Tag

Leadership & Culture Archives - Page 2 of 19 - How to be Awesome at Your Job

941: The Best Way to Hire Top Talent with Mike Michalowicz

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Mike Michalowicz reveals a surprising strategy for finding and retaining top talent.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The more effective alternative to job interviews 
  2. The key signs someone is perfect for your team 
  3. The three drivers of commitment and engagement 

About Mike

Mike Michalowicz founded and sold two multi-million dollar businesses by his 35th birthday. He is the bestselling author of Profit First, The Pumpkin Plan, Clockwork, and Fix This Next. He has built two additional multimillion-dollar companies and has become one of the world’s most popular speakers on small business topics. Fabled author, Simon Sinek deemed Mike Michalowicz “…one of the top contenders for the patron saint of entrepreneurs.” 

Resources Mentioned

Mike Michalowicz Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Mike, welcome back.

Mike Michalowicz

Dude, it’s awesome to be back. Thanks for having me, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, it’s awesome to be chatting. I have enjoyed so many of your books over the years, and I’m excited to hear about your latest All In: How Great Leaders Build Unstoppable Teams. Lay it on us, I know you go deep with your research. So, tell us the tale of how you came to understand the problem and the solutions that you’ve put forward in your book All In.

Mike Michalowicz

So, basically, what I do in my research, I say, “What’s the desired outcome we have in a circumstance?” So, in this case, it was recruiting high-performing employees, people that are super engaged, great people for our company. Then what’s the actual outcome? And most businesses have horrible outcome.

When we have a desired outcome, and the actual outcome is far off, I look in the middle, which is the method we follow, I call the DMO, desire method outcome. And the method we’re using is interviews. So, this is not a shocker but the solution is. It’s no surprise that most people we interview don’t work out for the long term or aren’t high performers. The percentage, which shows about 5% of people we hire are rock star employees for long term in our company.

But what I found is the solution kind of blew my mind. So, I said, “Well, is there any example of any organization that doesn’t use interviews or use a different method, and has a high percentage rate?” Well, sure enough, there’s an industry, it won’t be a surprise in a moment, but they’re over half a trillion dollars in revenue, that does not run a single interview, they only do performance-based and what they call workshops or camps, and the output is like 95% extremely high performers.

So, here’s the industry. Sports. And that’s not the surprise now, it’s like, “Well, of course.” If I’m a football team, I won’t go, “Hey, why don’t you come for an interview? Where is the green light?”

Pete Mockaitis

Actually, throwing balls, catching balls, running with balls?

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, you get on the field and do. But there’s two forms of interviews. There’s one where I’m considering a candidate and I want to see your functional skills, but there’s an even greater level, and this is the big opportunity for all of us. There is what’s called potential assessments, and it’s not done in the interview process. It’s through an education process.

So, I’ll give a personal example because I didn’t really appreciate experiences. I played Lacrosse in high school, and, admittedly, I was not such a good athlete but, whatever, I played. I went to Hobart Lacrosse campus, which is in the northeast where kind of where I lived, and this is like the preeminent school in this area, there’s 300 kids there. And while we were practicing over this week’s period, certain students were tapped on the shoulder, brought to another field, and invited to play more advanced skills, whatever.

The people who had potential in the beginning were quickly vetted out to perform on more competitive fields and try new skills. By the end of the camp, I think two or three students were invited to play for Hobart, this elite team. I was not one of them. But here’s what’s cool. I played Lacross in college, and it’s in the big part because of what I learned at Hobart. The lesson is this, that we, as employers, can put on camps, an educational event, where everyone gets elevated and used also as an observational medium to cherry-pick the best candidates.

Now, the last thing I want to share, because I get so excited about this. This is happening in the real business world, just not enough. And for the folks listening, I bet you no one’s doing workshops right now, but I’ll tell you a major company who is, it’s Home Depot. And the next time you hear they’re doing a Build a Birdhouse workshop, that is a recruiting platform, and this is how it works.

You see this ad, Build a Birdhouse, Bring a Kid, whatever, and you go down there, and you have experience. They’re there to educate you, you’re having fun, you get ingratiated at the store, it’s cool, we build a birdhouse. They have an employee there that’s observing participation, and if you’re the parent who is learning quickly, helping other parents, asking good questions, really enthusiastic about it, they will tap you on the shoulder, and say, “You’re the exact candidate we’re looking to work in Home Depot. Have you ever considered us?”

So, here’s the lesson. Don’t setup an interview platform, saying, “We’re interviewing people to build birdhouses.” Simply say, “If you’re curious, you can learn,” because the best candidates are curious. The other thing that’s interesting is it’s a recruiting platform that doesn’t follow where the standard fair is going. Everyone is going to the platform DuJour, or Indeed, or whatever it is nowadays. We go there, and everyone keeps going after the same 2% of unemployed people and a few people that are looking for a job right now.

But in an education format, I can go to my competition. I can go to anyone, and say, “Are you looking to get better at what you currently do?” Because, at the end of the day, top performers are always looking to learn. They’re learners. So, put on a learning environment, now people come, they learn the skills that you are looking to hire for, or they have the prerequisite skills and you’re giving them new education, and now you can observe and cherry-pick the people you want. I mentioned in the book, we were testing this other company, and, sure enough, we had a bookkeeping agency that, to a great effect, they preschool, the last organization is using this now.

Pete Mockaitis

Mike, I love so much of what you’re saying here because, well, I actually own a podcast production company, and that’s how we do hiring, is we just put people through sort of a gauntlet. They’re from all over the world, so it’s hard to get them together physically but we’ll just have a series of things, it’s like, “Okay, show me what you can do here and here,” in terms of one of my favorites is “Tell me what’s wrong with this sentence and write a better one. What’s wrong with this sentence, and write a better one? Summarize this podcast episode, etc.”

And so, then when we get together, it’s like, “Holy schmokes, you really sure know how to write very well. Go figure. And I guess you have to in order to pass this gauntlet of assessments.” And then this is also connecting in that I have coached many, many candidates through what I call case interviews for consulting jobs in which they have to solve real-time, live, a business case in front of the interviewer, like, “Hey, our client is this business, their profits are down, what do we do?” and they have to do this all dance of asking clarifying questions, and doing and putting forth a structure, and doing some calculations, ultimately generating a solution.

And, go figure, the folks they hire at the consulting firms tend to work out and not leave early. But I think the coolest experience of this was with, have you heard of the Fossey Foundation?

Mike Michalowicz

I have not.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, this is a nonprofit and, on their website, they identify and recruit and train individuals with extraordinary leadership potential, and Fossey scholars get full tuition leadership scholarships from their colleges and universities. And so, the idea is they want diverse students in colleges, and their students’ brilliance may not show up on the ACT/SAT GPAs. And so, I volunteered several times. It’s so fascinating.

Mike Michalowicz

That’s cool.

Pete Mockaitis

So, we observe high school students as they engage in these activities and we’re all just watching and writing down who’s impressing us with the leadership things they’re doing and who is not.

Mike Michalowicz

I love it.

Pete Mockaitis

And then when all the students leave, we talk about them. And so, that’s like one way that this talent is surfaced, and it’s like a camper workshop for “How do we find great high school talent that should be going to college who isn’t showing up on the ACT/SAT GPA?”

Mike Michalowicz

And you used that term students, which is perfect. So, when you talked about the gauntlet, that’s what’s called a skill assessment. The challenge of the gauntlet is these are people who are already applying for a job so they know they’re in a test environment, and it is a powerful tool. It’s kind of, like, I’m looking for a football player throw-catch-run, but there’s also camps, and that comes prior to this. This is for students, so this is people that they don’t know they’re being vetted, and that’s not even the primary intention, it’s to educate.

So, I can run a workshop, saying, “Learn to be a podcast editor,” or whatever it may be, and now I can invite in my competition, I can invite all these people, and they learn the experience. A couple keys to running a great workshop. Charge for it because people who are curious will pay, and it is educational. Give a certificate of accomplishment. Now they have a piece of paper, or digital paper, that they can use, if you decide not to employ them, maybe you can benefit them with another employer, but in the process always observe.

And that last example, as we said, they are students. So, they’re going through an education and learning, but we’re cherry-picking. The analogy I use, I put this in the book, is pretend you and I, Pete, we want to start a rock band, and we want just like trashing guitarist, and we’re like, “You know, let’s pick a guy from the ‘80s, let’s pretend Eddie Van Halen is still alive. We want Eddie Van Halen.” Now, how do you find Eddie Van Halen without knowing who he’s going to be?

We already know Eddie Van Halen is a qualified person, and if we called him, he would reject us, he’d laugh. The A players are gainfully employed, they’re making Goku box, and they’ll say no. But if we could have Eddie Van Halen when he is 12, that’s when he discovered guitar, I bet you we could’ve secured him. So, the big question, of course, is “How do you know Eddie is going to be Eddie Van Halen?” Well, you do a workshop. We could put on a guitar shop. If we need a future guitarist, we need a great guitarist. Let’s put him in a workshop.

I actually play a guitar but I don’t play it well. We need somebody that’s really a trasher, maybe you do, but we’ll bring in someone from the outside, and say, “We’re going to pay you for a five-day workshop, or one day, or one hour online, whatever it is,” then we reach out to all 12-year-olds, and say, and their parents, “A hundred dollars, learn to play a trashing guitar.” Then we look for the indicators of potential.

It’s always in three stages. Curiosity is the first stage, “Oh, I will do this or not.” So, people vet themselves out right there. Second stage is desire, it’s like, “Oh, I really like this.” Eddie couldn’t put the guitar down. He’s asking tons of questions. That’s what Home Depot was looking for, the parents that help other parents, ask questions about building birdhouses. The final stage is thirst. Thirst is, “I can’t stop.” It’s almost an addictive level. The job of the instructor is to provide an education so everyone comes out better.

Then, or additionally, observe for desire and thirst. When you find those people, that’s when you pull Eddie aside, and say, “Hey, by the way, we happen to be starting a band. Thanks for joining our class as a student here. Do you want to join a band? Do you ever think about that?” That 12-year-old Eddie may have said, “Yeah.” And we don’t know he’s going to necessarily be the Eddie he became, but those desire and thirst are the strongest indicators that he has that potential to become that guy.

Pete Mockaitis

And in the setting of the workshop, I can see curiosity, what are some of the telltale signs, “Ooh, there’s some desire. Ooh, there are some thirst”?

Mike Michalowicz
So, usually, if there’s homework assignments, they actually do the homework. Another part is lots of questions. So, curiosity will come after questions, but desire is also indicative of questions. It’s the person who’s raising their hand the most. The second one is attendance. So, you’ll see if someone is really into it will often arrive early, stay late. They’ll usually be distraction-free. That’s actually the biggest indicator.

When people try to multitask, it means they’re not engaged with the task at hand, so they’re trying to do other things. So, you can see someone online, or wherever, if they turn their cameras off, those are awesome indicators. In a workshop, someone is checking their phone regularly. Well, when someone gets immersed in it, it becomes this tunnel vision. So, we’re looking for the tunnel vision effect.

Thirst may not present itself right away. It may come later on but thirst is an inability to quit. It’s the person that stays for an extra five hours. It’s the professor that says, “Oh, my God, I wish this person will go home now,” or the instructor will go home. That person who can’t quit it has thirst, so we look for those elements.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s so phenomenal. And this reminds me, I was doing a workshop for a pharmaceutical company, just a series of workshops, what you said about the homework was striking. And I thought, “I need to encourage these folks to do the exercises outside of our workshops.” And so, I thought, “Okay, we got gift cards,” I thought a little bit of accountability, a leader board might embarrass them, like, “Hey, your boss and everyone is going to see that you’re not doing the exercises,” and that didn’t really motivate very many people.

Mike Michalowicz

Unbelievable, huh?

Pete Mockaitis

I was surprised, like, “I’d be so self-conscious about my name being at the bottom of the leader board.”

Mike Michalowicz

I know.

Pete Mockaitis

But, sure enough, there were two people who were smoking it, like, with great consistency, getting it done. And so, we stayed in touch, and they might be listening to this show. Hello, guys. And it was so funny, they said, “Hey, you know what’s really interesting, Pete? The two of us were the ones who got promotions, and we were also the ones who scored highest on doing all of the homework.”

Mike Michalowicz

No surprise.

Pete Mockaitis

And I was like, “Yes, that is interesting.”

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, very interesting.

Pete Mockaitis

Because they had the desire, it’s like, “Ooh, I really want to develop these professional skills,” and they went after it, and then they signed up for my email list and other stuff afterwards because they were just into learning these skills, and it so happened that those skills are the ones they needed to flourish in their careers, which is why that was the subject of the workshops in the first place. And so, that’s really telling. If I can give, set a stage to create an opportunity whereby people can distinguish themselves by choosing to proactively do the thing or not, that’s supremely telling. I love it.

Mike Michalowicz

I remember I was doing a presentation last week in front of 200 folks, and these are all business owners. And I said, “Who in the room here is an A player?” And I said, “Please don’t be bashful. This is an opportunity to brag, if you feel that’s appropriate.” And every hand went up. And they defined A player, drive and all the stuff. And then at the same group, I said, “Keep your hand up. I’m curious, what percentage of the population is A players?” And they’re like, “Five percent, 2%.” The most gracious was 10%.

I said, “Okay, we have 100% of the people who are A players, yet, at the same time, saying 10% of the population is A players.” So, this is some bizarre statistical phenomenon happening. There’s some warp in the universe right now, or something is not right. And what I believe is not right is everybody is an A player in the right circumstances. These people, and we all see the best, we all have the potential to see the best in ourselves, some people don’t, but we do have the potential to see the best in ourselves but we have to be put in the right environment.

Eddie Van Halen is probably a pretty crappy, or was a pretty crappy bookkeeper. And so, we’d say, “He sucks.” Yeah, but you give him a guitar. The thing is my little business, I got 20 people here, I have maybe one more role available in the next year. Of all the people in this planet, there’s a small percentage they will be a match for that. But what I had to realize as a leader, as an employer, everyone coming in is an A player. The question is, “Are they an A player for my needs?” And it does change the perspective.

When we think most people aren’t a fit, it’s all about just, “Oh, everyone sucks.” When we think everyone is great, then we start saying, “Well, what will be an indicator of their greatness in compliance with what I need or in alignment with what I need?” It just changes the vision a little bit.

Pete Mockaitis

It is, yes. And it feels more kind and hopeful.

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, totally. And I think it’s the truth. Pick any person, in the right role, they can crush it. And I’m not saying everyone is going to be great nine to five. Maybe some dude, all he does is sleep all day. Maybe he can test mattresses. Like, you got to figure it out.

Pete Mockaitis

“Dude, get in a sleep clinic.”

Mike Michalowicz

He’s a sleep clinic tester.

Pete Mockaitis

“You’ll be giving so much data for the scientists.”

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, or maybe he watches training videos to see if he can stay awake to any training videos. And if he does, he’s a great tester.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, Mike, you’re so fun. I love these perspectives. Okay. Well, that’s such a huge takeaway right there, is creating these workshops or camps. I’d love it if we could get a few more examples for how this can be turned into reality. So, Home Depot, build a birdhouse, sports camps, we talked about the Fossey Foundation. What else?

Mike Michalowicz

So, we worked with a preschool, and this preschool is what’s called site directors. This is a multi-location preschool and they need teachers that can review the performance to ensure all standards are being achieved in their multiple locations. And the prerequisite is you need to be a teacher already. And so, you can get people with advanced skills by having prerequisites.

So, what we did is we reached out to all the competition. And this is the beautiful thing, the competition will send people. We said, “We’re putting on an educational event,” it’s always educational, “We’re going to charge $150 or whatever it was, for a one-day training on site directors services and how you’d manage it. The prerequisite is you must be a teacher for five years, blah, blah, blah.” Our competition sent teachers, so now, at our location, all the competitors’ teachers there, and we teach in this process, we start observing who shows desire and thirst.

By the end, everyone has a certificate, they had accomplished the prerequisite skills or the tests, whatever, but we also identified three of those teachers, we said, “Well, gosh, you’re perfect to be a site director. We happen to be hiring,” but they’re also ethical, we said, “Hey, listen, you have a current employer. If they have a site director opportunity, it is clearly your talent. We invite you to talk with them and consider that, but if there’s not an opportunity and this is something you want to pursue, we’d love to have a conversation with you.” We got our best two site directors that way.

There was another case where a company of bookkeepers, they’re based out of the US, the founder, her name is Tuesday, she is originally from Kenya, an African country. I think it was Kenya. And she teamed up with the University of Nairobi, and said, “I’ll give you a bookkeeping course, all remote.” Actually, she even prerecorded the videos. She had an adjunct professor, she taught bookkeeping. They didn’t offer this course before at this particular university. I think it was a dozen students who went through it.

By the end, the onsite director, she gave them direction, saying, “As an adjunct professor, give me feedback on who’s doing the homework, who’s engaged the most, and I want to talk to those people, and I’ll start doing one-on-one coaching.” So, they did additive education, and she started coaching them individually, and she vetted down about three people that she hired. They’re her best performing employees. But the beauty of that story is the remaining nine people all got jobs as bookkeepers at other companies.

Now, here’s the last thing I want to share, this kind of feels overwhelming. I got to put on a course, I had to do a webinar. Even if it’s an hour, I don’t have the skills. Here’s the ultimate shortcut. Whatever position you need to hire for, find the workshop, the course, the education, the class that’s teaching it, and go as a student to observe the other students. That’s the shortcut. Just go and watch the others, seek desire and thirst, talk to them, and say, “Hey, I’m looking to hire, not deal.”

Pete Mockaitis

This is beautiful. All right, workshops is huge. Well, keep it going, Mike. What are some other pro tips on building these unstoppable teams? And I want to hear, generally speaking, interviews aren’t the method between desire and outcome that we’re after. Workshops are a cool alternative means of selecting folks. What are some other things you suggest that are not interviews?

Mike Michalowicz

So, the most common other thing I heard, and this was also mind-blowing to me, is the desire was, “I want my employees to act like owners.” The method was if you achieve certain goals, you’ll get rewarded. And the outcome is most employees see their job as just a job and don’t function as owners. They don’t put in that extra effort because they don’t have a desire.

What I found is a concept that was buried away in the 1970s-1980s called psychological ownership which is ignored by leaders, but, my gosh, it’s the tool that makes any of us, leader, owner, or not, to feel like owners. What it’s called is psychological ownership. So, there’s two types of ownerships. There’s legal ownership and psychological.

Legal ownership is just a contract of sorts but it doesn’t give you the feeling. Psychological always does, and we need to amplify it. The best example is I own stock in Ford, a hundred shares. I recently drove by a Ford factory, and I was just driving by, I didn’t look at it and say, “Oh, my God, I own three of those bricks on that building.” I just drove by, and I go, “Oh, there’s Ford. Where’s my money?” which is entitlement even though I have legal ownership.

Now here’s the irony, I also own a Ford pickup truck, and I feel that I own it but I actually don’t. The bank owns it, I’m making installments but I feel like I own it. So, the question is, “Why do I feel that way?” Because I treat it with such care. The reason is three elements. First of all, I have the ability to personalize it. I can program the radio stations the way I want. I can put bumper stickers on the back. When you can personalize something, you feel a sense of authority over it, and it becomes part of you. It’s an expression of identity.

The second part is I have control, authority, meaning I can park it where I want to park it, I drive whenever I want to drive it, all those elements. And the last part is I have intimate knowledge, I know all the bells and whistles. I went through the whole manual. I know what every button does. So, the more intimately we know something, the more we can personalize and put authority or control into it, the more we sense ownership.

So, as employees in an organization, within the confines of their job, where can they assert control? Part of it is idea generation. When someone comes up with their own idea, they feel control. Say, “Hey, here’s where we want to move our company, here’s your capacity in it, what do you think you could do or want to do to help us move the business forward?” So, now you’re asserting control, “How can you make this more your own? How can it be an expression of yourself?”

One thing we do when we have an SOP or standard in our own company now, I used to have the person that does it, currently teach it, and everyone follows a script, no control, no authority. Now, we do is we have a script, we give it to the new person, and say, “Learn from this. And then how can you enhance it and create the new training video because it’s going to be your standard?” The irony is the best student in every room is the teacher. So, they’re teaching, which means they’re learning, but also because it’s an expression of themselves, they have more ownership in the role.

Pete Mockaitis

I want to put you on the spot with, like, this really tricky example. Like, let’s say, “Hey, there is a standardized process by which this needs to be done for the sake of compliance or for the law.”

Mike Michalowicz

Right. Right. So, you can’t change the coding or anything.

Pete Mockaitis

So, there’s a few things that are kind of immovable. But could you give us some cool examples of how, even within such environments, folks manage to feel a lot of that cool personalization, control, and intimate knowledge?

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, so a quick simple personalization tip, trick, is to change the name of something, maybe not publicly but internally. So, if there’s some kind of compliance document, I can call it Kelsey’s compliance, and right there, with the assigned names, you have a sense of authority, and really personalization over it so you can give it unique names and lingo. It’s a real simple technique.

Intimate knowledge, I would exploit that. So, I’d say, listeners, “Rules and regulations, we had to follow it to the tee. I want you to be the master at this. So, research it, study. Can you find loopholes, which is an opportunity?” When you find a loophole, it’s a technique of personalization, it’s like, “Oh, there’s a little button here that no one knows about that I can get through.” So, explore it. But even if they don’t find “loopholes” the fact they know the protocol better than anyone else, they’re building intimate knowledge.

Control and authority. There may be protocols they have to follow but can they control the submission times? You can say, “Hey, when is the optimum time to get this in? Does it always have to be Monday at 10:15 a.m.? Or, can we work with a schedule that suits you?” That’s giving them a sense of control so you can assert it. Again, what we’re looking for is for them to say, “This is my responsibility. This is my job,” and that means they’re sensing that authority.

I will give one word of warning though. There is a risk here of fiefdoms. And what a fiefdom is it’s where a person has so much knowledge that they start blockading other people from access. That’s dangerous. So, we want to move to a higher level of psychological ownership which is called collective psychological ownership.

What we do here is you have multiple parties involved, you make teams around it, so if there’s something, a risk of a fiefdom being built, invite multiple people to work in concert, in that way you prevent those walls from being built.

Pete Mockaitis

And it’s funny how into things we can get in terms of if you feel like you’ve got your own little touch on it. In terms of like if I am getting into my own audio editing, which I do from time to time, here and there, even though I’ve got great supportive teams, I love to do certain things which are just sort of my little style. It’s like I’d like to do a gentle downward expansion to attenuate the intensity of a breath sound as opposed to a harsh noise gate that have layers of rich complex gradations of silence. It’s like, “Okay, that’s so dorky but I own it. I am invested in this.”

Mike Michalowicz
Amazing.

Pete Mockaitis

And it’s funny, if someone were to take that away, in terms of, like, “No, Pete, that’s not how we do it here. Actually, you’ve got to comply with the situation where we use XYZ software,” I wouldn’t like that.

Mike Michalowicz

Totally, right, because when someone asserts control or authority on you, we start building resistance. I was saying, when forced to comply, we seek to defy.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, Mike.

Mike Michalowicz

The classic study, and this works from poise, but the classic is with rental cars because we’ve all experienced this. The next time you go to Herts or wherever, you go through a protocol of compliance requirements. First, you got to fill out a hundred forms for an hour. Secondly, if you don’t return with a full tank of gas, we’re going to penalize you by charging $10 a gallon for us to fill it because it’s so hard. Secondly, no scratches, no dents. Third, must be clean. Fourth, good luck passing the DMZ zone where there’s going to be flashing lights, spikes coming up, and some dude coming out with a gun asking for your ID, all that compliance.

So, when forced to comply, we seek to defy. What do we do the second we pull out? We do donuts in the parking lot, or we fly into the light and skid in sideways, or we punch it when it turns green. We definitely drive it more aggressively. Rental cars get beat up on compared to our own car, where we’re, “Hey, this is my car. We’re going to take care of it.” No one washes their rental car before returning, but we wash our own car. Why is that? When forced to comply, we seek to defy.

And this is one of the things that great leaders realize. Most leaders focus on compliance, achievement, and so employees are seeking for elbow room to get back at the boss. Great leaders embrace the internal human and allow them to take charge. Yes, there’s rules and confines. You can’t let people just go wild. We have to work as a team collectively. You can’t have a football team where you say, “Everyone just run any way you want.” We have to serve the plays.

But if we can give them self-expression, they can expand.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, then as we speak, there’s a world of work, there’s these back-to-office mandates. Tell us, as we think about personalization and control, what’s your hot take on these?

Mike Michalowicz
Is that in the best interest of employees? Sometimes you have to require something that actually serves people, and you’ll get resistance, a.k.a. if you ever had children, that’s the world of raising children. My kids, “You have to take a shower at our house after a week.” There are some minimum requirements. These stink bombs walk around, and it’s really in their best interest.

Some employers are doing this because we’re losing the socialization at home. Everything is going virtual. And we’re losing that tactile experience. So, the employers that are requiring come back to the office to promote socialization are building connectivity among people.

It’s funny, they used to wonder that the water cooler, that business got done there, good ideas. No, business didn’t get done there. Connection happened there. People talk about their kids. When we have connection, we understand each other from a tactile level, we have trust. So, it’ll actually rebuild trust. But employers that are mandating it because they want to track time, or trying to assert authority, “I got to make sure you’re producing, so come on in.” That’s not going to work. People are going to, when forced to comply, they will seek to defy. That definitely won’t work.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. So, it sounds like what you’re saying is there are certain rules, guidelines, times, places, contexts where it is good, right, proper, and necessary for there to be some, “Hey, we’ve all got to be here” stuff going on, but if it’s from a perspective of authoritative, “I’ve got to watch you,” we’re in for bad news.

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, if there’s a kind of a nourished, flourishing, comply to fly. So, if you are nourishing people, have demanded to come back because you’re going to nourish the team, “Go team,” and it’s really in the best interest of people, they will flourish, that’s a great move. If you’re doing to force compliance, measurement, control, authority over, you’re going to get that resistance, and it’s not going to work long term.

Pete Mockaitis

Awesome. Well, Mike, tell us, anything else we really should know before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Mike Michalowicz

So, one last thing, it’s about safety. Leaders have to build a safe environment. Now, I’m not just talking only about physical safety. But ironically, this is a concern with many companies, including mine, and I didn’t even know. We’re a knowledge-based business, we’re writing books and speaking engagements, and other stuff like courses and classes. So, how can I have a safe environment?

Well, we ran a survey, and my colleagues said, “You know the back alley that goes to the cars…” we have a parking lot behind the building, “…is dark at night, and it’s kind of creepy going out into the pitch-black walkway.” I’m like, “Oh, my gosh.” So, starting at 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon, the sun sets in the winter by 5:30, people get nervous about going home, I’m like, “This is crazy.” We just put lights up, string lights, it’s always bright.

And now my colleagues are like, “Oh, I can see what’s going on. I feel safe.” So, we got physical safety, but the bigger thing is relational safety. Do people feel comfortable expressing themselves as they are? Because if they can’t show up as they naturally are, they’re going to start faking it, and now you get a depleted version of that person.

The leaders got to express themselves naturally. Lead with humanness. Show the warts. I’m not saying have a cry fest and talk about how miserable you are. What I’m saying is you can share your struggles. Be integral about your own experiences in life and talk about the wins and the losses, and you’re going to encourage your team to do the same, which actually builds connectivity.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, this is attributed to Oscar Wilde, “Be yourself. Everyone else is already taken.”

Pete Mockaitis

And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Mike Michalowicz

My favorite research is, oh, there’s a book that came out called The 3.3 Rule by a guy named John Briggs. And what he did was he researched out productivity and found that people can work up to three hours max without needing recoveries, safe recovery, and you need 0.3, which is 30% recovery time. So, if you work three hours, you’re going to need 90 minutes of recovery time, if that works right, and so forth, 3.3.

Pete Mockaitis

Three times 180 minutes.

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, I mean it’s not 90 minutes, but you know what I’m saying. It’s maybe 48 minutes. So, yeah, 30% of the time used is needed to recover. So, if I worked for one hour, it’s going to be 18 minutes or whatever that works out to be of recovery and so forth.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And a favorite book?

Mike Michalowicz

I just finished reading 10x Is Easier Than 2x by Dan Sullivan. Really opened my mind to perspective.

Pete Mockaitis

And a favorite habit?

Mike Michalowicz

My favorite habit is sauna, I do it with my wife. And I’m going to try to convince her to do it again tonight. I will tell you this, when you’re in a hot box, it is so hot you can’t have your phone in there, which is great. And the only thing you can do is talk, and it’s hard to think. So, when someone is talking, you’ve got to listen deeply. It’s like the best connection device ever.

Pete Mockaitis

And is there a key nugget you share that folks retweet and they quote back to you often?

Mike Michalowicz

Yes. What I say often is that the number one job of an entrepreneur is not to do the job. It’s to be a creator of jobs. So, I get that retweeted often.

Pete Mockaitis

And, Mike, if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where shall we point them?

Mike Michalowicz
MikeMotorbike.com because, similar to your last name, no one can spell Michalowicz. MikeMotorbike rhymes with motorcycle. Everything is there. I got book downloads. I used to write for the Wall Street Journal, you can get those articles, plus I have a podcast archive there.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Mike Michalowicz

Yeah, your clients want you to be profitable. And this isn’t just a final thought, but when you look at your clients, are you proud of your surviving check by check, to say, “I’m barely making it. I’m struggling,” or, “I’m very profitable”? I’ll give you context. Say you had an emergency, and you go, “I got rushed to the hospital. I have a heart attack,” or something. Doctor one comes down, and says, “I’m making no money. I need clients. I need patients. Let’s get this done quickly.” Or, doctor two says, “I’m very profitable and wealthy because this is all I do and I’m exceptional at it. I have all the time in the world to do this with you and do it right.”

Who do you choose? Option two. When your life is on the line, you want to be catered to. When your life is being altered or served in some capacity by us, we want to be catered to. Your clients want to be your number one customer. They want your undivided attention. And if you aren’t profitable, you can’t do that, so they want you to be profitable. You should be profitable.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, Mike, thank you. This is a treat. I wish you many, many fine colleagues who are all in.

Mike Michalowicz

Thanks, brother. It’s been a joy.

924: Enhancing Your Most Valuable Career Asset: Coachability with Jacquelyn Lane

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Jacquelyn Lane shows why being coachable is the key to career progression–and how to improve your coachability.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The 4 key elements of coachability
  2. How to reframe how you view feedback
  3. What to do when you’re running low on motivation

About Jacquelyn

Jacquelyn Lane is the president of the 100 Coaches Agency, codesigner of their proprietary curation process and relationship-first philosophy, and the Wall Street Journal bestselling author of Becoming Coachable. She has been with 100  Coaches Agency since its founding and is a critical pillar of the 100 Coaches Community. Jacquelyn comes to the world of executive coaching through her previous roles in the energy industry and lifelong commitment to improving the lives of all people by elevating the quality of leadership.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Jacquelyn Lane Interview Transcript

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

Jacquelyn Lane
Thanks so much for having me, Pete. Happy to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to dig into some of the wisdom you got in your book Becoming Coachable: Unleashing the Power of Executive Coaching to Transform Your Leadership and Life. But first, could you open us up with a really powerful story about how being coachable was really impactful for somebody?

Jacquelyn Lane
One of my favorites is of our friend Hubert Joly. And Hubert Joly was brought in as the CEO of Best Buy at a time when Best Buy was fully expected to go bankrupt. I’m sure a lot of people remember Circuit City had gone out of business just a year or two before, and Hubert was one of those people who had just come from McKinsey, he’d been a McKinsey consultant and then he’d been the CEO of another company called Carlson.

This is self-described, by the way. He described himself as being someone who had all the right answers, who knew how to do things, and that was a lot of his job, especially as a consultant, was to be the person with the answers. But he realized very quickly with Best Buy that he didn’t have all the answers and that he was going to need some help.

Luckily for him, he had Marshall Goldsmith as his coach at the time, and they decided to go against some of the conventional wisdom, which was, at that time, to cut headcount, to right-size the company, reduce expenses, and try to save it in any way they could. But, instead, he realized that the frontline workers probably had some answers.

So, he says his favorite thing that Marshall taught him was that he would go into a store, and say, “Hello, my name is Hubert Joly. I’m the CEO of this company and I need your help.” And in that moment, he became very open to other people having the answers, including, again, these frontline workers, people that he wouldn’t normally have gone to. And they did have a lot of suggestions for him about how to compete with Amazon, and what they were hearing and seeing from customers.

And, ultimately, he took their feedback and advice. He right-sized the company, or actually they didn’t actually reduce any headcount because Hubert came up with a term, he said, “We can’t afford to reduce heart-count. And heart-count is really the heart of our company. That’s how we’re going to turn things around.” And it was this amazing story where, over the course of, I think, five or six years, the company grew 330% at a time when the S&P 500 remained almost flat.

So, it’s this amazing turnaround story all because he was open to being coachable, leaned into the process, and made real change.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good, “I am the CEO and I need your help.” That sounds about as coachable as you can get right there in terms of “I am almost desperate in terms of, seriously, you’ve got the stuff.”

That’s awesome, Jacquelyn, about the Best Buy CEO there.

I’m curious if you have another story about someone who’s perhaps more in the middle of their career.

Jacquelyn Lane
So for the sake of anonymity, I’m going to change some details of the story and just say that this is a mid-level leader at a major manufacturing company. And, we were approached about finding a coach for him.

There were some things that he was struggling with, where he just wasn’t listening to feedback particularly well. Some people on his team were either a little bit afraid of him, certainly intimidated by him, just had this attitude that he knew best. And, I remember when we talked to the head of HR, and she told us about him, she mentioned that this is a great guy that we would love to see promoted in the organization, but the reality is he’s burning people out.

And he’s making a little bit of a hostile work environment for them. And so unfortunately, if these things don’t change, this could be the end of his career. Right? We may need to actually get rid of him. Even though we would love to be able to promote him. Because we think that he could be someone who, let’s say, could be a major executive in the future.

And, she was skeptical, certainly, that he was going to be open to being coached. But again, he really started leaning into that process and recognized that he had to make a change. And he got excited about the process of making a change. Because he started working with a coach who was really fantastic and I think inspired him and painted this picture for how life could be different.

And so they started working on some things together. And amazingly, within three months, he got one promotion. And that was great, and they came back to us again, and three months after that, so six months have elapsed, and he got a second promotion, and they said, the head of HR said, “You would not believe the transformation, not only has he completely changed the way that he interacts with his team, they’re all, gelling as a team so much better, and it’s so much healthier, but he attributes all of this change and growth to getting a coach, and so the entire organization is now saying this is an amazing transformation.

We’re interested in being coached as well,” and she said, “But the other thing I didn’t tell you six months ago when we first talked was that there was someone else in the organization that had a very similar situation, and it was very clear that he could also benefit from some coaching, but he didn’t really want to get a coach.”

And so unfortunately now, six months later, not only has this other guy gotten two promotions in rapid succession, but that other guy is no longer with the company.  So, I think that’s a great example, too, of someone who, who leaned in and the difference that it made for them, for their life, and for the entire organization.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. And then I’m curious then,  what would be an example of a behavior that someone starts or stops doing and discovers from a coaching kind of a process that  can make a big impact in terms of changing the trajectory from gonna get fired to gotta get promoted?

Jacquelyn Lane
For this gentleman, he was originally all about himself. He cared about his own role and positional power and authority. He was very proud of the life and career he’d built for himself and was vocal about that. And again, the attitude was, like, “I’m in this for me.”

And the major change was that he realized he was not going to be a leader without followers. That he needed to change his perspective into serving the people who reported to him, and to removing obstacles from their path, putting their needs first, not, you know, understanding how they were feeling, understanding the culture of the team and the organization, and just, and, the funny thing is, of course, by shifting his perspective away from himself and towards other people, he created so much more for everyone.

He created a healthier work environment for them, but he certainly created more for himself, since he did get those two promotions in rapid succession. So, it’s just amazing that that one shift can have such a profound impact.

Pete Mockaitis
How prevalent is coachability in this day and age in the workplace? And how do we measure such things?

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. It’s funny, I think of coachability as being very much a spectrum. It’s not quite as binary as coachable or not coachable. I think we’re all coachable to some extent. And do I believe that there are people who are truly un-coachable? I’m not totally sure, the jury is out for me there but that’s part of why we used the word becoming in the title of our book Becoming Coachable because it’s always this journey of becoming.

So, it’s not as common though as you might think for people to really understand what that means or how to lean into that process. Coachability is a word that’s being thrown out more and more these days, especially I hear in the world of executive search and other companies that are looking to identify successors to major C-suite roles. They’re asking, “Is this person coachable?”

So, it’s becoming more and more requested, more and more looked for, but I would say most people, maybe half of the people we talked to at the 100 Coaches Agency are ready, willing, and eager to lean into the coaching process. But I think by the way that we work, and then working with a good coach, they naturally become more coachable and more open to the process. So, if they’re going to get any results by the end, yes, they are definitely a coachable leader.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, as I think about the word, and I’d love to hear your definition, it is a spectrum. But, generally speaking, those on the less coachable side of the spectrum, when you offer some input, you’ll hear defensiveness, why that’s wrong, excuses, and more or less the input is one way or another rejected. And versus those on the opposite side of the continuum, when very coachable, would say, “Wow!”

They really think about that, they chew on it, they ponder it, and then they seek to understand it, “Can I have some examples? And then they get after that. And so, that’s how I view the word coachability. Do you have a particular definition that you like?

Jacquelyn Lane
Yeah. Now, I love the way that you broke that down, Pete, because I agree. It does have a lot to do with the way that we respond to different stimuli. It’s a mindset and some of these behaviors. Certainly, we can get into some more of that. So, to understand what coachability was and what that meant, my co-authors and I decided to talk with a lot of the people that are within the 100 Coaches community and just hear their thoughts.

Because, again, over and over and over we heard the same thing, that the best coaching engagements are with people who are coachable, that that’s the major differentiator. And so, we started digging into this, trying to understand, “What does that really mean? What goes into coachability?” And there were four key elements that came up as common themes repeatedly.

And that’s being open to change, open to feedback, open to taking action, and open to being held accountable. And if a leader can do those four things, then they most certainly are coachable.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly. And do you have a sense from your research, just what kind of an impact on career trajectory do we have if you’re highly coachable versus not so coachable?

Jacquelyn Lane
I think it has an amazing impact on someone’s life and career. And that was one of the most surprising findings as we were really researching and writing this book was that the leaders who are the most coachable, they go on to be some of the most successful leaders.

And the reason is if you are a leader who’s open to change, open to feedback, open to taking action, and open to being held accountable, then those are all qualities of great leaders. And so, it has an enormous impact on their career trajectories, where they can go, and the type of impact that they can have on the broader world around them.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’m curious, going meta for a moment, talking about coachability, are there some beliefs you had about coachability that you used to have but you’ve since abandoned or changed those beliefs?

Jacquelyn Lane
Well, I used to believe that coachability was a little bit more binary. I did really believe, for example, that some people were beyond being coached, that they were not coachable. But really, if you are willing, I think that’s kind of the first word, willing or open, then you can be coached. But I would say a lot of people have disbelief at first, and I think a little bit of skepticism is common, and maybe even wise.

But if you’re willing to suspend disbelief for just a little bit, lean into the process, and recognize that none of us do this alone, that we all need support in some form or fashion, then that really begins us all on the process of becoming coachable.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’d love to maybe step into the shoes of someone who might be on the lesser side of coachability or might have some valid concerns or skepticism, and say, “Hey, I think I’m coachable. It’s just that most of the feedback I’m getting is from total idiots who are way off base.” How do we discern that, Jacquelyn? Like, maybe we’re getting some garbage feedback or input coaching, or maybe we’re being super defensive and resistant about it, and we got to look in the mirror. How do we make that judgment call and discern and disentangle that?

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. And maybe it’s some of both, it probably is. Most people are not very skilled in giving feedback or not trained in that. And, similarly, people are not really skilled or trained in how to receive feedback, so it’s no surprise that it’s a little bit messy in that area. I find that acceptance is a great first step. Just hearing it for what it is, and Marshall has this great simple rule, he says, “No matter what anyone tells you, no matter what the feedback is, whether you agree or disagree, it’s glowing or it’s horrible, just say thank you and only thank you.”

Because if you respond to a first piece of feedback, and you say, “Wow, that’s so great. Thank you so much for that feedback. That’s fantastic.” And then the next piece of feedback that person gives, you say, “Hmm, okay. Thank you. I’ll think about that.” And then the last piece of feedback, you respond and say, “Oh, I don’t know if that’s true,” or, “I don’t know if that’s on base.”

Well, what you’ve done right there is you’ve graded the feedback. You say, “I agree,” “I’m not sure,” and “That’s horrible.” So, A, C, and F as if you’re going to give letter grades for that feedback. And that actually makes people less likely to tell you things that you don’t want to hear. So, the best thing to do, and maybe it’s a little bit unnatural at first, the best thing to do is to say thank you and just thank you, nothing else. And that really begins that process.

But, of course, once you receive that feedback, it’s time to chew on it a little bit. Again, this goes back to what I’m saying earlier, maybe just suspend disbelief for a moment, just sit down, think about it, ponder it maybe overnight, sleep on it. And if it still feels like it was completely off base, it’s still telling because they still have that perception of you.

And so, if only for that reason, it’s very interesting to note. And they’ve given you a great gift by telling you what they really think. So, at the end of the day, if we can just change our relationship with feedback and see it as the gift it is, I think we’ll respond much better.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s well said, Jacquelyn. And feedback, really, is a gift, and that’s almost cliché, it’s like, “Oh, feedback is a gift. I’ve heard that.” But I think I’m realizing just how wisely true it is because, one, it takes a risk for someone to share something with you, particularly if it’s challenging, as opposed to, “You’re great, Jacquelyn.” “Well, thank you. That’s awesome.”

Jacquelyn Lane
“Yeah, I feel good about myself.”

Pete Mockaitis
But if someone gives you a critique, they’re really putting themselves out there, and they’re taking a risk for your benefit, maybe. And there are some sociopaths out there from time to time who are not doing it for your input. They love to watch you suffer. That happens, unfortunately, but for the most part, people who are helpful do share, they are doing so at a risk, or a cost, or some discomfort to themselves for your benefit, and it truly is a gift.

And it’s funny, in the world of podcasting, I’ve been really just going dorking out on stats lately, and I was looking in Apple Podcast and this thing called Followers, and just how, over these years, I have had thousands of people go through the effort, which isn’t that easy, to do several taps on Apple Podcast and click unfollow the How to be Awesome at Your Job podcast, which is heartbreaking.

Jacquelyn Lane
What a shame.

Pete Mockaitis
But not once has someone said, “Pete, I’ve decided to unfollow your podcast, and here’s why. There are four things that you’re doing with your show that really aren’t working for me, and so I thought it might be helpful for you to know about them.” That’s never happened once. And, likewise, I think in our own lives and professions, there are lots of people noticing lots of things we’re doing to our detriment that are harming us and our ability to get where we want to go, and are not opening their mouths when we are just blindly stumbling in the dark, fundamentally unaware of these pieces of input that we need.

You got me on a soapbox, Jacquelyn. So, where feedback is a gift, I don’t think it’s just a cliché but it is a profound truth that we reject because it usually sucks to hear.

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. And, again, we’re not trained at how to give or receive feedback very well. Again, it’s one of those blind spots in our education system. You would think that somewhere along the way, we would learn this but, unfortunately, there’s not a great system yet. And so, of course, I think of myself, anytime when I was working in corporate America, if someone said, “Hey, can I give you some feedback?” What was the first thing I did? I immediately buckle up and I prepare myself to go to battle, or to be told something really abysmal.

Like, I have a physiological reaction to hearing the phrase, “Hey, can I give you some feedback?” I think a lot of people do because we don’t normally call positive feedback, feedback. We usually call it a compliment or praise. And so, usually, when people say, “Can I give you some feedback?” they’re really meaning, “I want to give you some constructive criticism.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s true. They rarely say, “Hey, I want to give you some feedback about that report you gave me.” “Okay?” “It was perfect in every way. Do every one just like that, please.” It’s usually not what comes after that sentence.

Jacquelyn Lane
Correct. So, I really would love to rebrand the word feedback in that way, and start using it in both a positive and constructive way. But Marshall gets around this by doing what he calls feedforward. So, Marshall says that the word feedback, kind of by definition, is referring to something in the past. Feedforward is about, “What can you do differently looking forward?” So, that’s another way to frame it that just kind of naturally, by construction, feels a little bit more positive and a little bit more constructive.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, let’s put ourselves in the shoes of the feedback receiver, and say, okay, fair enough. There’s a baseline physiological reaction in which someone is giving us feedback, we don’t like it. So, that’s sort of there. Can you share with us, is there a way we can learn to love it?

Jacquelyn Lane
Yeah. Again, I think this is a training exercise that we all go through, and I will certainly speak for myself, and say that I work on this all the time. Of the four elements of coachability – change, feedback, action, and accountability – feedback is the one I struggle with the most. And it’s some of my own, again, experiences in corporate America and my own relationship with that word.

But it’s this constant exercise that I have to make with myself to say, “Feedback is a gift. Feedback is a gift. I’m going to remind myself that this person is sharing really valuable information with me, and this is for my ultimate betterment. Whether it’s something I can improve, a way that I can grow, or simply understanding how it is that I’m perceived in the world, that is a wonderful gift to receive.”

Because, again, none of us do this alone. And especially for people who are in leadership positions, we need the reflections of other people. And it becomes so much more difficult for leaders to get feedback, especially, because there are some real and perceived power dynamics that are at play. So, especially for people who are leaders, we have to be constantly asking our team, asking the people around us, “What can I do better? What can I do differently? How can I serve you?”

And I find that people, they’re often a little shy at first, but that feedback has been just so rich, and has allowed me to grow exponentially faster than if I didn’t have that in my life.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. And it’s interesting when you mentioned these senior executives, it’s rarer and rarer, and harder and harder to get. I’m reminded of a friend of mine who’s a relationship therapist say that she’s given some tough feedback to some big-deal corporate executive folks and they love it, like, “Wow, nobody gives me this sort of perspective on how my behavior is problematic. Nobody, except you, relationship therapist.” And they eat it up. So, like it’s rare but, boy, they’re open to it and it’s hitting the mark.

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. I love that they’re hungry for it. I think that attitude will take us so far. If we’re hungry for it, if we’re asking for it, I find that that is really positive. That’s another thing that’s helped me. Because when someone says, “Hey, can I give you some feedback?” That’s feedback you weren’t expecting. But when you ask for feedback, “Hey, do you think you could tell me how I did in that presentation? Do you think you could tell me how my latest podcast appearance was?” then the feedback is solicited and expected, and I find that I am much better prepared to receive it.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s excellent. So, being open to feedback, we shared that key part of it is just embracing that mindset, feedback is a gift, and returning to it. Likewise, for the other open-to’s – open to change, open to taking action, open to accountability – are there any master paradigm shifts or perspectives that really open that opening all the wider?

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. I think, for me, the other big one is change. And that is the reason that open to change is the very first in our construction, is that, really, everything is changing. And we find so many people have this idea of control, or that they want other people to change, “If only other people would become coachable. If only other people would change their perceptions of me. If only other people would make changes, then my life would be better.”

But I think the call is to look at ourselves, first and foremost, and especially for those of us who are in leadership roles, to really lead by example and be open to making changes ourselves. And the way that we live that and the way that we communicate that with other people has enormous ripple effects.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, let’s say that maybe I want to be open to change, but I’m naturally not. It’s uncomfortable. I’ve got a good groove going. I don’t want to rock the boat, but I know I should be more open to change in order to unlock new business of opportunity and goodness. So, how do I shake myself up?

Jacquelyn Lane
Again, I think it comes back to that idea of awareness or openness, and that’s part of why we use the word open to, to describe every element of coachability because we find that just that openness makes such a difference. But, again, the idea with change is recognizing that if we’re not getting better, we’re getting worse. I don’t think, especially with so many things changing in the world around us, I don’t think there’s any such thing as just staying in the same place.

Pete Mockaitis
Can you expand on that? If we’re not getting better, we’re getting worse. Can you prove it?

Jacquelyn Lane
So, I think of a few different executives we’ve seen over the years, and again that was roughly the attitude they had, they said, “Oh, I got here because of my skills, my merit, my natural personality and gregariousness, or my innate leadership skills. And I’m pretty satisfied with the life and the career I’ve built for myself. I think I’m doing pretty good. I don’t think I need any support. I think I’m going to stay here.”

And I get that to some extent, but the reality is the company continues to grow and to change. The person they’re married to continues to grow and to change, and, ultimately, that person gets left behind. And I have seen them be blindsided by both a company that has decided they’re no longer really serving the needs of the organization, and how that’s evolved, or a spouse who decides, “You know what, this just really isn’t working for me anymore.” And so, I think there’s an openness to reinventing ourselves because the world around us is not staying still.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s powerful. In some ways, that’s self-evident, and yet, if you really stop and ponder these implications, it is just a very tidy logical argument. Your surroundings, environment, world, profession, everything is changing. If you are not changing, then, by definition, you are fitting worse than you used to. And by that measure alone, you are worse.

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. That’s correct. Yeah, if you have certain skills that got you here today, by tomorrow or next year, those skills will no longer be enough.

Pete Mockaitis
And when you put a loss frame on it, it really sort of sparks the motivation.

Jacquelyn Lane
Yeah, I couldn’t agree more. And I think to myself of the example of professional athletes. No professional athlete could possibly consider themselves at the very top of their game without, at least one, and probably multiple coaches, because they recognize that even if they’re the best in the world, if they’re not still consistently pushing the limits and getting better, and working with someone who can see them from outside themselves, then they’re not going to stay in that number one spot very long.

Pete Mockaitis
Right on. Okay. So, we talked about openness to change, open to feedback. How about open to taking action?

Jacquelyn Lane
I think this one, it feels the easiest in some ways, or at least the easiest conceptually, where you can express being open to change and open to feedback, you can talk your way through those things, but action is where the rubber meets the road. So, in our example of, let’s say I want to get in shape. I can express that I’m open to making a change in my life or my lifestyle, and I can hear some feedback and some ideas from the people around me about going to the gym, or getting a trainer, or changing my diet, or any number of things.

But when it comes time to actually do the work, am I going to show up and go to the gym, and put in the reps, and do it again and again and again and again? Because, let’s be honest, change is hard. But it only works if we work.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s true. No doubt. So, if we’re feeling lazy, do you have any words of wisdom to spark us into getting going, taking that action?

Jacquelyn Lane
Again, for me, this is where I find that I need support, I need a coach. And now, a coach can come in a lot of different forms. Certainly, this can be someone you hire as an executive coach, or a life coach, or any number of different areas and specialties that exists out there. And there are some great agencies and organizations that help people find the right coach or the right resource for them.

Or, this can be a friend, a close accountability partner, a peer that you work very closely with. In some cases, it can be a supervisor, kind of depends on the relationships that exist in someone’s life. A mentor is similar, not quite the same thing as a coach. But depending on some of those different relationships that exist in your life, you may be able to find that support that helps you remember your goals and actually take the steps to achieve them.

So, for me, again, using my own example of I want to get in better shape, I had to hire a personal trainer. New Year after New Year, I was committed to getting in better shape, and the gym was crowded, I came up with too many excuses, I can’t get up early, I don’t want to do the work. But it wasn’t until I started paying money to a personal trainer, and I knew I was going to be paying the money, whether I showed up or not, so I might as well show up. And that was what I needed to really make the change, take the action, and make it stick.

Pete Mockaitis
Jacquelyn, I really appreciate you sharing that and the humility there because you are a high-powered, high-achieving, very capable woman.

Jacquelyn Lane
Thank you.

Pete Mockaitis
Your accomplishments, your credentials are plentiful. And you want to be in better shape, and yet you were unable to accomplish that for yourself for years until you hunkered down and parted with money to have someone assist you in the matter. And in my experience with personal trainers, no offense to the personal trainers listening, it is less about their deep expertise in anatomy, physiology, and movement, and more about the fact that they make you do the thing that gets it done.

Jacquelyn Lane
Right. I could not agree more. And I’ll give you another example. So, Marshall Goldsmith, who’s my co-author at Becoming Coachable, I’ve spent a lot of time with Marshall. Marshall is, by most people’s accounts, the number one coach in the world, and has been for decades. He invented a lot of the tools that we use for coaching today. And Marshall literally pays someone to call him every single day for the last, I don’t even know how many years, to ask him his daily questions.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s right. We had Marshall on the show, and we discussed that, and I love that, so underscore there. So, a key to taking action is perhaps having another human being help you to take that action.

Jacquelyn Lane
Right.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that kind of says that we’re already talking about your fourth open to, accountability. What do you got to say about this?

Jacquelyn Lane
The key idea behind accountability is you want to make the change lasting. So, accountability is especially pertinent if you have reached a certain goal. Again, you’ve gone to the gym, you put in the reps, so taking that action and the accountability are intertwined.

But then, at some point, I think when I’m no longer working with that personal trainer, am I still going to maintain the habits? So, I’ll give you another example, I was working with a personal trainer for about a year and a half. Again, got in great shape, I had a great relationship with him, and I was seeing him twice a week to go to the gym. But when I stopped working with him, there was a moment in time where, again, I kind of fell off the bandwagon. I stopped working out and I got really frustrated with myself, and I realized it’s because I needed accountability.

And so, my husband actually became that accountability partner for me. So, now, twice a week, we have it on the calendar, and we’d go to the gym together. If my husband does not go to the gym with me, I don’t go to the gym. Period. And I consider myself a pretty motivated person, and yet I’m so good at finding excuses why I can’t, “Just too busy,” “I got to send that email,” “I got to call that person,” “I got to clean the house.” But there’s something about having an accountability partner, be it a coach, a trainer, a friend, who just says, “No, we’re going to do this,” makes a world of difference.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, Jacquelyn, tell me, any other critical do’s or don’ts you want to make sure you put out there to help people become more coachable?

Jacquelyn Lane
Yeah, I think the big thing is to remember why we’re doing it. Why does any of this really matter? And I think the answer that we came to in writing this book is, yes, being coachable helps us get more from our coaching. We have goals and ambitions that we want to meet, and that’s great, and those are important. But it’s even bigger than that. It’s not just about having a better life. It’s not just about becoming a better leader. And I agree that becoming a better leader is a great thing as well.

But engaging in this process and becoming coachable also makes us better human beings. We learn how to interact with the world around us better, to see ourselves reflected in the feedback of other people, and so we start to see our place in the world, and our impact in the world, in a more accurate way than if we just see things from only our vantage point.

Have you heard the many eyes theory? So, it’s like when a school of fish are swimming, and it looks like the whole school of fish just moves around obstacles, or again a shark will swim into the school of fish, and they will seem to disperse and rejoin. But it’s this idea of many eyes, that a single fish actually can’t function very well on its own. It’s more susceptible to predators, which is why they end up staying in schools.

And, in fact, they kind of have this mind that melds in a way where there’s these theories that the fish see through the eyes of the others, that they become aware of things in a way that they could never do on their own. And, similar, when we become coachable, that we can experience life through the many eyes. And, ultimately, the power of that is that in understanding the impact we have on people and on the world around us means that we can live more flourishing lives, we can have more flourishing communities, better flourishing families, our companies, and certainly ourselves.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. Thank you. Jaquelyn’s about to share her favorite things, and one of my favorite things are our sponsors: Today, Stanford Continuing Studies and UpliftDesk.com.

At Stanford Continuing Studies, you can Immerse yourself in a diverse selection of courses, available both online and in-person. This winter, perhaps explore the captivating field of AI and expand your horizons about what lies ahead…or dive into essential business skills in marketing, communication, decision analysis (My favorite! Did somebody say hypothesis-driven thinking and issue trees? I did, that was me. Boosting decision making skills can be so game changing in life). , project management, and more. Continuing Studies courses are open to everyone. That’s right, you don’t have to trek it out all the way to Stanford’s campus(though it’s beautiful and I recommend you visit some time) to enjoy some Stanford learnin’. Winter registration is currently open. As a How to be Awesome at Your Job listener they’re hooking us up with a tasty 15% discount this quarter. To snag that, simply use promo code: AWESOME when you enroll. If you’re ready to embark on your educational journey, discover more at Continuing Studies dot Stanford dot EDU.

Big thanks to our sponsor UPLIFT Desk.com who’s providing us with a 5% discount with the code AWESOME. I use my Uplift Desk every work day when I’m recording the show, preparing the show, and doing everything. Being able to go from sitting to standing and back in seconds is just huge. I purchased an uplift desk over five years ago with my own money and have dutifully moved it multiple times when other furniture didn’t make the cut during moving. And just recently I got another for my home office. I love enjoy standing to get the creative juices flowing and to become more productive and alert. And then sitting again when I want a breather. Uplift Desk doesn’t wobble. You can customize it with over 100 desktop choices and hundreds of accessories. Their configurator is super cool and fun. They offer free shipping, free returns, a 15-year warranty, and awesome service. I’ve had great experiences with them and their 4.9 Google Rating and thousands of reviews share a similar story. They shipped the desk super fast, making it the quickest delivery of a piece of online furniture I’ve ever experienced.
Go to UPLIFT Desk.com and use code AWESOME for 5% off your order. That’s UP-L-I-F-T Desk dot com, to get 5% off your entire order with promo code AWESOME

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

Jacquelyn Lane
One of my favorite quotes attributed to the Buddha is that, “A single candle can light a thousand others and never be diminished.”

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

Jacquelyn Lane
I am really loving this study currently called “More in Common.” It talks about how much commonality we have with people even on opposing sides of the political spectrum. And if we can just learn to remember the things that we have in common instead of our differences, how much more powerful we can be as a collective.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Jacquelyn Lane
My current favorite book is David Brooks’ new book How to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen. I think it is the most important book written this year. I highly recommend it.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite tool?

Jacquelyn Lane
Well, right now, it’d be hard to say I don’t love ChatGPT. That has been my go-to for a number of different use cases, and I’m sure everyone is coming up with creative ways to use it. We certainly are over at the 100 Coaches Agency as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, let us know, Jacquelyn. It’s so funny, when I play with it, sometimes I’m annoyed and frustrated, and other times I’m amazed. And so, it’s just I’ve yet to really get clear on the boundaries of, “This is what this is amazing for, and this is what it’s totally terrible for.” So, tell us, what do you think it’s amazing for?

Jacquelyn Lane
Well, I am currently using ChatGPT where I’ll tell it, “You are a world class therapist, or a world class coach. Here’s what I’m struggling with, or here’s what’s going through my mind. What would you advise me?” and just asking it for some ideas. And I can even instruct it, “Ask me a few good questions,” and I’ll answer those questions, and then the cycle continues.

So, it’s a really powerful thing if I want some quick feedback or some quick ideas to, essentially, stop looping and get out of my own head. I found that that’s really powerful. Great for summarizing content, especially on notes from a call or anything else, and putting together action plans and next-steps. It’s been really fantastic.

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

Jacquelyn Lane
I do find that the idea that’s resonated with people has been the third section of our book, which is called “To what end?” and that’s where we talk about human flourishing and the power that great leaders can have on the world. It’s really this aspirational and inspirational idea. We’d love to hear what people think about that.

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

Jacquelyn Lane
I would send them to, you can go to 100 Coaches Agency, that’s Agency.100Coaches.com. Or, you can go to BecomingCoachable.com. Of course, you can find me on LinkedIn. My name is Jacquelyn Lane. And please connect. Let’s stay in touch.

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

Jacquelyn Lane
I think just keep that growth mindset. Keep an open mind. Stay humble. Stay hungry. Ask for feedback. You can’t go wrong with any of those.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Jacquelyn, thanks so much for this. I wish you much fun and much coachability.

Jacquelyn Lane
Thank you so much. Right back at you, Pete. Thank you.

912: Maximizing Your Impact by Leading with both Head and Heart with Dr. Kirstin Ferguson

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Kirstin Ferguson shares how modern leaders can best meet the challenge of the new work landscape.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why traditional leadership is lacking–and what you should do instead
  2. Why you may not be as self-aware as you think
  3. Why you might want to talk less in your next meeting

About Kirstin

Dr. Kirstin Ferguson, PhD is an award-winning leadership expert, best-selling author, columnist, and keynote speaker. Kirstin has been called “Australia’s own Brene Brown” and been named one of the world’s top 30 thinkers to watch by Thinkers 50. Her latest book, Head & Heart: The Art of Modern Leadership, has been named one of the top 10 best new management books in the world in 2023.

Resources Mentioned

Kirstin Ferguson Interview Transcript

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

Kirstin Ferguson
Hello. It’s fabulous to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to hear about some of the wisdom you have for us from your book, Head & Heart: The Art of Modern Leadership. But first, I need to hear a little bit about your time with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. And most top of mind is what was your involvement with Bluey?

Kirstin Ferguson
Well, every Australian likes to claim that Bluey is somehow connected to them, but I have two connections with Bluey. It’s made in my hometown where I live in Brisbane and produced there, and I was on the ABC board when we commissioned it.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, beautiful.

Kirstin Ferguson
But I can’t claim any responsibility for that but it’s fabulous, isn’t it? Have you got young children?

Pete Mockaitis
It really is, yes. I’ve got kids – five, four, and one – and Bluey, wow, is maybe the top thing. I think Daniel Tiger, in my own opinion, for whatever it’s worth, Daniel Tiger is very strong in terms of enriching, but Bluey I think is just about as enriching but so much more entertaining.

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah, they’ve done so well to make it entertaining for adults to watch as well. My children are now not children, they’re 23 and 21, and I can tell you I wish we had Bluey on repeat rather than The Wiggles and Wesley. I love The Wiggles, of course. Another Australian children’s export but there’s only so much, so many times you can listen to their songs.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, so you’re on the committee that commissioned it. And, I’m curious, when it comes to creative works, it’s like do you know if you have a hit on your hands or do you not? Like, people have famously passed on The Beatles and other smash hits in terms of culture and creativity. But what was the vibe, like, “Yeah, let’s give this a shot. Some blue dogs? Yeah, it can’t hurt”?

Kirstin Ferguson
Well, this is where I can’t claim any credit. The board is a long way from most kind of commissioning discussions. And I remember, at the time, our head of television, who’s now the managing director or the CEO of the ABC, quite visibly so, I remember he said to me, “Hey, I’ve just commissioned this show about a dog called Bluey.” And he said it’s going to be a massive hit. So, I think the people who know, know, and he certainly said that before anyone had seen it, and he was right. So, I don’t know, whether I could’ve had the same skill, I’m not so sure.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Kirstin, I’m now going to force a segue. I think Bluey does a fine job of engaging the head and the heart.

Kirstin Ferguson
It does.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’d love to hear, with your book, any particularly surprising or counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made as you’re learning and researching and putting it together?

Kirstin Ferguson
I think your podcast is fabulous because it’s all about helping people to be awesome at their job, obviously. And what I really hope people take away from our conversation is that delivering whatever your job is, an inverted commerce, your job description and the outputs and the KPIs and all those sorts of things, are obviously incredibly important to retain a job but to be truly successful, you have to be able to balance that ability to deliver, and that is sort of encompassed by leading with the head, and we can go through what that looks like, but with leading with the heart.

But I think people sometimes forget that. And that’s because, as leaders, and let me say, we are all leaders. It doesn’t matter where you are in the org chart, you are leading in your families, in your communities, and in your role, so it doesn’t matter who’s listening right now, I’m telling you you’re a leader because you’re impacting those around you through the words you use, the choices you make, and the behaviors that you role-model.

And so, I think leading with the heart, which is around humility, and empathy, self-awareness and things, it has to be balanced with all those technical capabilities to be awesome at your job.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, certainly. And so then, are there some folks who just totally don’t have it in their head that they’re a leader or that they need to lead with their head or their heart? What are you seeing is sort of the antithesis of that message or that experience?

Kirstin Ferguson
I think anyone who thinks they know everything and is the smartest person in the room, we all know those people, they’re a challenge because they’re the kinds of leaders, and we all worked with them, who aren’t interested in diverse points of views, they’re not interested in feedback, they’re not interested in a different way of doing things, and I think those kinds of leaders are not the modern leaders that we need in the workplace today.

So, if you’ve got a leader like that, that’s going to be really challenging but don’t be that leader yourself. So, it’s really easy to identify who those people are but it’s much harder for us to look in the mirror, and think, “Actually, am I doing some of that myself? And is my leadership style still fit for purpose?”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, you mentioned modern leaders, and that’s also in the subtitle, would you contrast that with traditional or old-school leaders, or…?

Kirstin Ferguson
Dinosaurs, I tend to call them. Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
Dinosaurs. Okay.

Kirstin Ferguson
It’s not too bad. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But my mission is to rid the world of dinosaurs.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, sure.

Kirstin Ferguson
That pretty well covers most.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Understood. So, that’s the mission. So, then could you maybe paint a picture for what does a dinosaur or old-school traditional leadership look, sound, feel like that you’re saying is not what we need right now?

Kirstin Ferguson
Oh, my goodness. I reckon everyone listening have someone in their mind who doesn’t believe in remote working. They think if you’re not right in front of them, you’re not working, you’re just relaxing at home somehow, watching television. They don’t believe in doing things differently. Everything is done the same way. They’re not interested in feedback, as I said. They’re really just there to tell you what to do and to make sure we deliver on the KPIs for the organization. And that’s really work is a task to be done rather than a way to sort of be as humans.

And I think you can’t separate who we are when we come to work. We have lives, we have issues we’re dealing with, we’ve got all sorts of challenges, and I think modern leaders actually understand that and factor that into their leadership.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Understood. So, that’s a view of the dinosaurs. And then we talked about head versus heart. I’d love to hear how you think about this in terms of it sounds like it’s sort of a both-and approach as opposed to all head or all heart.

Kirstin Ferguson
Absolutely.

Pete Mockaitis
How do you think about, I don’t know if the word is balanced, or both, or simultaneous, or the same time, but what’s a view for too much of one versus too much of the other?

Kirstin Ferguson
I think we all know individuals like that, and, you’re right, being all heart is just as unhelpful as being all head. So, we would know, or people might know leaders who run a not-for-profit organization or really great causes, but they’re all about how they can benefit people, which is wonderful but they don’t think about the strategies for how they’re going to get there, how they’re going to fund it, all of those kinds of things. That’s as unhelpful in leaders as the CFO, and I always pick on the poor old CFO, but who’s just focused on balance sheets and not thinking about how decisions are impacting others.

So, it is about balance. And the art of modern leadership that I write about is knowing what is needed and when. And I guess I feel I’ve been really fortunate because I’ve been a leader myself for 30 years. I started in the military, I went through, as you heard, I sat on company boards, I’ve been a CEO, but I’ve also got a PhD in leadership.

So, not only was it important to me to write this book based on research. It also was sort of a counterpoint to some of the anecdotal leadership books you get, which are all very interesting. But I want to know, “How do you know that? And what’s the datapoint to show that?” And that’s how I came up with, obviously, it’s a metaphor, the head and heart, but four attributes of leading with the head, and four with leading with the heart.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, it’s fun, as we’re chatting, I just finished listening to the Walter Isaacson’s biography of Elon Musk, and, well, there’s some head there.

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah, yeah. Well, I went and heard Walter recently, just a week ago, in LA.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, no kidding?

Kirstin Ferguson
Fantastic. Yeah, yeah, talking about the book.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, it was riveting. It was 20 hours, and I was, “Wow, am I done already? I wish it were longer.” So, there were these periods of, I guess, what he would call being ultra-hardcore, and having a surge, and saying, “This thing needs to happen by this time or everybody’s fired.” Now, that sounds super head and minimal heart. I’m curious, is there a place for that ultra-hardcore? And how do we play that game?

Kirstin Ferguson
Look, I don’t think so because there’s always repercussions for behaving in that way. When things are steadier, you’re going to have people around you that don’t know when you’re next going to decide that it’s time to be ultra-hardcore. There’s obviously times when there’s a crisis, for example, and your leadership needs to change.

And you, as a leader, may have once been very consultative and taking the time to get everyone’s feedback, and, suddenly, that is not a priority. You actually, as a leader, need to step up then and make some decisions, and perhaps have just a very small core group around you. It doesn’t mean though that you need to lose your humanity.

So, decisions still have impacts on people, regardless of whether or not you’re making them in a crisis or whether you are doing them because you want to save money because you just bought a new company. I think we must, as leaders, be thinking about what the impact is beyond ourselves. And, yes, in a crisis, the consequences may be weighed up differently but it doesn’t take away from our need to be human.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so you’ve got a number of attributes associated with being a great head leader and a great heart leader. Could you share those attributes and maybe a pro tip or best practice for doing that well in practice?

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah. So, the four attributes of leading with the head, this is all the tangible stuff we’ve been rewarded for at school and being promoted, and that we feel really comfortable in, so there won’t be too much of a surprise. There’s curiosity. Most people love curiosity but it’s scary to think that, while the research shows 92% of us value it, only 24% of us get to feel curious at work. So, that’s a real challenge for leaders.

The second attribute is capability, and that’s all about how we feel capable in our jobs. We’re not just capable, but how we actually believe we can do things, and that we know that making mistakes is all just part of the learning process. The third one is wisdom, and that’s all about decision-making and we gather data and evidence to make really good decisions.

And the last one, which is the most important, actually, of all eight, is called perspective. And that’s about, in basic terms, how to read a room and really bring in the signals that you’re seeing, understanding the environment and the context that you’re leading in. And it also means that you can see who’s missing from the room, which is incredibly important. And it’s highly correlated with empathy because it means you can put yourself in the shoes of others.

So, they’re the four head-based attributes. And, generally, people are pretty comfortable with this. And I should mention now, anyone listening can just jump on HeadHeartLeader.com, totally free, but I’ve had 16,000 people complete this scale since January, that’s one I built with one of the universities in Australia, and will give you personalized report and a comparison to how you’re going on each of these.

And same with the heart. So, the four heart-based attributes are humility, which is all around confident humility, intellectual humility, knowing we don’t know all the answers, and being quite okay with that. Second is self-awareness, which obviously understanding that impact that we’re having on others. Feedback is a critically important tool there.

Third is courage, and that’s the courage to speak up for what you believe in even in the face of pressure not to do so. And the final is empathy, and that’s our ability to really understand that your lived experience is not the same as others, and to appreciate that you’re going to need diverse points of view to make the best decision that you can.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so within these eight attributes, I’d love to hear are there some particular tools, or tactics, or practices, things that you’ve discovered, “Wow, this little thing makes a world of difference in improving curiosity or perspective or empathy”?

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah. Well, let me share one with you that I, first, came up with about 10-12 years ago when I first started sitting on company boards, and I was only 38 then, so I’m 50 now. And I remember feeling really insecure, and feeling I needed to contribute to every conversation even though I wasn’t adding much value, I felt I needed to say something, sort of prove myself. I think we’ve all been in that situation.

But, at the same time, I was noticing that my really experienced colleagues around me barely said anything at all. And they might only ask a single question, but that question was gold, and it would change the course of the conversation. So, then I came up with a concept I still use now called the word-to-wisdom ratio, and I would write, back in the day when it was still hardcopy papers, WTW, on the corner of my page.

And it was to remind me that I really needed to be mindful of the impact I was having on those around me. And at that stage, the number of words that was taking me to add any wisdom at all was pretty unhealthy, whereas my colleagues clearly were doing much better than me. But as I’ve become more experienced and a more senior leader, what I use it for now is to really make sure I’m not taking up all the space in meetings.

So, for people listening who do have a team, if you’re going into a meeting, and you’ve already got the answer in mind, and you sort of are just checking in to make sure they all agree with what you’re proposing, then it’s likely you’re taking up so much space no one else gets an opportunity to contribute. And the word-to-wisdom ratio is something you can think about in terms of your coaching ability.

And I would encourage modern leaders that even if you know the answer, use that opportunity, when you’ve got the time and it’s appropriate, to really ask good questions of those you lead so they can feel they’ve come to answer themselves.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that’s a fun one, the word-to-wisdom ratio. Anything that you’d also put forward in terms of boosting our perspective?

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah, like reading a room is, I think, we all know sometimes it’s easier to do than others, and sometimes we get it wrong, and we really need feedback to calibrate whether or not we’ve read it correctly. But one of the challenges to reading a room is if you’re someone, firstly, who has blinkers on and pretty much thinks you’re right all the time, then you’re basically the only person in that room, and so that’s a problem.

So, you need to make sure that you’ve got people around you that are actually giving you dissenting opinions, respectfully, of course, but that you’re not surrounding yourself with people who just agree. But I think, also, around leading with perspective, it’s important to be getting feedback, and to really understand whether or not you’re reading of the situation is the same as others. Test that with people because, invariably, we’re not going to get it right.

Sadly, our self-awareness is very high, we think. About 95% of us we think we’re self-aware but only 10 to 15% of those we lead would agree. That’s a pretty scary statistic, and that’s why feedback is so important.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And I’m also curious about boosting that self-awareness. If we think we’re self-aware but we’re not, well, first, how do we know if we really are? And, second, how do we boost that?

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah. Well, that is why you need trusted people around you, and you need to sniff out the bad news. I think we, invariably, like to hear from people that tell us we’re doing a good job. We’re human, obviously, we love to be reassured, but they’re not the people that you actually want to seek feedback from. You also don’t want to go to the people who are really critical of you because that’s not helpful either.

But it’s finding those people in your life who know you well enough that they are unafraid to tell you what they think, and that they want you to succeed. So, it’s given in a way that’s there to help you actually do better. And I think if you’ve got those people in your life, whether they’re mentors, colleagues, your boss, someone that’s in your team, really thank them and take their feedback with a gratitude because it’s a gift.

And if you can be doing that for someone else, make sure that you’re open to that. I should say that when you’re getting feedback, though, curiosity is the most important attribute to bring into that conversation because we’re all going to have triggers. There’s three triggers we all feel when we get feedback.

The first is you think, “Well, you’re an idiot.” But the conversation or the feedback is clouded by your relationship with the person. Regardless of how valuable the feedback might be, you’re thinking, “How dare you tell me this?” The second trigger we’ll have is, “You’re wrong.” And you’re just thinking, “Well, I don’t agree with your perspective,” so you shut down, and that’s not helpful either. You need to stay present, even if you don’t agree. It’s not a matter of having to change based on the feedback but you do need to be able to hear it if you want to encourage others to give you feedback again.

But the third trigger is something in us, and it’s about shame, or embarrassment, or ego, or whatever gets triggered. And I think knowing that that’s going on for you, and still being able to stay present, is one of the most important things leaders can do when they’re practicing self-awareness.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so, zooming out a little bit, one of your key messages in the book is that we need to sort of know when is the right moment to lead with more head-style versus lead more heart-style. What are some of your top indicators or telltale signs which tend to nudge you one way or the other?

Kirstin Ferguson
Oh, that’s an impossible question to answer because that’s the art. And there’ll be situations, I know I’ve gone into meetings, that I think are going to be all about deliverables pretty much, and I’ve got my documents, or my policies, or whatever it is that you think you’re there to do. But in the course of that conversation, you know those things go a little bit off the rails. And some leaders need a huge amount of humility or empathy, whatever it is, to get that conversation back on track.

So, I think, in any given context, you’re going to be mastering this art back and forth, and that’s part of the learning process of being a good leader, and we never get it all right. It’s not as though you’ll ever get to a point in your career where you can say, “Alright, I’ve mastered that now.” And that’s okay, that’s part of being a modern leader.

You know you’re going to have a misstep but a modern leader doesn’t really fear that so much because they’re able to say, “Oh, I’ve got that wrong. Let’s talk about how we can get this back on track.” It’s freeing to be able to do that.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. So, there’s no cut-and-dry, hard-and-fast rules and algorithm that we can turn down.

Kirstin Ferguson
Wouldn’t that be easy if we do?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’ll just sort of see from my own experience, think about in Myers-Briggs language, thinker versus feeler, I am a feeler slightly. And I think there are definitely times where I need to be less accommodating and more hardcore, maybe not ultra-hardcore like Elon Musk.

Kirstin Ferguson
No. Talk it over.

Pete Mockaitis
So, what might be some indicators that more of a head approach is needed in a given moment?

Kirstin Ferguson
I’m similar to you, and so I’m naturally one who wants to make sure everyone’s on board with an idea, and I’ve consulted, and we’ve all got buy-in, and then I notice there’s been times in my career that that style, I’ve used it, and it just isn’t the right style for the moment, and so I haven’t read the room properly. And I think part of being self-aware is that you realize that fairly quickly. You’re assessing what’s going on, the response to that, whether or not it’s timely because, obviously, in some situations, it just practically takes far too long to be consultative in that way.

So, there’s definitely situations where you need to be adjusting your leadership style in that response, but you’re still using these attributes. Just think of it like a pendulum. You’re sort of moving back and forth as you need to, and really being intentional about the kind of leadership style. That’s all this is about. It’s about not mindlessly leading one way forever, and thinking that’s going to work.

And I think that might’ve worked in the past where it was pretty consistent at work that if you are ultra-hardcore, back in the ‘80s in some organizations where that was the culture, and you could just do that day after day for 20, 30 years, get to the top and then retire. I don’t think that is how organizations work now and it’s certainly not how individuals succeed.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, maybe instead of talking about broad-based rules, maybe you can just give us a couple examples in terms of, “Here’s a leadership situation, and, wow, that really pointed to head would be better,” versus, “Here’s another situation that points to heart would be better.”

Kirstin Ferguson
Well, I think a common scenario lots of people find themselves in, especially if you’re leading a team, is you’ve got your team meeting, and you sit down, you’ve got a bit of a plan you need to come up with, and you’re telling everyone what the plan is, and you ask, “Are there any questions or any feedback?” you’re trying to do the right thing, and it sucks, and everyone goes, “No, it’s great and it’s fine.” And everyone goes back to the meeting. This is a very common situation.

In that circumstance, it’s easy for a lazy leader, and I’m going to be pretty hard there, to just go, “Okay. Well, no problem. Let’s all go do this.”

Pete Mockaitis
“I guess there’s no questions. All right. Good news.”

Kirstin Ferguson
“I get to go to lunch early.” The better leader, a modern leader, I think, would see that as a signal, and like, “Okay, that’s something about my leadership is giving the impression that either I don’t want to hear questions, I don’t want to hear feedback, I’m not curious as to different ways we could do things.” I always think leaders need to look at themselves rather than thinking it’s the problem of the team.

And so, in that situation, you really need to turn it around, and maybe not in that meeting, but maybe having a second meeting afterwards to go, “Look, I noticed that in all our team meetings, there’s never really any feedback. What am I missing? Is it something about how I’m presenting the information? Is it something about how I’m asking? I’m really keen to know because I know you guys have got far more to contribute than what you’re showing. And I really need your contributions to make the best outcome.”

So, there’s different ways you can create a safe environment and try and explore what’s going on. And if you ask the right questions in the right tone, you might find that someone brave enough says, “Actually, well, when I did raise something three months ago, you really bit my head off, and I don’t want to bring it up again.”

Now, if someone was to say something like that, the only response you should have as a leader is gratitude because that person has had so much courage, firstly, to say that. But secondly, you’ve obviously not even remembered that that was an impact that you had. And remember at the beginning, I said I think leadership is just simply a series of moments. And that is a moment that you’ve missed, and you’ve got to do a lot of work to rectify it. But finding out what’s going on is the most important goal.

Pete Mockaitis
And it’s funny, as I imagine situations where I’m in the room and I have no questions, sometimes it means I am completely satisfied with the wisdom that I have received. And other times, it means, “I think this is boring, and stupid, and lame, and I shouldn’t really even be in this meeting in the first place. And I’m hoping this can be over as soon as possible.” Now, I’m not going to say that out loud. If someone really pressed me multiple times, one on one, yeah, I might let them know. But, generally, it’s like, no, I’m not going to go there.

Kirstin Ferguson
But if you think that, the chances are other people think that that meeting is a waste of time, which means leaders need to also be assisting, like, “Have I asked for feedback on whether these gatherings are even worthwhile? We sit here and you just listen to me for an hour. Is there another way you guys would prefer to work?”

And you might say, “Actually, I’d rather do all this stuff asynchronously because I don’t want to have to come in, or even get online, and have these meetings. I can be doing something else. But why don’t we…?” And you’ve got suggestion A, B, and C. If I’m prepared to hear that, it’s much more likely others in the team are going to have suggestions. And, suddenly, you come up with an agreed way that you’re going to lead, move forward, and you will be, as a leader, getting feedback.

Now, it might be that I’ve always thought, “It was better in a face-to-face meeting.” And, suddenly, when you are asynchronous, you’re giving endless feedback in a document. That’s something as a leader I need to get my head around.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. And it seems like, I guess, this is sort of next level humility for leaders to realize, “Oh, this whole initiative or project that we’ve been embarking upon is really ill-conceived, and should be shut down and reversed immediately. Oh, good to know.”

Kirstin Ferguson
But a modern leader goes, “Okay. Well, great, better we know this now than later. So now what?” And that’s when this isn’t all about bending to other people’s will. It’s about saying, “Okay, I’ve heard you now. Now, we’re accountable because this is an idea as a team we’ve come up with. What are we going to do? How are we going to get there? Who’s delivering what?” So, this is where that head and heart balance comes, but I don’t think you get there unless you’re prepared to open your mind to not having all the answers.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
Well, I’d love people to take a look at the book. It’s just been launched in the US. It’s been named in the Top Ten Best New Management Books for 2023 by Thinkers50. So, you can find it on Amazon. I’m all over the socials. I love connecting with people. So, please find me online. And do the HeadHeartLeader.com, go there and I’d love to hear how you go with the scale.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
Oh, that is so hard but I think the best advice I’ve ever been given that I give others, and perhaps I can sort of do it that way, is to just say yes. Say yes to opportunities as they come along. Even though I’m guaranteed that you’ll likely to think you’re not ready for them, say yes anyway because you just never know what other opportunities will come from them. And that’s certainly advice I’ve followed throughout my career.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
There’s one in my book that I’m currently loving, which is a guy who wanted to get better at chess, and this is back in the ‘60s, and he did an experiment with chess grandmasters and amateurs to see if chess grandmasters just had better memory, and it turns out no. They can read a board. Anyone who’s watched The Queen’s Gambit and seen her look at the ceiling and all the chess pieces move, that is perspective. They read the room or the read the board really well. But you can read more about the study in the book.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yeah, I think I’ve heard of this in that if pieces are just randomly placed on the board, the grandmaster has no better memory than your average Joe.

Kirstin Ferguson
That’s exactly right.

Pete Mockaitis
As opposed to they go, “Oh, wow, so that bishop is putting that kind in check right now, and so then he’s going to have to…” Like, it means something to them, like a configuration.

Kirstin Ferguson
It does. The researcher, his name was Adrian de Groot. And, yes, he put all, initially, just put the pieces in a position on the chess board so the amateurs couldn’t remember where they were, but the grandmasters easily because they must’ve looked at it, and go on, “Oh, that’s the queen’s gambit,” so they could put it back. But when he randomly mixed them up, as you said, they were no better than the amateurs. Not sure that it made old Adrian a better chess player, but he did learn about how they can read a board.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Kirstin Ferguson
Well, I’ve just picked up Elon Musk’s biography as well because I went and heard Walter Isaacson speak. So, I’m midway through that but I’m also reading the new book by Michael Lewis on Sam Bankman-Fried. So, I, obviously, have a penchant for reading about questionable businesspeople at the moment. I love reading about different types of leaders.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
I like the app Calm. So, it’s got good soundscapes, so this helps me get to sleep. I love having a good night’s sleep. So, I think every leader needs to sleep well.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And could you share a favorite habit, something you do that helps you be awesome at your job?

Kirstin Ferguson
I walk my dog. I live on the beach in Australia, which is pretty tough, I can assure you. We’ve got a ten-mile beach in front of our house, and I definitely try to walk my dog when I’m at home every day. That helps me just center myself and remember what’s important.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
Yes, to remember that everyone’s a leader, and that leadership is simply a series of moments. And every moment is an opportunity for you to leave a positive impact in your wake.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah, go to my website KirstinFerguson.com, or HeadHeartLeader.com, or you can find me on the socials.

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

Kirstin Ferguson
Yeah, have a look in the mirror first. So, as much as we can easily point out all of those leaders around us who are doing a bad job, it’s much more important that we’re considering how we’re going, and get feedback, and just work on it every single day.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Kirstin, this has been a treat. I wish you much luck and good head and heart moments.

Kirstin Ferguson
Thank you very much. It’s been a pleasure.

898: How to Reduce Workplace Drama and Ego with Cy Wakeman

By | Podcasts | One Comment

 

Cy Wakeman discusses why engagement is overrated and what really drives results.

You’ll Learn:

  1. How your ego ruins 2.5 hours of each day
  2. Three questions for breaking free from your ego
  3. Why to stop saying “should”

About Cy

Cy Wakeman is a drama researcher, international leadership speaker, and consultant. In 2001 she founded Reality-Based Leadership. She is the author of four books: Reality-Based Leadership: Ditch the Drama, Restore Sanity to the Workplace and Turn Excuses Into Results (2010), NY Times Bestseller, The Reality-Based Rules of the Workplace: Know What Boosts Your Value, Kills Your Chances, and Will Make You Happier (2013), No Ego: How Leaders Can Cut the Cost of Workplace Drama, End Entitlement, and Drive Big Results (2017), and her newest release, Life’s Messy, Live Happy.

Deemed as “the secret weapon to restoring sanity to the workplace,” Cy Wakeman was voted in the top 100 leadership professionals to follow on twitter for 7 years in a row. In 2021, 2022, and 2023 she topped the Global Gurus list of Top 30 Leadership Professionals across the globe, coming in at #1.

Resources Mentioned

Cy Wakeman Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
I am excited to be here as well and I have so much I want to learn about drama, and ego, and entitlement, and accountability, and results. So much juicy high-stakes stuff, Cy. But, maybe, first, could we back it up and tell us there’s a tale in which you had an accidental discovery which led you down the path of being a drama research. Could you tell us this story?

Cy Wakeman
Absolutely. I was doing some academic work, my Master’s degree, but also, at the time, managing position offices. I had 19 clinics and I was a pretty young leader, and wanted to combine my work with my studies so I could kind of do two things at once. And so, I was wanting to study how physicians were adapting to a lot of medical records, and I thought I would do a quick time study just to see if using dictation and moving to the computer where they had the keyboard would really change their productivity negatively.

So, I put an observer in every room and I had them time how much time the physician was spending with the patients or how much time they’re spending typing because I had a baseline from their dictation how much time they spent on recording. And I just wanted to see if the new electric medical record had really slowed physicians down as much as they were telling me that was the case.

And, very quickly, I got a call and I had only given the group two ways to record time – time with patients and time with the keyboard – and they pointed out they really wanted a third column, and I really wanted the research not to be changed. I just wanted to write my paper, graduate from graduate school, and be done. And they convinced me I would really lose out on a huge discovery if I hurried the completion of that course.

And I asked them, I got curious, “So, what would the third column be?” And they said, “Well, we record time with the patient, time with the keyboard, but the third column would be how much time the physician spends complaining about the keyboard and the patient.” And that was so juicy that I said, “Oh, my gosh, I’m a psychology social work background, I want to know this.” And it came out to be an astounding two and a half hours a day per person.

Pete Mockaitis
So, these doctors were spending two and a half hours a day complaining about how dumb it is that they had…and I guess this was in the early stages, it’s a new change. I guess, like, they would get old, I imagine, after some weeks or months.

Cy Wakeman
It doesn’t.

Pete Mockaitis
Like, years in, they’re still complaining for two and a half hours a day.

Cy Wakeman
Yes, the average person. So, when I found out that the average person, and it’s not just venting, but it’s internal, “This is freaking wrong. This shouldn’t be happening.” I thought, “Maybe these physicians, it’s a new change or they’re just whiners.” And I went out and I looked at nursing, I went out and looked at other healthcare, technical roles, I looked in finance, I just kept repeating this research, and the average person, good performer, spends about two and a half hours a day walking around, going, “I’ll do it, but I shouldn’t have to, and this is sick and wrong, and somebody should figure out a better way. And I was a consultant and no one asked me,” and it’s just this huge emotional waste, this source of emotional waste.

And so, that eventually ends up it’s 816 hours a year. And it’s not even about productivity because people can work while they complain. It’s about time spent being miserable needlessly because most of what people are complaining about, their suffering comes from story not actual reality. It’s their story of how things should be, not the real inconvenience of how it is. So, it just really opened up a lot of people’s minds to the emotional wastes that is really a problem.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s powerful. So, two and a half hours a day, and so some of this time is spent complaining and working at the same time, so it’s not necessarily all two and a half hours of that time…

Cy Wakeman
It’s not like we’re taking a break to vent, although some people do. But an example, as a senior vice president in a health system, we had a policy that really saw a patient or their family loss, we would be service oriented, we call it wayfinding. No matter your position, you would greet the patient and ask them where they want to go, or their family, and you would personally walk them there because hospitals are confusing complex places. It’s not always laid out very clearly.

So, while I’m doing that, with a smile on my face, “Where are you going? How’s your care here?” internally, I am thinking, “Screw all this. I have a paper bag. How hard could it be to do a GPS app to get people where they need to go. The signage around here is absolutely ridiculous.” But, outwardly, I’m kind to people but burdened because I shouldn’t have to be, “This is somebody else’s responsibility. I’m surrounded by jerks and idiots.” And it’s just that constant judging that separates and erodes, and it’s really the source of ego. It comes from ego.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, fascinating. So, some of this complaining is internally, inside our own headspace. You’re not verbalizing it externally.

Cy Wakeman
A lot of it is. A lot of it is judging. Yup, judging not helping. It is even creating a story about someone so that it inhibits your collaboration because your mind is saying, “I already know what this is about. They’re out to get me. I’m a victim. They want to disprove me with my boss.” Like, there’s so much dialogue internal and external. But what I’ve come to do with my research is teach people two things.

I teach them how their mind works so they quit getting played by their ego, and they quit believing everything they think as if it’s true, and I teach people how the world works so they stop arguing with reality, which is an argument you’ll lose, like, 100% of the time. Two colossal wastes of energy when people really could have an impact.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, boy, Cy, there’s so much to jump into here.

Cy Wakeman
Is that by topic?

Pete Mockaitis
All right. So, the book is called No Ego: How Leaders Can Cut the Cost of Workplace Drama, End Entitlement, and Drive Big Results. So, maybe first, let’s just define ego. What precisely do we mean by ego?

Cy Wakeman
So, ego is not a bad thing. We all have it. The way I talk about it is it’s a part of your mind that can provide protection, it helps you when you’re two years old, separate out from your mom, and come to know that you’re separate in the world. And, as human beings, we tend to really overuse it. It’s a very primitive part of our brain. Its job is really to keep us safe and be pretty paranoid, and not give people benefit of the doubt.

The way I explain it is, like, if you imagine having a light switch on your forehead, like a toggle switch, an old-fashioned switch, not a dimmer, not Alexa, like just a toggle switch. And when it’s toggled down, you’re seeing the world through the lens of ego, and it’s like wearing a pair of glasses, prescription glasses, but it’s the wrong prescription. It distorts your view of the world.

So, when you’re getting information in through the lens of ego, you see fact plus story, fact plus color commentary, and your view of the world is very distorted. You see the world as more dangerous. You come to the conclusion, usually, that you’re the victim, somebody else is the villain, and you’re helpless, and it’s distorted information upon which you make pretty outlandish decisions based on, and then you co-create the very thing you probably feared.

So, let me give an example. I’m driving down the road, and all I know if I told you the facts were that someone appear to be male, driving a pickup truck, bumper stickers which I disagree with on the pickup truck, saying things that I would not support, moves into my lane of traffic, allowing me less room than I prefer. So, all this happens on my morning commute as I was driving, and someone, who I described, moves into my lane of traffic, and I prefer more room than that person driving gave me.

Now, if that’s all the information I have, if I just keep it right there an accurate view of reality, I would make good choices. I would say, “Oh, my gosh, I prefer more room, so I will slow down and allow this person in, and continue my beautiful commute. There’s nothing to be upset about, there’s nothing to be mad about.”

However, many of us experience those facts and we add story, “He’s a male chauvinist. Obviously, he doesn’t care about human life. He’s the problem with this country. He doesn’t care about human life. Got up this morning, he doesn’t respect me, tried to kill me as if he owns the road. It’s absolutely ridiculous.” And it sparks in me what feels like real emotion and anger, but the anger didn’t come from reality. Our suffering isn’t from reality. It’s from the story we make up about reality.

So, what choice do I make? “I prefer safety and room between us, but given his behavior, game on, I speed up. If he wants it unsafe, I’ll show him unsafe.” And now I co-create the very thing I said I stood against, so I get to work. It’s not very bonding to say, “You know, Pete, my commute, just a lot of it is adjusting to other people moving into my lane with less room than I prefer. How was yours?” There’s no bonding to happen.

But if I’m like, “Oh, my gosh, thanks for asking. Attempted murder. This guy, like, literally, tried to take me out, and it was absolutely ridiculous and it escalated.” And now, what my ego has got me doing is just crunching on dopamine, crunching on like a brain cocktail, and actually believing everything I’m saying. And we operate at that heightened distorted view of the world.

And the conclusion I come up with is, “I was an innocent victim. He’s a villain,” and that we have to have very harsh consequences, two people who act like that. And we just keep separating it out. At the time at work, we need to be collaborative, we need to be inclusive, we need to be turning towards one another, and putting all ideas on the table. We’re judging, not helping.

And so, when you’re toggled down, you’re using the most primitive part of your brain and you usually don’t have very many options. You have fight, flight, freeze, or fawn, so what people do is they say, “There’s nothing I can do.” They disengage. They create impact. They disengage, they can’t have impact, and so then they feel, like, work is not engaging them but it’s actually their story that’s not engaging.

But when we’re toggled up, because we have another option, you’re bringing coherence, you’re using high levels of consciousness, you’re seeing the world as it really is. And when you’re toggled up, you have a thousand more choices, and it doesn’t feel like such a burden. And so, as you toggle up, you’re naturally your best self, you’re most evolved, you’re highly accountable, you’re collaborative, you’re resembling all the things that you could be to really co-create some amazing things.

But most people toggle down, outsource their happiness and their circumstances, rather than toggling up, seeing reality as it really is, and looking for ways they can plug and play that rebuilds and has impact, and is inclusive and collaborative, and creative and innovative. And so, once I can teach people how to run their toggle switch, which is simply through the act of self-reflection and questioning your own thinking, once I can teach them that, the same job is very different, the same colleagues are partners.

It’s not toxic positivity. It’s not just thinking better about people. It’s seeing reality as it really is so you realize most of what you thought happened never did. So, it was just your brain trying to protect you.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. All right. So much good stuff here. So, toggle up, toggle down is like we sort of have a switch or a gear shifter, and we got the down mode, which is our primitive lizard limbic stuff, fight, flight, freeze, or fawn. I understand fight, that’s aggress, “Let’s rip into it.” Flight, “You know what, I’m out of here. Forget it,” leave the room or check out.

Cy Wakeman
Or quiet quitting, “I stay and just quit.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Freeze, that’s just sort of like you just sort of disassociate or do nothing. You’re just sort of like do. And, now, what’s fawn? I don’t know about this one.

Cy Wakeman
Fawn is when, let’s say, we stop at the gas station, the guy goes, “Hey, sorry I cut you off.” And I’m like, “It really wasn’t any issue. I didn’t even get upset about it. I understand. It’s hard to drive a pickup, especially with all those bumper stickers on it. It might be difficult.” It’s that fawning is really a passive-aggressive approach.

So, like, in a meeting after the meeting, you talk really aggressively about what happened. And then when somebody asks you directly, “Do you want to add any comments or talk about the risk of this idea?” you’re like, “No, I think it looks amazing.” So, it’s really kind of self-abandonment, fawning is.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, and it’s interesting to think of it in the same context of those other options because it almost feels more devious and conscientiously chosen.

Cy Wakeman
And people say, “Our culture is just nice. We treat people like family.” I’m like, “That sounds a pretty dysfunctional way to treat family.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Okay. And then toggle up, so I like it. There’s a limited set of options versus toggling up. I’ve got a whole broader set of options, like, “Do I engage? Do I give a gift? Do I problem-solve something?” So, there’s a whole lot of ways we can go about that. All right, understood.

Cy Wakeman
And, usually, when you’re toggled up and you’re in high levels of consciousness, you’re helping not judging. You’re curious, you’re compassionate, you’re open-minded, open-hearted, “How can I give a person the benefit of the doubt? How can I turn back towards them? How can I approach this with curiosity?” because you’re not being driven out of, “I’m in danger and I have to do drastic things.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Cy Wakeman
I think your listeners want to know if they do this, go on social media, read some posts you disagree with, and look at how you respond. So, if you agree with me, and write, and like, “Heck, yeah, Pete, great post.” If you don’t agree, I just put an emoji, like a calf and a poop symbol, and go, “I hate for this woman to be my manager. She sucks,” after a one-minute video. And instead of, “Tell me more,” or, “How might you apply this to this particular situation?”

Like, so many of the algorithms in our daily lives drive us towards polarization and settle in cognitive dissonance where many things can trip us in time with simplistic polarized yes-no, “Whose camp are you in?” and then, like, “What if we can sit if there’s only one camp?” It’s like the world and the human race. There’s all these divisiveness, and that’s really the work of the ego.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, so then what are the tools we would use to do the toggling up to get out of some of the drama and unpleasantness here?

Cy Wakeman
Really simple. There’s these great questions that will set you free, and the first question I like to ask myself is, “What do I know for sure?” And that loosens the ego’s grip on my view of the world. Like, “You tried to kill me,” like, actually, I don’t know that for sure. “He’s a male chauvinist pig,” I don’t even know if it’s his pickup. I don’t even know if he believes the bumper stickers. I really don’t know what those four words mean to him.

So, when I ask, “What do I know for sure?” it gets me back to reality. And then the next question, now that I’ve stopped judging, I can ask myself, “What could I do next that will help? If I say I want world peace, what can I do next to be peaceful? If I say I want safe commutes, what could I do next?” And now it brings us back into helping, not judging, and personal accountability. And sometimes what I can do is just bless them or give them the benefit of the doubt. It doesn’t have to be any action.

And then a really final call for me is I often ask, because I want to live according to my principles and integrity, is, “If I were great right now, if I were my most evolved self, what would my next right action be?” And those three questions, those questions live in me. I just walk with them and I ask my teams a lot. So, when they come in and they’re mad at that colleague, I’m like, “What do you know for sure? Now, that you’ve stopped judging, what could you do to help? And if you were great right now, what would great look like?”

And that, people in their higher self, they usually come up with really helpful things that will move things along in the direction we all hope for.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, maybe could you give us an example? Let’s say someone is upset, they feel like they should’ve been included on an email, on a meeting. They feel undermined, cut out, excluded, something along these lines. It’s like, “I was not consulted, and I don’t like it.” How would we work through that?

Cy Wakeman
So, I would first premise with is a lot of people are like, “I just need to vent,” and they think venting is sharing feelings but venting, really, is a behavior, and it’s not sharing feelings. Venting is feelings plus story. So, feelings are like, “I’m frustrated.” A little context is, “I understand there’s a meeting that happened that didn’t include me, and I have some expertise in that area. My preference would be getting included.”

The venting is the respite, “They did this crap on purpose. They’re purposely excluding me. They want to discredit me. They’re trying to get by with something. And then you go back in history, they’ve done this 18 times. I’ve kept score.” That’s the venting part. So, let’s say my team member Alex comes in, and for my team, we’ve committed to note third options. You can either step in and impact. You can radically accept and extend grace, mercy, and tolerance.

But the third option where they don’t want to do either one of those, they just want to vent about it, most really great spiritual teachers, if you want little suffering, say, the third option, you can impact, and not control, its impact, or you can radically accept. Alex comes in, and says, “I’m so frustrated.” And as a leader, I want to validate his feelings, his experience, I’m like, “You look frustrated. What’s up?” “Well, Sara didn’t give me the information I needed for my report tomorrow. I’m going to have to stay late and I’m going to miss my kid’s ballgame.”

So, I can validate for him his experience, “Gosh, that sounds frustrating.” What I don’t need to validate as a colleague, a friend, or a leader, is the sense his ego is making of that.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, “Boy, she really did you dirty there.”

Cy Wakeman
Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
We don’t go there.

Cy Wakeman
Feelings sharing is like, “I see you’re frustrated,” but when he goes on to say, “She does this crap on purpose. She’s just trying to discredit me. Ever since she got that promotion, she thinks she’s all that bag of chips, and doesn’t realize that we’re still equal.” And I’m like, “Time out, time out. Two choices. If you were great right now, what would great look like? Please step up and impact this.” And he might consider that because self-reflection, you can’t vent and self-reflect at the same time. Your brain cannot do that.

That’s why it’s such a good hack because you can’t vent and help at the same time. So, I’m like, “Consider this question. If you were great right now, and you really wanted to impact your working relationship, that you were included and informed, what would that look like?” And he’s like, “Ahh, I could just simply like maybe put a reminder on our calendar three days before due date every month I needed the information, and to reach out to her to see if there’s any issue.”

I’m like, “Oh, my gosh, awesome. Go be great.” He’s like, “Yeah, but I shouldn’t have to.” The ego came calling. And I go, “Oh, my gosh, you were almost great.” The ego makes up rules that aren’t real and then when people violate it and we get really mad about it, like, “I shouldn’t have to put a reminder on a colleague’s calendar that’s helpful.” So, I said, “No problem, you don’t have to impact it. Then your other choice is can you radically accept it, that some days are like that? Have you ever been in a position where you missed a deadline? Can you extend mercy, grace, and tolerance?”

And his heart softened. He’s like, “Oh, my gosh, yes. She’s a good team member. We’ve had a lot going on. She helped me out before.” And I said, “Perfect. Like, can I help you? Like, if you have to stay late, I’ll pull some numbers for you. What do you need?” And we start working on that, and Alex goes, “Well, wait a minute. So, she’s just going to get away with it?” And I’m like, “So, you’re not letting it go? So, you’re going to impact it.”

And when you put the bagel in a squeeze box like that, you can see it grows more and more ridiculous, “So, you want her to pay for it and you don’t want to help her remember it, and you want an engaging great place to work without you being willing to do any part in helping your human companions?” And so, that whole piece of it, in the beginning, people get really mad because the ego can’t find a place to be a victim in there. It’s like adulting. It’s how the adults step up to impact. Yeah, it’s like adulting.

Pete Mockaitis
These are fantastic distinctions which just really clarify and crystallize things. So, sharing feelings plus context is different than venting. Venting is creating a big old story, it’s like, “I felt this associated with these things.” Okay. And then the main choices are: make an impact, change the situation, radically accept this is how it is, and extend mercy, grace, and tolerance, which feels nice. But don’t vent because then you’re just sort of giving ego fuel and being a victim, and that’s not really great for anybody in terms of our emotions, our engagement, our feeling good, our work relationships, etc. So, that’s cool.

Cy Wakeman
Exactly. And that’s a great point because a lot of people, I’m like, “So, why do you want to vent?” They’re like, “I want to feel better.” I’m like, “I have a more scientific way proven to feel better, which is accountability.”

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. Yes, I’ve seen some of the research.

Cy Wakeman
People are like, “I want to feel better,” but venting comes with a hangover. And the more you vent, the more you’ve trained your neural pathways that you need cheap dopamine and heightened disgruntlement. And for the ego to stay alive, it needs to stay mildly disgruntled. It eats anger for lunch. So, now you have to look elsewhere in the world for something that is wrong. And what we start doing is we outsource our happiness, “I’ll be happy when I have the perfect boss who’s never human. And I’ll be happy when everyone works exactly like I do. I’ll be happy when everyone agrees with me.” I’m like, “Well, your world has got to be pretty small then for you to get happy.”

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. That notion, “I shouldn’t have to,” and you said we make up rules, and then are angry when other people don’t follow them. And I’m thinking, I got a book on my shelf, Feeling Good, Dr. David Burns, talking cognitive distortions and ‘shoulds’ is a big one. I would love for you to dig into this territory a little bit. How should we think about ‘shoulds’? And what is an optimal approach when we hear our brains firing off that stuff?

Cy Wakeman
I’m so glad that you bring up on your podcast the solid evidence around cognitive distortions and all the ways that we do that. I think the best way I can explain my view on should is a question. So many people come to me as a therapist, it was about marriages, “Should I stay? Should I go?” And at work, like people come to me all the time, like, “Should I stay here and put up with this crap? Or, should I just leave and find another job?”

And what I tell people is, “If those are your questions, you’re never going to get good answers. If you want better answers, get better questions.” And when you’re using should, “Should I?” it’s a problem. One, it’s external focused, “What would you do?” or, “What would another person do?” or, “What would a good girl do?” or, “What would God have us do?”

It’s also very conditional, “I have a good week at work, then I should stay,” “I have a bad week work at work, then I should go.” So, it really keeps us externally focused. It’s so conditional, made-up, and silly. I would ask people, “What’s your soul craving right now?” or, “What do you hope to see happen? And then, how can you get that using your words and your actions, and evolving yourself to move through the world more skillfully to get that more often?”

Because that should piece has so many implications, like, “The world owes me something. There’s a formula on how the world should work. And I’m in charge of how people should behave. And I had some agreements, somebody’s ripping me off because my birthright is a perfect boss.” It really gets you into territory that you’ll be chronically disgruntled.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. So, if we catch ourselves in a should, is there sort of like a stop, drop, and roll or key protocol or steps you recommend we do?

Cy Wakeman
When you get into should, know that you’re absolute into story of how you would prefer the world to work, but you haven’t even questioned that. You may not even prefer it that way. But when you get into ‘shoulds,’ it is the key indication that you are externally attached and you’re into ego, your view is distorted, and you’re trying to dictate and control people, places, and things, and it will lead to complete and utter misery. It’s like co-dependency.

So, the minute you just start hearing that in your language about, “Here’s what they should be doing,” or, “Everyone knows that this is how it should happen,” just back out of it, and just say, “What is it that I want to be part of creating? And if I were doing that splendidly, what would I be doing right now? Invite other people to join me in that creation.” Like, get that internally focused. Get focused on, “What if we could? And how could we?”

And, for me, those stop, drop, and rolls are energy management. So, a lot of people are putting their energy into, “Why I shouldn’t have to.” If an organization has this strategy, like, “Well, they shouldn’t ask us to do that. And here’s what we shouldn’t have to. And here’s why it won’t work,” and I say that leaders today aren’t there to manage the work of people. They’re there to manage the energy of people away from why we can’t and why we shouldn’t have to, to how we could. And people get fired up about being part of the creation process.

And so, it’s like, “Well, let’s dream and scheme what would great look like. And what if we could, how could we?” and you re-plug people’s energy into that, now people have impact, which is what we all crave, and we’re in high levels of consciousness, and we’re out of ego. We’re seeing a lot of options that we didn’t see before. We’re into creativity and we’re into some big energy stuff. Very nourishing anti-burnout stuff.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And I think when it comes to should, in my own head, some of the most loud, or resonant, or powerful, emotionally feeling ‘shoulds’ involve things that are, I guess, associated with the law, like, “They should not be breaking the law,” or, “They should not be lying,” or sort of legal, or moral, or just like abundantly obvious resource things, that cost ten times what it could.

Cy Wakeman
It could be. I think what happens with should is it’s the way we feel justified in judging because I really believe that people are innocent till proven guilty. And so, I’m like, “They deserve a fair trial,” and I’ve already tried them and decided that what they did was wrong, or if a jury of your peers has said that by all accounts seems they have broken the law, then we support the consequence society has agreed on.

But we tend to take it out of the judicial system or out of the consequence system and put it in our own judgment system, and that’s where I have an issue. I wish people would replace the word ‘they should’ with ‘I prefer’ because that’s really owning it. That’s really owning it. Like, I grow as a therapist and social worker, and if you look at many of the people incarcerated, we can get from a privileged statement that’s really judge-y, and like, “They shouldn’t have broken the law.”

And so many times I want to say, “Come with me, give me all your money, give me all of your defenses, you grew up in a crappy environment, you have no boundaries, you’ve been traumatized, you’ve been sexually abused, your brain doesn’t work right, and you need position, power, food, something. Where’s the ‘should’ come into that?” Like, it’s very predictable when there aren’t those support systems there that the same people believing their same thinking will commit the same thing.

And that’s why most people who are saying ‘should’ have so much hypocrisy in their lives. Like, “People should not steal,” “And I cannot put something in my taxes because it’s not a big deal, and it’s not going to get caught. And the IRS is really underemployed,” or, “People should not lie.” And I lie every day. Actually, it’s a federal offense when I lie. I go into security at the CDC or NIH or NASA, the places I get to work, and if you lie to a security officer upon entry, it’s a federal offense. And they ask for my ID. And every day I turn over my driver’s license that says I weigh 150 pounds.

And so, all I’m saying is that when we are really focused on what other people should and shouldn’t do, we have these moral stances, it’s really just trying to protect ourselves in trying to control the world. Instead, I could say, “I would prefer we all seek to be more honest with one another.” That’s a more inclusive turning towards one another, but it happens a lot, too, at townhall meetings. Leaders should be kind and transparent, and create psychological safety, and make the world safe, and listen, and include.

Like, the list for leaders is long, and then in a townhall meeting, people are standing up, and are like, “Well, I don’t have all the facts, that I know that you’ve lied about this, and you fired that person,” and there are behaviors from employees that are not kind, or psychologically safe, or demanding answers, and it’s like their anger at leaders should include them, and we can also include in our leaders. Leaders should never lie to us, “Did you say when you called in sick that you weren’t sick, that you just really want to go to the Taylor Swift concert?”

And that’s where I think we need to be careful at ‘shoulds’ because ‘shoulds’ lead to shame but internally. We’re trying to shame others for not living up to it but they lead to internal shame because once I ‘should’ you, I’ve just guaranteed that probably a standard for you that I could never live up to.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, well said. Well, so while we’re hopping around your worldview, you also say that we should reject the fads of engaging employees and meeting their needs. What do you mean by this? And what should we do instead?

Cy Wakeman
Yeah, this is often taken out of context. What I have found out is that we really over-rotated on engagement. It’s like, “How can we create this workplace where people don’t have to face any sort of hardship and we can take care of as many needs as possible?” And while it’s beautiful, if it’s not balanced with personal accountability, it will lead to entitlement.

And so, I want people to create great engaging workplaces for high accountables. And the reason I say this is the same behavior will not please someone who’s in the state of low accountability and high accountability at the same time. So, if we need to make changes in our organization to stay competitive in the marketplace, if we slow change down, high accountables are like anxious, like, “Why aren’t we implementing this to stay competitive?” But if we speed change up, low accountables are getting anxious, like, “Why do we keep changing things? Why can’t we keep it the same?”

So, to think that we can engage people in a state of low accountability is really just not supported in the evidence. I can only work with the willing, and engagement has a lot to do with my shared accountability to lead. And what we found in the research, people in states of high accountability are more reasonable and they engage more easily in the same workplaces that people are in, say, low accountability are disengaging, that there’s a big part of engagement that is a choice that says, “I realize reality will be imperfect, and I would like to join you in relationship where we can move through that skillfully.”

And a lot of people, their minds are very conditional, “I’ll buy in as long as I get communication and I get this, and no one ever adds something on, and we’re all paid the same, and we’re always given enough notice.” And I’m just like, “What are the odds that that world is ever happening?” And it’s like, “Then what are the odds of you ever engaging?” And the part about that when you disengage is that you feel separate and you feel not part of something. And if you are a disengager, you will disengage at many relationships over time.

That’s just my therapist background, “I just show up at work and do no engagement. I do nothing. I hate it there. My life at home is amazing.” And I’m like, “Probably statistically impossible.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, then when it comes to engaging employees, it’s not so much that, “We’re going to do a thing that’s going to engage them,” but rather…

Cy Wakeman
“I can’t buy you love.” “I cannot buy your love,” that’s co-dependency.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. And, likewise, meeting their needs, it’s sort of like there’s an independent sort of responsibility piece that cannot be fulfilled by an external third party. Is that kind of your main message there?

Cy Wakeman
It’s my main thing. And I’m not anti-engagement. I think the people that work for me would tell you that it’s a fantastic place to work. We have very few rules. We just deliver great things. But the prerequisite is that you’re an adult, and a high accountable, and have a lot of skills to move through the world with a lot of loving kindness, inclusivity. The key is I can’t buy you in. Buy in is a verb. If you buy in, then we all have a responsibility to create a wonderful workplace.

And so, here’s a great tool to see where you’re at on this. A lot of people do engagement surveys, and then the leader comes in and says, “Okay, here’s what you said in the survey. Let’s make a list of what we need, what you want here at work. Like, what do you want? What would great look like? What do you want created?” And people come up with a really gold-plated list, like, “We want everybody included, and everybody should be consulted. Decisions have to be made quickly, and even if we don’t have expertise, and even if we have no stake in it.”

And this list is long, and most people want the leaders to take that list and go fix reality and deliver that. And a real question is, “Before I take that list to somebody’s leader,” I say, “Well, here’s the second part to this assignment. What are you personally willing to do to get it?” And a lot of times, that list is really short. The list is long that they want, and what they’re personally willing to do is, like, “Wait for it,” or, “Be here when you get back with it,” or, “Participate if everybody else does it.”

And I’m like, “What are the odds of that working?” And we just fill that list more robust where that’s personal accountability. And then our really awesome list is the third list, “Now that we have people participating, what can I, as your leader, what can the organization do to support all of this?” And that’s called attribution in a healthy way.

When high accountables are stressed or suffering, they first look to themselves, and they go, “What’s my part in this?” Like, I was betrayed in a marriage. Everybody could think he was the bad guy. I had a part in that. I abandoned myself long before he abandoned me. Like, I compromised on some. Like, if I don’t learn that, then I can’t really trust anybody in a relationship. I had to learn that.

So, once people identify that, then it’s like, “Here’s what we’re willing to do. What can the organization do?” So, when a high accountable suffers, they go, “I’m in pain here. What’s my part in it? And then what do I need from others?” And then they use the words and they don’t demand it. They request it and work to a solution.

If somebody is in low accountability, and they’re struggling, they skip that part where they attribute anything to themselves, they’re like, “I’m struggling. My leader sucks,” or, “I’m struggling.” What the ego does is it intellectualizes feelings, like anxiety into grievances. I wake up today anxious. I do a body scan, and I’m like, “I feel anxious. And so, great information. How can I move through today knowing I feel anxious? I can be more careful with people. I can really remember that they don’t read my mind and ask for what I need, and move through with that information.”

A lot of people have outsourced their happiness. They wake up, and go, “I feel anxious,” and then they intellectualize it, they’re like, “Why? Oh, I know, because my leader doesn’t tell me anything.” And so, we’re intellectualizing so many things into grievances, and now we’re outsourcing, we’re dependent upon everybody else for how we feel, we’ve outsourced that.

And I’m just inviting people. This isn’t blaming the victim. A lot of people get in, like, “Oh, she’s gaslighting.” And I’m like, “That would be your ego trying to discredit. Just stay curious for one minute longer and just wonder if your life might improve if you just reflect on what is also your part in this, and how can you partner differently with the people that can help you.”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Cy, this is a refreshing completely alternative way to run the brain to a common practice and culture, and I dig it. Tell me, anything else you really want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Cy Wakeman
I really invite people to do what you did, the books on your shelf. Get to know you as a human being. Where is your co-dependency? Where is your dysfunction? Where is your trauma? Where is your own cognitive dissonance and limiting beliefs and ways your brain is playing you? And as you discover that, a whole new world sort of opens up to you. So, I just encourage people to become a student, a curious person.

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

Cy Wakeman
Okay. Favorite quote, most of them that I love are from Rumi, a poet. And favorite quote is, “Out beyond the ideas of right-doing and wrongdoing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there.” And that’s just really a call for me to get out beyond judgment and just meet people where they are, and love people up, and call people up.

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

Cy Wakeman
My favorite study is the study that showed the observer effect, where as they shut light, it acted differently when it was being observed than when it wasn’t being observed. And it really just shows that we’re always involved in a process of co-creation. So, take your part of co-creation very seriously. We’re always affecting the outcome.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that experiment is so trippy.

Cy Wakeman
It’s mind-blowing.

Pete Mockaitis
Some folks are like, “This is proof we live in a simulation.” I was like, “You know what, I don’t know if we can jump to that conclusion.”

Cy Wakeman
It’s mental blue pill Matrix. I’m like, “No.”

Pete Mockaitis
It certainly makes you scratch the head, like, “What is going on here?” And a favorite book?

Cy Wakeman
My favorite book is, I’m huge into poetry, so my favorite book is anything by David Whyte, probably Consolations.

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

Cy Wakeman
I’d say it’s still low tech, my journal. If it needs to be self-reflected on, or remembered, or attended to, it goes pen to paper. I really think all war internally belongs in the ear. Once you get out beyond the ego, you can see it for what it really is. So, it’s got to be pen and paper, Byron Katie from TheWork.com talks a lot about that.

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

Cy Wakeman
Yeah, your ego is not your amigo, and stop believing everything you think, every question. If you think something that causes you, like you’re hooked, or you’re sure, or you’re out of curiosity and compassion, I would question them.

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

Cy Wakeman
I am at Cy Wakeman everywhere. Our newsletter is fantastic and you can sign up for that at RealityBasedLeadership.com/newsletter. We don’t sell you stuff. We just give you a great short content to consume and use with your team, friends, and colleagues.

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

Cy Wakeman
My final challenge would be tune in more to your own thinking and be an observer of your thinking. You are not the thinker. You’re the observer. And a lot of us are moving through life pretty unintentionally.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Cy, this has been a treat. I wish you much fun and love and minimal ego.

Cy Wakeman
Thank you. And thank you for the honor of being on the show. It’s fun to talk about these things. So, thanks for what you do.

894: The Three Keys to Retaining Your Best People with Joe Mull

By | Podcasts | One Comment

 

Joe Mull breaks down the fundamentals of why people leave their jobs then shares simple solutions to creating a happier, more committed workforce.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The true story behind the myth, “Nobody wants to work anymore.”
  2. The sweet spot for a team’s workload
  3. How to talk to your boss about improving your job

About Joe

Joe Mull is the author of 3 books including No More Team Drama and the forthcoming Employalty: How to Ignite Commitment and Keep Top Talent in the New Age of Work.

He is the founder of the BossBetter Leadership Academy and hosts the popular Boss Better Now podcast, which was recently named by SHRM as a “can’t miss show for leaders” along with podcasts from Brené Brown and Harvard Business Review.

In demand as a keynote speaker, Joe has taught leadership courses at two major universities and previously managed training at one of the largest healthcare systems in the U.S.

Joe has appeared as an expert in multiple media outlets including Forbes, the International Business Times, on ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and on Good Morning America.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, sponsors!

  • BetterHelp. Calm racing thoughts with online therapy. Get 10% off your first month at BetterHelp.com/awesome.

Joe Mull Interview Transcript

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

Joe Mull
I am so excited to be here, Pete. Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about your book, Employalty: How to Ignite Commitment and Keep Top Talent in the New Age of Work, whether listeners are managing, executivizing, keeping their talent, or they are the talent, and they’re thinking about looking elsewhere. You’ve got some great perspectives we’re excited to hear. But, first, I need to hear about you singing at Carnegie Hall. Joe, tell me, how did you get to Carnegie Hall?

Joe Mull
Well, I was one of those show choir kids in high school. I was really involved in theater and performing arts. And one year, one of our groups, our high school group, was invited to a choral that was being made up of kids from a whole bunch of other states, and we got to go to New York City and practice with a maestro for two days. And then we performed parts of Mozart’s “Requiem” on stage at Carnegie Hall in New York City. It was pretty amazing.

Pete Mockaitis
That is cool. That’s cool. I thought, when I asked, you would say practice, practice, practice but that was a very valid…

Joe Mull
That’s in there.

Pete Mockaitis
I was in the show choir combo for one year as well, and that was a good time. It’s a whole world there, man. Kudos. And it sounds like it’s a fond memory.

Joe Mull
Thank you. It is. And my jazz hands are still strong, I got to tell you.

Pete Mockaitis
Your rapid costume-changing abilities?

Joe Mull
No doubt.

Pete Mockaitis
That comes in handy sometimes, I bet. Cool.

Joe Mull
Absolutely, yes.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now can you tell us a little bit about Employalty. First of all, what do you mean by this word?

Joe Mull
Employalty is actually a franken word of the words ‘employer,’ ‘loyalty,’ and ‘humanity.’ What we know is that if you want to find and keep devoted employees, it’s employers that actually have to be loyal to employees, and actually create a work experience that prioritizes quality of life. When you do that, people would join an organization, they will stay long term, and they will do great work. So, employalty is the commitment that employers make to a more humane employee experience.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Now, Joe, that premise sounds sensible, reasonable, logical. Do you have any interesting facts or research tidbits that suggest just how essential this concept is for folks?

Joe Mull
Oh, man, did you just open a Pandora’s box because I completely nerd out on a lot of the social science research on what leads people at work to be committed, to activate their emotional and psychological commitment. And for this book, we analyzed more than 200 research studies and articles on why people decide to quit a job, or what attracts them to a new organization, or what leads people to stay. And I can tell you with conviction that there are three areas of the employee experience that matter the most. We call them ideal job, meaningful work, and great boss.

So, ideal job is made up of compensation, workload, and flexibility. You get those three things right, and my job fits into my life like a puzzle piece snapping into place. For meaningful work, it’s purpose, strengths, and belonging. If I believe my work matters, if it aligns with some things that I’m good at, and I feel like an accepted and celebrated member of the team, my work is meaningful and I want to do it well.

And then great boss, there’s a lot of stuff you got to get right for someone to point to you, and say, “Man, I’ve got a great boss.” But we think the three most important are trust, coaching, and advocacy. If my boss grants me trust and earns my trust, if they advocate for me, and they coach me, then that job is something I want to be a part of.

So, all of the research that we see in what leads people to want to be part of an organization, and want to do great work for that great organization, comes down to ideal job, meaningful work, and great boss.

Pete Mockaitis
Joe, well said, I think that that really cuts through the clutter and simplifies things, and feels true to me in terms of, “Yup, if you’ve got those things going, it’s hard to see how your job is not amazing.” It’s conceivably possible there’s an even more amazing job out there for you somewhere, but that’s pretty hard. You’re quite the competitive situation when these things are true.

Joe Mull
Right. And we think of this as a kind of internal psychological scorecard. Everybody is walking around with a kind of internal scorecard of ideal job, meaningful work, and great boss. And if you’re checking most or all of the boxes around the employee experience for that person, it’s very unlikely that they’re unhappy, that they’re looking around for something else. It’s very unlikely that they can be poached from your organization.

But if things change, or you’re not checking those boxes consistently, then people’s commitment starts to wane, they start to look around, or, worse, they’re mentally checked out and they stay. What’s interesting about this though is that there is not equal importance across all of those dimensions of that scorecard for every person.

And what I mean is that people’s priorities are different. I’m 46 years old, I’ve got three kids under the age of 13. When I was first entering the workforce, what was most important to me was compensation because I had a car held together by, like, duct tape and prayer, and so I wanted to earn some money and be able to get a decent car and pay my bills.

Nowadays, I make a nice living. What’s more important to me beyond finances is, “Do I have some flexibility because I need to be home two days a week to get my kids off the bus because of my wife’s work schedule?” And so, the priorities within that scorecard can ebb and flow and change from person to person, and even within the same person over the course of our lives.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely, that checks out. So, tell me, Joe, it seems like you’ve got a real nice synthesis of what matters and how we can think about that in an organized fashion, and that in and of itself is valuable. At the same time, I guess it’s not particularly surprising. I think once you say it, it makes me say, “Yeah, it sounds about right,” which is valuable in and of itself because you could say a dozen things that, hmm, feel like a stretch and know these skills right on the money.

So, tell us, have you discovered anything particularly surprising in your journey of research and digging into this employalty stuff?

Joe Mull
Probably the most surprising piece is the degree to which these old beliefs and myths and misinformation about work and why people choose to stay with an organization long term or why they choose to do great work, that continue to persist. So, we write in the book about what we call the myth of lazy. And I’m sure you’ve heard people talk about that the real problem is work ethic, “No one wants to work anymore. These kids today are just entitled. They don’t care as much about their work.”

And one of my favorite things that we found in the research for book was we found a professor out of Canada who has been studying generational theory. And this idea, this “No one wants to work” is actually the most persistent generational trope in human history. This man found examples of this exact sentiment “No one wants to work” showing up in North American newspapers every year going back 120 years.

Pete Mockaitis
Boy, that’s funny. Well, I was thinking, is there a quote from, like, is it Socrates or Plato or Aristotle or one of them talking about, “Oh, this generation”? So, maybe thousands of years, but at least 120, every year in the newspapers in the US that that’s an eyeopener. Okay, so.

Joe Mull
And we really want this to be the problem, don’t we? I have a local small business owner in my community who owns several restaurants in retail locations, and, for the past two years, he has regularly posted on social media when he has openings, and he always does it the same way. He says, “Help me find good people. No one wants to work,” and then he lists the pay and the hours.

And it’s been a really interesting thing to watch people in the community come back, and say, “Hold on. Time out. It’s not that no one wants to work, it’s that no one wants to work for you.” And that’s really what this conversation is about. When we have trouble filling positions or keeping people in an organization, we want to blame people, we want to say that they left for greed, we want to say “No one wants to work anymore,” when the real problem has been the work.

All of the research that we did to kind of capture what’s happening at this moment around what we’ve heard called The Great Resignation and quiet quitting and all of these ideas is that we are living in an era where people are looking for upgrades to their quality of life. So, think about it this way, Pete. When did we start hearing about The Great Resignation?

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, well, now it feels like it’s been a long time. Is it three-ish years?

Joe Mull
Three-is years, right. So, we first started hearing this language in late 2020 or early 2021 when a professor out of Texas labeled this as something that he predicted was going to happen in the labor market. Would it surprise you to learn that what we know as The Great Resignation actually started in 2009? It’s actually been going on for 13 years. And here’s what I mean.

So, if you remember The Great Recession in 2008, we get our economic feet under us a little bit in 2009. And then in 2010, something interesting happened in the labor market. Two million more people voluntarily quit their job than the year before. And then in 2011, it happened again. And in 2012, it happened again. And every year since 2010, more and more people than the year before have voluntarily left their job. But during that same time period, we had had 50% more hiring in every industry category in the United States.

So, if you nerd out around this stuff like I do, and you look at this on, like, a graph chart, you see that for every year since 2010, quitting has gone up but hiring has been above it and has gone up. So, what’s happening is not the people are quitting, it’s that they’re switching because they can, because we don’t have enough people to do all of the jobs that are available to us that we continue to add to our economy.

And so, people are upgrading. And if you ask people, “Do you know someone who switched jobs in the last year or two?” Nearly everybody raises their hand. And you ask them, “Why are people switching?” and you get a whole bunch of answers, “I need more money,” “I’m leaving a toxic work environment,” “I want more of work-life balance,” “I want a shorter commute,” “I want to work from home,” “I want more time with my kids,” “I want a better boss,” “I want more fulfilling work,” but all of those answers role up to a bigger idea, which is “I want a better quality of life.”

And so, when we talk about employalty, we’re talking about a more humane employee experience that prioritizes quality in life because we’re living in an era where that’s what matters most.

Pete Mockaitis
There’s so much good stuff here, Joe. So, it’s like, “I want a better quality of life, and because of the supply-demand market dynamics for labor at the moment, I can get away with it.” It’s like, “Things aren’t so tight and me so desperate that I’m going to hold on to something lame because I don’t have to.” So, there we are.

Well, now I’m curious. I’m thinking about my buddy, Steve. Shoutout to Steve.

Joe Mull
What’s up, Steve?

Pete Mockaitis
He listened to one of my guests mentioned that he put himself through grad school via juggling, and Steve said, “Oh, boy, this guy’s a boomer. You can’t do that now.” And I thought that that was interesting in terms of so we have, “The next generation is lazy, nobody wants to work,” sort of that idea is a myth that’s been sort of believed in or shared for 120 plus years in the US.

Although, I think it does also seem true that from a, I don’t know, I don’t exactly how we measure this precisely in terms of economist and quality of life, etc. but it also seems that the minimum wage could take you a lot farther 50, 80 years ago, like paying for grad school with juggling, like that kind of a thing was more possible then.

So, I don’t know what’s the best way to measure quality of life because I guess we’ve got bigger houses and iPhones now, but also more sort of dual-income households in order to make ends meet. So, it’s sort of like, “Are we better off? Are we worse off?” I guess it depends on how you look at it. But, nonetheless, it would seem that your minimum-wage restaurant job offer today is just way lamer than it was 60 years ago.

Joe Mull
And it’s not sustainable. So, since compensation is one of those nine dimensions of employalty that we talk about in the book, we devoted an entire chapter to talking about wages because it’s a complex issue right now. But one of the things that we know that is not up for debate is that we’ve endured nearly 40 years of wage stagnation here in the US. The average salary for the median US worker rose 10% between 2021 and 1979. It’s absurd.

Pete Mockaitis
In real terms?

Joe Mull
In real terms, and while the cost of living has gone up 400%. And so, we know, we write about it in the book that the number companies need to look at around compensation nowadays isn’t minimum wage and it isn’t market wage. It actually needs to start with what’s called a living wage, which is an economic calculation of what somebody needs to earn to avoid a substandard of living.

And what we know is that, in nearly every state in the US, a living wage is $17 an hour. But here’s the rub, that’s for a household of one. If you add a child, the living wage in the United States for a household with one parent and one adult is above $30 an hour. If that adult earns less than $30 an hour, they will struggle to afford adequate food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medicine, all of it.

And so, when we see folks who are changing jobs, for many of them, it is not about the money except for those for whom it is entirely about the money, and their choices around money aren’t being driven by greed, they’re not being driven by entitlement. They’re being driven by survival.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s powerful. Yes, living wage is near and dear to my heart when I’m hiring out of developing countries, and, sure enough, it lets me get fantastic quality talent because most people aren’t, “Oh, can I get away with giving you three bucks an hour? Then I will.” It’s like, “Okay. Well, good luck getting the finest talent from these nations.” That’s a whole other conversation.

Joe Mull
And that’s part of the reason we saw, finally after so much availability in the labor market over the last two, three years, especially since COVID, is organizations, employers have been forced to push wages up. They’re sort of reckoning with the sins of those 40 years and recognizing that, in that supply and demand model, we actually need to stand out more.

But here’s the crazy thing. There’s just been a bunch of news coverage over the past three or four weeks here in the US about how wage growth has actually slid back just a little bit this year. It’s not keeping pace with what it had been before. And what’s that old quote about “History is doomed to repeat itself”? We have these employers who are looking around, and going, “Oh, well, if the labor market is cooling just a bit, I’m going to try to get away with paying people less than I was coming through the door than I did a year or two ago.”

And in the aftermath of so many years of people being underpaid, you’re immediately creating a flight risk when that person walks through the door and knows that they’re not getting all that they could have, or they find out that somebody else in the company came in at a higher wage, or there’s an organization across the street that has decided not to slide back onto those lower wages and recognizes there’s an economic challenge for most people across their organization and they continue to pay at that level.

Pete Mockaitis
So much good stuff. This is good real talk about compensation that I appreciate. So, let’s say, okay, we check that box. You, as an employer, you are providing solidly above living wage, so that’s cool. So, then tell us, what are the highest leverage points, I guess, in terms of facilitating loyalty, in terms of what is something, a dimension here, that’s really broken really frequently, and is actually not that hard to fix? Joe, where shall we start?

Joe Mull
Well, one of the things that comes to mind for me is workload. So, we know that workloads in the last 20 years in the United States have continued to explode, and it was driven through the ‘90s and into the early 2000s by what we refer to as rightsizing or efficiency. In organizations, you would see the work of three people became the work of two people, and then, suddenly, that amount of work was foisted onto one person as organizations look to maximize shareholder value and revenue.

And so, we live in this world now where organizations of every shape and size are operating with minimum staffing thresholds. And we think and we connect all of the labor struggles that we’re having right now, and turnover, and The Great Resignation with COVID. But if you remember 2019, burnout was at an all-time high in the US workforce before anybody ever heard of COVID.

We took fewer vacation days as Americans than every other developed nation on earth prior to COVID. And the number one reason people don’t take vacation time in the US is fear of falling behind at work. And so, we know that our expectations of what one person can reasonably accomplish have slowly moved. In fact, we know managers here in the US, we know that their workloads have increased by more than 30% in just the last seven years.

And so, if we want to create a workplace where people join, and they stay, and they care and try, we want to create a workplace that doesn’t disrupt people’s quality of life. We have to look at workloads, and we have to look at staffing levels, and we have to disperse that workload across a greater number of people so that people aren’t running at 100% capacity all the time.

There was actually just some research that came out over the summer that pointed to, “What’s the sweet spot?” And forgive me for not knowing the exact source of that research right off the top of my head right now but I can certainly send it to you.

Pete Mockaitis
You are forgiven, Joe.

Joe Mull
But it said that about the sweet spot for effort and capacity around workload was right about 85%. That if you asked people to work to about 85% of their effort and capacity most of the time, you’ve actually hit a sort of Goldilocks kind of just right sweet spot because what happens is, that leaves enough time for people to build camaraderie, to engage in professional development, to have a little bit more creativity around their work, to invest time and effort into, if you’re a manager, building more relationships and trust with your employees.

And if something happens, and you need to ask your employees to ramp up, they have space to give. It’s the difference between putting the pedal to the metal in the car and driving with the accelerator pressed to the floor the whole time versus leaving a little something behind so that if you need to go up a hill, you have a little bit more there to push on, and so, I think workload is a big part of this.

In terms of how you fix it, we got to increase the staffing levels in a lot of organizations, we have to get involved and invested in evaluating the individual workloads that people have, or we got to figure out where we can minimize those a little bit more.

Pete Mockaitis
Joe, you must be really popular amongst the executives when you’re saying these things, like, “Joe, I’m hearing that we need to spend a lot more money. Joe, I need to pay people more per hour and get fewer hours out of them. How am I supposed to survive in my business, competitive forces, blah, blah, blah, blah?”

Joe Mull
Well, you know what I like, I like gin and tonics. So, here’s what I would tell an executive, I’d say, “Let’s sit down at the bar, and if you are so inclined to order a grownup beverage, what my wife and I call a drink-y drink, I’ll order a gin and tonic, you order what you want to order. And on the back of a napkin, we’re going to do some math. I’m going to ask you, what’s your turnover in the positions that you’re struggling to keep? How many did you lose last quarter? How many do you have open right now?”

“Because we know it costs between half to two times a position’s salary to replace that position in an organization. I’m going to ask, how much time your managers are spending on recruitment? How much time are they spending on performance management issues? I’m going to ask you on the back of that napkin, can we find a way to calculate the impact on your customer experience if you’re understaffed, or if your customers encounter someone who is not fully emotionally and psychologically engaged in their work.”

“And we’ve very quickly going to come up with probably millions of dollars of invisible costs that don’t always show up on the balance sheet that we know are offset if we can invest just a little bit more in the employee experience.” I was just telling an executive the other day, “You’ve got to choose your hard. You can run an organization on a minimum staffing threshold. You can run an organization paying people as little as possible. And you’re going to have some hard challenges as a result of that in terms of quality of product and service delivery, retention, churn, turnover, etc.”

“Or, you can invest more in the employee experience. You can pay people a little bit more. Ask them to work a little bit less. You can invest in quality-of-life initiatives. And is that hard? It is absolutely hard but only one of those hard sets of problems comes with a higher quality of product and service and a better customer experience, which is going to lead to improvement in every metric you care about in your organization as an executive.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, we’ve made the case. And speaking of numbers, 85% of effort and capacity, am I measuring that in hours?

Joe Mull
Oh, that’s a good question.

Pete Mockaitis
Like, on the numerator and hours on the denominator, and they cancel out, yielding a percentage?

Joe Mull
There’s a couple of different instruments that are being used popularly right now to measure workload. One of them is a Task Index that was actually built and founded by NASA, and so it does evaluate time but it also evaluates perception of effort. So, think about a one-on-one conversation that you might have with a direct report that asks them, “What are the parts of your job that demand the most time and attention and energy? What are the parts of your job that energize you versus what are the parts of your job that actually leave you feeling defeated or exhausted?”

And this isn’t a conversation about what someone can or can’t “handle” because that frames it in all the wrong way, and we know that workers will lie because they don’t want to give their perception that they can’t handle certain things in their job because that just works against them. But if we evaluate both time and perception and effort, it starts to give us a more complete picture of how workload is actually impacting someone.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. I guess I’m just thinking if a manager or a team is looking to get a sense of this, like, “All right, 85% is the number I’m shooting for. I do the NASA inventory to see what’s up.” I guess what I’m thinking is that it can really vary person by person in terms of physical fitness and vitality, or even season by season of a person’s life, it’s like, “Hey, my parents are aging and there’s a whole lot I’m dealing with there which sucks my energy outside of…”

Joe Mull
Or, season by season in the organization because there are some months of the year where a particular kind of work might be more demanding than in other slow times.

Pete Mockaitis
So, I guess I’m wondering, it seems like it’s not as straightforward saying, “Hey, 40 hours is the whole size of the pie, so 85% equals 34.” It sounds like it’s not quite that straightforward here, Joe.

Joe Mull
Yeah. And you also have to factor in, “How do people like to work?” So, I have one employee on my team who loves to be busy, like borderline overwhelmed. She thrives in it. She asks for it. She says, “Give me more,” whereas, I thought other people who really want to take on a little bit less so that they can go deeper and perform at a level that they think is a bit of a higher quality.

So, this is where the relationships that you build with your direct reports, one on one, truly matter, and it’s where just using an instrument like the one we talked about, like the Task Index alone, isn’t going to give you a complete snapshot of what people need to be at their best every day. And so, if you’re familiar with the concept of stay interviews, the idea is the opposite of exit interviews.

If someone’s decided to leave an organization, we ask them, “What could we have done differently?” or, “How can we improve?” And if you think about it, exit interviews are absurd. I’m a recovering HR professional, and I tell organizations all the time, “Exit interviews are stupid. Let’s stop doing them.” Because, if you think about how absurd they are, Pete, it’s, “Okay, we’ve got somebody who’s got one foot out the door, they’re leaving, they have no stakes here whatsoever, ‘Hey, now would be a great time for you to give us some feedback.’”

Well, why don’t we have that conversation with the people who actually stay, where we actually make time, and maybe it’s just once or twice a year, maybe it’s once a quarter? And we sit down with folks, and we say, “Tell me about what’s working for you here. Tell me about something you’d love to see changed around here. If you ran this place, what’s something you would do differently? What do you love about your work? What keeps you here? If you were to leave, what would the reason be? What energizes you about your work? What would you like to learn more about in the year ahead? Or, what would you like to do more of or less of in the year ahead?”

It’s really about getting inside that person’s head and their heart to understand what’s important to them, how this job fits into their life, and how you can turn their job at this place into their ideal job and a destination workplace.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s super. And let’s say someone listening here is the employee, and they would love for their organization, their team, their manager to deliver all the better on their internal scorecard, how can we nudge things in that positive direction when we don’t hold all the cards and power?

Joe Mull
Yeah, there are certainly power dynamics at play in terms of how risky is that conversation? But it really does come down to a conversation with your, first, your direct supervisor. If something is missing, then can we ask for it? And I think that’s one of my favorite parts of this framework that we’ve written about in this book, of ideal job, meaningful work, and great boss is it’s giving people both at the organization and leadership level and at the individual contributor level, it’s given them a vocabulary that we can use to talk about what I’m getting.

Because for years, what we’ve advised leaders to do is, “Hey, if you want to know what employees want from their workplace or from their bosses, you should ask them,” and that’s true. It’s 100% true. But employees don’t always know exactly what they want, or they don’t necessarily have the language or the vocabulary to put their finger on it. And so, we wrote this in such a way that it created some language around it.

And so, I can go to my supervisor, and I can say, “Hey, this job is working well for me in terms of flexibility, and in terms of benefits, and in terms of workload. But in terms of compensation, it’s falling short, and that feels to be like the one missing piece for me that would make this my ideal job, and it’s the one thing that makes me consider maybe looking around someplace else. Can we have a conversation about opportunity to grow my compensation, what the timeline might be for that? What would be your openness to that conversation and see where it goes?”

We know, for example, that right now, the shortest path to a significant pay increase is to change employers. But employers are also recognizing that as well, and they’re stepping up in some big ways to actually increase salaries to prevent people from leaving. And if you’re in an industry that’s really struggling with filling positions, if you’re in healthcare, if you’re in education, if you’re a laborer, if you’re in management, if you’re in corrections, if you’re in law enforcement, these are industries right now that have been decimated with turnover.

So, there’s more opportunity than ever before to say, “You know what, I would consider staying but we need to move the needle on this a little bit.”

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. So, Joe, I think each of these things make sense in terms of if they’re in place, folks are more likely to stay, and they’re also more likely to be motivated. Can you share with us, is there a distinction between the psychological forces that keep people staying versus the psychological forces that keep people fired up and hungry to make stuff happen?

Joe Mull
Great question. So, when I am invited to be a keynote speaker at conferences or for corporate meetings, one of the first things I will do is I put a question on the board that says, “What motivates employees to care and try at work?” And I’ve got some of this cool software where everybody could take out their cellphone and they can type in, like, one-word answers, and we create this word cloud, and it sort of morphs and shifts on the screen.

And every single time I do this, the words that are the biggest, because the words that get entered the most across the group appear larger in the word cloud, the words that appear most as answers to this question, “What motivates employees to care and try at work?” are all related to money. You’ll see pay, you’ll see compensation, you’ll see raises.

And what’s interesting is that pay and benefits have very little to do with effort at work. They have everything to do with that join and stay. They have everything to do with hiring and retention. Money is about hiring and retentions, “Come through the door. Stay here with us.” That has a lot to do with money. Once we get them through the door and the money is right, it no longer has an impact on people’s effort.

The other things that we’ve been talking about here – belonging, purpose, a great boss who trusts and coaches and advocates, getting to do work that aligns with my strengths – these are the things that activate people’s commitment. Because if I come to work every day, and I’m getting my ideal job, compensation, workload, flexibility, that job fits into my life in a great way. But then I’m also getting to do work that gives me purpose, with a team I love being a part of, that aligns with my gifts, for a boss that I like working for, all of a sudden, we look around, and we say, “Wow, I hit the lottery. I want to be a part of this. I want to do great work.”

And so, those first three pieces of ideal job, they have a lot more to do with retention. The rest of that employalty model has everything to do with effort.

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

Joe Mull
I appreciated what you said at the top about how it really does seem like common sense. One of my favorite things that I mentioned about the book is that, quite simply, we know people generally do a great job when they believe they have a great job. Do we understand what a great job is nowadays though? And it really does come back to quality of life. So, thank you for noticing, and I think that is absolute truth.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I’m flattered. Absolute truth. That’s what we’re going for. Now, could you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Joe Mull
I am known for repeating the quote that, “Comparison is the thief of joy.” I say this to my kids a lot. I tell it to myself as a lot as an entrepreneur, as a speaker, as an author to remind myself not to benchmark myself against someone else’s perceptions or successes.

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

Joe Mull
I am a big fan of a lot of the research that appeared in Gallup’s book a few years ago called “It’s the Manager.” And my favorite little nugget from that is that they found that in organizations with some of the highest scores around employee engagement, that the managers in that organization had two things in common.

First, they were a part of a peer group of managers. Second, they had an ongoing commitment to professional development. And if you think about it, isn’t that the most simple, beautiful structure for getting better bosses in the world, is, “Hey, let’s make sure that these leaders have other leaders to talk to about being a leader. And, hey, let’s see if we can nurture within them an ongoing commitment to growing as a leader. Do they read books? Do they go to conferences? Do they listen to podcasts?”

It would seem that those two things alone actually not only move the needle on leadership but on engagement.

Pete Mockaitis
And can you share a favorite book?

Joe Mull
My favorite book is Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us by Daniel Pink.

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

Joe Mull
I use Siri a lot. I’m not going to say her name because she’s going to light up on my watch or my phone. But I ask her to remind me of things all the time. I’ll park my car at the airport, and as I’m leaving, I’ll say, “Hey, Siri, remind me on Friday at 10:00 p.m. that I am parked in 10-B.” And then when I’m landing Friday at 10:00 p.m., my phone goes “You’re parked in 10-B.” So, that’s probably my favorite tool.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit, something you do that helps you be awesome at your job?

Joe Mull
Vacation. I am a big believer in taking time away to be with my people, my kids, my wife, my dog. And I’m a big believer that a once-a-year vacation is not nearly enough. I believe that everybody should get away multiple times a year. I know there’s a lot of privilege in that statement, socioeconomic privilege, and entrepreneurial privilege and whatnot, but the truth is we are better for others when we take better care of ourselves.

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

Joe Mull
“Pull the weeds.” So, my first book was called Cure for the Common Leader, and when I did a lot of keynoting on that, and still around this topic, I talk about how we tend to tolerate toxic employees for far too long, in that they are weeds in the garden. They masquerade as flowers but they truly are weeds in a garden. And if you allow a weed to go too long and grow too strong, it suffocates the garden. And that once you know a weed is a weed, the only way to save the garden is to pull the weed.

And so, when I talk about “pull the weeds,” man, the number of people who have written to me, called me, come up to me after conferences, and said, “Hey, we pulled a weed, and it was the best thing we ever did.”

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

Joe Mull
JoeMull.com is probably the best way to go.

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

Joe Mull
Commit to creating a more humane employee experience at work. Never forget that people aren’t a commodity. People are people.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Joe, this has been a treat. Thank you and I wish you much luck and fun in your employalty life.

Joe Mull
My pleasure, Pete. Thanks for having me.