, “What’s on your mind? What are you excited about? What are you nervous about right now? What are the biggest challenges you’re having?”

You have to cap these check-ins with 30 seconds each or something. But you can get a sense of what’s going on in a person’s life and how you can work together. You don’t feel so alone when you find out others in your team are having challenges like you. It’s a brilliant way of building a more supportive environment in the team.

Pete Mockaitis
So, in practice then, that might just be asking that question, “What are you excited about? What are you worried about?” And just going around each person at the beginning of a meeting or something like that?

Vanessa Druskat
Yes. And as I mentioned in the book, I wouldn’t start with that if it’s the first time you’re doing it. I might start with an easier question, you know, “What was the best job you’ve ever had? Where did you work before this?” you know, little things. And then I would get deeper. But you know what I advise leaders to do is to pass those questions off to team members.

So, put somebody in charge for a month in the check-in questions. And help them realize that they need to start light, but you can get deeper as you go. The other thing is to find out whether or not anyone in the team wants to talk about their personal lives. There’s a lot of teams where people just don’t want to, they just want to have a clear demarcation between, you know, what’s going on with their kids or their partner and what goes on in the workplace. So, anyway, that’s that.

Another, one of my favorite ones, let me just say this, because this can be even, take you even to deeper levels of understanding, something I like to call a gallery walk. And this is where whoever’s in charge of the questions gives everyone a flipchart paper, if you’re meeting face to face. I’ll tell you how to do it if you’re not in a minute. And then you answer a bunch of questions.

So, “What does this team need to know about you?” or, “What do you like most? What do you like least about this team? What do think we need to change? What’s working well? What do you think is working well?” Or, “What was the best team experience you ever had? What were the ingredients in it that you want to replicate in this team?” you know, little things like that that can teach you.

You can also do it with pictures. So, I’ve had team members bring in pictures of their old rugby team or pictures of them skiing with their, of course I lean towards sports because I love sports, but skiing with their family and the camaraderie they felt on that holiday. But, anyway, and you put it up on the wall and people walk around and read one another’s and they can comment on it, and it’s over with pretty quickly.

You can do that virtually by just having everyone bring in a PowerPoint slide and you get 30 seconds to read off your PowerPoint slide, your answers. And it’s a powerful way of getting a lot of information pretty quickly. I am constantly trying to get to the point where I know you well enough to give you feedback. And I care about you. I’m no longer stereotyping you. Because I really believe that giving one another feedback is important in teams. I’ve seen it work so well.

If you can build that level of respect and knowledge of one another, there’s different ways to give feedback. Some people want to hear it, boom, like that. They need to or they won’t listen to it. Some people want it very gentle. And so, caring about how you give the feedback allows the feedback to get heard. And I think, again, this individual cluster of norms, we call it how we help one another succeed.

Okay. So, the second norm is one that we call proactive problem solving, and team members love this. And leaders don’t often involve their teams in thinking about, you know, “What are we missing? What are the opportunities we’re missing? And what’s getting in the way of our success?” One of the things I use, which many of your audience members will probably know a lot about, is a SWOT analysis.

So many team members are anxious about what’s being missed. I mean, as a team member myself, there are so many things I know that I never have the opportunity to share because we just never have those conversations. No one said to me, “What are the threats that you see, Vanessa? And let’s talk about it and let’s prioritize those threats. Yes, what you care about Vanessa is important, but it feeds into something that’s even more important right now.”

And that aligns me. That helps me feel in control. We all have a need. This is one of our fundamental core needs. Belonging, by the way, is the most fundamental core need we have. Social neuroscientists will tell you that, psychologists who study it have long known that. We’ve evolved to need to not be rejected, but to be included, which is what belonging is.

But we need to feel a sense of control as well. That’s another core need. And you help me feel more in control when I’m able to have those conversations in the team. So that’s the other norm that’s often, those are two really key norms.

And then just a third one that I would focus on. You didn’t ask for a third, but would be this norm that we call “Understand Team Context,” which is about understanding what’s going on in the broader organization that we need to know about, or in the client’s world that we need to know about. It helps you be more proactive, and it helps you be more successful as a team.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And so then, earlier, you also talked about listening and how we’re not doing it right. And if that’s the case, we’re called out on it. Can you share, how can we tell if poor listening is happening and how do we call out as best practice?

Vanessa Druskat
Great question. Well, it’s the norm, and it becomes the norm in the team. So, are we building on one another’s ideas? Are we writing down? What I love to do when I lead a team discussion, I write down everyone’s ideas. And I’ll come back to, “What do we think about what Pete said, what Vanessa said?” And I just make sure that everybody’s ideas are heard and entertained.

We know about listening with nonverbals. So, for example, I talked to a colleague recently who served in a team where the team leader would take notes on what people were saying on her computer. And whenever my colleague started talking, she’d stop taking notes, those ideas. So where does your brain go with that?

We have a hyper, hyper, hyper – I can’t underline this enough – sensitivity to whether we’re being heard and valued. This is linked to our core need to belong. Back in the day if you were ever kicked out of the tribe, you were dead.

And so, we have evolved to have an emotional brain that is really sensitive to reading the nonverbals of others and knowing whether our ideas and things are valued or not. And so, we look, we look around, and we notice, “Are people checking their email while I’m talking? Are they looking at me?” Eye contact. Now, we’ve got a lot of focus on neurodivergence these days around how people, whether or not they want to receive eye contact.

But, in general, the research basically says that when you make eye contact with me, it tells me that I’m accepted by you. It’s really powerful, even more powerful when it’s online. When you’re meeting electronically, when a person feels like the leader’s looking them in the eye when they’re talking, they feel a greater sense of acceptance and belonging and validation.

And so, it’s more than the eye contact, it’s the attention. Attention is a gift. So let me just make this practical for you. I had a team of very masculine engineers who were, their team wasn’t doing well and their boss couldn’t let go.

But, anyway, they decided, in order to enact this norm of what we call caring behavior, which is demonstrating respect. We said to them, “How do you demonstrate respect?” And someone said, “Well, you nod your head while someone’s talking.” And so, anyway, they decided that they were going to nod their head and look people in the eye while they were talking.

The consequence was huge. People started sharing more information that they had not been sharing. They started giving more ideas, helping one another more. It’s a motivator. When people are listening to you, now you got to start cutting people off a little bit more, but the participation is more full. And one of the biggest, biggest costs of not having a good team environment is not having people share their best knowledge and information with one another, not supporting and building on one another’s ideas.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Now we had a guest, and he said it just so clearly and simply, it’s that, people see stuff that’s dumb all the time. And if you don’t have an indication that you have any interest in hearing about it, you just won’t hear about it. And so, the dumb stuff will continue. And that is rampant in organizations everywhere.

Vanessa Druskat
Yes. Yes, absolutely. And so that’s why that middle bucket of norms matters so much, which is talking about what’s working and not working. And it’s why the first bucket matters, because the first bucket checks the box on belonging. Typically, we try to belong by conforming. We don’t want conformity. We don’t want people just saying, “Yeah, yeah, that’s how we do it. We do dumb things here.”

We want people to able to raise the truth in that middle bucket, right? People always ask me about the teams I’ve observed, and I got to tell you, the difference between the way the outstanding teams perform and the way your average team performs is stark.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, the way the performance difference is stark, and then just the way they conduct themselves in terms of a meeting is stark. Like, one might be shaking, nodding their heads and saying, “Mm-hmm,” and the others are just, like, dead in the eyes.

Vanessa Druskat

Yes, they’re thinking about the next, or they’re competing with one another, which, the higher you get in the hierarchy, the more you get into these. Because who goes higher in the hierarchy? Highly competitive people, which is great. You don’t want to squish that competition. I mean, that can be useful in a lot of cases, but there are times when you don’t want it. There are times when you want collaboration, and that’s how the organization gets ahead.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, now let’s hear about some of your favorite things. Could you share your favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Vanessa Druskat

So, there’s a guy, Robert Sapolsky, who’s at Stanford. He’s a neuroscientist and a sociobiologist and does all kinds of things. He’s a MacArthur Genius Grant person.

And someone asked him, “Well, are human beings altruistic or are we selfish by nature?” And he said, “We are neither. It’s all about context. In some contexts, we’re selfish. In some contexts, we’re altruistic and pro-social.” And so, his quote was, “Context, context, context.” And I love that quote because it reminds people that building a team is about building a context. That’s one of my favorites.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Vanessa Druskat

A favorite study is a great study that looks at how good human beings are, how good we are at talking without really saying anything. So, when we’re in a team meeting, how we know just the right amount to say and how to say it to make it look like we are really in and to really not really be sharing our best information, our best ideas. We’ve learned that throughout our lives. And if you’re not careful, that’s what your team members do.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Vanessa Druskat
I think everyone should read Matthew Lieberman’s book Social.

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

Vanessa Druskat
The Stakeholder Analysis Worksheet. So, this is basically a worksheet some colleagues of mine developed that, basically, where you list your stakeholders, who’s got information and ideas that could help you perform better as a team.

And so, you list all of them and you list how well do you know them. And then you list who’s going to be the ambassador to that person, and go out and connect with them and find out what they know and bring it back to the team. I just love that tool. It’s so clear, it’s so easy to do, and it has huge impact.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Vanessa Druskat
Question asking, and follow up questions. So, I just feel like we, in conversations in teams or elsewhere, we talk too much about ourselves and we don’t ask people enough questions and dig. People are fascinating. We can learn so much.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And is there a key nugget you share or a Vanessa-original quotation that people mention over and over again?

Vanessa Druskat
Well, the biggest one would be that you don’t build high-performing teams by hiring stars. That you build them by shaping social norms that bring out the best in everyone and that use the talent in the team.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Vanessa Druskat

I’d point them to my website first, so VanessaDruskat.com. I’ve got resources and information on there. And then I’d also point them to my LinkedIn account. I do a lot of posting on LinkedIn these days. And it’s just, again, Vanessa Druskat. You can find me there quite easily.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Vanessa Druskat
Assess your team norms. Find out if they’re working well. Find out what’s working and what’s not working. You can change them quite easily. And it’s not hard. It’s easier to change team norms than it is to change people. A lot of bad behavior is the result of bad team norms.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Vanessa, thank you.

Vanessa Druskat
Thank you, Pete. It’s been really a pleasure to talk with you. I appreciate you having me on and your excellent questions.

1087: How Neurodivergent Professionals Thrive at Work with Shea Belsky

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Shea Belsky shares his top do’s and don’ts for managing neurodiversity in the workplace.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why neurodivergency is unavoidable at work
  2. The unique strengths and struggles of autistic people
  3. When and how to discuss neurodiversity at work

About Shea

Shea Belsky is an autistic self-advocate. He is a Tech Lead II at HubSpot, and the former Chief Technology Officer of Mentra. Having been the manager of neurodivergent & neurotypical employees, he brings many unique perspectives on neurodiversity in the workplace. Shea has championed neurodiversity for organizations like Novartis, the Kennedy Krieger Institute, Northeastern University, in addition to being featured in Forbes and the New York Post.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Shea Belsky Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Shea, welcome!

Shea Belsky
Pete, thanks so much for having me. I’m super excited to be here and I’ve been looking forward to this for a while. Thank you.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, thank you. Well, I’m excited. We are going to talk about neurodiversity today. That’s come up only a couple of times out of a thousand episodes, so it feels like doing it again is worthwhile from my perspective. But could I hear your perspective on making the case for why should your typical professional give a hoot about this topic?

Shea Belsky
The simplest reason is that you definitely work with neurodivergent people. And to set the record straight, neurodiversity includes people who are autistic, such as myself, people who have ADHD, dyslexia, anxiety, depression, OCD. There’s a very large umbrella that it covers that I’m not going to define every single thing. But the important thing to note is that the chances of you working with somebody who’s neurodivergent, loving someone, knowing someone who’s neurodivergent is 100%. You definitely do.

You might not know that they’re neurodivergent. They might not know that they’re neurodivergent, but you definitely do. And that alone should set the standard for why you should care, why you should give a hoot, as you so well put it.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, so if we are aware that someone is neurodivergent, or may be neurodivergent, how does that inform our general way of being, acting, behaving, interacting with such folks?

Shea Belsky

It depends a lot on what they need and who they are. Me, as an autistic person, I have my unique set of support needs. For me, that can be more sensory and social. We had a little chat about sarcasm before, where it went whoosh right over my head. And that’s me and my autism. But someone else who’s autistic, they may not struggle with that at all, but instead they may struggle with executive functioning. They might struggle more strongly with something that’s sensory.

So, to answer your question directly, it really varies based on the person, on an individual, and their own needs and what they need. That kind of relies on them knowing what they need and then also feeling comfortable asking their peers, asking their manager for what they need, which can sometimes vary based on a type of job, psychological safety, the circumstances of what their employment is. It really depends on the situation.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, could you tell us a tale of, in a workplace environment, someone who was oblivious about their neurodiverse colleagues around him or her, and what that person did to gain a more comprehensive perspective and how that made an impact?

Shea Belsky
Yeah, I can talk about a personal experience of mine. One of my first managers, coming out of college and me working as a junior software engineer at a big tech company, I had multiple different managers who all had varying degrees of awareness of autism. Some people had a loved one who was autistic, some knew about it, some had seen it on TV. And then I had a manager who knew nothing about it. They were completely unaware. And they recognized that them not being in the know was actually something they needed to fix.

And so, I started talking to them. This is like week one or week two of us being in this manager relationship. I’m talking about it and they’re like, “I need to stop you right here because I know this is important, but I don’t know anything about this. So, I want to go and do some homework on my end.” This is the manager talking, “I need to do some homework on my end as far as what I need to do as a manager to support you. And then I need you to come back and tell me with like specifics.”

Because up to that point in time, I had just been kind of saying, “Hey, Mr. or Mrs. Manager, I’m autistic,” end of sentence. I’m kind of leaving it up to them to figure it out. But because I was challenged to unpack the specifics, that actually made it really enlightening for me to figure out like, “Okay, what do I actually need in the workplace? What actually is making it harder for me to do my job and what makes it easy? And what do I need my manager to do to help advocate for me?”

And that whole interaction, fundamentally, changed how I approach the conversation as it did for them going forward.

Pete Mockaitis

That is super helpful. And as you mentioned that, there may be a label that we have and that might be accurate and helpful, but there could be many things underneath it, and your individual needs and implications can vary widely from person to person. So, well, tell me what did you, in this story, articulate are some of the needs or accommodations or adaptations or changes in behavior? And how did that improve the experience of working and collaborating?

Shea Belsky

Something that I noticed very early on was the type of workplace that I was in, most people are really direct communicators. Like, when they said something, they meant it, I didn’t have to read between the lines. And I realized that for some people, they might be a little bit more vague about what they were asking for, they might be a little bit less specific, might be sarcastic. When they were talking to me about it, they kind of expected me to kind of figure out what that all meant. And at the time, I struggled with that.

So, I said to my manager at the time, “Hey, like, as I am working to unpack what these people actually mean, I could use your help in kind of helping unpack that/asking these people alongside with me to be more direct when talking with me.” Because in that moment, it’s like one or two things can happen. Like, I could have asked them to be more direct or he could have asked on my behalf. We did a little bit of both where we both sat down with these people, and said, “Hey, like this is Shea’s communication style,” mentioning autism a little bit.

But we said, “Hey, this is Shea’s communication style. Going forward, if you have a very explicit and clear ask of Shea, can you please just be clear and explicit and not kind of beat around the bush? Because, otherwise, it’s a little bit tough for him to understand what you actually mean and it actually makes things more confusing for everybody.”

And as soon as we asked that out of the way, everything changed in a communication style. It really became easier for me. I didn’t have to, like, cut through this noise or fog. I could just say, like, “This person needs me to do a thing. I will do the thing, and make sure I follow up with anything else they didn’t ask me about, but just kind of going start to end in that front.” That’s one example, but that was the one that made the biggest difference at the time.

Pete Mockaitis

And what difference did that make?

Shea Belsky

It made it easier for me to do my job, because a part of that cognitive tax for me was trying to understand what am I being asked. As a software engineer, we have tickets, Jira tickets, GitHub issues, whatever software you use. And so, we’ll put stuff into a ticket to say, “This is what we have to do here. Here’s the story. Here’s these details. Here’s information from users. Here’s what we want to accomplish.” And so, that’s a very clear, easy in and out thing, “I want this thing to be done kind of like a recipe.”

But sometimes if you talk to people in person, there’s less structure. And so, I needed to be able to manage a little bit less structure, but not a complete absence of it. So, in this mode, where it’s like two people talking with each other, and then I have to go make a ticket based on this conversation, I needed to have enough information to put into the ticket.

And the effect that this whole conversation had was making it easier for me to understand what goes into the ticket, what goes into this work, and not have to like overthink or overanalyze this, but make it very clear, “This is the information that I need to work off of.” And then the more and more that I work with these people, I learned their communication styles as well. I learned when they mean this, they also mean these are the other things. I can learn other parts about the systems we’re working with.

And so, over time, I can gradually start to do more with less, but at that moment, I needed a lot to work with to do that.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. So, just very basically being able to do the things that people need doing, but fundamentally. All right.

Shea Belsky
Exactly. Yes.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, let’s dig deeper into autism, specifically. I’m thinking, on the show, when you talk neurodivergent, we had Skye Waterson talk about ADHD stuff. We had Kate Griggs talking about dyslexia stuff. We had Richard Newman, mention autism as being a surprise strength as he was learning about body language things, because he had to get very explicit about this body language means this. And that was, in a way, an asset, giving him a fresh lens, a new perspective.

Shea Belsky
Oh, yes.

Pete Mockaitis
And being able to teach the stuff super effectively and in a novel way. So, give us the rundown, when it comes to autism in the workplace, well, I guess, we’ll start with the 101, the basics. What is autism? And how is an autistic brain different than a neurotypical brain?

Shea Belsky

The sentence has a lot of meaning, so I’ll try to cut to the short version, but an autistic individual can struggle with a lot of different things and have different strengths on top of that. The common things about autism, not saying that everybody has these traits, but commonly includes struggles with social situations, sensory situations, sometimes executive functioning, sometimes motor control, and sometimes like a spatial or social awareness.

And again, not everybody struggles with all of those things, but that I would say are common things that a lot of autistic people experience. On top of that, we have a lot of strengths and talents that can come across because maybe our senses are more keenly attuned to certain things, like pattern recognition, detail, ability to focus, ability to drill into something. There are a lot of strengths that come out of autistic people, with the caveat being that we sometimes have support needs and accommodations that we need in the workplace to actually get there.

Something that I actually take a little bit of issue with is people only characterizing autism as a superpower, because for a lot of people that is not the case where it can be problematic for them. They manage it with therapy, with medicine, with other sorts of masking in the workplace. And for other people they can manage and then they can unlock a lot of their talent, and other people exist somewhere in the middle.

So, the important thing to note is that a lot of autistic people have a lot of strengths and support needs. But in order to get the most out of autistic people, we have to acknowledge and support them with whatever their needs are.

Pete Mockaitis
And in my minimal beginner understanding is that the brains of autistic people are, in fact, structurally different than the brains of neurotypical people. Can you tell me what’s different?

Shea Belsky
This is a biological underlying difference. And that comes down to genetics. Like, my brain is fundamentally different. How I perceive information, how I perceive my surroundings at a fundamental level, like how my brain, how my nerves operate is just different. And again, that difference can be very different from one autistic person to the next. Like, my taste buds are kind of weird. I don’t eat all the same foods everybody else does. My senses are different. Like, the way that I perceive light and sound and touch is very different from other people.

So, at a fundamental level, the way that I take in information and perceive it is kind of like a different operating system, if you want to think about it that way than it is for other people. Not that it’s like, it’s not like Mac versus Windows, but it’s like one version of Windows versus another version of Windows.

Pete Mockaitis
And so, do we know, roughly, what percentage of people have autism, in the US, for example?

Shea Belsky
The number changes pretty frequently, but at the last time that I checked, I believe that it was one in every 37 people in the US who were autistic. It’s pretty high. It’s like the chances that you know at least one autistic person is pretty high.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And can you, like, bring us into your world a little bit? Sound, light, touch, process differently. How so?

Shea Belsky
For instance, it’s interesting because people think that because of the sounds that I don’t like concerts, I’m actually a really big, like, pop punk rock fan. And I love those sorts of concerts. I wear earbuds to manage the sound because, otherwise, I blow out my eardrums on a physical level as everybody does. But if it’s too overwhelming, I will, like, physically feel that energy draining as I have to process the sound.

And, typically, like at a concert, one source of sound is not a problem. If it’s like a couple of big speakers all doing the same thing, great. But if I’m in an environment where there’s, like, 20 or 30 different senses of sound, you mentioned the brain difference, my brain has a really hard time being able to manage the different sounds coming into my brain and being able to say like, “Okay, this person is talking with me. I’m going to prioritize their sound. This person is not talking to me. I’m going to tune them out.”

My brain really has a hard time telling the difference between that, and that treats every conversation around me as though they’re talking to me, even if they’re not. And so, there’s just more energy being used. It’s a tiring, exhausting process for me. So, if I am at a bar or a party or an event or some other sort of gathering where everybody’s talking around me, it is more physically draining on me.

I have very little control over that other than managing where I am in relation to that sound. For instance, like my wife and I discovered this. Like, if we go up back against the wall, like if we’re in an environment where I can go up and stand against a wall, there’s no more sound coming from behind me, so only in front of me. So, there’s less sound coming into my brain that I have to manage. And then I can focus on, “Okay, I can manage with, like, half the room of sound, but not like a full 360 degrees worth of sound,” for example.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Understood. Intriguing. And so now, it’s funny, I’ve been told a couple times that I could be on the spectrum. And the piece of it that resonates the most is I understand that people with autism can have a special area of interest that they just study the bejesus out of. And it might be one thing for a long period of time. It might be kind of alternating from season to season.

And in the TV series, “Atypical” on Netflix, which is kind of fun, our main character with autism had a deep interest in Antarctica, Shackleton and penguins. That was his thing. He knew all about it and the insides and out of it. So, can you speak about this phenomenon?

Shea Belsky
My special interest is absolutely Dungeons & Dragons at the moment, I want to say. I am playing later today. And everybody’s special interest varies as well. And how that special interest comes across is also pretty different from each individual.

For me, it’s like a fixture of my schedule. I make time for it. It’s like every other Thursday for me. But how this special interest comes across is very different for other people.

And to your point, like, sometimes I can get really passionately interested in a topic and then completely lose interest and walk away from it. That was me in, like, Pokemon Go, honestly. I played Pokemon Go for a couple years, and then one day I just lost interest and I moved on to something else.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. All right. Understood. And when you talk about superpowers, in some ways, having a deep interest in a thing that no one else has as much interest in can be a superpower because you can develop a specialized knowledge and expert status on a matter that dwarfs others, and then becomes supremely valuable. It’s like, “Hey, well, we’ve got a subject matter expert on acoustics,” or Dungeons & Dragons, Pokemon Go, whatever the thing may be.

And so, that can be incredibly valuable for a team to have access to that deep expertise. Tell us more about the so-called superpowers.

Shea Belsky
It’s an interesting balance because, especially in the workplace, you are right, you can have those subject matter experts, those people who are exceptionally talented or knowledgeable or passionate about a topic or topics or certain technologies, certain practices, whatever it is. And the way that autistic people really work is absolutely in that area of special interest, they can just go 100 miles an hour on that subject. But maybe those individuals need some support in the workplace to get that done.

It might be a situation where, on a Zoom call, for instance, or Teams, or whatever we use, Google Meet, they might not have their video on all the time. Maybe they’re looking away from the camera every once in a while. Maybe they have a fidget device in their hands. Like, the way that they need to help self-regulate and manage can really vary from person to person.

In my case, I actually have a “working with me” document in my workplace, which kind of describes to people, it kind of gives them like a one-pager on me being autistic. It’s more pages than that, but I have one page just on, “I am autistic. Here’s what you should know about that working with me.” And I talk about eye contact, I talk about flexible hours, camera. If I’m in the office, I got big headphones on. I kind of lay it out for people so they know what to expect.

And it makes it easy for them to kind of match my working style to unlock those superpowers, to really unlock those talents, because without that level of support, I am not able to do my job as well. If I had to not wear headphones in a busy, loud office environment, I would say I work half as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, you know, we actually had a recent guest who said creating a user manual is just a great practice, in general, for individuals and teams getting together and seeing how we work best and under what circumstances. And so, in the case of autism specifically, that sounds phenomenal.

I’m also thinking about, because the first time someone mentioned they thought I was on the spectrum, my immediate reaction was, “But I don’t have any cool superpowers like Rain Man. I tried to learn counting cards once and I was terrible at it.” So, what’s like the Rain Man stuff?Apparently, he’s autistic and, thusly, he could count cards. And what’s that connection about?

Shea Belsky
That’s an exceptional form of a specific talent, which has a specific use case. In their case, they could recognize patterns, they could track things with their eyes. They had this innate talent of being able to see patterns where neurotypical people could not, and then leverage that to an advantage. And that comes up in the workplace all the time, like recognizing patterns, seeing things over and over and over.

For instance, in my case, in software engineering, it could be like, “Oh, I’ve seen this error come up a couple of times. And when this error comes up, it’s because this other thing has happened. Maybe we know why this is happening, let’s go off and fix it.” And that’s just something that I can look at over time. And maybe other people may not have the same level of attention to detail or patience.

Not that they could not do those things, but it comes easier to me to see those trends and perceive them and then translate that to, “What can I do about it? What am I able to do about it? Should I tell someone about this?” In my current role as a tech lead, I’m pretty empowered to go off and do stuff about these things when I see them.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, let’s hear some more great practices in terms of, if we are autistic or have another neurodivergent feature, or there are others on our teams that are, what are some of the top dos and don’ts you really recommend?

Shea Belsky
The number one thing that I say to autistic people is really reflecting onto yourself, to ask yourself, “What do you need? What are your must-haves, deal breakers?” Because my deal breaker is headphones and flexibility and camera and eye contact. Those are things that if I don’t have to constantly manage them, if they’re taken away from me, basically, I would say that I work half as well or worse because that’s just what I need to do my job.

And for other people, like they may be different things. They might be fine without the headphones or video, camera video or eye contact or whatever, but they may need something else. They may need a quiet room or a sensory room. They may need to be able to, like, take walking meetings. They may need an AI meeting notetaker, which is pretty common ubiquitous these days, but you still have to have permission sometimes.

There’s lots of different ways in which that comes up. And I’m not going to sit here forever and talk about all of them. The point is, what do you need? What do you need? What do you want? And being able to articulate them, jot them down, talk about them with your manager and with your team is going to set you up for the most amount of success.

And then if you are the manager, teammate on the receiving end of this, you should feel empowered and trusted that they want to talk to you about this, and then be able to actually go ahead and do something about it. Because you are a team. Like, if you don’t get there together, you don’t get there at all.

And the most important thing about that is being able to recognize that, if this individual needs something to do their job, that it should behoove the manager and the team to want to get that behind them to make this happen, whether it’s something that’s easy and straightforward, whether it needs some sort of work or permissions or approvals, but it should behoove the team to want to get behind people who need help and support no matter what it is, whether that’s flexibility or a physical thing or digital thing, just knowing that we’re all in this together.

Pete Mockaitis
What are some telltale signs that someone we’re working with may, indeed, have autism, ADHD, dyslexia that might make us say, “Ah, perhaps I should have a conversation about this matter”? Or, is that taboo, like, it’s not ideal for someone to suggest, “Oh, it looks like you might have ADHD.” It’s like, “Well, hey, buddy, that’s none of your business, my health matters.”

So, how do you think about that in terms of identifying who might have a need and how to have that conversation respectfully, but not intrusively? Just how do I navigate that whole world?

Shea Belsky
It’s a spicy question, it’s a good question, because, honestly, everyone’s neurodiversity is a personal topic. Some people talk about it a lot. I’ve talked about it pretty frequently, but I would say I’m on the rarer side of people who are very open about it, who are willing to talk about it. Different people have different levels of comfort for what they will and won’t say.

And as far as having a conversation around it, that is typically initiated by that neurodivergent person when they feel comfortable, when they feel like there’s emotional safety, psychological safety. So, to kind of answer your first question, it’s a matter of creating a psychological safety where people can speak up if they’re finding something is wrong about the team, they have a process improvement.

If you can make a change to make things more inclusive, regardless of how somebody’s brain operates, that can kind of lead somebody to be more motivated to disclose. But the idea of self-disclosure is a pretty personal topic. Some people have trauma from having disclosed in the past and being ridiculed or shamed for it or, worse, been fired for it. So not everybody is going to be as open to talking about it as the next person.

But what you can do, if you suspect somebody’s neurodivergent, I would not go up to them and ask them about it unless they already have or have talked about it in the past. Like, if they put it in Slack or talk to you or your team about it, that’s open territory. But if you don’t know that but you suspect it, then you can at least initiate creating the psychological safety, having retrospectives, suggesting process improvements, working with your manager to make sure that people feel welcome and respected and that opinions are heard regardless of where they’re coming from. That helps initiate the likelihood that somebody will self-disclose. Doesn’t guarantee it, but it makes it more likely.

Pete Mockaitis
That makes a lot of sense. And you could talk about accommodations, adaptations, etc., without using any labels whatsoever.

Shea Belsky
Of course.

Pete Mockaitis
Like, “I noticed in a few meetings that, when a lot of people are talking at the same time, you appear agitated. Is that accurate?” And it’s like, “Well, yeah, actually that’s one of the things that gets me kind of feeling nervous.”

Shea Belsky
That can actually help people a lot.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s like, well, then you can have the chat without using the word autism.

Shea Belsky

Some people will have whole conversations like that without discussing neurodiversity. And some people may be kind of waiting for the opportunity to discuss it without ADHD or dyslexia or anxiety or OCD coming up. They may be afraid to put a label on it or may be afraid of how people perceive that label. And being able to talk about the effects that the neurodiversity has without addressing it can sometimes make it more comfortable for people.

Again, it’s really up to the individual, but that may be more beneficial for some than it is for others, especially for people if they don’t even know that they’re neurodivergent at all, which happens pretty frequently. People may have ADHD, un-diagnosed, and not have any idea whatsoever. And so, you may describe a situation, describe a person who is not able to manage their ADHD, then you have an improvement to the team.

Maybe you have a note taker, maybe you have an executive function and coach, or it’s like a thing that helps you manage focus time in your calendar. And that can be a solution to the issues you face with ADHD, without even knowing ADHD is involved at all.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Thank you. You said some folks have disclosed these matters and then been fired for it. My first thought was, “Is that even legal?” Is it even legal?

Shea Belsky
It’s not, technically.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s not technically legal.

Shea Belsky
But people find other reasons for firing somebody that are either adjacent to it or not, because they may be afraid or worried about it. I have not personally experienced this, but I directly know people who have either been ostracized for their neurodiversity, have been treated differently because of it, or have been, like, avoided it for promotions, they had responsibility taken away, or they have, in worst case scenarios, been fired for it.

And I think people are, like, we have conversations like this, like you and I were having right now, because people don’t know how to support neurodivergent people. Remember, in trying to learn, people kind of like shy away from it as like a hot potato, but it doesn’t have to be that way. It doesn’t have to be this big scary topic. I think people are just afraid of managing change, is honestly more what it comes down to.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, when you say that that’s not legal, is this under the Americans with Disabilities Act? Or what’s the relevant legislation?

Shea Belsky
I believe it’s the ADA, I could be wrong about that one, but I’m reasonably certain that it’s the ADA or Civil Rights Act, where you’re not allowed to discriminate employment on the basis of disability, which sounds more like it’s ADA, but I could be wrong about that.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I don’t know, maybe this is a can of worms, but the word disability seems tricky in this context.

Because, as we said, hey, it’s different, and sometimes there’s superpowers, I don’t know. Well, you tell me, Shea, like, the word disability, it sounds like some people might say, “Yes, that’s appropriate.” And others would say, “Heck, no, this is not appropriate. And that’s offensive to even say so.” What’s the vibe in the community on this topic?

Shea Belsky
The answer is that it depends based on the person, on the individual. Like, you could be listening, looking, hearing me right now and not believe I have disability at all, but bring me to like The Burren in Somerville, Massachusetts, and that place gets really loud and, like, anxiety-inducing for me. And I have to bail out of there, after like 30 minutes. In that moment, I have disability.

But if I’m here talking with you on a podcast, no, I don’t have the appearance of having a disability. So, neurodiversity, the idea of it being disability varies greatly based on the individual, on what their needs are, on where it shows up, on what they need, on their strengths. It really varies based on the person.

If you are an autistic person who has higher support needs, maybe you lack the capacity to drive a car. Maybe you don’t have the ability to ride a bicycle. The disability is more pronounced and more obvious, but not every autistic person lacks that ability, not every person has that ability. So, it really varies based on the person.

There is a subset of the neurodiversity community who does not associate neurodiversity as being a disability because it really varies based on the person. If you ask somebody who is dyslexic about disability, they’d probably be more inclined to agree with you. But if you ask somebody who was ADHD or autistic, maybe not. It just really depends on the person.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, I think that word is pretty emotionally charged and I hear what you’re saying. It could go either way, depending on who you’re talking to. The way I’ve thought about the word disability came from a speaker I volunteered with some years ago, Matt Glowacki, who didn’t have legs. He was born without legs.

And so, he’s just a really hilarious speaker who talks about these sorts of topics. And he simply defined disability as anything you got going on that makes it harder to do stuff. And in that definition, that seems not so personal, loaded, charged, emotional. And I was like, “Oh, well, I might think of a number of things I got going on with myself that would qualify under that definition.”

Shea Belsky
Think about it another way as well. If you are pushing a stroller, if you’re like pulling something in a carriage behind you, if you are like carrying a bicycle, for instance, and you have to go up a set of stairs or an escalator or anything that involves like a steep incline, you have a temporary disability that is based on where you are and the thing that you’re trying to do.

For me, it’s the same way. If I am at a business conference and I need to do some networking and I need to mask, if I need to manage sound, if I have to manage light. I went to a conference a few years ago, in a casino. That was extremely overwhelming for me for all the reasons you can probably imagine. And that was like 10-out-of-10 anxiety for me, but something that I had to do. And my disability was a little more obvious in that moment because I was really trying to manage. But if the same conference was in a quiet hotel ballroom, maybe the same thing wouldn’t have been true.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. You said the word mask, and it’s interesting. I was chatting with an AI, that was some months back about autism. And it just sort of dropped these words like I was supposed to know what they meant – masking and stimming, which I subsequently looked up. So, if anyone else is hearing these words, like, “What does that even mean?” Shea, can you lay it down on us? What do we mean by masking or stimming?

Shea Belsky
Masking is something where you, as an autistic person or ADHD or any form of neurodiversity, kind of act in a way that you think people are expecting you to act, whether it is what you say, how you behave, your body language, how you speak. It is kind of putting on a literal mask and altering your behavior based on the expectations of the situation that you’re in.

For instance, if you’re at a business conference and have to network with people, you need to shmooze, make small talk, warm up to people, all of which are things that I find very alien to me, that do not come naturally to me. That’s my brain. My brain does not think to ask someone, “How’s your kids? How’s your home project going?” And I have to kind of, like, remember to ask that, kind of checking off items from a list because it doesn’t come naturally to me. And then I ask them whatever I have to ask in this moment.

And so, that is a frustrating thing for me as something that I have to kind of almost robotically do when I’m in a situation where it’s necessary, versus when I’m at home or people I care about, I ask a little bit less. I don’t ask those robotic things unless there are people who I really actually intrinsically want to hear that information from, like my wife, “How was your work day? How’s your parents?” etc.

On the subject of stimming, that is really like a self-regulation thing. Stim is stimulating. So self-stimulating could be anything. So, for me, like my form of stimming can be a fidget device. Like, I play with this with my hands, typically out of sight and out of range of a microphone because I’ve been told it can be loud before.

That’s also a form of masking. Like, if it was up to me, I might hold the fidget thing right up in my face, and your editors would have a really hard time editing out the audio. So, I kind of keep it down below where it does not come up on the mic. I’m still stimming and stuff, it’s kind of just at my side. So, I still get the benefit of stimming and you don’t have to worry about editing the audio out later.

Pete Mockaitis
And this stimulation, the benefit of the stimming, what is the benefit? And can all of us have it? Or is that more so for folks who have autism?

Shea Belsky
It could be anybody. I would say that it is more pronounced and more beneficial to autistic people. Not every autistic person stims. I want to make that clear as well. Like, for some people, that form of stimming can be something that is autonomous or at the musculatory level where they don’t have a way of controlling it. It just happens.

For some people, you can think of it as like picking a scab and like feeling the release that it causes you. For people who maybe have less control over their body, stimming could be walking. It could be like hitting themselves for some situations. It could be biting things. There are lots of self-stim toys out there which help people manage it without causing harm to themselves or to other people.

And every autistic person stimming takes a different form. Some autistic people don’t have a stim at all. Some have lots of different ones. Some have ones that could be harmful. Some have ones that are very subtle. It depends greatly on the person.

Pete Mockaitis
And what does it do for you, the benefit of doing so?

Shea Belsky

To me, that is like a cognitive form of release and anxiety calming for me. When I am playing my fidget thing in my other hand, a fidget toy is where you describe it. There’s, like, fidget spinners, there’s those fidget cubes. Those are basically stim toys for everybody. I have, like, a whole bag full of fidget toys and gadgets at my desk at work, and I say, “If you ever want one of them, come take one.”

One of my favorite ones is a little, like, independent bubble wrap thing, where like it’s like a plastic bubble popper and you pop it and you flip it over, and you can just keep popping. My wife has one, she’s neurotypical, and she loves it. So, anybody can stim. You don’t have to be autistic to gain the joy out of it.

It can just do something to distract your hands if you’re like picking at your fingers, picking at a bug bite. It can just help calm you down. I can’t really describe how it feels, honestly, because again, everyone is different and the reasons for it really vary, but anybody can do it. It doesn’t have to be autistic people only.

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

Shea Belsky
Everyone has their own kind of fidget device. So, for me, like, this was like a career fair thing that I got at a career fair back in school. And, like, if you’re listening to this and doing career fair gadgets and, like, swag, don’t give out T-shirts and water bottles. Give out fidget devices because Bell, whatever company Bell is, I still have your fidget device and I want you to know that I love it. So, if you work for Bell and you make fidget devices, I want to say thank you.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Let the records show that it has been stated.

Shea Belsky
There’s my endorsement for you there. I gave my endorsement for Bell, whatever company it was that made this fidget gadget.

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

Shea Belsky
“Minds are like parachutes. They only function when open.”

Pete Mockaitis

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

Shea Belsky
I’ve been doing my Tolkien deep dive at the moment. I, like, browsed the Tolkien Gateway, which is like the Lord of the Rings Wiki. And I have the audio book for the Lord of the Rings queued up that are narrated by Andy Serkis. So, I’m kind of ready with all of the terminology and lore from the world. I’ve seen the extended edition movies, so that’s not an issue. But I’m kind of doing a Tolkien deep dive right now.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Shea Belsky
Right now, I am reading, this is actually a HubSpot favorite, it’s called Radical Candor by Kim Scott.

Pete Mockaitis
She was on the show.

Shea Belsky
This is actually really helpful for me about giving honest but meaningful feedback to people.

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

Shea Belsky
I like taking a lot of walking meetings. It’s not really a tool. It’s like a thing. But if I can, like, if I can listen in on a meeting and go for a walk in the middle of the day, that also helps me stim or self-regulate. That helps me kind of calm down and relax and be more present on the meeting, honestly.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Shea Belsky
Oh, I’m running and walking and hiking and stuff like that. Anything that kind of gets my body moving. I feel like it’s a form of physical therapy.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And is there a key nugget or sound bite that you’re known for?

Shea Belsky
Autistic people are really inspirational and so powerful and talented, but you have to really work with us and acknowledge our support needs to get the most out of autistic folks.

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

Shea Belsky
I have my own podcast called Autistic Techie. If you’re neurodivergent, know somebody who is, and you want to learn more about this subject in great detail, find me in all your podcasts platforms, social media, Autistic Techie. If you want to find me personally, my name is Shea Belsky. There’s only one of me. If you search for me anywhere on the web, you will find me. I am one of one, I promise.

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

Shea Belsky
Challenge what you know about neurodiversity. And if all you know is “Rain Man” or “Atypical” or something else, seek to broaden your perspectives and learn from people in your life who are neurodivergent because you’d be really surprised at what you hear from them and what you may take away from those conversations.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Shea, thank you.

Shea Belsky
Thank you so much, Pete.

1083: How Tiny Actions Inspire Others through Mattering with Zach Mercurio

By | Podcasts | One Comment

Zach Mercurio reveals the hidden epidemic that’s plaguing the workplace—and what we can do about it.

You’ll Learn

  1. The root of disengagement and quiet quitting
  2. How to help others feel valued in just 30 seconds
  3. The questions that help people feel seen

About Zach

Zach Mercurio is a researcher, leadership development facilitator, and speaker specializing in purposeful leadership, mattering, and meaningful work. He advises leaders in organizations worldwide on practices for building cultures that promote well-being, motivation, and high performance. 

Mercurio holds a PhD in organizational learning, performance, and change and serves as one of Simon Sinek’s Optimist Instructors, teaching a top-rated course on creating mattering at work. His previous book is The Invisible Leader.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Zach Mercurio Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Zach, welcome!

Zach Mercurio
Thanks, Pete. It’s good to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about your work on a very important topic, and I’ll kick it off by just getting some of the goods. Can you share with us a particularly surprising and fascinating thing you’ve learned about us humans as you’ve done your research and put together your book, The Power of Mattering.

Zach Mercurio
Yeah, there’s this notion that we, as people, should be valued once we add value. So, it shows up everywhere, right? Like, we get a good grade, we get rewarded, or we add value at work and we get recognized. And so, we wait for people to add value for them to be valued and to value them.

But what we’ve discovered is that the opposite is actually psychologically true. People need to be valued in order to add value. We need to feel valued, feel seen, heard, needed so we can develop the self-confidence we need to add value.

And what’s interesting is that, when you think about what’s invested in, we tend to invest in the lagging indicators of valuing someone once they add value, and tend to leave the leading indicator which is making sure someone feels seen, heard, valued, making sure they feel worthy and capable so they can add value up to chance.

So that’s been very interesting reframe is that we tend to think that we need to add value to be valued, but we actually need to be valued to add value consistently and sustainably.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. And, in a way, this topic is as real and as deep as it gets. And I’m having flashbacks to episode 500 with Victor Cheng, when he talked about how to have unshakable confidence. And so, we went into some deep topics about, like, value.

We might not feel it, but, in a way, some of like our fundamental societal beliefs, law, religion, philosophies, wisdom, traditions are like the sort of the ground truth foundational thing is, whether I think about the United Nations’ Declaration on Human Rights or some, you know, biblical stuff, humans being made in the image and likeness of God, is that the fundamental like human beings have value just cause fundamentally, intrinsically.

And that’s why it’s like just very basic. That’s why you can’t kill people, like, “But why? Like, you can kill a cockroach, there’s no laws against it. No one gets upset about it. You can’t kill a person.” Like, well, fundamentally that’s because people have value in and of themselves. And yet, we cannot feel that way internally, and that can create a cascade of not-so-great implications.

Zach Mercurio
There’s a lot there. Can we go back? Well, I want to share a quote from Dr. Paul Farmer, who was a doctor that revolutionized the treatment of tuberculosis worldwide. And he said that the idea that some lives matter less is the root of what’s wrong with everything in the world, is the root of all that’s evil in the world.

And so, when you’re talking about worth, independent of what you do, don’t do, who you are, where you live, you’re talking about dignity. Dignity is that inherent worth that a human being has independent of what they do, don’t do, where they live, who they are. You also mentioned confidence. We don’t develop confidence by sitting in our offices, or wherever we are, chanting self-affirmations to ourself.

We develop confidence because we can go out, try, fail, and experiment. Why? Because someone has our back. This goes back to our rooted need for secure attachment as children. One of the things I like seeing is when I go to a house, a family, a friend, and they have kids, if their kids are loud in front of them, I know that there’s secure attachment there because I know, seriously, I know that their sense of mattering to an adult is not threatened by what they do or don’t do.

They can be corrected, but it’s not threatened. So, they can go out, experiment, take risks, learn, build relationships, play, and know that they have a secure base to come back to because they already matter to someone else. This is how mattering plays out instinctually. And as we age and as we develop, as we go to work, you may have heard of the term psychological safety.

Pete Mockaitis
We had Amy Edmondson on show.

Zach Mercurio
Yeah. Now, I haven’t talked with Amy about this, but I don’t think many books would have been sold if it was called adult attachment at work. But that’s essentially what it is.

Psychological safety is adult attachment, because when someone feels that they have a leader who has their back, that they matter to enough, that they can go out, experiment, take risks, learn, speak up, and they know that that sense of mattering to another person will not be threatened, then they’re more likely to thrive and innovate in all of those things because they have that secure base. I mean, that’s what psychological safety is.

And all of this goes back to what you mentioned as our primal human drive to be significant to other people. The first thing you did as a baby when you were born, scientists find, is you grasped your arms out in a hugging motion. It’s called the grasp reflex. And you actually searched to grab onto somebody before you searched for food, because your survival depended on you mattering enough to someone else to keep you alive.

So that drive to be significant to another person for our very survival motivates and animates almost all human behavior. And when that’s satisfied, we experience what psychologists call mattering.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, let’s talk about the definition of mattering. So, we’ve got that psychological definition there. Can you run that by us again?

Zach Mercurio
Yeah. Mattering is the experience of feeling significant to the people around you. And psychologist, Isaac Prilleltensky has theorized that it comes from two areas that’s well supported in the research – feeling valued by others and knowing how we add value to their lives. And, again, that feeling valued and adding value dimension, they have a reciprocal relationship. The more we feel valued, the more we’re likely to add value. The more we see the evidence of our significance and how we’re adding value, the more we feel valued.

Motivation, resilience, productivity, performance, all the things we say we want comes from that virtuous cycle of mattering. It’s different, and I think distinctions are important because it’s different than belonging or inclusion. I had a friend, recently, who moved abroad, and I asked her, I said, “How is it going?” And she said, “Oh, you know, it’s great. Like, I get invited to all of these conversations, dinner parties. I’m doing a soccer club after work, but I’m around all these people, but I feel completely unknown. I feel completely invisible.”

So mattering is different than things like belonging or inclusion. She felt like she belonged. That’s feeling welcomed and accepted in a group. She felt like she was included. She was able to take an equal active role in that group, but she didn’t feel that she mattered. She didn’t feel significant to individuals in that group. She didn’t feel seen, heard, valued, and needed. That’s why I can belong on a team.

Well, let’s use this conversation. I can belong in this conversation, but you might not notice that I’m a caretaker for a parent who’s in the hospital. You might not be able to name my unique strengths or my unique gifts that I bring. I can feel included here. I can speak. I can take an active role. But I may not feel that my voice is truly heard by you when it’s given. So mattering is the interpersonally generated experience of feeling significant to those around us.

And something we get to reinforce that inherent dignity that we mentioned earlier, strengthens that dignity, and it’s also something we give to others. And, actually, the more we show others how they matter, the more we see the evidence of our significance and the more we feel that we matter.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like these fine distinctions that you’re drawing here because, in a way, I think this might be sort of like the missing factor for a reasonable segment of folks and work or their home lives or wherever, is they say, “Okay, yeah, I’m included. Yeah, okay, I’m doing the stuff. Okay, I share what I think and I am part of the team and I do the things and it’s kind of interesting, but something’s kind of missing in terms of I’m not vibing with this team and feeling awesome in my experience here.” This may be the thing.

Zach Mercurio
Yeah, it’s that feeling of being in a room of a bunch of people, even your friends, and feeling completely invisible and unknown. We’ve all had that feeling where we’ve been around people, but felt like people don’t really know or see that our inner experience, that inner voice that we bring and that we have. And that’s that feeling of not mattering. And the data indicates that what we’re really facing is a mattering deficit, not necessarily an engagement crisis or loneliness epidemic.

For example, more people than ever report that they’re disengaged in their work, as an example. We’ve heard that from Gallup for 20 years, how disengaged we are. It’s about seven out of 10 of us are emotionally uninvested in our work. This is despite DEI programs, wellbeing programs, perks, wages increasing even with inflation 42% in the last eight years, a collective $1 billion investment in services to improve engagement, 100 validated surveys, right? We’ve programmed the heck out of this. Yet people are still disengaged.

And there’s a couple data points that weren’t well publicized in Gallup’s latest report. One of those was that this is the lowest it’s ever been. Just 40% of people strongly agreed that someone at work, where they spend one third of their one waking life, cares for them as a person. That’s the lowest that’s ever been.

Pete Mockaitis
That just feels very sad.

Zach Mercurio
Just 30% of people said someone could see, name, invest in their unique potential. Workhuman did a study in 2024, found that 30% of people self-reported, they felt “invisible in work.” When it comes to loneliness, we’re more lonely than ever, but, ironically, we’re more connected than ever. We send about 30 to 40 text-based messages to peers and colleagues every day. We’re on more platforms than ever. There’s 38 million people probably right now exchanging messages on Slack.

We are on Teams chats. We’re sending messages. We’re sending short texts to each other. We’re more connected. We’re more lonely than ever. And the conventional wisdom on how to address loneliness has been to connect more, put yourself out there, join clubs. The organizational response has been more meetings. So, Americans’ time spent in meetings has tripled since 2021 because of this loneliness epidemic, but we’re more lonely than ever.

And one of the reasons why is that, psychologists find, it’s not the quantity of connections that matters. It’s the quality of connections. And we are having lower quality connections than ever. And what makes a quality connection? Psychologists call it experiencing companionate love. It’s not passionate love. Companionate love is experiencing the behaviors of attention, of care, of affirmation, of compassion from another person. That’s mattering. That’s experiencing that we matter.

So, the opposite of loneliness isn’t having more people around you. It’s feeling that you matter to the people around you. And what’s going on now is that we’re having lower-quality interactions. And one reason why is because we’ve lost, over the last 25 years of using technology obsessively, we’ve lost a lot of the skills that allow us to truly see, hear, value, and show the person across from us how they’re needed.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, there’s so much there. And, well, the notion of feeling invisible, I mean, I imagine this can be a whole spectrum, you know, in some ways, feeling invisible versus visible feels very binary, black and white, one you can see, one you cannot. And yet, there is a whole continuum in terms of care and attention. I was just a little bit versus ample.

And I’m thinking, I remember one time I was with my podcast mastermind group, and they’re awesome, and we really do care about each other and attend to each other. And they were having some sort of weird technical glitch because I said something and no one acknowledged it. And I said something else, and I said it like a third time. They’re like, “Oh, what was the name of that software tool?” I don’t know. And I was like, “Oh, it’s called Claude.”

And then it was like, see them talking, “It was Claude was the name of it.” Then he was like, “No, it’s called Claude.” And then it’s like, “You know, I’ll Google it.” And so, it was about as invisible as you can be, because like I’m literally saying the thing and there is like zero acknowledgement of it. And even though I figured, “Okay, this is probably something with a microphone or an AirPods switch over something somewhere,” it felt terrible. It’s like, really did.

I even had the thought, it’s like, “Am I invisible to you?” And then I sorted out and we had a little laugh, but I think that’s very striking that even a brief moment of technical difficulty-induced invisibility was severely distressing. And to have some folks have that be their daily existence in work and/or home day after day, I got to imagine that results in some pretty spooky health implications. Can you tell us, Zach, what’s at stake here?

Zach Mercurio
So, what we know is that what you experience is a brief moment of what psychologist Gordon Flett calls anti-mattering. And anti-mattering is the opposite of experiencing mattering. It’s feeling insignificant, feeling unseen, feeling unheard. And there’s two consequences to feelings of not mattering.

One is withdrawal. So, leaving, it’s pressing leave. Like you try, you try, you try, nobody sees you, you leave. You isolate, you stay silent, you withhold. That whole quiet quitting trend was totally misdiagnosed as a lazy generation choosing not to work when, really, it was a generation who was responding to perpetual experiences of feeling insignificant to the systems and organizations around them. That’s the inevitable.

Quiet quitting is the inevitable withdrawal response to feeling insignificant in perpetuity. Or, let’s say that your microphone incident kept going. You could have lashed out and slammed something down, right? So, acts of withdrawal, or it can be much louder. And this is actually dangerous, societally. It can result in acts of desperation, “Hey, I matter more than you think.”

Acts of acting out. Destruction, protesting, complaining, blaming, gossiping. When we look at the research on childhood bullying, for example, what nobody wants to talk about with childhood bullies is that bullies, that bullying behavior is actually the last-ditch effort to get attention and control that one is not getting in their family life and in their personal life. It’s actually a consequence of not mattering. We see that in the workplace, like workplace gossip, for example.

Negative workplace gossip, a lot of people think is because of toxic narcissistic employees. But, really, the number one predictor of negative workplace gossip is called psychological contract violation. It’s a fancy word that just means that, “My expectations of fair treatment from my leader were violated. So, because I can’t speak up to them, I’m going to go speak out to someone else. I will do anything, even if it’s talking negatively about someone else, to feel that I matter.”

Societally, when people don’t feel that they matter, this results into division, and it results into clinging to small groups or people that help me feel that I matter because I’m not experiencing it in my everyday interactions. And you talked about the health implications. There was a researcher, John Taylor, he’s a sociologist. He studied thousands of people for six months, and he actually took blood and urine samples, and he was measuring hormones, cortisol, fight or flight hormones, objectively in the blood.

And then he rated them, had them rate the number of relationships they had in their life in which they felt they mattered to, using this general mattering scale. And the people who experienced more relationships, in which they felt seen, heard, valued and needed, actually had objectively lower cortisol levels in their blood after controlling for the same life circumstances than those who did not experience mattering.

So, literally, the experience of mattering, because it’s a survival instinct, can serve as a protective resource for a lot that life throws on us. But when that protective resource is absent, we tend to succumb to life rather than surmount when it comes to resilience.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, this is powerful stuff. It’s a big deal. Well, could we maybe zoom in and get a picture and some hope in terms of perhaps a team or an organization that wasn’t doing a great job of having folks feeling like they mattered, that they had any significance, and then what did they do to turn it around and what kind of results came out on the other side?

Zach Mercurio
I’m actually going to zoom in on the power of the individual manager and supervisor. Because I live in Colorado, and we try to grow gardens every year, but I live on the front range. It’s super dry, and you have to, like, obsessively create micro climates for these plants to grow. And what I’ve been finding through looking at organizations who do this well, there’s a lot of leaders who are in systems that are really difficult that create micro climates where people feel that they matter and feel significant.

One of the things that we find, and if I were to ask everybody listening, “When is the time in your life or your work when you most felt that you mattered?” Most likely you are going to think about a small moment, a small interaction, not a big initiative, not a big program, not getting your direct deposit, getting a promotion, getting an award. You’re probably going to think about a small instant in which you felt seen, heard, valued and needed by other people.

And I’m going to take this back to my first study that we did on the experience of meaningful work. And we embedded ourselves with a group of custodians, so university janitors, for a year and a half. And we were trying to understand what made work meaningful in a very difficult and overlooked occupation.

So, if you want to think about experiences of anti-mattering, I remember sitting in a break room with this group of custodians, and a building user walked by, crumpled a piece of trash. He threw it and it hit the trash can, bounced off and just kept walking by. And the custodians were sitting right there.

That experience of everyday anti-mattering could rake on a group. But this team, this group was profoundly joyful and connected to this bigger purpose. And we wanted to know why. And we found out that it was their supervisor who did very small things to regularly remind them of their significance. For example, one of the custodians said that she was miserable in her first couple of months on the job.

She just took the job so she could put food on the table for her two young sons. She got rejected from 14 jobs before she applied for this one. And she said she kept saying to herself, like, “Why couldn’t you have done something more with your life? Why are you just a janitor?” And during that first month, she would clock in, clock out, that’s it.

And her supervisor brought her into this break room, and said, “Hey, I just noticed that you’ve been struggling. I want you to read this.” And he put in front of her a dictionary and he had her read the definition of the word custodian out loud to him. And the definition was a person responsible for a building and everyone in it. And he goes, “I want you to read that again. Now I want you to look outside.” It was a glass conference room.

“I want you to look outside of all of these students walking by. These are someone’s precious child that’s trusting you to keep this place clean. Look at them. I mean, that’s why you’re here.” And she said that it was that moment, that was the first moment in her life that someone showed her she was worthy. And it went on to change her belief systems about herself and her job. She was actually at the university for over 30 years. She just had a retirement party.

When I asked her what’s the most meaningful part of her job, she said to me that it’s cleaning the bathrooms in the university dormitories after the weekends. And I said, “That sounds gross, you know. Why?” And she goes, “Because after that moment with my supervisor, every time I go into that bathroom, I say to myself, ‘I’m cleaning this bathroom so that these kids don’t get sick.’”

And what happened was, is that over time, this group had developed a collective so-that mentality, because this supervisor was creating repeatable moments, interactions where he was showing them the evidence of their significance. And that’s how we develop these three major practices, right? He was noticing them. He noticed that she was struggling in that moment. He affirmed her. He showed her the difference that she made. And then he reminded her how she was needed.

And so, organizations that are doing this well tend to scale the skills, those skills that that supervisor had, to create repeatable moments where people feel noticed, affirmed, and needed. But I think that what’s an important distinction, it doesn’t come from big projects, big initiatives. It comes from small interactions.

Like, I mentioned the engagement data from before. You can’t tackle employee engagement problems with a program. You can only tackle it through optimizing daily interactions. And that’s where we’ve missed the mark. But that’s why there’s hope. I mean, I think that you asked, “Where’s the hope?” The hope is, is that your next leadership act, your next great leadership act is in your next interaction.

I mean, we can do something about this loneliness epidemic, disengagement crisis in our next interaction, because mattering happens in moments. Mattering happens in moments, not through programs.

Pete Mockaitis
Zach, this is so good. You’re bringing me back to my second job. And I was placed as a temp, a temp worker, at the Danville Area Community College in my hometown in Illinois. And I had this wonderful woman, Anne Weigel, and she was creating some documents associated with the nursing curriculum at the Community College.

And so, I was just sort of helping out with a bunch of these things. And so, I’m cruising along, cruising along, cruising along. And at one point, we got a bunch of them done, and so it was sort of bound and all done. And she said, “Pete, look at this.” And so, I looked at it, I was like, “Yeah, that’s cool. That looks nice.” And so, I went like right back to like, you know, just kind of cranking through my things. And she’s like, “No. Stop.” She’s like, “You did this.” And I was like, “Huh! Well, yeah, I guess I did.”

And it was awesome because my nature was, “Oh, I got a list of tasks. I’m going to continue checking them through.” And then she, like, somewhat forcefully, like redirected me, paused, and I was like, “Well, yeah, I did.” And I don’t remember what more she said after that in terms of like how the nursing students will be using this and what, dah, dah, dah. But it really stuck with me such that, “Yeah, I’m doing a bunch of documents, you know, copy-paste format, dah, dah, dah, dah,” but, really, it stuck with me that people who are learning to become nurses will be referencing these documents.

And so, to the extent to which they are clear and visually engaging and helpful and accurate will, in some small way, improve their ability to, ultimately, care for people in hospitals and healthcare settings. And so, she really transformed it. And it was a lovely experience.

Zach Mercurio
What she did is a practice that we can all do, right? She showed you how you made a difference. I worked with the National Park Service, and there was one park in the West that had a really high morale, low turnover with their maintenance staff.

Maintenance in the National Parks is incredibly grueling work because many of these locations are in rural areas, the weather’s not always great. It’s sort of harsh conditions. It’s tough to get employees. But this manager had, again, created this microclimate where it was this outlier, high morale, low turnover.

And I asked him what he did, and he said, “I go around the park and I take pictures of projects my team worked on. I’ll take pictures of visitors walking over a bridge they repaired. I’ll take pictures of a shorter line for a bathroom because they opened up a bathroom that was needed repairs. I’ll take a picture of people working on a trail, and I send them an email every Friday, and the subject line is just ‘Look what you did.’ And then I just attach the pictures.”

And he said that, “They can’t argue that their job matters or doesn’t matter. I give them photographic evidence.” And I loved that because leaders and people who show others they matter, don’t just tell them that they matter. They show them exactly how they matter. I mean, one way to do this is to simply start giving better gratitude for one another and expressing that gratitude.

Like, for everybody listening, think of someone you’re grateful for. Now, think about the last time you explicitly told them. For most of us, there’s a gap between our feelings of gratitude for someone and our actions of showing that. When we ask people, “What does meaningful gratitude look like?” they mention four things, right? One is describing the setting, like when and where, what you’re thankful for someone doing, when and where did it happen.

Two, describe the behaviors, “What did they actually do when they did this thing that you’re grateful for?” What gifts did they use? So what perspective, what strengths, what wisdom did they use?” And then, finally, impact. Show them, and this is most important, show them the impact that it made on you, that, “If you didn’t do this, this wouldn’t have been possible for me,” and showing them very vividly.

So, in your daily routine today, go beyond saying thank you or good job and show someone vividly the difference they make and how they make it. And you will see someone come alive. You’ll see some go, “Oh, well, wait, wait.” Like you did, “I was just doing some tasks, but wait, I did do this.” It jolts people out of this routine, out of this sort of inertia of the routine. It reminds them that they matter and shows them how.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. Could you share with us, let’s just do two example demonstrations of how that is articulated?

Zach Mercurio
Yeah, sure. So, Pete, at the beginning of this podcast interview, before we got on, we had a really good conversation, and you mentioned your interest in this topic of mattering. That it was deep and philosophically important for you. And, for me, that demonstrated your interest, your wisdom, your intentionality, your preparation.

And as someone who’s trying to create a world where every single person feels valued so they can add value, I felt really comfortable coming on this platform, and I’ve been on a lot of podcasts, but that made me feel really comfortable.

And so, the way I’ve been able to explain things today, and if one person just is able to name that they may not be experiencing mattering or someone in their life or work might not be able to experience mattering, and they can do something about it, well, that’s because of you and the prep that you put into this and how you welcomed me on. So, thank you.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. I wasn’t expecting it to be about me, but…

Zach Mercurio
But that’s the difference. The difference between the, just saying…

Pete Mockaitis
“Thanks. Good job.”

Zach Mercurio
You know, “Hey, you know, thanks for being here.” Or, I’ll give another example of me, personally. Like, I travel a lot. I’m in airports a lot. And I was in an airport bathroom, and there was a cleaner or a maintenance worker, he was in the bathroom and he was fixing the paper towel dispenser, and I was washing my hand next to him.

Now, I saw about 10 people just walk right by him, brushed by him. And I stopped and I just said, “Hey, thanks for getting this working again. By the way, it looks great in here.” And he was like, “What did you say?” Like, that’s what he said. He was almost defensive. He was like, “What?” I was like, “Oh, I’m just saying thanks. Like, thanks for fixing this. It looks great in here.” And he goes, “Well, thank you.” And I said, “Okay.” But he was shocked, right? And all it took me was 30 seconds, but that may have been the only time he saw the difference that he made that day for someone else.

And this is what’s so maddeningly simple about the work that I do, is that I’m teaching people how to optimize moments with people in everyday interactions, whether you’re leading a team, an organization, or using the bathroom at an airport, that can introduce somebody back to them the evidence that they are significant so that they can go home and have that evidence to reinforce the belief that they are significant and that they matter.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s perfect, yes. And I honestly, mostly what you’re doing in airports is waiting anyway. So, let’s make it count.

Zach Mercurio
But just notice how often there’s so many, you know, another example that I have that we can extend to all areas of our life is, you know, my kid is seven and he likes watching the trash truck come. And there was this guy, I mean, he was like, he did not look happy this day to be there. And he was like throwing the bins down and all this. And my seven-year-old’s out there just waving at him.

And when that guy caught the eye, I mean, this is powerful, that guy was seen by this seven-year-old, his demeanor completely changed. He got the biggest smile on his face, jumped off the truck, said, “Hey,” right? And I wonder what it would be like if we were more astonished at other people’s presence in our lives like that on a daily basis. You know, like honestly, not that, but really just when you go through the grocery store line, say, “I know life is hard, I’m really glad you’re here.”

Your team members saying these five words that we hear often in our interviews that are so powerful, “Hey, I just want to remind you, if it wasn’t for you, this wouldn’t be possible. If you weren’t here, this meeting wouldn’t have been like this. This week wouldn’t have been like this.” But I think that there’s so many people around us that make our lives possible, that make what we do possible, and they don’t know it because we don’t tell them.

I mean, that’s why we go back to the beginning of the conversation. You can believe that you matter on your own. You can develop a sense of self-worth on your own, but others can either strengthen or shatter it through the evidence that they’re feeding back to you. And just that act of being acknowledged by my kid completely altered this person’s entire demeanor. That’s the power of mattering.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, boy, I love that example when you talk about kids. It reminds me, one time I was at church and I just caught some woman’s look, and she was like beaming with a huge smile and bright eyes. And I was like, “Wow!” And I was like, “Well, hi.” I waved and was like, “Well, that feels amazing. All of us should, like, greet each other in this way all the time.” And then it’s like, “Oh, you’re looking at my kid.” It’s funny. It’s like we do that for little kids, but we big kids still need it.

Zach Mercurio
Yeah, I mean, next time you’re in line for the construction person, you’re at a one lane road and they have that annoying stop sign, we have to stop and wait, and you’re driving, roll down the window and say, “Hey, I know this is a tough job, I just want to thank you for making sure I get through here safely,” and do it authentically. And you will be shocked at what happens. I bet that person will go home and tell their kids, their parents, their siblings about that.

And you know what’s interesting, is that we were talking about these moments and they seem just very simple and mundane, and someone may be listening and be like, “Well, what does this have to do with work or my job or being a leader?” This is precisely what we find creates mattering in work, motivation in work, and engagement at work. It’s these small moments where someone sees us, they hear us, they remind us of a gift they had, they remind us of a difference we made.

For example, one of my favorite studies is researchers had freelance editors who were contract workers go on and they would edit this fake document. And on one document, there was edits from someone who had worked on it before, and then there was nothing else there. But the other document there was edits that someone else did, and then the lead editor, the head publisher wrote thank you notes on the comments on someone else’s edits before that editor found it.

And the editors that saw those comments actually ended up catching almost double the amounts of mistakes and spent more time on their edits than the group that didn’t even see a hypothetical thank you to someone else. So just even the anticipation that someone might notice our work, that someone might notice us, can actually compel our performance and commitment and engagement and motivation to do something.

So, while we’re talking about like saying hi to a trash truck operator, which is powerful, this also translates to these everyday moments of seeing, hearing, and valuing people.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, and this is such a master key that unlocks so many things and has so many implications in so many little ways. I think it’s well worth just reflecting on it for a while and how it intersects your world. I’m thinking about, one time, I went to Midas and I got some car work done, you know, and they were, super helpful and I really appreciated it, and they were honest.

And they said, “Hey, actually,” point at the records, “It looks like you got this issue and it’s still covered in your warranty, so you should really just have the dealer do this for free.” It was, like, that’s awesome. And I thought that was really cool. So, I thanked them. I appreciated them. It was all good. And then it was also interesting, these Midas guys, they’re crushing it, I got a phone call from someone asking me how my experience was with Midas.

And it’s so funny how that struck me as extraordinary, even though, in some ways it’s not, like, we hear, “How likely is it that you’d recommend us to a friend or a colleague?” like everywhere. And, hey, I worked at Bain, the net promoter score stuff, but, like, we see that everywhere. But when it’s a push button on a screen, or they email you, “Hey, take this survey,” part of me, part of us always wonders, like, “Does anyone care at all? Will they read it? Will they think about it? Will this have any impact? Does it matter?”

But when I had a human being spending time in her life, inquiring about my experience, well, one, I just thought, “Man, Midas is even more awesome now.” I had good vibes, and appreciation, goodwill toward them. And, secondly, it was like, “Well, I will tell you precisely how my Midas experience was in some detail and how cool I thought it was,” because it was just transformational in terms of a human being called me, and you might say, “Oh, they interrupted me. Argh!” I was in a good mood, whatever, I had some time.

A human being called me and I was like, “Oh, you actually want to hear what I have to say about my experience. So, I’m actually going to tell you, as opposed to ignoring all of the emails that ask me to take a survey.”

Zach Mercurio
Let me mine out two practices there, actually, in the customer service example with Midas. That’s an act of compassion, right, of knowing that you could spend this money, that’s the struggle, taking an action to alleviate that struggle. I mean, one of the things that people who help other people feel that they matter do is they move from empathy to compassion relatively quickly.

Empathy is coming to understand what someone’s going through, like feeling your pain. But compassion is taking an action to alleviate that pain using what’s in your power in the moment, even if it’s small, in a customer interaction, to alleviate a potential future pain is something that you’re biologically wired to respond to. So that’s why you felt that commitment of, “Wow!”

That’s what helps us feel noticed, helps us feel seen when somebody actually sees our struggle and offers an action to help. The second though is that someone called and took an interest. Asked you a question, a deeper question. A lot of people in a lot of organizations, they do the net promoter or they measure satisfaction, “How satisfied were you with this?” And they don’t measure impact, “What impact did this have on your life?”

And the questions we ask can also demonstrate whether we see somebody. One thing that people can do right now is start asking better questions. Take an interest in people, instead of, “How are you? How’s it going? How was your day?” Those are all greetings, right? Again, I have a 10 and a seven-year-old, I travel a lot. When someone asks me, “How are you?” my brain can’t compute the last, like, eight hours of living a complex human life, so I just say, “Good. You?”

It doesn’t help them. They don’t learn anything about me. It doesn’t help me share my experience, help me feel seen. But if someone asks me, “Hey, what is your attention today?” Or the question I ask everybody, like I asked you at the beginning is, “What have you been working on before today?” And I learned that a carpenter is helping you work on your studio. I would have never known that if I didn’t ask that question.

Or, “What’s been most meaningful to you today? What’s been important to you today? What are you struggling with? How can I help?” If you’re a leader, “What logjams are you coming up against on your projects today? Anything I can do to remove them?” Those clear, open, and exploratory questions, the art of asking the question, the art of having a human being call you and check in authentically, helps us feel seen.

So, those are two practices that you can mine out of the Midas example, the Midas touch, whatever it is, is the compassion, seeing a potential struggle, anticipating a potential struggle, offering an action to alleviate that, but also taking a genuine interest.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. Well, Zach, in many ways, this is just super simple, but could you give us some top dos and don’ts as we think, “This is awesome. I want to spread more good mattering vibes around me”?

Zach Mercurio
Yeah, the top do is to simply go out and ask the people in your life, or in your work, or the people that you serve, this question, “When you feel that you matter to me, what am I doing?” and listen and write it down, and do more of that. It doesn’t matter where you are in the organization or where you are in life, you have a relationship with somebody.

And asking that question can really, as you said, be the key that unlocks what actually cultivates healthy relationships, which is feeling seen, heard, valued. But everybody experiences feeling noticed, affirmed, and needed in different ways. So, when you ask that question, it’s very powerful. So do that.

The second is to make sure that you’re taking captive the interactions you have on a daily basis. Don’t underestimate. So, this is a do and a don’t. The do is overestimate your impact. The don’t is don’t underestimate your impact.

There’s a psychologist named Nick Epley, and he did studies where he had people write thank you notes out of the blue to certain recipients, and he rated the giver of the note what impact they thought that it would have on the person, what emotional impact it would have and then he rated the actual emotional impact it had.

And almost every single time, the giver of the thank you note underestimated the emotional impact that they would have. This has been replicated time and time and time again. So, overestimate the value of small gestures of seeing people, of affirming them, of showing them how they’re needed. And that will get you out of this gap between your good intentions and your good practices.

The final do I have is to schedule your good intentions. Like, I don’t think anybody wakes up and it’s like, “I’m going to be an uncaring person today.” I just think we get caught up in all the things we have to do, and we lose that. Like, I’m the kindest person in the world when I’m out walking my dog. I think about all the people I should thank, all the letters I should write, and then I get back to my office and I have a big to-do list and I put it off.

Schedule your good intentions. If you have that thought to reach out to someone, put it on your calendar. Put a reminder in your phone. Don’t leave acts of kindness and compassion up to chance. The don’t I have is don’t do this to get more out of people. That’s manipulation. Don’t do this as a tactic. Don’t do this if you don’t believe that this is how you want to show up in the world.

Because the moment we start treating someone as a means to our end is the moment we actually stop seeing them as human, and we start seeing them as “a cog” or a piece of my puzzle. But do this because you see a person as a worthy end to themselves.

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

Zach Mercurio
I’m going to go back to my favorite book, which is Man’s Search for Meaning. And in it, Victor Frankl quotes Nietzsche, a philosopher, but he says, “He who has a why to live, can bear almost any how.” When we know that we matter, when we know that someone else relies on us, it can pull us through even the most difficult times.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. And can you share with us a favorite study or a piece of research?

Zach Mercurio
One of my favorite studies is actually by the organizational psychologist Adam Grant. And he did a study, when his daughter was born, he was in a hospital that was struggling to get clinicians to comply with handwashing procedures, which sounds gross, but it’s very common in healthcare systems. And what he did was he took all of the handwashing stations in one side of the hospital, and he looked at the signs.

The sign said, “Hand hygiene prevents you from catching diseases,” and he replaced them all with “Hand hygiene prevents patients from catching diseases,” focused on others. And he left the other side of the hospital signs the same of the handwashing stations. And what he did was he measured, he had covert raters go in and rate frequency of handwashing behaviors per clinician, and then he had people going in and actually measure the amount of soap that was used in the dispensers.

And the sign that just changed that one word to focus us on our why, that other, had 33% more soap gone on average at the end of every day than the signs that had the focus on you. And there were 10% more handwashing behaviors per clinician per hour in the signs that just changed you to patients.

And I think it gets to our natural human desire to feel that we matter because when we know that we matter, we act like we matter as human beings. And that’s why when we know how what we’re doing is significant, we act like we’re significant. And I love that study because it’s just one word that reorients our mind to focus on our contribution.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. And a favorite tool, something you use to be able to make your job?

Zach Mercurio
This tablet here, it’s remarkable, because I used to have piles of Moleskine notebooks. And now it’s all organized into one piece.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Zach Mercurio
Every day, I play with my kids in the morning.

Pete Mockaitis
And is there a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks, a Zach original?

Zach Mercurio
Yeah, “It’s hard for anything to matter to someone who doesn’t feel that they matter.”

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

Zach Mercurio
You go to ZachMercurio.com, or I’m on LinkedIn at Zach Mercurio. I’ve a small group of engaged people there doing all sorts of different types of jobs that really engage in this work and are trying things out, so it’s a cool community.

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

Zach Mercurio
Don’t be a passive recipient of culture in your organization or wherever you are. Be an active constructor of the culture you say you want.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, Zach, this is fabulous. Thank you.

Zach Mercurio
Thanks, Pete.

1053: How to Create Win-Win Workplaces with Dr. Angela Jackson

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Dr. Angela Jackson reveals how practices that help employees thrive translate into enhanced business results.

You’ll Learn

  1. What’s really driving disengagement at work
  2. How the social contract of work has changed
  3. The best way to get your boss’ support 

About Angela

Dr. Angela Jackson, a Workplace Futurist and ESG expert, is at the forefront of reshaping the future of work. As a lecturer at Harvard University on leadership and organizational change and as the founder of Future Forward Strategies, a labor market intelligence and strategy firm, she collaborates with Fortune 500 companies, growth-stage startups, and policymakers, offering valuable research and insights into the ever-evolving landscape of work.

As a subject matter expert in the future of work and learning, Dr. Jackson is widely published in leading journals, including Fast Company, Fortune, Forbes, Newsweek, Harvard Business Review, and Stanford Social Innovation Review, and has spoken at numerous conferences, including the Economist, Wall Street Journal, and TED conferences. Her forthcoming book, The Win-Win Workplace: How Thriving Employees Drive Bottom-Line Success, releases on March 11, 2025. 

Resources Mentioned

Dr. Angela Jackson Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Angela, welcome.

Angela Jackson
Hey, Pete, thank you for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to hear your wisdom, talking about “The Win-Win Workplace.” And I’d like for you to kick us off by sharing any particularly surprising, fascinating, counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made about us humans at work during the course of you putting this together.

Angela Jackson
So, the research that I do at Harvard University that really undergirds this book is really around what helps people thrive in the workplace. And just a simple one-liner that came out for me that was really surprising, that won’t be surprising to others, that at its base, people just want to know that they matter.

And that can be realized and seen in many different ways. And what we tried to do in “The Win-Win Workplace” book was to identify nine ways that, when people experience these strategies, these behaviors, that they feel like they matter at work.

Pete Mockaitis
I feel like we could talk for 40-ish minutes about that sentence alone, “We just want to feel like we matter.” So, can you maybe unpack that a little bit in terms of what are some work experiences that just say, “Wow, I feel like I matter a whole lot” versus some work experiences that are like, “Wow, I feel like I absolutely do not matter”?

Angela Jackson
Yeah, and I just want to be clear. A lot of my work, and I’ve looked at over 1700 companies, I’ve never met a CEO or a leadership team who said they don’t care about their employees. But what’s so fascinating is that when you go and ask rank-and-file employees, does the company care about them, you have upwards of 60% saying that they don’t. So, there’s this huge disconnect in between what employers, management teams, leaders, executive leaders think that they’re doing and what’s being actually felt.

And so, when we talk to like actual everyday workers, things that they said mattered to them was that, one, that there’s a recognition from their manager or from the company that they have a life outside of work, and that their life outside of work, their lived realities, really impacts their ability to show up engaged in work.

So, being very specific, if you think about, like, we’re all in this sandwich generation today where we have kids of our own, we have parents who are elderly, and we know the numbers of boomers who are retiring. And so, because of that, what we’re seeing more and more are that workers are asking for flexibility, not because they want to sit at home and twiddle their thumbs. It’s because they’re playing defense at all levels.

You know, how are you there for your parents, how are you there for your kids and showing up. And so, a bit of flexibility in saying to people, “Can I adjust your hours by coming in maybe a little bit late? Is there a one or two days that you can work from home?” To them, to employees, they told me that means that their employer actually sees them as a full human.

Pete Mockaitis
I hear you, yes. What’s intriguing is, with regard to the senior folks, you said they don’t say, “Our people don’t matter.” And yet, it is felt at 60% perhaps that it feels that way, that as though, “We don’t matter,” or, “They don’t care.” And it’s intriguing in terms of just like the mental processes at work. What’s behind that? Is it perhaps that the senior folks are just so fixated on the results and the pressure and bottom line and delivering, delivering, delivering, or what do you think is at the root of this?

Angela Jackson
Yeah, Pete, I think about this a lot and I talk about, in the book, we’ve got these win-win workplaces and we have this other phenomenon that I call zero-sum workplaces. And how I describe a zero-sum workplace are these are very traditional workplaces. They’re the ones that say, “You have to come into the office because I came in the office. And when I came in the office, this is the way I was mentored.”

So, it’s really anchoring what that leadership’s experience was. It doesn’t matter that they’ve been 20 or 30 years out of the rank and file. And so, it’s what we’re asking for is like a re-questioning and a re-imagining of the workplaces for this moment. And so, one is a lot of leaders are tied to nostalgia. They’ll tell you the great ways that they’ve been mentored and invested in and how they rose through the ranks. And so, it’s hard for them to reimagine how mentoring could happen, how development could happen at distance.

I was very fortunate early in my career. I worked for Nokia and we were a global firm, and I led teams that were based in Singapore, I had colleagues that were in the UK. I worked remotely 50% of the time and, because of the distance, because of the time zones, you really had to put trust in your people. And what I found as a manager is that if people weren’t doing their job, it became evident really quickly. But we shouldn’t penalize everyone because there are some people that might take advantage of a policy.

Pete Mockaitis
And what you said there really resonated in terms of, “Well, when I did this, it worked like this. Like, I had to hustle, to stay till midnight, to be abused verbally by higher-ups.” And it reminds me, we had a conversation with Rahaf Harfoush, who used the turn of phrase, performative suffering, which I thought was just perfect in terms of, like, “Whoa, well, we did it, and so look how much we suffered and we experienced the hardship and so, too, you must. And if not, something is going wrong, or it’s unfair, or I was cheated, or there’s something that ain’t right here.”

Angela Jackson
And people today have a different type of social contract with work. I’m Gen X, and I would think about what I was taught to do is you go into work, you put your head down, you get in before your boss, you leave later. And what you get in exchange for that is a good paycheck, right? Hopefully, a good paycheck.

What we’re seeing now when we’re looking at this next generation of workforce, many of them report, 42% said that they would take a pay cut if they could maybe work remotely, if they could have more flexibility. And what we’re seeing with all of the research is that people want purpose in their work. They’re willing to take less. Some of people want to go away from the big cities and want to be closer to home.

What I’m saying is there’s a very different calculation today than it was in previous generations. Gen X, the Boomers, you know, if we were born and raised like I was in Chicago, I was willing to go out to LA and go out to New York. Like, we’re willing to run and go wherever for that next milestone. And what we’re seeing with today’s generation, they’re not doing that.

The second thing is, I think about my grandfather who worked at a Chrysler factory, he was there for 40 years, he was part of a union, I was able to go to college because of that. That’s not the same social contract we have today.

So, you have everyday workers who are watching, mass layoffs, when we see that with government jobs that are typically the safest, people immediately think, “What’s in it for me? What’s in it for me to work at a job that could lay me off and I haven’t seen my kids in seven days because I’ve been traveling, because I’ve been going in late?”

And so, really, today when we think about employers and CEOs, they’re really thinking about, “What’s the value proposition that’s going to resonate most to employees today? That is how we’re going to keep people. That’s how we’re going to attract people.” And they’re actually putting a number on that.

So, by meeting their needs, reimagining their benefits, reimagining how people are trained and placed in their positions, they’re seeing lift on the financial side by implementing these practices. And I just think they’re going to be ever needed when we think about the climate now where no one’s hiring, right? Everyone is trying to do more with their incumbent workforce. Well, it becomes, “How do we keep them and keep them engaged, they’re not quiet-quitting?”

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, wow, there’s so much to dig into here. Let’s talk about the social contract in terms of just really articulating that in terms of the old world versus the new world.

You highlighted that job security is no longer a thing, that’s just kind of not around, and so that changes the calculus. Could you elaborate on your articulation of the social contract between executives and lower-level employees in the olden times versus the now times?

Angela Jackson
So, one, you would have, and I think about my parents, your parents, people would stay at their job 20 or 30 years, right? There was loyalty. There were pensions at the time. There was sharing in the success of the company. It was beneficial for people to stay. They were getting bonuses at that time. They had factories and unions that were looking out and making sure that people had benefits and that they could pay for the latest hospital bill or emergency bill.

And what we’re seeing today is that people still expect those things, when I say people, everyday workers. For example, there was this Edelman Trust Barometer that came out, and it said that when people think about where they should be up-skilled for the future or learn these new future work skills, generative AI, they’re looking to their employer for that.

Typically, in the past, employers did invest in training their people. What we’re seeing now is the shift that people are left on their own. And so, what does that mean when you are thinking that you’re a cog in the wheel, at any time your job could be eliminated? And maybe that’s not because sales are down, maybe sales are great. And we’ve seen that with a lot of the tech companies, but they want their share price to rise. So, they’ll just, again, let people go as a signal to the market that they’re being more efficient.

Those are things we didn’t hear about in the past when we talk about that social contract. You were let go because typically you were underperforming. Someone had, whether you disagreed or disagreed, they had a real rationale. It wasn’t because we’re trying to manipulate the stock market, for example. And also thinking about that social contract, the other thing was the stability that you had raises. And you know, there was more employee ownership. There were more pensions.

Right now, when you negotiate your wage, that’s the best that you’re going to do when you’re going in the door. Most people know that. And so, to get that next raise, right, even if you are awesome at your job, you have to go somewhere else. And what we’re seeing now are companies who are letting their best people go because of small things.

This return to office is becoming a big thing. We have A-players, and there was research by colleagues out of MIT, where companies are losing their A-players because there’s inflexibility. And what I always say to CEOs are, “A-players always have optionality. So, it may not be just in this moment, but they’ll have one foot out the door.”

Pete Mockaitis
So, as you sort of lay out the social contract before versus now, it seems kind of like the employee’s contract is just worse now than it was then, and the “compensation” to keep it fair-ish, is that it’s like, “Well, loyalty is no longer something employees bring to the table.” And it just seems like, “Why would they? That’s normal.” So, is that a fair characterization? If the social contract is worse, what are the employees…are they just kind of out of luck or is there a counterbalance on their side?

Angela Jackson
I absolutely think it’s a counterbalance. There’s a set of employers who are still interested in that contract, and they’re interested in centering what employees want. I’ll give you an example. A couple months ago, Spotify put a billboard in Times Square, and it said in substance, “We let our people work remote because we hire adults.” And some would say, “Okay, that’s cheeky and it’s cute, but why did they do that in Times Square?”

Well, if you look down the street from Times Square, you have JP Morgan Chase that is requiring people to come back in the office. And they know some of those people will leave. And what Spotify is trying to do is say, “We’re different.” And they’re using that to actually attract talent, get A-talent. And they’re seeing a tangible benefit.

When I connected with their CEO, he was saying, “We attribute our flexibility and our policies and our people policies with keeping our teams. We let them work from wherever they want in the world. We want them to pursue their passions. Why? Because we know that if they’re excited in their lives, that they’ll bring that excitement to work, if we can sustain that.”

And so, while it’s broken with certain companies, there are a set of these companies that I write about in that I call win-win workplaces are actually using this as their competitive advantage, this moment and this differentiation.

Pete Mockaitis
Now, so in this new contract, Spotify is bringing some things to the table with regard to flexibility, etc. They will still fire you readily because they’ve had rounds of layoffs and such, but they’re bringing some other goodies, such as the flexibility. And any other key things you’d highlight there?

Angela Jackson
I think it’s flexibility. I think it’s passion. When you talk to their employees, they’re passionate about what they do. And what gets exciting about that piece, is when you’ve got employees who are passionate about the mission, that they feel supported, what you’re building towards is what I call an ownership mindset.

And those are the employees, my research shows, are the stickiest, the most loyal. Like, they feel bought into what the company is doing and they want to go the extra mile. And it’s not just about the paycheck. It’s because that company matches up with their values, the way that they live their life. There’s not that gap, that air in between the two.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly. It seems like there’s got to be something going on in terms of bought into the mission or purpose, or we’re having fun solving problems, or there are colleagues that were just a blast to be around who inspire and are fun. Are there any other key bits of value on the employee side that are really getting accentuated these days?

Angela Jackson
Yeah, the big one is around agency. And so, we have a number of companies, the most famous one is we think about Google and their 20% time off to pursue an interest or an innovation. We’re seeing more and more companies actually give their people time to tinker. And by that, I mean some of them are doing it in different ways.

They may bring a problem of practice to an ERG group or a group of employees, and say, “If you can come up with the ideas, all ideas are welcome.” And giving people funding and budget to actually work on some of these ideas. Coca-Cola bottlers, in North Carolina, is doing something very similar. They had a challenge around frontline workers and how we retain them. And so, they challenged a group of rank-and-file employees to come together and solve that problem.

And that was an acknowledgment that these people are closest to the problem. So, of course, they might have some loose solutions to solve it. And so, it’s innovations like that where people are bringing rank and file into the thinking of the company, into the challenges, and also giving them the agency to begin solving some of these problems.

Pete Mockaitis
And I like that a lot in terms of, like, the Coca-Cola bottling example, with the solving of the problems, because when I think about purpose, and maybe I just have too high a standard, but I don’t imagine, I guess it depends on how you define purpose, and I’d love for you to expand on this, that folks are saying, “I am deeply inspired at my core by the mission of getting sugar water into the hands of more and more people and growing the market share,” right?

Like, I don’t think that purpose sense in the Coca-Cola context specifically is resonating. So, when you say purpose, are you thinking about something with more, broader, with additional facets, or maybe it’s like, “Hey, know what, purpose isn’t going to be so much of a motivator in certain organizations. So instead, hopefully, we’ve got some of that autonomous problem-solving goodness to offer”?

Angela Jackson
Yeah, I love that. And I love your push on this too, Pete. Purpose means different things to different people. And so, say you’re at a Coca-Cola bottlers, for example. For them, the purpose is, “At my job, can I be really good at it? And do I have a company that’s investing in me? And do I feel like my work matters?”

So, that’s having purpose versus being at the front line and you’re feeling, you’re just a number. No one knows your name and what you do. You don’t know what you do, how that connects to the overall vision of the company. And that’s hard sometimes when you’re at the front lines. How do you connect that to the overall strategy and show that through line? So that’s one set of purpose.

Then you have the other set of purpose where, you use a Spotify, or I even use my job at Harvard. I love the research I do. It gives me a sense of purpose that I can work on research around workplaces that help connect people to better companies that are willing to invest in them. And so, really thinking about, like, this is something I’d probably do for free, that I would talk about. And you have a set of people who are just really connected to what the business is delivering, and they find deep value in that.

And I believe if you go to some of those employees, they’ll tell you why they’re excited to get up every day and go to work, what they’re learning, how they’re growing, being an international company. They’re doing a lot of exciting things within the company to keep their people engaged.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’d love it if you could share perhaps a favorite story of an organization you’ve seen really make a transformation or an about-face in terms of getting with the program to creating more of a win-win workplace?

Angela Jackson
One that just came to mind was a CEO of a fast casual restaurant. He brought in me and my research team because, again, with their frontline workers, they were having a challenge around getting them to take advantage of the benefits that the company offered.

And the CEO, he was so excited and proud of himself because he offered rank-and-file employees, access to the 401k plans, but he was perplexed because no one took advantage of it. And so, he called me in, and he’s like, “Dr. Angela, tell me, what does your research say about this? Like, I would have killed for a benefit like that.” And I said, “Well, I don’t know.” “Have you asked them?” And he hadn’t asked them.

And to his credit, fast forward, he did end up asking them. And what he learned from his rank-and-file kind of employees is that the 401k was great, people appreciated it, but they had more present-day issues that they needed help with.

Pete Mockaitis
That was my guess, it’s like, “I’m paycheck to paycheck. Saving for retirement would be nice, but that feels more like a luxury at the moment.”

Angela Jackson
“Will I be able to retire,” right? And that was it. And so, to his credit, he acknowledged that. We did the listening, and what he did was the money they had allocated for that, they put into a flexible fund so that employees would have choice about how they wanted to spend those dollars. So, they could spend it on caregiving. They could spend it on transportation. They could spend it on a massage for themselves in the area.

But what he was able to acknowledge, and when we went back and talked to employees, one thing that they told us when we asked that same question, “Do you think your employer cares about or give us some examples?” they start citing that they had some agency over how these funds were spent. And everyone spent them differently.

And what was so interesting that we found after we tracked where they spent the dollars, many of them spent them in their local community, with local small- and medium-sized businesses. So, not only was it great for these employees and giving a sense that this company was actually shoulder to shoulder with them in what they need today, they also felt good that this was money being driven in the community where the business does business.

And I’d say one thing is, when we talk to actual employees, they would say, “We’re appreciative for the 401k, but I’m so happy that I actually get choice. I feel like they really see me and understand me.” And again, all of this is around perception, when we talk about how we feel at work.

So, there’s intentions, and then there’s like how those intentions are received. And what I’m seeing with these win-win companies are they’re really keen on tracking how it’s being felt and experienced by the rank-and-file employees so that they actually get it right and not assuming that they know what’s best and what they want.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yes, that is, in my entrepreneurial journey, I have made that mistake numerous times, like, “People should want this because it’s cool,” as opposed to, “Well, do they actually?” and “You must ask.” So that’s handy. So, you lay out, in your book, “The Win-Win Workplace,” nine strategies for creating better workplaces. Could you share with us a favorite in terms of it just being tremendously transformational and high ROI? Like, “This is not that hard and yet it makes a world of a difference. So, come on, workplaces, everyone should just go ahead and do this.”

Angela Jackson
Yeah. And I have to say, a lot of this book, and what pleased me about it, is these are common sense things. And what we noticed with our conversations with leadership is that it’s harder to put them into place because what it really takes is, one, intention; two, and what we write about this in the book is a commitment to measuring this.

We do lots of things for people. We don’t ask their feedback on them. The second thing is we don’t measure if it’s effective. And this is a problem with a lot of the plans and trainings that we do in the world and, again, billions of dollars spent, but the outcomes, we’re not really seeing any of them. And so, what we’re asking companies to do in this moment is to reevaluate how you’re training people, how you’re developing people, and really think about what’s adding value for them and making sure that it’s actually adding value for the bottom line.

And these nine practices, in particular, they show a correlation to output, a lift on the financial side, and that’s really important because what we’re trying to do is move conversations around investing in people just as an expense or the charitable thing to do to, one, actually seeing it as a revenue driver.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, and I totally buy it in terms of, maybe if you could just specify the mechanism of action here, because it kind of seems like the extent to which people, human beings, are feeling good things, and able to take care of themselves, their lives, that which is important to them, their health, they are able to show up and be smart and creative and engaged and rocking and rolling. And so, that just seems intuitively commonsensically true, but it is kind of a trickier thing to measure.

Angela Jackson
It is and it isn’t. So, the one way that we’ve mapped out, and for this case study, we talk about the private equity firm Blackstone. They have hundreds of portfolio companies, and one thing that they did is they did their research across their portfolio companies. They saw that, investments in talent, they were able to map out an ROI.

And so, what we found were, and what they found were, investing in actually training people to manage people had an ROI. And how they mapped that was amongst retention. They did pulse surveys about frontline, “How did they feel about their managers? Would they recommend their managers?” And then what they were able to do in terms of some of the financial institutions that they looked at, they had measures, for example, on like cash on hand and assets under management.

They noticed that people, when the employees were happier and that they felt great about their manager, that some of their businesses had more assets under management and they had higher sales. And so, they were able to disaggregate that. And so, we tell employers, “Find two to three metrics that you think are key, that you think would show you the health of your employees.”

“Have those metrics on the same dashboard that you’re thinking about, ‘What’s our sales over this quarter? How many products have we produced? What services have we put out?’ And have those same three metrics? So, you should be looking at them. So, one, get a baseline. Two, think about the problem of practice or opportunity you see with your talent. Is it around training? Is it around training managers? Is it about reimagining benefits? Is it about like building your deep pipeline? And just think about what those two to three measurements are, and begin to measure them quarter over quarter.”

And again, it’s going to vary from company to company, but just once you have those three metrics, you’re going to have two measurements that you’d say, “If this is going right, this is how we know. This is the effect that it will have on the bottom line.”

So, it’s an art and a science, but it’s absolutely doable and it doesn’t have to be cumbersome. We’re not saying measure 20 different things. We’re saying, “What are the two to three people metrics that are most important to your business and the business model and the bottom line?”

Pete Mockaitis
This brings me back to one of my favorite consulting projects in which we were trying to reduce attrition at some call centers. And so, as a lowly analyst, my job was to create an actual tool that actually measured real attrition.

And so, I was creating this spreadsheet, and it was so fun because, like, every day or a couple days, more people said, “Oh, hey, can you add me to that daily list?” And so, it’s like I was the keeper of the real attrition numbers. And I had, I guess, my first professional audience, the email list was growing and growing and growing. And, sure enough, once they got engaged, there was real numbers, the excuses disappeared, and we got real about the interventions.

And we could see, in terms of more experienced representatives have a lower average handle time on the phone, resulting in more cost-effective solutions and answers to customers. And so, we could sort of see that line very clearly and it’s cool. Can you share with us, in terms of you mentioned higher sales or assets under management, can you connect the dots a little bit between “We did a thing and it made people happier, and somehow dollars came out the other side”?

Angela Jackson
Yeah, absolutely. So, there was a healthcare system, and what they were having issues with, with all healthcare systems across the country, is retaining talent. You have nursing shortage. You have frontline kind of worker shortage in healthcare. And so, what they did was implement two things that they did were great. One was a flexibility around scheduling.

So, many people who are listening and know healthcare, it’s one of those tenured issues. Like, if you’re the new nurse in, you get the worst shift. If you’re tenured, you get the better shift. They tried to, one, is just reimagine that, and be more equitable, and fair in their scheduling so that new nurses don’t always get the most terrible shifts, because what they found out through measuring it, that was actually burning them out.

They were able to reduce turnover with nurses by 10%. That was really significant because the average turnover they said of a nurse cost them $180,000. So, when you think about that across 3,000 nurses, that’s real dollars and cents that they were able just, by tweaking the schedule and understanding they started with listening, trying to understand “What were the barriers? Why were people leaving? And what would make them stay?”

Two, they knew what their baseline is. And then, three, they got real about what you said, the cost of attrition. I was surprised with my number of companies that how many of them didn’t have a real grasp on the cost of attrition. So, most people might think attrition is just the person leaving their job. Attrition is also the time that you spent finding that person, the time that you spent training them over the years, the value that they had.

And now it’s the cost you need to find someone else and to train them, and they’re not going to be as good as the person who’s been there for four or five years because it takes that onboarding time and getting up to productive speed.

The second thing this healthcare center did, and we found, they found that one thing in common is that people wanted training. And so, what they begin doing is offering training benefits. If it was anything related to a person’s job that they wanted to learn, or if they wanted to go back to get their degree, they were giving them a pool of funds. And they watched, of the people who took advantage of this training, how longer they stayed versus others.

The people who took advantage of training stayed 30% longer. And, again, in a healthcare field where tenure actually really matters, people get better at their jobs and costs are going up when you’re trying to replace talent, like 30% longer became very substantial to their bottom line. And so, they reinvested those dollars into more training, more internship, and just doubling down on what the nurses and other healthcare providers said they needed.

Pete Mockaitis
And, Angela, I’d love your take, if we could shift gears for a moment away from the executive strategic level, to, let’s say you are an individual contributor listening to this and saying, “Okay, that sounds really cool. I’d like some of these goodies,” do you have any pro tips on how we can make the case for whatever it is that we think would help us to flourish?

It sounds like we’ve got a clear situation along the lines of getting some numbers and a financial ROI case to be made? What are some of your other pro tips for folks who find themselves in that position?

Angela Jackson
I think the biggest thing you can do to be awesome at your job is to know your value. You need to understand how you add value in ways that line up with the business and the business strategy.

So, for one, every company that I’m out talking to now, they’re thinking about their generative AI strategy. This is new for everyone. And what a rank-and-file person who’s working, you know your job intimately, you’re an expert at your job, you should be thinking about how do you add value with the new technology? How are you saving money? How are you saving time? How are you being more productive? And have an analysis on that.

When you go in and you’re talking to your manager, the second thing you need to do is speak their language. And so, going in and knowing how you’ve been more productive, what you’ve added in your value, and talking about that in terms, starting with that, and then telling your manager or leadership who you’re in front of, what they can do to help you be even more efficient.

So, you’re really couching it in it’s in their best interest to do this. You’re saying, “I’m an A player. This is what I’ve delivered. And from my job, I’ve noticed if I could get XYZ support, I could be even more productive.”

So, for example, I’m in Boston. We have the worst traffic in the country. And so, what I saw one employee do, she went in and instead of saying, “I want more flexibility to work,” she’d say, “You know, this is what I produced last year, but I did notice that I spent four hours,” her commute was two hours back and forth, “in traffic.”

“I think that if I could leave and show up to work either flexible 6:00 a.m. and get off earlier, come in late, that I could be more productive. I could also be more productive if I could have one day of non-commute time.” Laying it out like that, she got a great response because you’re leading on with curiosity, you’re coming in with data, and again, you’re centering what matters most to them and helping you, you’re helping them help you help them.

Pete Mockaitis
Is that a movie, “Help me help you help them”? That’s good. Well, Angela, tell me any other key things you want to make sure to mention before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Angela Jackson
Yeah, I think the biggest thing, and I just want to just double down on the point I just made, in this time and in this moment, particularly, we have to advocate for ourselves. I think about people who are in jobs today who have ideas on how to improve the company, how they can be more productive. Make sure you’re communicating those to your direct manager. Make sure that you’re getting face time with a more senior management. Make it your business to do that. People need to know you exist.

I’ll give you an example. I have a very dear friend that was in DC and she was part of the latest rounds and cuts at the IRS, and she’s a tax attorney. And she goes, “You know, for a time I didn’t even have a manager for months.” And I told her, “I wish I would have known, because if you can’t find the person who manages you, or if they’re not paying attention, you need to find the next person up the rung to do that.”

And then, two, these strategies give you that economic case and argument. And so, once you make it to your employer, they may respond favorably, they may not. I always say that’s data. If they’re not giving you what you need, there’s a host of employers who are looking for people like you, who are adding value, and who are thinking differently. So, I’d say be on the lookout for those employers and also bring the ways that you’ve been adding. Lead with the ways that you’re adding value when you speak to them.

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

Angela Jackson
“Whatever you can, do, and whatever you do, do it to the best.” And that’s one of the Goethe quotes. And then I love this other one by Howard Thurman, and I actually just write it in my book.

It says, “Whatever you want to do in the world, do something that lights you up because the world needs more people who are lit up.”

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

Angela Jackson
Oh, gosh, my favorite one was putting up a worker advisory board. We had 200 workers from across the U.S., red states, blue states, across different sectors, and really worked with them to help place them in jobs that were impacted by the pandemic, and we’re able to study what happened to them once they were placed in the jobs.

And that actually became the research that undergirds the book. You know, we found somewhere in these, what we now call win-win workplaces, and the others were in what we call a zero-sum where people didn’t want to work there. They were quitting. They weren’t staying. They had regular turnover. And just really understood that the difference between the workplaces were these nine strategies, how they were investing in their people.

Pete Mockaitis
So, as we contrast a win-win workplace versus a zero-sum workplace, could you give us a couple telltale signs, maybe it’s a number or a metric, or maybe it’s a vibe that’s like, “Okay, yeah, this sounds like what a win-win workplace is versus this sounds like what a zero-sum workplace is”?

Angela Jackson
So, I’ll give you an example of one and it just popped in my mind. So, a few weeks ago, some of your listeners may have seen Jamie Dimon at JP Morgan Chase. They had a town hall meeting. They invited all of their employees to ask questions.

One brave soul, he stood up, and he asked this question around the return-to-work policy to Jamie Diamond. I think Jamie would say it wasn’t his best day. He totally went off. And then the person went back to their desk, and their direct manager said, “I can’t believe you asked that question. You’re fired.”

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, really?

Angela Jackson
Oh, really.

Pete Mockaitis
I didn’t know that part of the story. Okay.

Angela Jackson
Yeah, let me tell you more about it.

Pete Mockaitis
Keep going.

Angela Jackson
So, Jamie Dimon didn’t, I’m sure, and I’m certain that Jamie didn’t say to that manager, “Fire him for asking that question,” but what that manager was operating on is that zero-sum workplace. That zero-sum workplace means if you say anything that ticks off the big boss, you are gone. No questions asked. It doesn’t matter what you’ve done, right?

And what that did in that moment, you know, they subsequently told him he could keep his job. And so, the person stayed there, but you have to think about all of the thousands of people who were watching that moment. We say centering worker voice and these town halls are important, but as leaders, how we show up in those spaces really matter and it builds or decreases psychological safety. Like, who’s going to ask the next question that they think, might think, might tick off Jamie? Probably it’s not coming anytime soon.

The second is, “How do we train our managers differently,” right? This manager had an old-school frame, and if he had been actually trained, knew the policies and procedures, had talked to someone and got advice, that person wouldn’t have lost their job, and I wouldn’t be able to tell this story today, which is not the best shining example of JP Morgan Chase.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s just…I am shocked at that notion. It’s about as antithetical to psychological safety as you can get, “You said a thing we didn’t like, so you’re fired.” It’s like, “Okay, well, good luck getting any kind of creativity or quality constructive friction in conversation that leads to goodness if that’s the vibe that we’re all keenly aware of here.”

Angela Jackson
Yeah, and you’re being invited into a town hall, right? And so, this is why we talked about that disconnect. Companies spend billions of dollars on saying that they listen to their people, but it’s not felt. Those are just one of those moments, “You invite me in to listen. You ask for my advice and then you blow up.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah.

Angela Jackson
And so, that’s a classic. There’s many more samples and flavors of that zero-sum workplace. I’m sure what your listeners can listen and lean in on how that looks like. Like, we’ve all had the bad bosses, but it becomes the norm, right? And that’s really unfortunate because instead of operating out of creativity, there’s a lot of fear. And in general, there’s a lot of anxiety in the world today. When you’re bringing that in the world of work, it just becomes closer to home.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Angela Jackson
I think my biggest one is “Outrageous Openness” And it’s just around being open to what’s happening in the world, being curious and outreaching.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool?

Angela Jackson
Right now, my favorite tool, honestly, is ChatGPT. And can I tell you why?

Pete Mockaitis
Yes.

Angela Jackson
When we talk about being productive, some people have zero inbox, I’ve not gotten there yet. But it helps me be more productive with my responses and doing it in a more timely fashion.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m a huge fan of the Superhuman email app, and they’ve incorporated some AI features that I’m genuinely impressed. It can now clearly label podcast pitch in all of my incoming emails. And so, I can just very quickly go, “Hmm, forward, forward, forward, forward, forward, so my producers get those fast.” It’s like, “Okay, well, that’s 90 emails out of my inbox in about three minutes. That felt pretty productive. What else?”

Angela Jackson
And don’t you feel good at the end of the day? You’re like, “I’ve done my job. I’m not the bottleneck.” It’s like playing tennis, you know, get the ball over the net.

Pete Mockaitis
Totally. And a favorite habit?

Angela Jackson
My favorite habit is meditating. Every morning, I don’t do it for long, I’m not one of those gurus. I do about five minutes. I get clear on the day. I say what I’m grateful for from the day before and it actually centers me to have a better day.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And is there a key nugget you share that really connects and resonates with folks that you’re known for?

Angela Jackson
The time to make friends is before you need them.

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

Angela Jackson
So, they can go more in the book, they can go to ReadWinWinWorkplace.com. Also, I’d love to share with your listeners. We’re doing our first summit on “The Win-Win Workplace.” We’ve got 80 employers who are actually practicing these principles and using these strategies to see their ROI. We’re doing that in Chicago on May 5th and 6th, and it’s open to everyone. I say employers, managers come, but even people who are looking for their next opportunity, these are the employers you want to be in front of. They’ll be in that room. And you can go to WinWinSummit.org for that.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Angela, this is fun. Thank you.

Angela Jackson
Pete, thank you again for having me. I appreciate it.