Tag

Learning Archives - How to be Awesome at Your Job

1157: How to Improve Processes, Remove Friction, and Accelerate Innovation with Jon McNeill

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Tesla’s former President Jon McNeill reveals the five-step framework behind one of the world’s fastest-growing companies.

You’ll Learn

  1. What most miss when designing processes
  2. How to identify outdated requirements that slow things down
  3. Why automation should be your LAST step

About Jon

Jon McNeill is the CEO and Co-Founder of DVx Ventures. With a track record of founding and scaling companies, Jon has led teams that generated tens of thousands of jobs and delivered multi-billion dollar returns for investors.

Previously, Jon served as President at Tesla, where revenue grew from $2B to $20B in under 30 months, and later as COO at Lyft, helping double revenue and take the company public. He currently sits on the boards of General Motors, Lululemon, Asurion, CrossFit, and Stash.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Jon McNeill Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Jon, welcome!

Jon McNeill
Thanks. Nice to be here, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to discuss The Algorithm and I’d love it if you could kick us off with a story you shared, which I found riveting, in which when you were just getting started at Tesla, even actually before you had the job, you took it on yourself to tackle a project. Could you tell us the story?

Jon McNeill

Yeah, I was talking with Elon about joining Tesla and I kept saying to him, “I think you need a big company guy to come in.” And he said, “No, that’s exactly what I don’t need. I need a fellow entrepreneur.” And I said, “Well, I want to make sure I can be helpful to you. So, like, what’s your biggest problem right now?”

And he said, “We have a demand problem.” And I said, “Okay, like frame that for me. They’re public companies. So what’s your commitment to the street this quarter?” He said, “Roughly 12,000 cars.” And I said, “How are you doing so far?”

It was about a month into the quarter. He says, “It’s a month into the quarter. We’ve sold like 2,500 cars, short of 3,000 cars.” I’m like, “Oh, now I understand your demand problem. You’re going to miss your quarter. Let me go to work on that and see if I can help.”

So I went to, just in the travels with my own business at the time, I went to eight different cities over the course of about 10 days. And I went into eight different Tesla stores and did what I was told was the pinnacle of the sales process and sales funnel, which was taking a test drive.

And the whole idea was that people would come in, they would get in an electric car for the first time, hit the accelerator. And the accelerator in an electric car is way different than a gas car. It’s instant torque to the wheels, and so you take off like a rocket. And so a lot of people experience that. And then they can’t stop thinking about it until they’ve got a car.

So I went in eight stores, I did a test drive. And then, oddly, like a few days later, I hadn’t heard from any of them. So Elon had put me in touch with his head of sales ops. And I called him and said, “Like, am I blacklisted in the system or something? I used eight different email addresses so people wouldn’t know who I was. And people don’t know who I am anyway. And I’m not getting any callbacks. Why?”

And he looked in the system, he’s like, “No, you’re not flagged or anything.” I said, “Can you do me a favor? Can you tell me how many test drives you’ve given in the last 30 days that haven’t been followed up?” And he’s like, “Sure, give me, like, an hour. I can go run that.”

So he calls me back in an hour, and he said, “Nine thousand, 9,000 test drives, no callbacks.” I said, “Well, congratulations. You’re going to miss your quarter because you haven’t called anybody back. And no wonder you’re so far short of orders.”

So then I said, “Can you shut off a store rep’s ability to take any new leads until they’ve called all of their previous test drives back?” He said, “Yeah, I could do that.” I said, “How fast?” He said, “Globally? I could do that in a few hours.” I said, “Awesome. Do it, because we got to force-change, like, super fast or, otherwise, you’re missing your quarter.”

So he does it. Calls me back the next day, he’s like, “You won’t believe the orders are flowing in like crazy.” And I said, “Yeah, because you’re just calling people back. It’s the easiest thing ever. You’re asking for the order.” And then it dawned on me that I didn’t work for Tesla yet. And so I kind of gulped, and I said, “Hey, I got to call you back, because I got to call Elon and beg for forgiveness.”

So I called Elon and said, “Hey, look. Here’s the situation. You’re demand-challenged. Here’s what I found out. You’ve done 9,000 test drives with no callback. And so here’s what I did about it. I was on the phone with your head of sales ops and we shut down any new leads into the system until everybody called their previous test drives back.”

And I said, “But I got to ask your forgiveness. I was acting like this was my company because I’m a CEO in my day job. But this is not the company I’m the CEO of. You are. This is your company. And I did something and I didn’t even ask your permission. And I’m really sorry. I got to apologize.”

And I didn’t know it because we were just getting to know each other. But I had this long period of silence on the other end of the phone line, and I thought, “Oh, my God, what have I done?” And it seemed like forever. It was probably 60 or 90 seconds of just dead silence.

What I’ve learned since is that’s how Elon processes. He, like, shuts off all other sensory input and just thinks. And so I was about to ask him if he was still there, and he hopped on and he said, “You know what? That’s exactly a rational decision, and I’m so glad you made it. I think you’re going to fit in here just fine.”

And that was the last hurdle. I said, “Well, I think I’ve proven myself I can be useful. So I think I’m ready to sign on, too.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s a lovely story on many dimensions. But when I reflect on it, what I’m stuck with is, “All right, Tesla, great, great brand, tremendous company, tremendous leaders, lot of smarts there.” How is it that we find ourselves in a situation where one of the most fundamental things one can do in a sales operation – call people back – isn’t happening?

Jon McNeill

I think I see this over and over again. People look at a lot of data and miss the obvious. And when you just go and see a process with your eyes – this is going to sound completely old-fashioned – but it’s actually the case.

Like, I believe that the strongest analytical instrument you have as a leader are your eyes and ears. And if you go to the front line and eat your own dog food and experience the product or the process for yourself, you’ll often see exactly what’s wrong. But unless you know the exact piece of data to look for that would give you the clue, you don’t know that.

And so this is a complete hack I’ve found in leadership is just go to the front line, go experience the process yourself. You’ll understand really rapidly exactly what’s wrong. And it doesn’t always work, but it works a lot of the time. And this was an example of that.

So a bunch of really smart people looking at data missed it because they didn’t leave their offices. And my encouragement to people, and those people, as I then became their leader was, “You’re going to leave your office at least one day a week, and you’re going to go to the front lines because you’re going to see stuff way faster than the data will show you. And, hopefully, we’ll miss a lot of these potential big divots in our plan if you do.”

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s tremendous. We had Marina Nitze on the show, who was the CTO for the United States VA, and that was one of her core recommendations, is follow the thing all the way through the process and then you’ll say, “Oh, that’s why it’s taking forever because so-and-so is waiting for something to be faxed. Well, let’s stop that. All right, now we know. Understood.”

All right. Well, so then zooming out a bit, your book, The Algorithm, any particularly surprising or fascinating discoveries you’ve made in your career or while putting together the book that you’re putting forward here?

Jon McNeill

I think this is, like, I had gone into Tesla having been a student of the Toyota Production System and Lean, and what I found was those frameworks were awesome for incremental improvement and optimization, but not awesome for quantum growth.

And so what we tried to distill in The Algorithm, this was the whole team at Tesla and, really, the leadership team that came up with this framework, was to distill a framework for quantum growth into some digestible steps that we could push to the edge of the organization.

And the edge could start to innovate super fast, because that’s what doubling a business every eight months at scale requires. And that’s exactly what the team was pulling off. They were doubling a business every eight months.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So the classic Toyota manufacturing, Lean, Kaizen, Kanbans, etc., is great for your small incremental growth and you’ve got a whole another thing for hyper growth. And can you unpack sort of basically what is the algorithm?

Jon McNeill

It’s a five-step process that we used on a weekly basis to drive innovation. And this is used at Tesla. It’s used at SpaceX. And I think, as leadership experts or academics go to study Elon 20 or 30 years from now, and ask the question, like, “What made this guy such a successful entrepreneur and industrialist? Like, what was it?” I think they’ll come down to this, like, weekly cadence of deploying this framework, because that’s exactly what he does.

He determines the one or two issues that are existential to the business. In other words, the two things that could kill you if they don’t come true. And then he just devotes his time to that. He delegates everything else to the team. And so you have great agencies as a leader because you’re running the business and he’s really working on two existential issues, but he’s doing it on a weekly basis.

And what that does is that keeps the organization innovating on a weekly basis. So if you’re doing that every week, you’ve got 52 opportunities to build advantage versus your competition. And that’s exactly what that delivers.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, so could you maybe walk us through a couple examples of, all right, grab existential issue and then work through the steps?

Jon McNeill
So I’ll take you through one to make this super simple. So the first step is question every requirement. Second step is you delete every step and you simplify. The third is you optimize. The fourth is you speed it up because no process can get faster and have high quality with speed unless it is like optimized, so that’s a test. And then you automate last, which sounds kind of nuts especially coming from a technical company or Silicon Valley company to say automate last, but I’ll kind of illustrate that.

So let me start with the first, the negative example. So we started to prepare for Model 3 production. And the idea of the teams was, “We’re going to have a fully automated line, the most automated manufacturing line ever in the history of automobiles.”

And so you might remember this phrase, “We’re going to build the alien dreadnought,” or, “the machine that makes the machine.” That was this whole era. And so teams went to design the Model 3 production line in digital simulation. Today they would call it a digital twin. And they designed all the machines, the flow, the conveyors, the people, everything. They didn’t lay it out manually and do it manually first.

And so when we were down to the wire in terms of, “We got to produce Model 3s because we’re going to be out of cash if we don’t,” they went to start that line, and the line wouldn’t work for a thousand reasons. There were major, major mistakes that were made in that digital SIM.

And digital SIMs usually don’t work because they can’t think of everything. And cars were falling off the conveyors, falling off the line. And that then led to a radical step, which was one of the leaders, Jerome Guillen, said, “I’m actually going to scrap this whole process and build a tent outside. And we’re going to do what we should have done from the start. We’re going to build cars by hand.”

And so we started, over the weekend, building Model 3s by hand. And we simplified the entire process because we didn’t have conveyors, we didn’t have a lot of the machines that were necessary, and we did the bare essentials to produce that Model 3.

So we simplified the process, we deleted all the unnecessary steps, we didn’t have the luxury, really, of having many steps. And then we started to optimize the process, and we started, we produced 50 cars a week, and then we produced 100, and then we produced 500. And the goal was to get to 5,000. And we kept creeping up, creeping up, creeping up by optimizing the process and applying speed to it.

Once we finally had the process nailed, then we automated at the very last step and moved from the tent back into the factory. We had rebuilt the factory production line by this time so that it could actually produce cars.

And when we went to do the postmortem, we said, “How would we have avoided this? Number one, we automated first, not last, and it almost killed us. We did not run the process manually first. We did not delete a bunch of steps. We did not optimize the process. We automated before we had done any of that work, and we almost killed the company.”

So it was, really, at the end of Model 3 production, that the algorithm came together, and we said, “Here are the steps we’re going to follow from here on out. When we go to launch a new product, when you go to invent a new product, we’re going to follow these steps.”

And so that’s an end-to-end example of how not to do it, but then it led us to a framework of how to do it.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So maybe digging into each of these in some detail, with “question every requirement.” I have a feeling many of us, it doesn’t even occur to us to question the requirements because the requirements, they’re just like the air we breathe or the water we swim in. It’s like, “Well, this is just how it is.”

So could you maybe surface for us some prompts, or some examples, or some perturbations so that we can identify some requirements that maybe need to get questioned?

Jon McNeill
So when we started to sell cars online, we figured out it took 64 clicks to sell a car, but 44 of those clicks were in the financing process. And that’s because a loan doc or a lease doc for a car has 12 pages of paragraph after paragraph after paragraph. You’ve got an initial sign, all this stuff.

And so a question on requirement step that we did was I took that loan doc to our general counsel at the time, his name’s Todd Maron. I said, “Todd, out of these 12 pages, I need to get rid of some clicks. Can you tell me how many of these paragraphs are a requirement of law or regulation?” He came back about 24 hours later and he said, “None.”

I said, “Well, how does a 12-page document exist then?” He said, “It’s the result of a bunch of well-meaning corporate lawyers at banks trying to protect their client. And so they insert paragraphs for all these uncertainties or these edge cases that could come up to protect the bank.”

But he said, “None of these are required by law or regulation. And, actually, the bank has case law on its side. Like, they don’t need all this stuff because if somebody cheats in a certain way, that’s already been decided by case law. So it’s not like you need to make somebody acknowledge something that the courts have already acknowledged as being out of bounds.”

So I said, “Todd, you’re telling me we could have a one-paragraph loan or lease that says, ‘Here’s the price of the car, here’s the interest rate, here’s the term, and here’s the monthly payment?’” He’s like, “I’m telling you, you can do that.”

Nobody in the industry had questioned whether or not the loan doc or the lease doc should exist. We were just crazy, silly enough to make that, to raise that question. We discovered something that none of our competitors had discovered, which is you didn’t need to put customers through a 44-click process. And as you know, if you had to buy anything on Amazon, and it took 44 clicks, you’d probably opt out a lot. And that’s true in e-comm, and it’s certainly true when people are buying a $100,000-car online.

So we went to talk to banks to see if we could get anybody to go along with us on this one-click loan release, and we got the door slammed in our face by everybody, even though they would intellectually acknowledge that they didn’t need all these paragraphs.

They said, “I would never take the risk of doing this. I would never take the career risk of going to my CEO and suggesting we do this.” Finally, we found a very enterprising CEO at US Bank, and he said, “We’ll do it. In fact, we’ll talk to a CrossTown digital bank called Ally. They’ll probably do it too. We’ll take your loans, they’ll probably take your leases, and we’re off to the races.”

All that started because we questioned why a 12-page loan doc had to exist. And that’s probably the clearest example or the best prompt I can give you on questioning requirements. There’s a lot of stuff that nobody ever questions and takes as a given. If you question that stuff and it turns out it’s not a given, now you’ve got an advantage.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like that a lot. And I’m thinking about, well, the phrase that comes to mind is checkbox marketing, or really checkbox anything. If your mindset is, “Well, that’s just what’s done. It’s just what needs to happen.” And I’m thinking about, well, I have a one-page guest release form.

And I think lawyers tend to want to put a lot of intense, you know, things in there. It’s like, “I own all of these forever, no matter what.” And I think, “Well, actually that’s not the vibe I’m trying to put out there when I’m just meeting somebody. I’m just sort of like, ‘Hey, you and I are both cool to do what we want to do with this thing, okay? So no pressure, it’s all good.’” And that’s kind of what I’m trying to convey.

So it was not the default. We had to shift and adjust and then it is, well, it’s much smoother because then I don’t have a lot of people say, “Whoa, whoa, hold on, buddy. What, what is this? I don’t know. Wait. Time out. I got to talk to my lawyer. I got to talk to my agent. I don’t know if we can do this, you know?”

No, that just about never happens because it’s very quick and it’s simple and it’s handy. And I liked that example because the law, in particular, feels like something that’s immovable, like, “Oh, ‘legal’ said, we just have to have that. And end of discussion. It was like, “Oh, well, maybe legal would be willing to have a follow-up conversation and see what can be done here.”

Jon McNeill

Totally. And it takes a certain mindset. So, like, Todd, as a leader of the legal teams was willing to come along on that journey with me and question requirements, and that’s pretty rare in that kind of a leader in that function, but he was super commercial and business-oriented.

And so he would start that journey without having a bunch of hesitation. Like, he’d say, “Yeah, let’s go, like, look into this and see if this is really true and if we really need this.” I don’t experience many general counsels like Todd because they largely go into that career to mitigate risk. And so that’s where their position starts.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, and as a point of curiosity, I mean, I understand frictions and clicks are, you know, undesirable. They slow down the behavior you want, and this is cool and convenient and nice and pleasant to have fewer clicks.

But, you know, Jon, really, lay it on me, is a few dozen clicks for signing an initialing a hundred thousand dollar vehicle enough to move the needle so that folks are like, “You know what? I wanted that Tesla, but this is too much effort. I’m done with this document. I’m abandoning my cart”?

Jon McNeill

It happened a lot, and when we eliminated it, the opposite happened. People started to buy like crazy online, and our digital sales went through the roof, which is because it’s just science. In e-comm, clicks equal anti-conversion. So you get rid of clicks and your conversion rate goes up. It’s just math.

So this is why when you get to the cart in Amazon, the search bar disappears. They want to take away any potential click that you’re going to do other than hit order, because they know how hard it was to get to that point and how hard it is to get you to actually click the order button.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, and I believe they’ve litigated the one-click ordering.

Jon McNeill

Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis

It’s like, “No, this is ours, we own it, no one touch it.” And it’s like, “Very touchy,” and because the stakes are huge.

Jon McNeill

Because of that, because it’s powerful. Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, can you chat with us about deleting the steps in the process?

Jon McNeill
Yeah, so here’s another example, and Elon actually cut a little video in this early on, but he had taken on this challenge in manufacturing where there was this separator between the battery and the car. And so it’s basically along the floor of the car.

And we could not produce this separator, big piece of plastic. We couldn’t produce it to save our lives. It was warping and it wouldn’t fit right, etc. And so this is one of the chapters where he’s literally sleeping in the factory trying to solve this problem.

And, eventually, he asked the team, “I got to talk to the engineer who spec’d this part. Who spec’d the part?” And the closest people around are the battery people, and they said, “Oh, it’s the auto dynamics team. They wanted a noise dampener in between the battery and the passenger compartment.”

So he grabs the guy that’s the head of the auto dynamics team, and said, “Why did you spec this part?” He said, “I didn’t spec the part. It was the battery team. The battery team told us they needed a heat shield between the battery and the passenger compartment.”

He’s like, “I was just with the battery team and they said it was you, not them.” He said, “Give me the name of the person who spec’d this part.” So they go look for the name. And it turns out the name of the person that spec’d the part was a summer intern that didn’t even work at Tesla anymore.

Elon had spent weeks in the factory trying to solve this problem, all for a part that didn’t need to exist. And so, at that point in time, “We said, nobody claims ownership of this ‘requirement.’ So we’re going to delete it out of the car. And, therefore, we’re solving a whole production problem that was holding us up.”

And you will find, over and over again, that there are steps you can delete from your sales process, from your delivery process. And the hack to finding those is, essentially, map your process on a wall with a bunch of sticky notes. Then have your team go circle those steps that the customer pays you for. It turns out there’s very few of those.

They don’t pay you for the order sheet. They don’t pay you for the PO. They don’t pay you for, in our case, the bill of lading. They don’t pay you for all this stuff. And the things they don’t pay you for are immediate candidates for deletion, because you’re doing those for internal reasons, and you’re creating cost for internal reasons.

Now some of the stuff is necessary to track dollars and cents. I totally get it. They don’t pay you for accounting. They don’t pay you for tax. I get that. But there are a bunch of steps you can cut out when you start to say, “Hey, the customer really doesn’t pay us for this. And we don’t really get anything out of it. So why are we doing this?” And those are good candidates to delete.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. Well, I was curious, did Elon get on the phone with the intern? Like, “Hey.”

Jon McNeill
The intern didn’t even work there anymore. Like, didn’t even work there.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, mean, hunt him down wherever he is.

Jon McNeill
He was like, “I don’t need to waste time talking to the intern, like, it’s gone.”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So then simplify and optimize.

Jon McNeill
Yeah, so once you delete steps, now you’ve got way fewer steps. So you’ve got a simplified process and now you can start to optimize that process and make it go faster and faster and faster and faster. It’s a little bit like starting any skill, whether that is playing a musical instrument or a sport, where you start and you’re like, “Man, I can’t go very fast.”

And then you practice and practice and practice, and it turns out you get faster and faster and faster because you get more and more efficient and optimized. And that’s the idea here is you keep speeding the process up and speeding it up.

Now you’re still in manual mode. So you’re learning a bunch about what’s causing, what’s getting in the way of speed, and the stuff getting in the way of speed is usually a quality issue. And so you eliminate these quality issues. And then once you’ve got the target speed achieved, now you know you’re optimized and you can then start on automation.

Pete Mockaitis
A quality issue in terms of something needs rework or is outside of the spec we’re looking for?

Jon McNeill
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And then with the acceleration, so there’s practice. What are the other drivers of accelerating?

Jon McNeill
Mainly, it’s putting speed goals that are double the current speed. So you say, “I want to either double the output at current speed or I want to double the speed at current output,” either one of those works in my book, just try to double.

And it starts to reveal, “Oh, here’s all the things that are in the way of doubling. So maybe we can delete more steps. Maybe there are more requirements that we should question. Or, maybe there’s a better method.”

And as you do those, then you start to identify, “Ah, there are a bunch of things that we didn’t see at first that we now see now, that we can either delete or simplify to help us speed this process up.”

Pete Mockaitis
So the doubling of the speed is not so much a, “Hey, it turns out we can just double the speed, it’s all good.” But rather, it’s sort of like a magnifying glass to identify, “Oh, that’s what’s holding down the speed doubling.”

Jon McNeill
Totally. There’s this great series of scenes in the Hulu series, “The Bear,” which is about this super high-end restaurant in Chicago. And it’s turned from a roast beef cafe with the same team in the back that is now trying to earn its Michelin star.

And there’s a woman that’s at the pasta station, and she has two minutes once an order comes in to cook pasta. And she starts at five minutes. And then she does things like she portions each serving of pasta in a little plastic container. So she’s pre-portioned.

And she starts to do multiple boiling water pots to drop the pasta into so she can do more than one at a time. And then she’s got a saucier step that she realizes, if she preheats the sauce, it meets the pasta at the right time, she can speed it up. And she gets the process down from five to two and a half minutes by just eliminating all these steps, but she’s still not at her two minute target.

And then the sous chef, who really runs the kitchen, comes over and is just helping her. They have a busy night. And so the sous chef comes over and does a few things that experienced chefs know to do. Bam! Bam! Bam! Order comes out in a minute and a half.

And the woman who is at the pasta station says, “I’ve been working this problem for like 90 days and I got it from five minutes to two and a half. And you walk over and you do it in a minute and a half.” And she’s like, “Yeah, I’ve done this before. So just watch me and you can see the extra steps you can take out of your process to make yourself faster.”

That’s what we’re talking about is just optimize, optimize, optimize until you get to a really different output than you’ve had before.

Pete Mockaitis
And then the final step is automation.

Jon McNeill
Yeah, and then you can automate it. Because automation is like wet cement. When you put it around a process, it sets up really hard and you got to get jackhammers to get rid of it. So you don’t want to automate until you’ve really got the process nailed. Otherwise, you’ll be suffering with the cement that’s already solidified the current process where it is.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So now, as we were talking about this with the restaurant example and manufacturing examples, I’d love to change gears a little bit and hear about, let’s say there’s someone who’s in the middle of an organization and their output is not physical, but, nonetheless, there is a process that’s cranking out something on the other end. Could you give us an example in that domain of working through those steps?

Jon McNeill
Yeah, so, like, whether you’re producing software or whether you’re producing marketing or you’re producing financials, I think the same steps apply. If you step back and say like, “Hey, look, I produce financial statements for the business,” or, “I produce a budget for the business.”

If you step back and say, “Okay, let me just map the process that we use today to do that. And maybe I should question some base assumptions here. And do we have to do all these steps? Like, are all these things really required?”

And so an example of that is Tesla, when I joined, was doing standard annual budgets. And the senior management team and the CEO would set the target for sales, and the target for gross margin, the target for cash flow. And so these annual budgets were being done in the way they’re done at almost every company.

The challenge was we were doubling the business every eight months. And so, like, if you’re trying to project out a budget for a year, it was horribly inaccurate by, like, month three, because things were changing so fast. So all that was essentially wasted effort, all that planning and budgeting.

So we asked ourselves a question, like, “Time is super, super valuable in this company. How could we improve this process? And rather than going through a big planning cycle every year, what actually needs to get done?”

And where we ended up was, we questioned the requirement of having a year budget. It turned out what we did was we had quarterly budgets because the business was moving on a quarter basis, not a year basis, and we would have these rolling four quarter budgets.

We would spend less than two days setting targets in the budget because it was only going be good for a quarter. So you didn’t want to spend a week of the quarter, a huge chunk of the quarter doing it. And that finance team evolved a whole different way to do financial planning and budgeting.

And they did it, not on an annual basis, but a quarterly basis. They did it on a rolling basis, and they just used the key inputs that everybody was looking at in the business anyway, “What’s the sales rate? What’s the production rate? What’s the margin?”

And we can build a budget off of that, and rather than taking the whole company’s time planning, we’re just going to keep rolling this and rolling this, and we’re absorbing everything that we’re learning from the market as we double.

And so you can apply this whether you’re sitting in a finance department or a marketing department or a sales department. You can apply these principles to your advantage, too.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Jon, tell me, any final top tips, do’s or don’ts, for folks looking to implement this stuff?

Jon McNeill
As we talked about, like one of the principles that is a complete hack is eat your own dog food. I learned this from Sam Walton in his book, Made in America, where he would tour stores on a weekly basis to find out what the customer wanted that they didn’t have, what they had too much of that the customer didn’t want, and what were the things that store managers were doing that were super good that he could spread across the company.

And I learned from that and started to see that, “Oh, he’s onto a complete hack.” Like, if you use your own product, if you experience the customer experience, you’re going to see all kinds of areas of improvement. And if you teach your people to see it before you, they’re going to move even faster than you can.

And so I would say, like, the secret hack is go experience your own product and use it. We even went so far at Tesla to have a rule that you couldn’t present product in a PowerPoint. We didn’t want to see, like, some rendering or rendition. We wanted to see the real thing. So if you’re presenting product, you had to do a live screencast onto the screen so we could see the product, we could play with the product, and we could see how it actually worked.

I was with a group of bank executives a few months ago. I asked them to raise their hand if they actually use their own bank’s consumer app. No hands went up. And I said, “I could have guessed that because I’m a consumer of two of your banks, and your app sucks.”

“It’s so bad that if you used it, you wouldn’t live with yourself for another day without fixing it. You would call up the head of engineering and you say, ‘We got to fix this, this, and this.’ But you don’t use it.” So the organization gets the sense that nobody cares. And if you can live with it, they can live with it.

And eating your own dog food changes all that. It creates an immediate feedback loop to the top and it allows you to set the bar of acceptability with your organization.

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

Jon McNeill
I think this whole approach is about simplicity, and so I love the Mark Twain quote, “I would have written you a shorter letter if I would have taken the time.” It speaks to how hard it is to simplify. Humans, I think, we are naturally complicators. We’re not natural simplifiers, and it actually takes work to simplify.

And I love that quote, because it reminds me, each time I read it, of the fact that simplification is work. It’s super valuable and rewarding work, but it’s work.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And can you point to a favorite study or experimental or bit of research?

Jon McNeill
I think, if you want to understand AI and the current version of AI that we have with LLMs, the best piece to read is the original DeepMind paper.

Pete Mockaitis
“Attention Is All You Need”?

Jon McNeill
Yup.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Jon McNeill
Favorite book would be, I’ve got two right now, one is The Goal, which taught me a completely different way of looking at business, by Eliyahu Goldratt. And the second is Unreasonable Hospitality by Will Guidara. I think it applies to every business. It’s so good.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Jon McNeill
Reading. Like, if I could answer the question that way, I’d start every day reading for an hour and a half, and I read variety of things. I read books, I read, obviously, the news. I read Twitter, I read Reddit, Hacker News sometimes. Reading for me is a tool.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. And is there a key nugget you share with teammates, audiences, that they quote back to you often, a Jon original?

Jon McNeill
We had the standard for service at Tesla that gets quoted back to me, it got quoted back to me today actually, and that is, “Make them talk about you at dinner tonight.” Do something that is so awesome that they’re going to talk about you at dinner tonight.

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

Jon McNeill
I’d point them, you can find me at DVX.ventures.

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

Jon McNeill
Become a simplifier and you’ll stand out.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Okay, Jon, thank you.

Jon McNeill
You bet. Thanks, Pete.

1146: How to Reclaim Your Focus and Unlock Your Genius with Memory Champion Nelson Dellis

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Memory champion Nelson Dellis shares simple techniques to upgrade your thinking to genius level.

You’ll Learn

  1. The core skills behind genius-level thinking
  2. How to learn faster and better using one powerful tool
  3. Why you shouldn’t write off your intuition

About Nelson

Nelson Dellis is a six-time USA Memory Champion, two-time Guinness World Record holder, Grandmaster of Memory, keynote speaker, and world-renowned memory coach. He teaches at the university level, holding degrees in computer science and physics, and is also an accomplished mountaineer with four Mt. Everest expeditions. 

Beyond the classroom and the mountains, Nelson has medaled in international competitions, contributed to remote viewing research on stock prediction, and even played on a professional card-counting Blackjack team that won over $100,000. He shares his passion for unlocking the mind’s potential with over 300,000 YouTube subscribers, where he makes complex skills practical, fun, and accessible to anyone willing to train their brain.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Nelson Dellis Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Nelson, welcome!

Nelson Dellis
Hey, thank you. Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to talk about becoming more of an everyday genius. You are a six-time memory champion. Could you tell us one of your most amazing feats of memory ever?

Nelson Dellis
Let’s see, I’m most proud of having memorized 10,000 digits of pi. That was a good one.

Pete Mockaitis

10,000 digits. Wow! Now that sounds like a record to me, I don’t know.

Nelson Dellis
Oh, it’s not. Although, you know, if we’re talking about how many digits someone has used their memory to store, it’s many tens of thousands. The unofficial record is, like, a hundred K, but the official record is 70,030. Yeah, both are insane.

Pete Mockaitis
That is wild. How does a person do such a thing?

Nelson Dellis
Well, first you have to have the desire to do such a thing. I’ve known of people who have done it without really much of a technique other than brute force repetition and a lot of time. That sounds horrible. And I would ask the question, “How?” That sounds crazy.

But those who are more well-versed in memory techniques would look at numbers and have some way of converting them into more meaningful things, things that are easier to visualize in your mind than these abstract symbols. And then encoding it all into some elaborate story that connects them in order.

And that is the basics of memory techniques in a nutshell, honestly.

Pete Mockaitis
So now I remember reading a book about this in terms of, like, each digit becomes a letter or sound, like one becomes T or D, and two becomes N and so forth. Is that what you’re talking about in terms of making them more meaningful?

Nelson Dellis
That’s one of the methods. With abstract symbols like numbers, for example, the system is to, yes, convert it into words that, then, you can visualize, right? You look at numbers, it’s maybe hard to visualize them, maybe not individually, like, if I see a seven, I can visualize a seven or seven things.

But if you are talking about a huge sequence of numbers, there’s only 10 different digits. So if there’s a lot of digits, you’re going to get a lot of those repeating. So it’s hard to think of, like, “Oh, I’m picturing a seven, then I’m picturing an eight, then I’m picturing a seven.”

It would be easier if you could collect groups of numbers and then have images preset for certain combinations. So instead of saying, I don’t know, 124, I see Michael Jordan, maybe, you know, that would always encompass with one and two and a four together, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, okay. So, like, he’s number one, and his number is 24. So he’s one, two, four.

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, you’re not too far off. My system is a little…

Pete Mockaitis
Wait, wasn’t he 23? Wasn’t 23 his number? And I’m not a sports guy.

Nelson Dellis
Exactly, No, no. So 024, the 24 is Kobe Bryant. That actually was his number. So all of the 24s, this is the way I do it. There are different ways to do it. Some might argue that my way is a little more complicated, unnecessarily, but it works for me.

Anyways, so 024 is Kobe Bryant. So all the 24s, things that end in 24 are shooting guards in the NBA. So 124, I made Michael Jordan because, you know, after Kobe, he should be number one, right? Yeah, and then I just go through a bunch of different NBA stars there for the 24s.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, that was fun. So then you’ve taken some time in advance to construct this whole rubric.

Nelson Dellis
Language, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
And it’s like a Nelson only. It’s pure custom, what does 24 mean to you? What’s one-four mean to you?

Nelson Dellis
Yeah. And that’s the most important part about coming up with visuals to remember is the more meaningful they are to you, the more rich they are with associations to you, the better they’re going to stick.

So, yes, somebody could learn my system. And, again, this is, yes, a pre-learned system so that when I’m encountering numbers in competitions or day-to-day life, I have a way to look at them and already have something set up to visualize instead.

But it is maybe not advised to take my system and learn it as is because there’s going to be a lot of images for numbers that mean nothing to you. Like, I have my personal friends in there. I have characters from books and shows that I’ve enjoyed throughout my life.

Some people might have never seen those shows, you know. Or, basketball, maybe nobody cares about basketball. And while you could, I guess, learn to visualize Michael Jordan, but why not choose something that’s, you know, you like to visualize or that’s easy for you to visualize?

Pete Mockaitis
But I think that speaks to a principle. Well, you tell me, a potential principle in terms of, if something is deeply meaningful and emotionally resonant to you, it is more memorable. Yeah, sometimes, people say, “Pete, you have the most amazing memory that you remembered this thing.” And I was like, “Well, no, that thing was very important to me in that moment of my life,” versus, I guess, for everyone else, was just like, “Yeah, whatever.”

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, exactly. Our brains are designed to remember novel things that stick out, and then the stuff that’s every day, commonplace. Like, it decides usually to drop that information. It treats it like noise.

And if you think kind of evolutionarily way back when, our brain was designed to remember these novel things, because it usually was tied to survival, right? Like, “This plant here has this pattern on it,” visual, “if I eat this, I will die because it’s poisonous with this pattern on it,” right? So simple things like that.

Nowadays, there is so much information, I think our primitive brain doesn’t do a very good job of isolating the things that are actually important because it’s not so tied to survival anymore, versus things that are noise.

Even though you may have the intention of you’re completely interested in this thing, your brain might be not so convinced, you know? And so it doesn’t stick, even though you’re paying full attention to it.

So it does start with things that you’re more interested in, that are paying attention to, tend to be memorized better, but it’s a complicated world out there, and our brain is trying to figure it out.

So if you can tap into kind of its evolutionary traits, which is we remember pictures that are associative and filled with sensory information and are meaningful, those are the things that you’re going to remember.

A great example is like, think of 9/11, right? We all remember where we were, what we were doing, sometimes even what we ate that day, what we were wearing that day, what somebody said that day, and that’s because that day was all of those things.

It was memorable. It was emotional, terrifying, scary, and it was out of the ordinary, for sure. We saw things on TV that we will never see in our lives probably, so it sticks out. Versus, you know, last Tuesday, what did you do?

Probably went to work. Did the exact same thing you usually do. Maybe a slight variation here and there, but nothing to the effect of something that dramatically different.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so we learned, your subtitle is “Hacks to Boost Your Memory, Focus, Problem Solving, and Much More.” We talked about a hack for numbers, which is kind of interesting.

But I’m guessing for your person who is interested in becoming awesome at their job, memory contests are not their job, but you’ve got some goodies for us. Tell us, what’s sort of your main message or big idea in the book, Everyday Genius?

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, so the main point of the book is that I believe that there are plenty of mental abilities that we can train and learn that are associated with genius. And in the process of learning them and mastering them, you tap into that and could even convince yourself that you have a higher intellect, that you are genius, or can tap into genius from time to time.

What I learned over the years doing the memory thing, I didn’t have a background in memory techniques. I had an average memory, but I learned about them. I trained them obsessively, to a point where I could win these competitions and do break records and such. But it wasn’t a gift I was born with.

And that was always an amazing thing that, “Oh, wow. I thought memory was a fixed thing. And that super smart people had good memories and dumb people had bad memories,” right? But it’s not like that. It’s memory is a skill. And that was a huge thing for me to kind of unlearn.

And then, over the years, doing 10,000 digits of pi or 20 decks of playing cards in an hour, crazy feats of memory, people will throw out that label of genius just because they don’t understand it or don’t think it’s possible.

And I hate that. I’m not a genius. Like, I’m just like anybody else. I just have a skill that I learned. And I could teach you how to do this skill, and the person down the street, how to do this skill.

So genius is definitely a subjective term, ultimately, you know? People use it very flippantly. If they see something that looks smart, you consider someone smart, but that might not be the end of the story. Someone might not actually be as smart as you think. They just showed some quality of intelligence in a moment, in some situation. but I think we all can kind of uncover that.

And that’s what the book explores, the different pockets of mental abilities that can be taught and learned if you spend a bit of time on them, or understood how they worked. And then you can have some fun with it, right?

You can do it for show. You can do it for improving your life. You can do it to just be a better person. It’s up to what you what you want to do with it, but we all have access to it.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, you lay out a few core skills of genius. Can you share those with us?

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, so I started the book off, the first half of the book kind of laying this foundation, which, and again, this is largely my opinion, but I think many people might agree that memory is a cornerstone of genius.

I think if you have a good memory, you can do a lot with that to do some genius kinds of abilities. So that’s talked about at the beginning of the book. And in tandem with that, long-term learning, better study tactics. So being able to take your memory and use it for the long-term.

Reading faster. I think if you can read more, that’s how you learn more. That’s how you learn more about the world. So if you can consume more written content, more books, you can increase your knowledge base.

I also talk about focus and attention. So if you can master the ability to hone in on something when it counts and to block out distractions, you, of course, can put more efforts into learning things or outputting more, right?

And then, using those foundational techniques, I go into more nuanced parts of genius. Social genius, like how to interact with others around you. Mental calculations, so being able to calculate with numbers faster. Creativity, problem solving, even in the last chapter, it’s a little woo-woo out there, but intuition.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, well, that’s a lovely lineup. Well, let’s hear, when it comes to, let’s talk about memory and social at the same time, if I may. How can we do a better job of remembering people’s names and faces?

Because I think that can make a huge impression in terms of like, “Oh, wow, like that person, he remembered my name and he said it to me. He seemed happy to see me.” It’s just like it skyrockets your likability real quick. So give us some hacks for this one.

Nelson Dellis
I mean, Dale Carnegie said that the most interesting person is the most interested person. And I think there’s nothing more than, bigger than, or showing more interest than if you remember somebody’s name. And it’s just a little memory trick, right?

And it’s such a small thing, it’s just this little word, sometimes a longer word, but a word that represents this person, but it’s so powerful and so meaningful. So I treat it as this very special, delicate thing that a person can present to me.

And I want to know this thing. I want to store it in my mind because I know how powerful it could be. And so memory techniques will serve you perfectly for this situation. And, again, tapping into what I mentioned about the numbers, you’re taking some piece of information. It’s not a number this time. It’s this word, this label of a human that’s in front of you, and turning it into a meaningful picture.

And so what that typically means is you hear a name, hopefully, maybe, but sometimes maybe not, it reminds you of something. Maybe a person you know, close to you, or a celebrity, or someone, an athlete, whatever has that same name. You can think of that person. There’s a picture suddenly in your mind for that name now.

Or, maybe if you don’t, maybe if you can take a syllable, the first syllable of the name, or a couple of the syllables, and those individual atoms of the name, maybe come up with a picture, create a picture for you. Like Nelson, maybe you think of Nelson Mandela, okay?

Maybe you don’t, maybe you’ve never heard the name before. So what could you do? Well, Nell, Son, okay, maybe Nell makes you think of like a nail, like a hammering nail. And then Son, sun in the sky.

So both are pictures, right? Either Nelson Mandela, even maybe Nelson from the Simpsons, if you’re a Simpsons fanatic, he’s a character on the show, or you have this image of a nail being driven into the sun. So that’s a representative thing for the name. That’s a little more tangible than this collection of letters that’s somewhat abstract.

The next thing is to find a way to always be able to reliably pull it back when you need it, pull it out of this person when you have to call them that name to remember it. And that’s where this other part of memory is super important, which is how we organize and store information.

There are methods to do this, and we don’t really think about it when we try to remember something. But one of the techniques, and this applies for names, is anchoring it to something that will be helpful to retrieve it.

And for names, it’s the person. The person is who’s going to show up, whether it’s online in the form of a picture or in front of you at a party. They are the one that shows up, and at that point is when you usually have to remember their name, right?

So you can attach it or anchor it to a physical feature. I think that’s the best way to do it because you’re usually looking at the person in the face, so why not choose something that you notice on the person’s face?

So whether it’s a big nose, like a five o’clock shadow, a big forehead. I’m just pointing out my flaws here. But it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t even have to be a flaw. It’s just whatever you notice. Maybe they have pretty eyes or like a little dimple or a little wrinkle, whatever.

And you could come up with a story or some kind of way to attach the image to that feature. The weirder, the better, the crazier, the better, but that’s what makes it memorable, unforgettable.

So if I imagine Nelson Mandela jumping off the edge of my huge nose, the next time you see me and my big nose, you’re going to think, “Oh, there’s Nelson Mandela jumping off his nose. Nelson.” You say this all in your mind though. You don’t say this out loud. You can get into some trouble there.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Well, talking about getting into trouble, I’m wondering, like if I did choose your five o’clock shadow, and then you showed up clean-shaven, like am I out of luck, like, “Oops”?

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, I would lean towards not choosing things that could change but, again, yeah, somebody could get a facelift, too, and then what do do, right? But I honestly think that the technique is really good for in the moment, getting the information in your mind quickly.

And then a big part of being able to remember it, say, the next time is a bit of review. So when you’re learning the person’s name and interacting with this person and talking to them, or you’re perusing around the party, like schmoozing, learning other people’s names.

When you come back or say goodbye to that person, or maybe you look around the room and you see that person, tell yourself, “Okay, this person, that was Nelson, okay,” you review. Like, we need to review things to remember them for the long term.

The technique I just said is very good for getting information in your mind quickly, and it often imprints for quite a while. But if you truly want to remember names for a long time, you have to be super intentional about all of it. You have to review it.

I do a tremendous amount of review for the people I meet. I’m a different story because, as a memory champion, of course, everybody expects me to remember everybody’s name. So there’s a lot more riding on me remembering a name than most people.

But I keep, like, a name journal, so when I meet people after the event or the party or whatnot, the meeting, I always keep track of the mnemonics, and the names, and the people and the context of those people, and I review that from time to time.

And some of those people in that book, I will never see again. They’re just filling up pages in my name book for no reason. But in the off chance I bump into one of those people, and I can say their name months later, years later, it’s so powerful, right?

They’ll think like, “Wow, that person remembered me? Whoa, I must have made an impression,” or, “What an interesting person. Wow! It shows a lot that he thought about me,” and who knows what they’ll think, but it’s usually a good thing.

Pete Mockaitis
Very good. Well, now can you give us a hack for just learning better, in general. Like, I’m trying to pick up a skill, whatever that might be. It’s coding. It’s AI. It’s copywriting. I’m trying to figure out some new stuff.

Nelson Dellis
So now you’re getting into the process of learning, right? And so to learn, obviously you got to have techniques to remember things quicker. That helps. The review part is so much more important because, if you truly want to know something to your core, it needs to be almost automatic, right?

So there’s this idea of two kinds of memory. There’s declarative memory, where you can pull things out, think about it, and then declare it. Kind of like remembering somebody’s name. And then there’s procedural, which is another fancy way of saying muscle memory.

So let’s take the example of remembering somebody’s name. This is a good example. When I’m learning somebody’s name for the first time, I’m using this technique, right, to store their name. And then, when I see them, I’m going to have this effort to kind of collect it, to declare it.

But there’s a point where, let’s say, you know, you just started this job, you started working with this one person, you learned their name using a technique, and you use it every day, and they become close to you, you become friends. You’ve worked together for five years.

In five years, let’s say you are very close to this person, you know this person’s name, you don’t have to declare it anymore. They are Bob instantly. Like, it’s part of you. You don’t even have to think about it. Like, think about your siblings and your mother, like you know their name. You don’t have to pull it out of your brain. It’s just there, right?

That’s procedural. It’s something that’s rehearsed so much that you just know it, right? So the goal is, with long-term learning, whether you’re learning a language or some programming language, you want to get it to a point where you don’t have to sit there and get it out of your brain.

But there will be a point at the beginning where that has to happen. That’s just how our brains work, unfortunately. So the question is, “How do we hack getting things from our declarative, which is always the first step, into a procedural process, into muscle memory?”

And, unfortunately, while declarative has tons of little hacks, all these little memory techniques, and that’s what all of chapter one is about, the procedural isn’t as easy to hack. The best strategies we have are active recall. So actively trying to access the information in our mind.

So by closing your eyes, and you don’t have to close your eyes, but just to prove the point further, you know, when you’re trying to get the information out, the more you access it, the more you kind of fire those neurons, those connections, the better it’ll become automatic.

And that shouldn’t be a surprise to many people, right? The more you do something mentally, the more automatic it becomes. You strengthen those neural pathways and then it becomes more automatic.

But a lot of us, when we study, we think about it wrong, right? We think we have our notes in front of us and we just look at it again and again and again. And you feel like you have this sense of familiarity with the information. You’re like, “Oh, yeah, I’ve got it.”

You’re going even through it and you’re maybe even ahead of where you’re reading saying, “Yes,” and saying it before you read it. But that’s not active recall because you have the information in front of you. It’s not true declarative, right?

So if you can put that information away and struggle to get it out, which it always is a bit of a challenge, but that’s where the magic happens, right? When you do that active recall, go through that process of the nitty-gritty of pulling it out, that’s where you are building these neural pathways, strengthening these neural pathways to procedural.

Space repetition, so there’s plenty of studies around this where, if you are doing everything, studying for something all in one session, well, yes, you could use memory techniques and it might work for the short term. In the long term, you will forget more of it.

Our brain likes to work on things for a little bit, take a break, and then come back, because I guess there’s that, in that moment when you come back to it, you do have to kind of struggle with it to get it back to where it was. And I think that repetitiveness of, or that repeated action of going back to it, almost starting a bit more from scratch is where you strengthen those neural pathways again.

And then the last tip on that is something called interleaving. So if you can, in a study session, let’s say, interleave, in a similar set of what you’re studying, different kinds of things.

So let’s say if you’re studying for a language, and you do a lot of problems or questions or quizzes or testing yourself on verb conjugations, and then maybe you just do straight up vocabulary training, and then maybe, I don’t know, you study basic phrases or something like that.

They’re all different, right, but they all have to do with you learning language. But if you can go in between and kind of alternate, maybe every 15, 20 minutes, that is proved to be better than just studying for one big chunk of time, say, verbs, right?

So we found that if we switch up the task, but keeping it in the same domain, actually we learn better. And I think it’s a similar principle to space repetition. But, yeah, it’s a tedious process to learn. But if you understand how to hack the brain in that sense, you can learn more efficiently and faster.

Pete Mockaitis
And what’s interesting with active recall, in some ways, you need a little bit of a prompt in terms of like, “What is that thing I’m retrieving?” And so, I suppose there’s many ways you can do this. Like, people use flashcards, or I guess now with AI, you can just say, “Hey, this is what I’m trying to learn. Ask me questions now, one at a time. Go.” And so then you’re practicing the active retrieval.

But I’m hearing you that the key point there is I’m not looking at the thing. I am hiding, I’m covering up the thing, and I am depending on my ability to pull it out from the depths of my memory.

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, that’s better for learning, and there’s different ways to do it. As you mentioned AI, you know, it’s proven to be, or increasingly been proven to be detrimental to our memories because we’re doing a lot of cognitive tasks, using the tool rather than ourselves.

But, I think, as a sparring partner, as a coach, or a quizzer, I think it could be super powerful because it can give you all sorts of ways to do that active recall. Another great method, I don’t know if it was invented by him, but it’s been coined as named by him, it’s the Feynman method.

So Richard Feynman was a legendary physicist who was really well-known for being able to explain things, complicated things, in physics really well. And the technique is, basically, when you’re learning something, try to explain it to somebody else in the most basic way possible.

And as you explain it, you’ll quickly find out what you truly know and don’t, and it’s a way of kind of refining the weaknesses and strengths of what you’ve studied. And, again, it’s active recall in disguise.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that’s cool. Well, now let’s hear about focus in terms of just being able to hunker down and do stuff.

Nelson Dellis
Well, in this day and age, it’s extremely difficult to focus, and so I feel like a big part of finding how to pay attention to something is figuring out what are the points of distraction for you, and being ruthless in kind of eliminating them preemptively.

Thinking about there’s, like, this planner in your mind that says, “Okay, in the future, Nelson needs to focus on this. So I’m going to make sure that, when he’s working, the distractions are at bay.”

And there’s plenty of tips on how to do this. It depends on what is the source of your distraction, but, oftentimes, it’s the internet or your phone or some device. So blocking that in some case, maybe going analog during a session, putting your phone out of sight while you work on a task.

The goal with paying attention, you want to have this deep work at your disposal. And oftentimes, we’re really doing what’s called shallow work, where we’re like low value, low focus tasks that don’t really push you forward, like you’re checking your email, you’re responding to messages. You’re not doing the deep work that you need to do, the deep focus.

And it often comes to your environment. Like, put yourself in a place isolated and work on this problem or thing that you need to get done, and you’ll have tremendous focus on that thing.

Another thing is we get tired, especially nowadays, where we’re so used to being stimulated all the time. It’s not our faults. Devices around us are designed to distract us as their main purpose.

And so, if you can put these things at bay, but also train your mind to work for longer and longer periods of time without being interrupted or needing to kind of satisfy yourself with dopamine hits somehow, so there’s this idea called a Pomodoro technique, where you can set a timer, preferably an analog timer so you don’t have your phone near you, but for 20, 25 minutes.

And the idea is that you work intensely for 20, 25 minutes, and that’s doable, right? If you can say that to yourself, “I’m just going to work hard, focus on this one thing, nothing else for 20 minutes,” and then you get a five minute break to do something mindless.

And then you dive in back again. Do another Pomodoro session for maybe 20, 25 minutes again. And you can stack these, and then every maybe three or four, you can take a longer break.

And it turns out it’s a lot easier to get work done. And, oftentimes, you maybe get started with 20 minutes, and you end up working for an hour because you just needed to get started.

So, oftentimes, the focus thing is a trained ability. And the more you work on it and the more you set yourself up to have success without getting distracted, the longer you’ll find that you can focus on things more intently. And when you can do that, you can get more work done, you can have better memory, read more, all those things.

Pete Mockaitis
Now I’ve heard with this, it’s cool, we can practice, we can get better and better. I’ve heard that the quote, “human limits”, given ultradian rhythms, is something like 90 minutes. Like, you probably need a break by then.

Although, occasionally, I don’t know, every once in a while, I get uber fascinated by something and it goes way longer. So what’s your take on this one?

Nelson Dellis
I agree. I mean, I think we all will get burned out at some point. And so I think, over time, I think prepping for that eventual mental deterioration in the session by breaking it up, it’s like in a workout, you have a lot of reps to do. It’s tempting to just get them all out of the way, but you might crash pretty quick versus breaking them up early into sets of 10.

Something that seems too easy, but you could do 10 at a time, and you could almost never stop, right? So I think the same kind of idea applies mentally that, even though it seems like, “Oh, I’m going to get an hour and a half of studying in,” it might be better to break that up into multiple shorter sessions so that you can actually be productive, fully productive, really not mentally fatigued for longer, and make more progress that way.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And this speed reading, how much of that is a real thing?

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, I’m careful about that term, and even though I call the chapter’s title “Speed reading,” I quickly changed it to “Focus reading” because I am aware of some of the associations or the connotations with speed reading.

There’s a lot of history in scam-y programs and bogus claims of people being able to speed read thousands of words per minute. The average person is somewhere between 300, 400 words per minute.

And so what my chapter is truly about is learning how to optimize or make your reading more efficient, and having the skills to be able to turn up the dial of your speed and to turn it down, right, because not everything needs to be speed read or read fast.

There are going to be things you just need to drink right and chug, versus like a fine wine where you’d rather smell it, take a sip, enjoy it, maybe even go back and have another glass, you know?

So I think reading is really up to what the person is trying to get out of it, and being able to kind of work with how they know their mind works and how to read better, and remember what you read better using some basic strategies.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And what are the strategies?

Nelson Dellis
Well, there’s a big part of, again, paying attention, so putting yourself in the right frame of mind to read, having an intention to read. A lot of people want to read a lot of things, but they just pile up books.

So being more intentional about getting through the books you’d like to actually read, which means making time for it. There are so many things that we spend time on that do not advance us in our books.

And if you can just make it more of a thing that you purposefully do every day, whether that means you have to carry a book around with you all the time, I always do that, or you have always got a book by your bedside or on your desk, and you take five minutes here, even just to get like a little chapter out of the way.

You’re always reading in some form. It’s like what you do. Just like maybe you’ve made working out an exercise just as important in your life. Reading should be as well. And I think there are so many benefits to reading. So it’s hard to tell me that maybe that’s not a good thing to read so much.

There are some other more physical, tangible techniques. For example, if you want to increase your reading speed, some suggestions in the book are, if you use some kind of pointer, I know it sounds very infantile, but what happens to most readers is, if they don’t have some kind of guide, they’re often subject to their eyes bouncing around the page or backtracking a lot.

So if you can have some pointer, whether it’s your finger, a pencil, a spaghetti noodle, I don’t know.

Pete Mockaitis
Uncooked, yeah.

Nelson Dellis
An uncooked spaghetti noodle, to guide your eyes across, you’ll find that you backtrack way less, if at all, and you can make more progress through the pages, the chapters that you’re trying to go for.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, when we read, we don’t read every single thing. Our eyes are constantly jumping in what’s called saccades. And if you look at somebody, for example, if you look at someone on a train looking outside of the train, you’ll see their eyes are like jumping, jumping, jumping, jumping.

That’s because it’s kind of trying to track the moving landscape. And even though the person looking out the window doesn’t feel like their eyes are like jumping like that, that’s just naturally what our eyes do. And we do it when we read as well.

And so what you can do, since we don’t need to read all the words, we’re actually skipping around a lot because we can cluster words, we can actually see things in our peripheral as well, and oftentimes we can piece together clumps of words, like just by context, right?

We know what’s going to come next, so do we actually need to read the word? Sometimes we aren’t, even though we feel like we have to. So what you can do is play around with this. I like to draw some, with pencil, some margins inside. Maybe, like, you can start kind of shallow, so maybe a half inch or an inch on each side of the page.

And then as you’re guiding yourself, you just stay between those lines and you realize that, “Oh, shoot, I’m not reading the outskirts of each line of the page. Like, I’m maybe missing hundreds of words per page if I do that,” but you still can remember and read what is on the page partly because peripheral is picking up on that, but also again, context, you can figure it out.

And so if you can even narrow that further, you find you’re just, like, reading a very central narrow part of the page, you can still read the page. It’s really fascinating and fun to play around with.

And this is just to train you, right? Like I’m not saying go through all hundreds of pages of your books and put margins. But if you can train a little bit, this purposeful practice, again makes you better, this training, you can get better at doing that kind of automatically without having to guide with your finger all the time and write these margins in there.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Nelson, tell me, what are some of the top hacks that absolutely most professionals could benefit tremendously from adopting that we haven’t already covered?

Nelson Dellis
I’m a big fan of the chapter on intuition. I know it’s a less of a thing that you can kind of hold and, like, purposefully grasp in your mind the results. But I think there’s some kind of intangible thing to it where people can recognize that it’s doing something for them or not.

And so that whole chapter is about tapping into kind of, like, this gut feeling and how to listen to it better and to hone it better for things that don’t necessarily seem like they’re in your vicinity to make decisions on or perceive.

And I know that sounds a bit out there, but there are techniques out there to hone that. And I don’t want to get too deep into it because it gets a bit weird, but I think the short of it is to listen to your intuition more.

Not that it’s always correct, but if you do listen to it more and open up to it, you’ll find that it often has something important to say, whether it’s about a deal you’re about to say yes to, or some turning point in your life, or the people that you hang out with.

I think if you listen to them, you get those bouts of intuition. I think you get more information about the world, and then you can have more at your disposal, right, more information. I think about what’s happening around you can only be better.

So I’m really happy about that chapter in the book. And I encourage people to kind of explore that a little more.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, I think that there’s a lot to that in terms of intuition. I don’t know the neuroscience, but I think I’ve heard, or at least my hot take is that our advanced brain nervous system has just oodles of associations all over the place from all of our experiences. And sometimes it’s not yet conscious.

Like, I could not articulate why I’ve got a weird feeling or a bad feeling about this contract or this deal. And yet, there’s something to it. And I like what you said. It’s not necessarily correct, like, “Oh, absolutely, trust your guide every time. It’ll never lead you straight.” I don’t think that’s true.

But it is surfacing information, and I think it’s funny. It’s almost like, well, I’m thinking about, we had Joe Navarro, the FBI agent who does body language stuff. And I think he said it well, in terms of like, you can’t like prosecute someone based on, like, a body language situation, like, “Judge, jury, there you have it, you know? He crossed his legs at the wrong time. He’s guilty of sin.”

But what you can do is say, “Hmm, this thing right here seems worthy of additional investigation, additional resources. Let’s go search the apartment of his mom. Oh, and what do you know? We found the key item there because we listened to those clues from from the body language.”

And, likewise, I think that when you listen to your intuition, and say, “Hmm, something about this deal feels off. I’m just going to run it by a lawyer.” And the lawyer says, “Oh, my gosh, this is a terrible deal. Look at all the things you have to do, and almost nothing that they have to do. Do not sign.” It’s is like, “Oh, okay, well, it was good move that I checked my intuition.”

Or you might talk to multiple trusted advisors, and said, “Ah, yes, it could feel sketchy. But, in fact, that is just how this whole industry operates, so you got to choose. Are you down with that or are you not?”

And then I think it really can be a valuable tool or indicator to point you into where we’re going to dig deeper.

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, and I think, more than anything, our brains are very logical and rational, and we tend to always think with that, and I think that’s great. I mean, we should be logical about the real world and information around us.

But our brain isn’t always, like, what we think logically. It’s not always getting it correct, you know? There are many things that can alter what we think is correct, and the brain is not quite getting it correct.

So I think this mix of having a well-founded logic in life, but also using intuition when it needs to and listening to it more often, again, not necessarily to make the decisions, but to maybe factor in as part of your decision-making can really make a difference in how you navigate your life or your job, how to be awesome at your job.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, thank you. Well, anything else you want to share before we hear about your favorite things?

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, no, I’m so happy with this book. I always talk about memory, and over the years, I’ve just been always fascinated by the brain, clearly. And I’ve kept little notebooks of all these cool tricks, mental tricks that I’ve been taught or stumbled upon because of my memory explorations, and it’s all in this book.

And I’m so over the moon about this book. And I think it’ll help a lot of people. And it can be fun, it can be serious. You can use it in so many different ways. And so I hope people go and check it out.

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

Nelson Dellis
This is always changing, but this one has always stuck with me, and it’s by Albert Einstein, who I talk about a lot in the book. and it’s that, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.”

And I’ve always loved that because, especially coming from him, you know, you’d think like of Einstein, he just knows so much. That’s how he figured everything out, but he actually figured everything out his staple discoveries from just imagination exercises.

And oftentimes, silly ones that, like, broke the boundary of what you’re supposed to think about, I guess, for some physics examples. And that’s how innovation came about for him. And I think that’s, in general, how innovation comes out is by bending the rules, which can only happen in your imagination.

And so I think if you think that way, that it’s more valuable to have these imagination, visualization skills, which you can train and practice, it’s often more important than what you know.

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

Nelson Dellis
Yeah, I’m a bit biased, but I was a part of a study at Washington University in St. Louis, where they were, you know, there’s been memory studies forever, and people have been subject to fMRI scans to look inside the brain, but they’re largely uncomfortable machines to sit in for very long.

So, typically, studies in the past have taken a lot of large quantity of people in the machine for very short periods of time, and kind of taking averages. They’ve never really done in-depth long hours in the machine study.

So they took me, how many hours did I do? It must’ve been at least 15 to 20, maybe more. And then they have maybe 10 controls, who also volunteered. I don’t know who these people were. They must’ve been incentivized, somehow.

But anyways, the results are finally, they were published this year, and they’re trying to get it published in some well-known journals. But, ultimately, what came out of it, there’s a few things that came out of it, but one of the most striking or kind of, I don’t know, controversial, but against what most people might’ve thought is that the hippocampus for most people is where the magic happens with memory.

There’s a lot of activity when somebody is using their memory. And for a lot of the tasks they had me do in the machine, it showed a very different structure, that I’m actually not using, well, I am using my hippocampus, but I’m using more of my brain, that the pathways and the parts of my brain that I’m using when I’m memorizing is completely different than the normal person.

And this is trained, right? So the ultimate finding of the paper is that memory training literally rewires your brain. And that’s always been said, you know, anecdotally, but now there’s proof.

This is literal proof that anybody can change the way their brain works. And also that memory doesn’t fully work the way we think it does because how can Nelson here be memorizing all these sorts of crazy things, and it’s not through the conventional systems that we see when people use their memory.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Nelson Dellis
I’d have to say Godel, Escher, and Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by Douglas Hofstadter.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite tool?

Nelson Dellis
My brain, seriously. You know, it might be easy to say, like, “Oh, I have this app for this, and then I use tech or AI for this.” But, honestly, my favorite tool is my brain, and I really try to use it whenever I can, even though there might be an easier way, more efficient way. I don’t want to lose the ability to use my brain and to think.

And I feel more terrified than ever in modern day, just because I feel like we’re losing the ability to think. We’re outsourcing it so much that I don’t know what our future looks like, honestly. So I’m loving my tool in my head that I’m purposefully using to keep it strong and to fight the trend.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Nelson Dellis
My favorite habit is just always working out early in the morning. The first thing I get out of bed, and I do some intense exercise, that, to me, I don’t even, I mean, yeah, it’s just what I’ve programmed myself to do. And if I don’t get that done, my day just is shot. When I get my workout in early, it’s just sets the tone for productivity throughout the day.

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

Nelson Dellis
Yeah. I mean, I think it’s using your memory, being intentional about memory, and understanding that the memory is something that can be worked on. If you say to yourself that, “I don’t have a good memory. I forget names. I’m just that person who is forgetful,” yeah, sure, you’re going to be that person.

You get to decide what your memory is. And I find that’s the most profound thing people get out of my talks or my content is that the brain is malleable, and that nobody has a bad memory. They just have untrained memories. And that’s usually the nugget that changes a lot of their perception on what their brain is capable of.

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

Nelson Dellis
Best is just to go to my website, NelsonDellis.com. You can find everything about me there, my books, my coaching, memory coaching, my YouTube channel. A lot of content out there teaching how to do this stuff, and, yeah, exploring my books. But NelsonDellis.com, you’ll find it all.

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

Nelson Dellis
Yes, use your brain more. I know it can be challenging right now, and oftentimes, you use it and you’re maybe let down, but it’s, again, it’s plastic. It can be molded. It can be trained. So the more you use it, the stronger it gets. So give it a shot. You won’t regret it.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Nelson, thank you.

Nelson Dellis
Thank you so much.

1143: How to Build a Career that AI Can’t Replace with Aneesh Raman

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Aneesh Raman guides you on how to use AI and turn it into a competitive advantage.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why you shouldn’t see AI as competition
  2. How to make the most out of AI in your workflow
  3. What AI can’t replicate–and how you can double down on it

About Aneesh

Aneesh Raman is the chief economic opportunity officer of LinkedIn, where he works with leaders across societies and sectors to shape the global response to the historic changes hitting work. 

Previously, he served as senior adviser on economic strategy and public affairs to the State of California, led economic impact at Facebook, worked as a presidential speechwriter, and was a war correspondent. 

A graduate of Harvard College and a former Fulbright Scholar, he serves on the boards of the College Futures Foundation and Shanti Bhavan Children’s Project

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Aneesh Raman Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Aneesh, welcome!

Aneesh Raman
Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to hear your insights about AI and economic opportunity. Could you maybe kick us off by sharing what’s the most surprising or counterintuitive thing you’ve discovered about us career professional folks and AI?

Aneesh Raman
Ooh, it’s a big one. It’s an existential one that we have internalized this diminished sense of self as humans at work across the industrial age. When AI broke out, what now three, four years ago, immediately, there was this great fear.

Immediately, the conversation was, “We’re done. We’re at the end of the road for humans at work. We’ve got this thing that can beat us at these things. It’s going to beat us at those things next. It’s going to beat us at everything soon.”

And I just sort of, like, intrinsically, didn’t believe that. I was starting from a place where, for a long time, I had thought the labor market did a horrible job matching talent and opportunity, indexed on pedigree signals like your college degree, “Where did you work?”

So I just knew there was so much human potential out there that had been blocked out or locked out of economic opportunity all over the world. And so I just didn’t believe that humans were done. I kind of felt like we hadn’t even begun yet.

And the more I sort of thought about it, the more our CEO and I talked about it, what led to the book was this realization that humans are more than we’ve been at work for a couple hundred years now. For a couple hundred years, we have been about one thing above all else – efficiency.

And we sort of told ourselves a story that the knowledge economy moved us out of the industrial age, of people working on factory floors on assembly lines. But it didn’t. Even if you were with a laptop in an office, you were doing more, better, faster, more, better, faster, more, better, faster. Everything was about efficiency and productivity.

And we had derided almost these skills that make us, us. We called them soft skills. We said they were nice to have, not must have. And all the math worked in terms of the industrial age and what the economy valued in terms of technical and analytic abilities.

But I think what’s been most surprising to me is that AI is forcing us to reassert ourselves because it is going to out-machine us, it’s going to out-efficiency us. And yet, our human brain, which is I think still the most incredible object in the known universe, it’s been around for tens of thousands of years, long before the steam engine arrived, and the industrial age descended upon us.

And so we’re going to pull from these strengths that we’ve had for millennia, that we talked about in the book, and it’s going to be a moment to reassert ourselves and our capability, I think.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, wow! These are big ideas.

Aneesh Raman
Welcome to my brain.

Pete Mockaitis
“Internalize the diminished sense of self.” My goodness. You know, it’s funny, I was just chatting with Claude last night because I think the First Lady was with a robot doing an education event. And I was like, “Oh, can that robot finally load my dishwasher for me? And when can I buy one?”

And so, I was looking at that, and it said, “Oh, this robot is impressive because it could figure out how to fold a towel with just 80 hours of video.” I was like, “Oh, well, my five-year-old figured out how to fold a towel in about four minutes of instruction with a hug.”

So, yeah, I’m with you, our brains are spectacular. But, yeah, there are some domains in which we are being out-efficienced by the AI.

Aneesh Raman
Yeah, and I think that’s okay. It’s not okay right now because it’s causing a massive disruption to work. It’s changing the rules of the game, which are hard to manage if you’ve been playing the game the old way and you’ve done everything right and, suddenly, you know, old math won’t solve new equations. But I think it’s an opening for people that see it.

We were never meant to be machine-like. We were never meant to spend our days doing the work of efficiency and more better faster, more better faster, more better faster. I mean, at one point, as we were reporting in the book, you know, thinking about those people on assembly lines who are fastening that one widget over and over again, or the knocker uppers that we talk about, the people who their job was to shoot peas at windows to wake people up as this sort of human alarm clock.

I looked up and they were just at this coffee shop, four people sitting next to each other, on their laptops, just slamming through emails. And it just connected for me that this is all still ever been efficiency work. And so, I think the real opportunity we talk about in the book is to see this as a big change to everything, to be understanding of the fear that that’s going to cause, because the human brain is wired to fear change. It is not wired to get exponential change. We are in a moment of exponential change.

But then act despite that fear, push past it, because while it’s understandable, it’s also unhelpful. And if you start using these tools and using them not in ways that then just take all the work out of your day, but start to take away the stuff that’s mundane, routinized, efficiency work, free up time to do more cool things with these tools, to learn new things in new ways, to build new things in new ways.

And then to open up space to do the things we uniquely do, to give yourself time to think critically, to think about ethical implications of what you’re building if you’re an engineer, to spend time brainstorming or partnering with other humans.

The turning test started us down this path of AI versus human, and then it beat us here, it beats us there. But that’s not where the story goes. There’s no innovation. There’s no growth if it’s just all about AI. Humans are illogical. We’re unpredictable. What works for us requires someone to be us, to be human, to in-tune that.

So, really, the test we should be doing is human versus human with AI, versus humans with AI, because we always do the coolest stuff together. And that means think about yourself five years ago, think about yourself today, “What are you doing that’s new and better and energizing that you couldn’t do without these tools five years ago?”

And in the book, we talk about an easy way to start this. Put your job title aside. It doesn’t matter if you’re a CEO. It doesn’t matter if you’re a senior director. It doesn’t matter if you’re the newest hire at a company. Your job title is irrelevant for the purposes of this exercise.

Every week, you do about a dozen tasks, list them down, and then you’re going to put those tasks into three buckets. The first bucket are tasks that AI can now do or can soon do. So coding is in there, quick summary, quick analysis, first draft of content, meeting notes, like all that stuff’s in bucket one.

Bucket two is stuff you’re doing with AI that’s new. It’s not just additional stuff that you’re putting in bucket one. It’s, “Are you learning something new with AI?” “I’m on marketing, I got to talk to the sales team. They speak a different language. How do I close that expertise gap in what I’m trying to pitch them?”

Are you building something new? “I have to present. What’s a cool image I could associate with this idea? A video? How do I make this land in a more visceral way to the people I’m trying to convince to back this project?” So that’s bucket two.

And then bucket three is, with the time you’re saving in bucket one, with the cool new stuff you’re doing in bucket two, what are gyou doing that’s uniquely you? And that starts with what’s uniquely you as a human, your ability. We have the five Cs in the book, but with those, think critically, “What’s an ethical implication of what we’re doing?”

But then are you spending new time with people to try new things, to test something out as a partnership, to get advice on how to pitch something. And as you sort of move the tasks of your job away from bucket one towards bucket two and bucket three, you’re adapting your job. You’re redefining your job.

We have a statistic at LinkedIn, 70% of the skills for the average job will have changed by 2030. Now, the old way that disruptions hit meant that, at some point, in six months or a year, your boss, your boss’s boss would come to you and say, “Here’s how your job has changed by 70%.” Because old disruptions from the steam engine to electricity to the internet, they played out over years and they came top down.

This one is different. Your boss actually doesn’t really know how your job is supposed to change. Their boss doesn’t know how their job is supposed to change. CEOs are trying to figure this out at an organizational level. So we get to change our jobs now. We get to start figuring out where these tools come in and then what that opens up in bucket two and three, not just because we’re human, but because we’re us.

We have a chapter in the book, “No One Beats You at Being You.” That’s where it’s going, is that you’re going to shift your job and then re-center your career around your unique curiosities and capabilities.

Pete Mockaitis
No one beats you at being you. And it’s funny, I’m thinking about, you know, so me here now, here we are having a podcast about professional skills development, and there are a lot of places where you can get such things.

And it’s interesting how, if I talk to an AI about such a matter, I might get the answer, and it might be quick. And yet, it is not as satisfying, complete, thorough, giving rise to new ideas and connections, the way hearing a full blown conversation between two folks on a matter is. And I think that that really resonates.

Aneesh Raman
And I think that it’s really important. Yeah, I’m glad you’re saying, because right now there’s this sort of idea to AI or not AI, as if it’s binary. And if you AI, you’re doing everything AI. If you’re not, you’re rejecting it for righteous reasons, and that’s where you’re at.

And in the book, we have the story of Neil Pretty, whom really, he embodies this idea that you need to use AI, but you cannot misuse it, nor should you overuse it. And Neil starts using this tool to help him prepare for different presentations, and he overuses it and realize it doesn’t sound like him and it’s not going to distinguish him. And he dials it back and he uses it differently.

Instead of asking it to tell him what to say, it says, “What would this CEO say about what I said, or this academic? Give me 12 reactions to what I think.” And then he would use that to even get better at what he was going to say that would have taken much conversation with many people ahead of a meeting.

So you can overuse AI. And MIT has done cognitive scans and come up with this term cognitive debt. Like, if you’re sitting at work and your boss asks you something, you copy and paste it in the tool, then you copy and paste the answer back and send it to your boss, you might be doing efficiency work more efficiently.

But if you run into your boss a week later, and they’re like, “Hey, that was a great idea. How did you think of that?” you might not even remember that exchange because your brain is not tracking it, and you will have brought no critical thinking to it. So that muscle is atrophying. So you got to make sure that you are using this tool to do better things yourself. You cannot outsource to it.

Pete Mockaitis
So in the universe of more, better, faster efficiency work, how would you suggest is the contrast? If I’m thinking efficiency work AI stuff is in the land of more, better, faster, what is the land of our humanity?

Aneesh Raman
This is the first time someone’s asked me that. Because what’s crazy is we had to define what makes us us. We had to define what makes humans unique in the arena of work.

It turns out not much work had been done around that. As you started talking to neuroscientists, behavioral psychologists, behavioral economists even, when I’d ask like, “Who from companies or from the world of work comes and talks to you?”

One neuroscientist said, “Not many. Like, athletes will come because they want to push their brain to the limit. The military will come because they can’t hire from another military. Hedge funds will come because they want a cool like summit speaker. But you were not getting incoming from everyday practitioners of work.”

But now the mind is going to the center of work, not the machine. And so what does it all lead to? You know, in the book, we identify the five Cs that we think are at the core of human capability – curiosity, compassion, creativity, courage and communication. Those are what we offer up at the intersection of our IQ and EQ of our consciousness and conscience.

Then we say there’s some habits we all need – resilience, adaptability, handling hard well, failing fast, learning quick. And we sort of bundle it all into this idea of being entrepreneurial in our habits and in our thinking. And we know that in saying that, we lose a lot of folks who think being entrepreneurial means starting a business, and that is not for them.

Paul Cheek from MIT, who’s a professor on entrepreneurship there, has an amazing definition for it. “Entrepreneurialism,” he says in the book, “is doing more than is reasonable with the resources you have.” So every one of us every day has a task, has a project, has something we’re doing at work, what’s more than is reasonable that we could do with these tools and with others with the resources we have?

And then what that leads to is a flip. Instead of more, better, faster, I think we’re doing new, bigger, bolder. We are creating a whole bunch of new ideas, a whole bunch of new ways for businesses to grow, a whole bunch of new businesses to go after, a whole bunch of new areas from climate to healthcare to all sorts of stuff that we could create technology for businesses to address, at the local level for just a community, or at the country level, or at the global level.

So, to me, “more, better, faster” becomes “new, bolder, better” and not just in terms of work. Like, I think if we do this right, and it isn’t just us as individuals. Institutions need to completely redesign the systems of work from employment to education, entrepreneurship.

But, ultimately, we get to better work for each of us, better work for all of us, better defined by just more human work, more fulfilling, more high value, more impactful. But that all leads to greater prosperity and progress because of this sort of innovation explosion, this entrepreneurialism that can take root.

Pete Mockaitis
And to these notions of efficiency work versus newer, bolder stuff, I’d love your hot take on these AI layoffs. I mean, some say, “Oh, well, that’s just AI washing. They over-hired, interest rates are worse. It makes a better story for Wall Street to say, ‘Oh, it’s because of AI efficiency.’” But others say, “Oh, no, no, no. Sure enough, one person can now do what things that previously require two, three, or four, and thus it makes sense to shed those jobs.” You’ve got an interesting vantage point. What’s your take on this?

Aneesh Raman
I mean, we’re seeing jobs get added, one million plus jobs around AI. That’s not just the sort of like hardcore engineering jobs. That’s also the data centers. We know sectors are hiring, like healthcare. Look, there’s these two truths we have to hold at once that are somewhat inconsistent.

The first truth is we know at the other end of all of these moments of disruption from technology, we generally see an increase in employment, and the Fed is out there sort of repeatedly with that. Jobs change, new jobs emerge. MIT has a stat, 60% of employment in 2018 didn’t exist in 1940. Creator wasn’t a career 10 years ago. Data scientist wasn’t a job 20 years ago. So we, generally, do see employment go up.

That happens after a messy middle where a lot of lives get upended and it’s really hard for people. But we do see employment go up. That sort of thing one, truth one. Thing two, truth two that contradicts that is we’ve never been here before in terms of this technology. It is fundamentally different in terms of what it’s able to do.

And I think predictions are unhelpful right now. Anyone with absolute certainty about what’s happening to a job category or to all jobs or to jobs in this sector, let’s see how it turns out in five or 10 years. Like, I think it’s just impossible for anyone to know with certainty anything absolute.

The one thing we do know, to contradict myself a little, is the only thing that matters right now is what we believe, and what we choose to do, and what decisions we make, and what steps we take. And that is true for us as individuals. It’s true for us as organizations. It’s true for us as societies. It’s true for us as humanity.

If we decide that worse is more likely, and we make decisions that make worse more likely, worse is more likely. If we decide that better is more likely, and we make decisions that make better more likely, better is more likely.

So in terms of where employment goes, there’s so much in the air. I mean, we’re going from an old world to a new world of work. There’s so much macroeconomic muckup that’s going on on interest rates and geopolitics. Every company is going through its own moment of business transformation.

Some over-hired and now they’re managing that. Some are built with an org chart for stability, order, predictability. That isn’t going to help you innovate, be agile, and grow. They’ve got to manage that. There’s no one truth to everything that’s happening.

And so I think for folks who are looking for a single answer, who are looking for someone to tell them what to do, who are looking for an off-the-shelf playbook as an individual or as a company, like, that’s not this moment. It’s not like back when it was like everyone get a CS degree or bootcamp certificate in coding if you can find one, because that’s the ticket.

There is no “it” right now, but that’s it. We’ve all got to start to figure this out on our own, use these tools, and with these tools start to understand our own unique interest, capabilities, where those could go, where we would pitch ourselves across a broader set of job opportunities that we might, otherwise, have looked at. And I think that’s what we’ve got to do is look. It’s a metacognition sort of moment.

Pete Mockaitis
Understood. But you do have some interesting data. 85% of people are in jobs where AI can automate at least a quarter of routine tasks. Can you tell us a little bit about that data and what sorts of things we’re seeing automated now with AI?

Aneesh Raman
A big thing we’ve been trying to push people on is to look at jobs as a set of tasks, not as titles. A good example of how not to do it, I would say, is looking at software engineers. And for a bit coming out of the gate with AI, everyone said that title describes all software engineers in one way, and that one way is that they code. And as AI got better and better at coding, it became, in that line of argument, intuitive that software engineers were done.

We’ve actually seen recent data where the hiring for software engineers is going up because as AI is able to do more coding, more companies want to build tech, so they’re hiring. And the job of software engineer was never limited only ever to coding.

Some of those jobs, entry level jobs, even middle, they were, but the job doesn’t have to be just that. In fact, as AI is able to do coding, it shifts to reviewing the code, or talking to customers, or having those conversations about ethical implications of what’s being built. It’s the same three buckets and things move.

ATMs are a good example, we talk about in the book. When ATMs hit in the late ‘70s, everyone thought bank tellers were done. We have a quote from the New York Times. It basically says bank tellers are done. Bank teller jobs, like, doubled between that moment and 2010, and they doubled because you had more banks opening so you needed more tellers because ATMs allowed it. The job of the bank teller shifted to being more about relationship banking.

Now, there were some debate over whether the quality of the job went up, but in an absolute term, you know, the jobs went up. They came down after that because of the iPhone and the smartphone and all the banking we’re now doing. But you couldn’t have predicted that in the ‘70s.

So that’s all to say our data doesn’t look at job titles. It looks at jobs. It looks at the tasks people are doing. And it says, if you are in a job where a lot of your job is that bucket one, that’s worth knowing. That doesn’t mean that entire job is going away. And it doesn’t mean you are done at work. It means you’ve got AI coming for well over 50% of the jobs in that task. So you want to start on your own moving tasks in your day to day to bucket two and bucket three.

And if you do that, don’t worry about the job category or the job title you have. That’s all secondary now. It used to be job title mattered first because you’d reverse engineer from it. Job title matters last now because we’re going to be reshifting work.

And so depending on your number, and you don’t need us to tell you this data, you can do an evaluation of the tasks in your job and look at where you’re heavy. Anyone who is heavy in bucket one, okay, what do you got going in bucket two and three? How can you build out from that?

If you’re in a job category that feels really volatile, okay, what are the transferable skills you have across two and three that could take you into other job functions or job categories? But it’s not an overnight, everything is done end of day sort of thing. It’s a step-by-step incremental of, “How do I manage this change sort of thing?”

Pete Mockaitis
And we had a really good chat with Jeremy Utley, who suggested shifting perspective from AI is not the oracle with the answers, but rather like a collaborator, a teammate, and that’s been pretty helpful. I’d be curious to hear, for those whose AI use is limited to sort of an enhanced Google or enhanced Bing, where do you think are the most promising opportunities, like, “Hey, go do this right now with AI, and you’re going to see some cool career benefits”?

Aneesh Raman
This is another one where there’s no one answer for everyone. I’m sorry to tell folks. Like, you’re going to have to go to the gym. You’re going to have to try things out, test things out, and figure out what is the high value of AI for you.

It could be learning new things. It could be building new things. It could be coaching you on new things. You got to keep trying the tools. Like, to your point, I think too many folks either are afraid of AI and don’t want to touch it. Or, if they’re using it, they’re using it just for a better search.

We have five Cs I talked about, and curiosity matters most right now as individuals. And the first place to start is be super curious about these tools, because their capabilities are changing every day. It’s almost like a skill of tool dexterity.

I use multiple tools every day. Every once in a while, I shift to the dominant tool. I use them for all sorts of things. Every week, I’m trying to push a new task out to the tools so that I’m constantly testing what new things that I’m working on can it help with.

It helped with writing at first, and then that pushed me to realize, “Okay, I got to focus on how I elevate what I can get help with on the research or first draft side. But also how do I spend more time doing in-person communication?”

So I started studying, like, theater actors who have it down, who know how to command a room, command energy. What can I learn from them now that my bucket three is going to be more of this? Right now, I’m using the tools for a lot of coaching. I want to send this email. I’ve told the tools what I’m working on, which is sending less emails that are less lengthy with less ideas to people like Ryan, who I can bombard with ideas.

And so it’ll say like, “Hey, you just got yesterday, like take a day off,” you know, like stuff like that. So it’s not so much about the tool capability. It’s what is the human capability you’re working on in that moment? Because we’re all going to want to keep growing right now in new ways, which is fun. It’s hard, but it’s fun.

And then you’re going to use the tools differently based on what you’re working on. If you’re just doing search, that’s an issue. So the easiest way to do it is find the hardest part of your tomorrow. You got something at work tomorrow that you’re not looking forward to, that is either monotonous and drudgery or complicated and a hard conversation you got to have, or you’re suddenly going to have to come up with an idea and you’re bit freaked out about that.

Whatever is your hardest thing tomorrow, start going to the tools and asking them how they can help you with that. And they might not be able to help you. Okay, that’s like a good example of a tool that isn’t there yet, or a task that isn’t there yet, but they’ll give you something. And that’s the sort of rhythm you want to get in.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, could you give us some fun examples of folks who saw some really great tactical good things flowing from tools into what they’re up to tomorrow?

Aneesh Raman
My favorite from the book, probably, I mean, they’re all stories of individuals who are using these tools to get jobs, keep jobs, and change their career, build businesses, like, all of it. But Jonetta Gresham is in her 50s, and because of her age, she came to AI with, in her words, a “Hell, no to AI,” mindset, because she had seen Terminator and Terminator 2 and Terminator 3, and really felt like this was a robot apocalypse come to life.

Again, she had a task at one point, which was to get her resume ready. And she used a tool to just help her do that. And she was blown away at how the tool helped her articulate skills that she had and better organized experience that she had in a way that made her so much more employable for the job she was going after.

And so that sort of opened up her eyes to like, “Okay, maybe this can help me.” And a little bit later, she was taking an IT certification course. And she is someone who, in various moments of education, didn’t feel like she was being taught in the way that she would like to learn, in the way that her brain process information, and in the way that would feed her curiosity.

So she told the tools to help her learn all the stuff she had to learn in the ways that she likes to learn, with stories, with analogies. The tools did that, she passed the test, she got the certification.

It can personalize against your needs in a way that no technology has before. It can close learning gaps. It can close entrepreneurial gaps or building gaps. You just got to get in the rhythm with it.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I like that a lot in terms of, if you’ve got a laser focus on, “This is the thing I need to go learn,” and then how can the tool facilitate that, I found that rather handy. Like, I found myself getting in the Mac OS Terminal bash command line, and I don’t know what I’m doing, but it’s like, “Hey, if you want to, you know, do this automatic downloading of stuff, you’re going to need this tool.”

So I was like, “Go to GitHub,” it’s like, “Okay, no, you’ve already lost me.” And so I say, “Explain it like I’m five.” And it’s really funny, it’s like asking the robot to go to a store. It literally explains it like I’m five. But that was very handy. And I’ve heard that theme from a number of people.

It’s, like, they know a little something about the domain that they’re after or looking to enter for perhaps the first time, but not nearly enough to actually achieve anything. But with this sort of mega-crutch, they’re saying, “Oh, okay, I can kind of fake my way through step by step.” And then afterwards, like, “Oh, hey, I guess I know how to do this now. How about that?”

Aneesh Raman
Yeah, we’ve got a great story of a guy named Diego, who’s in Texas and is trying to push for rural entrepreneurship with AI to really inspire more folks to realize they can build businesses. Often, folks who couldn’t afford to go to college for whom entrepreneurship is, as he calls it, this permissionless path, this ability to go build your career on your terms.

And he has a great line, which is, “We are no longer limited by what we know. We are only limited by what we can think to ask.” And just imagine what that means for all people all over the world who have access to these tools, who hopefully have electricity and AI infrastructure.

But you’re only limited by what you can think to ask. All of us as humans are innately curious about things, wildly different things. That’s what’s amazing. We all have different perspectives, different things that drive us. But imagine now having this tool that can sort of feed that curiosity and help us align it with the work we do and the impact we want to have and the purpose we want to bring to our jobs.

That’s where you start to get excited. I think we are collectively doing a horrible job telling that story and making it clear, that hiding in plain sight is this thing that is going to make all of our jobs more interesting and more fulfilling, and all of our efforts lead to greater impact for good in the world.

And that’s now on us to try and reset that story and that conversation, which is like the big reason we did the book.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that, “What you can think to ask.” Have there been some power questions that you found transformational?

Aneesh Raman

I think a lot of it is, right now, for folks around, “Where do I start?” or, “What do I do about? How do I think about AI? How should I use AI? When should I not use AI?” You can just dump that in as a voice memo into one of these tools, and it gives you a start. It gives you something to react to.

Again, it doesn’t give you the answer. It gives you an option. And it’s your job to push back on it or to pull from it, and then try and learn something here. Ask it to challenge your thinking over there. One of the things we talk about in the book is like the, I think, it’s a hundred to one rule.

I mean, “You pick your number, but give me like 80 versions of something,” and then you react to which of those you like. And then you can start to think about why and build from that. Or, “Give me the five best arguments against the thing that I think is true about what I’m going to do tomorrow.”

That’s where I think people are really starting to get good results from it. Not, “Give me the answer,” but, “Give me a way to get to a better answer.”

Pete Mockaitis
And I like what you’re saying with regard to the challenging is because it seems like that’s the default setting is sycophancy in these AI tools. It shows me a study. I was like, “Wow, that’s very compelling.” I was like, “Do we think this is real?” It was like, “Actually it has all the hallmarks of being a fraudulent paper mill submission.” I was like, “It’d be nice if you proactively shared that.” But, yeah, to ask it to do the challenging is great.

And you said voice memo and I think that’s a brilliant hack right there in terms of not just the one sentence, but the five minutes of verbiage can make all the difference.

Aneesh Raman

And you can just dump it all in and it’ll organize it. I know someone who does a call with AI every day. They do the chat functionality because you can also, without having to type in or do a voice memo, you can literally converse with these tools.

And they go out for a walk, and they just talk about everything on their mind, “I’m like thinking about this, I had a hard conversation with this person.” And over time, what these tools start to have is longitudinal data on us. They aren’t another person. They are just a collection of insights and knowledge that’s out there. And then, increasingly, if you give it context and give it info, insights, and thoughts on us over longer and longer periods of time.

And so in these conversations, the tool will start calling out, “Hey, you’ve talked for a few times now about wanting to learn more about neuroscience, or how that’s going to relate to work. Here are some, like, podcasts you might want to listen to.” Or, “I’ve noticed, like, anytime you have to have a conversation that’s tough, and it is how you end your day, it really upends your day. Like, have you thought about making those conversations happen at the start of a day?”

It starts picking up on stuff for us that we might miss in the day-to-day of just life being busy. So the key thing is, like, this is a tool that is the easiest technology humans have created for humans to use. It is literally like just talking to someone else at the most basic level. You don’t have to go learn AI. You just have to, like, sign up for a free tool or watch a couple of free videos on it, and then just start using it.

Pick a thing. It can be an exercise plan, a meal plan, or something at work, a project, or a set of tasks you’ve got going, and just start using it. Like, it’s sitting there for any of us to use. So you got to just start using it and keep using it but don’t outsource to it. Use it to then start building you into a better person.

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

Aneesh Raman
I think it goes back to your opening question. Like, it has been surprising how we have internalized a diminished sense of self, and yet it is a reality. And so the biggest thing I would tell people is, like, what matters most right now is your belief in yourself.

You’re going to have to bet on yourself. That’s the future of work and then push your leaders, and we’re pushing them, to build systems that make that bet pay off. But the thing that starts it all is going to be that you believe in yourself and you’re going to bet on yourself. And that’s going to take some work because we are all coming out of an era for work that wasn’t about betting on yourself.

It was turning yourself into whatever the job description needed, whatever the job category needed. So it’s going to be a flip for your brain. The good news is, and there’s a great book, Tiny Experiments, a bunch of them on neuroplasticity and how we can rewire our brain to become a different person.

The good news is you got a human brain and it is able to be rewired and you can become a different person. You can get to belief. You can get to a place where you know exactly how and why you’re going to bet on yourself, but it’s going to take some work. But that’s where it starts. That’s what I would say.

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

Aneesh Raman
I like the, “Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were, and ask why not.” That drove me for a while. I think, right now, it’s more “Be curious, not judgmental.” I think it gets appropriated to Walt Whitman.

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

Aneesh Raman
Mine, I mentioned at the MIT one, 60% of jobs in 2018 didn’t exist in 1940. That’s just like a good number for us to keep in mind.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Aneesh Raman
A bunch of them. My favorite hits at a certain moment in life, that sort of like hits me deep as it relates to this conversation, Sapiens. I read that in August 2023, GPT had gone global the prior year, and it is a brief history of humankind.

And so it just helps you have a sense of, like, how incredible the human brain is, but just also how much has happened across millions of years when we all focused on a few hundred years. So that really widened my perspective.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite tool?

Aneesh Raman
Copilot, I’m using it a lot because I work at LinkedIn. My co-author is working on Copilot. So it’s kind of a default because I can go tell someone if there’s something we should make better out of it. But it can really give me good advice on, “Should I send this email?” or, “What am I overspending my time on?” because it’s got my calendar, it’s got my email, it’s got the team’s messages. So, for me, right now, because a lot of my growth is growth I want to do at work, it’s been helpful.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Aneesh Raman
This is probably controversial, because I don’t know if people would say this. My favorite habit is small talk, actually. I love small talk. I think every human is like a documentary unto themselves. There’s this great word, sonder, that I won’t do it justice, so people should look it up. It’s a word someone made up, I think, five, 10 years ago. But it’s that every human around you is living a life as complex and interesting as your own.

And that’s true across human history, or at least since we’ve had the brain we have with the ability for complex thought that we have. So I find small talk just amazing. I love meeting new people and just, I’m sure I’m awkward about it because I ask like deep questions sometimes really quick, but I just, like, love learning about people.

Pete Mockaitis
And is there a key nugget you share that people really connect and resonate with and quote back to you a lot?

Aneesh Raman
Hard things are hard. That’s a good one. You know, at one point, someone asked me, “What’s been the hardest part of your career?” And I was like, “You know what? All of it.” And I did it kind of, like, begrudgingly. And then as stuff has stayed hard in just figuring this story out, I revisited, you know, when I worked for President Obama, he had a “Hard things are hard” plaque on his desk because at certain moments when legislative victories were hard fought, people would remind each other hard things are hard.

And that just has led me to become a real believer in the bigness and value of hard. I have, like, an ode to hard things. It’s got, you know, quote from a stoic Marcus Aurelius, who’s like, “The obstacle is the way,” to “Hard things are hard,” to Carl Lassen, the Duke women’s basketball coach who has a viral video that’s amazing about how the whole thing in life is, “How do you handle hard well?”

Roger Federer had a commencement speech a few years ago about the mastery of hard things. Nvidia CEO Jensen was at Stanford Business School and said, “I wish upon you pain and suffering,” because his point to these Stanford Business students was, “You got to build resilience and you got to go through hard for that.” So, yeah, hard things are hard. I think I’ll take that.

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

Aneesh Raman
LinkedIn. The sleeper functions on Linkedin, I think, that people don’t know enough about is you can follow people without connecting to them.

You can go follow folks and they’ll be in your feed. So I am, I’d say, regularly, every three months, unfollowing some people where my curiosities have moved somewhere else, following new people who are talking about the things that I’m newly curious about.

So follow me until you get bored of me. Follow others. All the people in the book are on LinkedIn. And then the book, Linkedin.com/opentowork, that’s where you can go find out about the book.

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

Aneesh Raman
Bet on yourself. Find your way to betting on yourself and you’ll be okay.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Aneesh, thank you.

Aneesh Raman
Thanks for having me.

1089: Mastering New Skills and Information Overload through Lean Learning with Pat Flynn

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Pat Flynn shares his strategies on how to escape the trap of endless information—and learn the right way.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why learning less can help you achieve more
  2. How pressure helps you learn better
  3. How to teach others in order to learn faster

About Pat

Pat Flynn is a father, husband, and lifelong learner from San Diego who has built a reputation as one of the most influential voices in digital entrepreneurship.  Through his diverse portfolio of businesses, award-winning podcasts, newsletters, YouTube channels, and thriving online communities, Pat reaches and inspires millions of people each month.  

He is the founder of SPI, an online community for digital entrepreneurs, co-inventor of the SwitchPod, and host of the Deep Pocket Monster YouTube channel as well as founder of Card Party, a large-scale live event for the community of Pokémon collectors. 

Pat also serves as an advisor to dozens of companies and is a sought-after keynote speaker.  In his free time, he enjoys fishing, collecting Pokémon cards, and rewatching the Back to the Future trilogy.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Pat Flynn Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Pat, welcome back!

Pat Flynn

Thanks for having me. Excited to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m super excited to dig into the wisdom you’ve got for us in your latest book, Lean Learning: How to Achieve More by Learning Less, which is almost blasphemy here on How to be Awesome at Your Job – learning less. Pat, explain.

Pat Flynn
Yes. Well, it’s about learning the right things, not everything. And here’s what I mean by that. We all grew up, or at least I did, thinking that the more information you knew, the better. Because with more information, you were more powerful, you were more useful, you had more utility, right? And that was the case for such a long time until now, because now we have access to all the information that we could ever need and beyond.

However, we are still fine-tuned to absorb information as if it were scarce, right, as if it were a scarce food source. We see it, we’re like, “Ooh, let’s get that. And get more food and more food,” because it’s a survival sort of mechanism, right?

But now we’re at this buffet line of information. And not only are we stuffing our plates full of everything and everything that we may or may not need, we’re also getting force-fed stuff into our throats from algorithms and other things that believe they know more than we do what we need, and that we’re all seeing that and experiencing that on all these platforms.

So, lean learning is really about learning from the right resources at the right time for the right things, trading just-in-case learning for just-in-time learning, as I like to call it. And it’s how I’ve been able to accomplish a lot of different things across many different fields in such a short period of time.

And I believe that this is where we need to go when it comes to figuring things out, not by trying to figure out literally everything there is to know about something before taking action, but choosing action over information and using that action to actually give us the right direction to move forward.

Pete Mockaitis

Boy, there’s so much there. Thank you, Pat. it’s so funny. Well, when it comes to just-in-time learning, this phrase I’ve been familiar with for some time, and it’s kind of meta, actually, because here you are Pat Flynn on me, Pete Mockaitis’ podcast, talking about lean learning and just-in-time learning.

And, in fact, the most just-in-time learning experience of my life was going to your Pat Flynn podcast tutorial, YouTube playlist, watching a video and then doing exactly what you said. And then watching the next video and doing exactly what you said, it’s like, “Okay, on RSS feed. All right. Let’s see. So, Pat says this. Okay. Let me fiddle. Oh, hey, I got an RSS feed. Okay. Cool.”

And so, literally, step by step, I was learning seconds before doing the thing that I needed to do to achieve the thing I was trying to achieve.

Pat Flynn
Right. Case in point, exactly. And this is the thing about lean learning. It’s figuring out what your next step is, learning about that, trying to fight the urge to learn everything and feeling like a fear of missing out, right? The FOMO really plays a role here with trying to learn everything, because everybody’s talking about all these new things and dah, dah, dah, you don’t want to get left behind.

But, really, it’s about trusting the process and understanding that, when it comes to step two or step five or step 10 down the road, that there will be resources for them when you need them. You don’t need them now, though. And that’s really hard to say no. Saying no is really the strategy for a lot of this stuff.

It’s similar to Elle from “Legally Blonde,” who was played by Reese Witherspoon, who chose and had the discipline to say no to going to the fraternity parties so she could study for the bar exam, so that she could go to Harvard and see her ex-boyfriend there. If you’ve ever seen “Legally Blonde,” you know what that means. If not, you probably have no idea what I’m talking about.

But, anyway, discipline is a part of this as well, honoring what you put on your calendar, honoring the idea that there are resources out there that they’re going to be there for you when you need them, but you don’t need them all right now.

Pete Mockaitis
And it’s really interesting to note that we do have this compulsion toward more information. And I think I noticed this the most during COVID because it’s, like, we all wanted information. It’s, like, there was some uncertainty, which is true whenever you’re doing something new, but there’s uncertainty there, it was high stakes, and we didn’t know what the heck was going on.

But CNN and others were all too happy to continue providing you with whatever they had, any expert from any place, they’ll be there, they’ll be talking. And I think we saw that in terms of, like, the viewership of news was way up during that time. And yet, science will also suggest that hearing about spooky, unpleasant things continuously for hour upon hour upon hour is not great for our productivity or our mental health.

Pat Flynn

No, no, this is why I don’t watch the news. It is meant to hold your attention. It’s a lot of negativity that just kind of like makes you feel like, “Well, okay, the world’s going downhill, so I might as well go along with it,” versus, I try to surround myself, when it comes to inspiration around people and items that are positive.

However, even though that can be great, it can also work against you, too. Yes, there is such a thing called over inspiration, not just an overwhelm of information, but an overwhelm of inspiration. And this is why I, when I sit in the car, this might sound weird, but when I tell you why I do it, it might not sound as weird anymore.

But when I’m in the car, I don’t have anything playing. I don’t have the radio playing. I don’t have any music. I don’t have a podcast playing like I had for years. I always thought that if I had a spare moment in time, I had to insert something new that I had to learn that I may or, again, may not need at that time just so that I was feeling productive. If I wasn’t doing that, I wasn’t setting myself up for success. Automobile university as they call it.

Now I keep it silent because it gives me what I like to reference as shower time. If you know shower time and you have shower thoughts, you know that those are some of the moments in your day where you have the best ideas, you’re able to think, and because there’s nothing else to do in there, you’re taking a shower, so there’s literally nothing else to do.

So, I like to have “shower thoughts” in my car, and it gives me time to decompress. It gives me time to go deeper into thought about things that I’m already thinking about versus getting over-inspired by this new, fancy, shiny thing that everybody else is talking about. We don’t have that time anymore because everything is being filled in with extra small more endorphin-related things.

So, that has been a key as well to allow yourself to go deeper by saying no to these other things even though they are not necessarily all negative.

Pete Mockaitis

Understood. So, it’s kind of like the trade-off or opportunity cost is present there such that we may well be better served in some minutes, having some silence, some processing, some synthesizing, some creative, “Aha! Eureka!” moments, as opposed to more information because we may very well have plenty already.

Pat Flynn
Correct. Yes, exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
And I was going to ask, you almost already answered that. I think sometimes we’re learning not necessarily for the purpose of taking action or implementing, but we’re learning because learning is, in and of itself, fun, interesting, enjoyable.

Pat Flynn
It feels good. It feels like you’re making progress, too. If you’re reading a book and the book is about a topic you’re interested in, oftentimes, it feels like you’re already making progress even though you’re just absorbing information.

But what often happens after you finish that book? You forget most of it and you maybe not ever take any action on it. Versus, what if you read a book like this? You read a chapter on taking the next step and then you just put the book down and took the next step, right? And then what?

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, and I think what you’ve already done here is we’ve accomplished a real good, a thing to be aware of, it’s like, “Wait a second. Am I…? What am I doing here?” I think just, like, triggering that awareness, that mindfulness, that presence of, “What am I doing here?” is very powerful.

Pat Flynn
Yeah, one of the chapters in the book is called “Un-automate Everything.” We’ve automated too much. I mean, similar to, like, if you automate all the subscriptions that you have from Netflix to whatever, you’re going to realize that you’re spending $400 a month on stuff you don’t even use anymore.

Same thing happens with where we put our time. We’re automating, “Oh, yeah, sure. I’ll just listen to a podcast because I’m in the car now. Just because that’s what I always do.” But you’re not realizing the “cost” of that, if you will. We are automating a lot of things that we should be thinking about.

So, what I like to do is just kind of declare bankruptcy on where our time goes and start over, and then start only placing things into your life that you want to learn about, that are only related to the things that are right there in front of you, that you want to learn about.

Knowing, again, that you can always go later, creating compartments of time to focus and learn and go deeper into those things, realizing that, okay, you’re going to reach that endpoint to then be able to make a decision whether or not you want to continue or not. I mean, probably the first example of this in my entrepreneurial career was how I wrote my first study guide for my architecture website.

I didn’t know everything about writing and publishing a study guide. In fact, in doing the research on figuring it out, all that stuff, I got overwhelmed. And that’s what most people do. It’s, “Yes, I want to start a business. Let me think of all the things I need to do now from incorporation to marketing, to content creation, to social media. Oh, my gosh, I’m overwhelmed. I’m not going to do anything.”

So, when I wrote my book, I knew that I’d, at least, have to have something written. So, besides the design of it, the formatting of it, the marketing of it, the how I was going to even technically sell it, I put that all aside for what I knew the first step was, which was to just get everything onto paper or, at least, in that sense, Microsoft Word is where I wrote that.

And then 77 pages later, a couple weeks later, I had something, something that I didn’t have before. And then I was more motivated than ever to keep going because I was making progress. I needed to know now how to take this thing that was just a long essay-looking thing into a format that was usable with blank spaces to write in and workbooks and all this kind of stuff. Great.

I found a YouTube video at the time that showed me how to format a Word document to have it be horizontal and some more landscape, if you will, and look nice. So that’s what I did. It took a day and that’s it. So now I had the final product, the PDF file. I was like, “Okay, cool. Now I need to sell this.” I’ve never sold anything online before. I had a website, but I never sold anything. I didn’t know how to do this.

A question that is a guiding question in the book that I always ask myself, and I recommend people to ask when trying something new is, “If this were easy, what would it look like?” That question comes from Tim Ferriss and it’s guided me so much and it guided me back then. And I found, from a person who had already sold stuff before online, the answer.

It was a tool called E-Junkie, which doesn’t exist anymore, but there’s a lot of tools that are similar now where you can upload a product, get a button in exchange and put it on your website so that when a person clicks on that button, they pay and that thing gets sent to them automatically. I set that up in half a day. I was much further ahead by taking it piece by piece and learning as I was going.

And, finally, then I was like, “Okay, now I need to learn how to write a sales page because I need to convince people who are on my website to click that button and buy my study guide about this architecture exam I was selling.”

I’d never written for copy before. I never figured out how to try to convince somebody to buy something based on words I was saying. There were entire schools dedicated to copywriting. My first inclination was to go to one of those, but $18,000, no, I don’t have the time and/or money to do that.

It’s funny how we often think that, in order to do a business, for example, you have to go to business school and you have to do all these big things that cost a lot of money. But again, if this were easy, what would it look like? I was recommended a book by a friend of mine called Moonlighting on the Internet by a guy named Yanik Silver.

And he said, “Pat, you don’t even need to read the book.” And I said, “Then, why am I buying it?” “Well, there is an appendix in the back of the book. It’s a Mad Libs-style sales page. You can just put your product in there. You can put your benefits and the features of your product, and you’d have it.”

That was the sales page I used, from that book, literally Mad Libs-style, that I used for seven years that helped me earn over a million dollars off of that e-book. And, again, not from learning everything and outthinking myself, but by taking it one step at a time and learning from the right resources at the right time from the right people.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, now that’s really cool. So that question, “If this were easy, what would it look like?” is a useful question because it shifts your brain from wherever you were, “Let’s go to copywriting school,” into imagining the easy things. And, sure enough, “Oh, I guess, when you go down that road, you discover, oh, there is a resource, there is a tool, there is a person, there is a something, that has already done a lot of the hard work for me, and I can just piggyback off that goodness.”

Pat Flynn
Yeah, they’ve already made the mistakes that I would have made if I had just gone down this path myself. They have mentorship opportunities to help me get it right. They have podcast episodes, whatever it might be, right? You can find those resources when you need them, because they are there. They’re everywhere.

Pete Mockaitis
And I want to clear up a little bit. I think if, tell me what’s your take on this one, Pat. If we know full well, “I am learning something for the purpose of my own entertainment. And I know that this is not productive and this is an alternative to playing, playing a game of Pokemon, or this is an alternative to watching a Netflix TV series. What I’m doing is…”

Let’s see, I just discovered a new YouTube channel, Kurzgesagt, in German. So, the word is German, it just means, like, “in short.” And it’s just like, it’s been over a thousand hours making these animations, explaining stuff. I was like, “Wow, where has this been on my life? This is so fascinating.”

And so, if you know, “I am learning as a form of entertainment, and that’s what I’m doing. I’m not entertaining any delusion that this is a productive means of driving forward achievement of some objective or goal is,” is your take is, like, “Yeah, that’s cool. As long as you know what you’re doing”? Or, is your take, “Oh, no, no, that’s still working against us”?

Pat Flynn
I say have fun with it. Have fun with it. Enjoy it. In fact, there’s an exercise in the book that helps you understand which parts of your life you are putting your time into, whether it be something vocational or something hobby-like or maybe a waste of time. It’s called the inspiration matrix to see where, in fact, you’re putting your time in.

For most entrepreneurs at least, who I speak to, they have zero things in the hobby box. They are not putting any time into things outside of their work because they’re so entrepreneurial and career- focused, where it’s very important to have other things and hobbies. For example, for me, it’s fishing.

And for me, fishing is an escape. It’s to get back in nature. It’s a way to remove myself from all the entrepreneurial stuff and the emails and all the things I need to do, and the meetings. And it just gives me breath. It gives me space so that I can go back into it even better. And I love that. And I’m learning about that. I’m obsessed with learning about fishing.

But it’s far enough removed from my entrepreneurial stuff that it’s not going to get in the way of, “Oh, I should do this over here instead,” and kind of derail the plans that I initially had or the tiny experiments that I’m working on right now, right?

However, that being said, I still use lean learning in my fishing. In fact, I want to be efficient in my fishing because I only get to go maybe three or four times a month, and I want to make sure that I’m maximizing my opportunities when I cast that bait. In fact, I use a strategy that I talk about in the book called force function to recently learn something in fishing.

So, there is a particular fishing lure called a jig. It’s a large hook with some like skirt-like material on it and you kind of move it up and down. And it’s a very hard bait to fish because it often, just, it’s hard to utilize and you can go hours without getting a bite. But when you do, typically, you can catch bigger fish and it’s just much more fun when you do, when you get a strike because you kind of like really, really set the hook, but it’s difficult.

So, I remember for the longest time, I always wanted to catch a fish with a jig, and I would cast a jig on and cast it out there and get nothing for like 20 minutes, and I go, “Yep, see? I’m not good at this. So, I’m going to put it away and go back to my old reliable drop shot rig, which I’m way more confident in,” and I’ll get fish. And I’ll say to myself, “Yep, I’m not a jig fisherman. I’m never going to be good at it.”

But one day, because I, again, really wanted to learn how to do it, I went out on the boat and I brought nothing except jigs. There was literally nothing, no other kind of fishing that I could do other than jig fishing. So, started the day, went 20 minutes like I normally do, and started to question the whole thing, “Oh, my gosh, I’m terrible at this. I’m never going to get a bite on a jig. I’m going to go cast something else. Oh, wait, I can’t cast something else.”

“I’m forced to just fish with this. What am I going to do, go home? No, I’m out fishing, like a good day of fishing. Even if I don’t catch anything, it’s still a good day of fishing.” Hours go by, I get nothing. And then, finally, in the afternoon around 3:00 p.m., I finally get a bite. I didn’t land it, but I felt something on the other end, and I knew it was a fish.

And by the end of the day, I ended up getting two fish, and now that’s my go-to bait because I forced myself to do it. And that’s a lean learning strategy because we often will walk away from those things that are a lot harder, things that we’ve never done before, just to go back to our comfort zone. But sometimes you need to get forced to do those things and add a little bit more pressure to get the results you want.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, Pat, let’s dig into some of these, the top tools and strategies that folks are finding most transformational inside your lean learning philosophy. Lay them on us, what do you think has been the most powerful for folks?

Pat Flynn
Yeah, so force function is definitely a big one. We’ll just kind of continue that conversation. Now, if you’re not fishing, maybe you want to, for example, learn a language. That reminds me of an episode of a show that Tim Ferriss did back in the day. It was on Apple TV, but it’s no longer in existence.

He did a show where he was trying to quick-learn certain things. And in order for him to learn how to speak Tagalog, which is the Filipino language, or the main Filipino language, there’s many dialects, but he ended up booking an interview with a Filipino news channel that was going to be conducted in Tagalog.

And he had a certain amount of time to just learn how to get it done because that date was coming, right? And that’s a great force function. Having a publisher tell you that, “You have a due date for your manuscript” is a great force function to have you get up and start writing.

Having a presentation at a certain date in front of a crowd at a conference is a great force function to help you learn how to become a better public speaker because you’re going to, there’s only a limited amount of time to tell yourself, “No, I can do it later. I can do it later.” No, you can’t. You have to do it now, right? So, that worked really well.

Another method of speed-running skill acquisition that I love is called micro mastery. It’s taking this big thing that you have that you’re doing and finding small little components of it that you can get better at that you can then stack on top of new things that you focus on for limited periods of time.

Going back to public speaking, a great way that I learned to become a public speaker was not just getting booked on a stage, but it was actually micro mastery, where I’d go into different presentations really hyper-focusing on one thing that I wanted to do better than anybody else and better than I’ve ever done before.

There’s a million things to do with public speaking to get good as a professional speaker from how you open, how you project your voice, where you stand on stage, what do you do with your hands, what do you put on the slides, how do you end, how do you pause, like all those things. There are so many.

But by focusing on, for example, just, “How do you start? What are the first words that come out of your mouth?” Let’s watch a hundred different TED Talks, but let’s just watch the first 30 seconds of each of them to see which ones have the best opening and how I can kind of learn from that.

Let me get training from other public speakers on how to open a show or open a presentation like that. And you can micro master that and, therefore, every future presentation you do, you’re going to have that skill. I got to the point where I was micro mastering what I do with my hands.

I was watching TED Talks and just watching people, “What do they do with their hands?” And they make these big grandiose gestures in moments that have big points to be made. And sometimes they go really small and kind of bring their hands closer to their body when they’re being more vulnerable. These are things that I learned only by absorbing and learning in a hyper-focused fashion, maybe two weeks at a time.

It reminds me of my buddy who is an ultra marathon runner. I called him up one day and I was like, “Hey, what are you doing?” And he’s like, “Well, I got a camera crew over at my house.” The ultra marathons are crazy. He runs like 15 miles a day just for fun. I think he’s crazy. But these marathons that he runs are like 50 miles or more.

And he had a camera crew at his house who had one of those super-duper slow-motion cameras who was filming the contact of his heel to the ground. He wanted a slow-motion footage of what his foot was doing to grab the angle of attack and all these other words he was throwing at me to, like, just get incrementally better at how he hits his heel on the ground when he’s running.

But when you think about it, it’s like, “Okay, well, that’s just like one moment in time,” but across 50,000 steps, I mean, that adds up to huge differences over time because he’s, again, a high performer and a high-caliber runner. He wants every little advantage that he could get. And so, he spent about two weeks focusing with, like, physics people. Again, it was way beyond what my understanding of all this stuff.

But he found the right angle of attack and the right way to run so that he could save a little bit more breath and time, and dah, dah, dah, so that he could just get seconds back over the course of many, many miles.

And that’s just a cool demonstration of just, like, what happens when you take a small moment in time, focus on something, a little micro thing inside of the thing that you’re doing that’s much bigger, and that then becomes a part of you so that you can kind of become a master at it over time by continually stacking those skills.

To finish up, we can go the opposite direction. I like that, instead of thinking about the micro, we can think about going bigger. And a lot of times, going bigger is very scary, but you can go bigger just for a small period of time to get really, really big results that will last a lot longer. And this takes me back to when I used to row. I used to row at Cal where I went to school and I was on the lightweight rowing team on crew.

And one thing that you do when you’re in a race to get ahead of the other boats is, yeah, you could just kind of run your race and kind of just pull fast as you can. But in order to kind of sprint ahead of a boat next to you, you implement what’s called a power 10. And that means the coxswain will offer the command, the coxswain sort of the small person on the boat that kind of commands the rowers.

And he’ll say, “Okay, power 10 in three strokes, two strokes, one stroke. Go!” And for 10 strokes, and just 10 strokes alone, the rowers on the boat will give it their all. Just 10 strokes. Somehow you find extra energy to offer. For just 10 strokes, it’s not forever. If you were to go hardcore all out for the rest of the race, you’d pass out, right? It’s too much.

But if you kind of just coasted and just kind of merrily went along, you would be beaten. So, in order to get ahead, you, every once in a while, offer a power 10. And in your life and in your learning, whatever it is you’re doing, you can do a power 10 of sorts.

If you’re podcaster, for example, like you and I are, Pete, a power 10 metaphor, or example, would be like, “Okay, well, I publish a podcast every single week. However, this one week in September, I’m going to call it marketing week. We’re going to have a podcast every single day of that week. And we’re going to promote it. We’re going to hype it out. It’s going to take a lot of extra work.”

“It’s going to be a lot of extra energy, but just for a period of time to get better results because we’re going to have more people listening, more people downloading. We’re going to create a whole event around it. We’re going to have a special guest. They’re going to promote it. All this stuff happens. And now we can see bigger results because we’ve inserted additional effort and pressure for a limited amount of time.”

Think about a hackathon. When coders go into a hackathon, again, it’s like, “Okay, 24 hours, you’re going to code something new that you’ve never coded before. Great. Go, get the Red Bulls, the Monster drinks, the pizza. You’re up for 24 hours.”

And that’s how a lot of the coolest, different pieces of software have been built because they focused on it for a short period of time, additional pressure, additional focus for a period of time. And then you go to sleep for two days to make up for it. But this is how you can get ahead much faster.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, so much good stuff there. And I’m thinking that the force function can even feel sort of low stakes. It’s, like, you’ve got a gym buddy, like they’re going to be at the gym, and so it’s not the end of the world if you don’t show up but there’s a human being, you know, a friend is like, “Dude, so I’m here and you’re not. What the heck?”

Or, just sort of any kind of accountability, a regular meeting with another human factor, there’s some forcing goodness there. And I love that example of the of the feet hitting the ground for the runner because, as you’re trying to think about, “Well, huh? Well, if I’m being lean with my learning, what’s really, really worth learning? Oh, maybe it is things that are done thousands of times over.”

We’ve had guests talk about how transformative improving your typing speed is for the professional because you do a lot of typing, and so that’s the case. Or, talk about the coders, sometimes they’ll go deep into creating a tool which will save them, “Oh, this will save me, like, three minutes a day, times hundreds of days, oh, that’s worth a few hours making that tool. That’s going to pay off rather handsomely.”

Pat Flynn
Yeah. We tend to think of getting better as just like doing the thing over and over again. And, yeah, you can get a little better by doing it over and over again, but think about the way that a band conductor makes their song better in the band. They don’t just play the same song a hundred thousand times to get better. They stop when something goes wrong, and they go, “Okay, trombones, that run that you just did there sound a little mushy. Okay, trombones, just the trombones, play those eight measures. Go.”

They hear it, and go, “Okay, we need to do this one at a time.” Again, breaking it down, “Okay, Jimmy, you play a run until you get it right. Okay, good. Now, Max. Now, Janine. And then now let’s all do it together. And now we can move past that because we micro mastered that. We can move past it now and work on the next part that might need help or the next part that might need to improve.”

Such a perfect way to start improving and it’s not by just doing it over and over and over again. It’s finding the one little thing that needs help, mastering that and, over time, those things can add up.

Pete Mockaitis
There’s also a forcing function built in there because if all the band members are aware that this could happen to them, they’re going to want to bring their A-game so that they’re not zeroed in on and embarrassed in front of everybody.

Pat Flynn
Yes. Additional pressure is required. Yet, most of us want to live in this little comfort zone where nothing ever happens. So, finding additional pressure works. You were talking about physical fitness and having a gym partner. I have a trainer. His name is Jeff. He lives in Columbus, Ohio. I live in San Diego. He’s going to call me on FaceTime at 7:30 p.m. this evening. Whether I’m in my garage or not, I’m to be ready for it because that call is coming.

And that alone is enough for me to go, “Okay, I’ll put my shoes on. Let’s go.” And then I do it. And then when I’m in it, I’m fine. But I just need that encouragement and knowing he’s going to show up there for me, which is what I pay him to do, is great.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’d love to hear your take, as folks who are jazzed about your lean learning approach and start going down this pathway, are there any mistakes or watchouts or pro tips you’d offer to folks?

Pat Flynn
Yeah, I mean, probably the biggest pro tip is you can’t do this alone. We were just talking about the importance of other people, but even finding other colleagues who are going through it with you, not necessarily a mentor or even accountability partner, but just other people who are doing it with you so that you can kind of inspire and feed off of each other’s energy. Those things are important. You speak the same language, right?

And then, of course, if you can, finding a mentor or a person who can take you under their wing or, at least, show you the ropes. Whether you have to pay for that or not, it is definitely worth it because they’ve gone down those paths before.

Another big mistake is this, again, this idea of, because we’re so socially connected, it’s very easy to see a lot of things in front of you that may be interesting, desirable, you know, bright, shiny objects, right? The draw is, well, we want to see that because everybody else is talking about it. It’s just human nature, so we can’t feel bad about that but we have to learn how to deal with it, the FOMO, the fear of missing out.

For a while, there was a tactic called JOMO, to battle this joy of missing out, which I think is just false. You kind of just kid yourself when you say, “Yeah, I’m happy that everybody’s talking about that and looking at that, but I’m not.” That’s just not real. The answer, however, is close to JOMO. It’s J-O-O-O, which is joy of opting out.

It is you saying to yourself, “I see that, I acknowledge it, and I choose not to spend time there because I’m going to recommit to the things I’ve already said yes to.” The joy of opting out. That is a proud recommitment that you’re making. The sort of plus one here is that you’re still going to go, “Yeah, that’s there, and I may need it.”

So, here’s the trick. You can put it away for later. Find a Notion folder or an Evernote folder or just a For Later folder of sorts and put it in there. And I guarantee you, 99% of the time, you’re never going to go back to those things. It’s just a mechanism for you to move forward from it. And what’s funny is, by the time you probably, if you do need those things, there’ll be another better, more relevant, and more recent resource for it.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, that reminds me of when you’re decluttering, you know, getting rid of stuff, like, “Oh, but I’ve got fond memories of this thing. And then maybe someday it could be useful.” I think my wife taught me this trick, it’s like, “Well, if you have good memories of it, you can take a picture of it on your phone and then you can look at the picture of it and enjoy those memories, and then get it out of the house.”

Pat Flynn
Yeah, the same memories. Yeah, I mean, that one’s a hard one for me as a collector at heart, a collector of Pokemon cards, it’s hard. It’s like, “Well, I kind of like this card. I’m going to keep it even though I should probably sell it, whatever.” But, yeah, if this sparks a joy, right, that’s the other sort of filter. And those filters are great. I think filters are really important. And again, the whole point is just be conscious about where you’re putting your time and effort, not just go through life in automation mode.

The other thing I’ll say is teaching. Teaching is a great way to learn. I had a friend of mine who lived in Hawaii, and he was wanting to learn how to play the ukulele. And, of course, Hawaii is the place to learn how to play the ukulele, right? So, we hired this really like grandmaster ukulele player who, after first few lessons, you know, he taught him a few chords to get started with.

And then the teacher told him, “Okay, now you teach it to your son.” His son was like 10 years old. And my friend was like, “Wait, no, I’m not qualified to teach. I just know like three chords. First of all, you’re the teacher, you’re supposed to teach me. You want me to teach my son?” And he’s like, “Yeah, because when you teach your son, you’re going to have to figure out a way to explain it that you will never forget.”

And he was like, “Oh, okay.” So, he taught his son and he learned these chords and was showing him how to play these chords and was explaining it in a way that a 10th grader or a 10-year-old could understand. And then, therefore, it was absorbed into his mind and he would never forget those chords, and he could move on to the next lesson from there.

You learn so much by teaching. It’s kind of meta because, even writing the book Lean Learning forced me to distill the way that I learn and approach things in a way that was more easily digestible for people who could pick up the book and read it and/or listen to it.

So, I actually learned even more about creating vocabulary around this, about finding the frameworks that would be memorable, which made it even easier for me to begin to understand them, which made it easier for me to now, again, talk about them in a podcast like this one. So, you don’t have to be the expert to teach.

In fact, many people would rather learn from somebody who’s just gone through a process versus the person who’s spent 40 years removed from the front lines of that thing and they’re now at a podium at some university speaking through many people versus being in it themselves. So teaching is a great, great way to learn.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. All right. Well, now let’s hear about some of your favorite things super quick. Can you give us a favorite quote, Pat?

Pat Flynn
There’s a few quotes that come to mind, “You can have everything in life you want, so long as you help other people get what they want.” It’s a Zig Ziglar quote. My son rolls his eyes because I say it so often when he hears me say that, but he knows it, and he sees it come true. So that’s one.

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

Pat Flynn
There was some research out of, I believe it was Ohio State University, I wrote about this in my book. There’s a lot of controversy around the idea of sharing your goals. And there was a study done a long time ago about the idea that, “Well, you know, if you share your goals publicly, you’re actually less likely to achieve them.”

And I think Derek Sivers from CD Baby was the first one to talk about this really publicly in a TED Talk a while back. He said, “If you speak your goals out loud in a social setting, like on social media, you are less likely to accomplish them.”

And the reason is because you are already getting those feelings as if you did accomplish them. People are saying, “Yeah, you got this. Good job. You can do it. I know you can do it.” You start to already feel good about it before you even take the first action. However, I think, in 2014, there was a secondary follow-up to this study that said, “No, that’s actually not true. It just depends on who you share your goals with.”

Yes, if you share your goals publicly to people who you don’t even really know or care about, you care about your audience, but you don’t really care about them from heart to heart, well, then, yeah, that’s true. You’re not going to achieve your goals because you’re getting those feelings.

However, if you were to share your goal to a mentor, to somebody who is a teacher, or who is going to be keeping an eye on you, accountability partner, but especially a mentor, you are many, many more times likely to do it because you don’t want to that person down.

There’s a loss aversion that happens. You don’t want to let your mentor down who you said you were going to do something for. And that study was really interesting because it kind of is the right sort of happy medium between sharing your stuff publicly but also not sharing it at all. Sharing it with a mentor or trusted person who you care deeply about.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Pat Flynn
Favorite book, as of late, would be Buy Back Your Time, Dan Martell. And there’s another good book that’s not out at the time of this recording, but maybe by the time this is published, maybe not. September 2nd is the release date. My good friend Chris Ducker is about to publish a book called The Long-Haul Leader.

And it does speak to this idea of, you know, instead of optimizing for scale and for rapid growth and all these things that we kind of grew up kind of trying to be, especially an entrepreneur with the hustle culture and faster and sacrifice everything for all these things, it’s more about the idea of optimizing for peace, for longevity, for both mental and physical health.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool?

Pat Flynn
Favorite tool, Poppy AI. I do use AI as a tool to help me get to the point of service to my audience faster. I never copy and paste from AI or just tell it to do something for me. However, I do use it to help me with my research.

If I have a lot of inputs and I need to understand these inputs much faster, I can go through Poppy AI to bring YouTube videos, social posts, other comment sections into one place and then start to analyze them in a more visual way. Other tools can do and accomplish those same things, but Poppy AI has been out of this world and has saved me so many hours of time.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Pat Flynn
Favorite habit is, before I buy something, I ask myself, “How would I feel if I bought this tomorrow?” That’s been fun. It helps. I’ve probably saved a lot of money, but also felt better about the purchases I make as a result of that filter.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, it’s like, “Will I be disappointed if I didn’t have it yet?” versus, “Probably fine. Maybe let’s just find out.”

Pat Flynn
Yeah.

Pete Mockaitis
And is there a key nugget you’re known for, a Pat Flynn original quote?

Pat Flynn
“I would much rather live a life full of ‘Oh, wells’ than a life full of ‘What ifs.’”

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

Pat Flynn
SmartPassiveIncome.com or, of course, my book Lean Learning, available wherever books are sold – Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc. And I’m at @PatFlynn on social media.

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

Pat Flynn
What’s the one thing you could say no to right now that would help you get better at your job?

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Pat, thank you.

Pat Flynn
Thank you so much for this.

1037: A Better Approach to Chasing Goals: Tiny Experiments with Anne-Laure Le Cunff

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Anne-Laure Le Cunff explains the problem with how we approach goals—and why experimenting is key to fulfillment.

You’ll Learn

  1. The two approaches to setting goals
  2. The fallacy that leads to regret
  3. How to handle frustrations and disappointments

About Anne-Laure 

Anne-Laure Le Cunff is a former Googler who decided to go back to university to pursue a PhD in neuroscience. As the founder of Ness Labs and the author of its widely read newsletter, she is the foremost expert on mindful productivity and systematic curiosity. She writes about evidence-based ways for people to navigate uncertainty and make the most of their minds. She lives in London, where she continues to research and teach people how to apply scientific insights to real-world challenges.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

Anne-Laure Le Cunff Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Anne-Laure, welcome.

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to dig into your wisdom associated with Tiny Experiments. You do a lot of research and put together these tools in a practical, applicable way, which is kind of what we’re into. Can you tell us any super surprising and fascinating discoveries you made as you were doing the research and putting this stuff together?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
To me, the most surprising thing was how many of the decisions we make at work or in life, in general, are actually following automated scripts that we kind of copy-paste from other people, and a lot of them are useful. You don’t want to overthink every single decision, and sometimes someone has done the thing you want to do in a way that makes sense for you to just copy, right? But a lot of these copy-pasting that are happening are happening subconsciously. So, that was interesting to me to just notice the number of decisions we make that are not truly our own decisions.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, they just come from whatever is around us, huh?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Exactly. We’re social creatures and we learn from observing others, which, again, is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is actually worth it taking sometimes a second, especially for big decisions, asking yourself, “Where is this choice coming from? And am I making this choice based on what I actually want to do and explore and achieve with this particular project or area of my life? Or, am I just automatically copy-pasting what someone else has been doing?”

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, good to know. And can you tell us, in terms of the folks you’ve worked with doing these tiny experiments, any really cool or especially inspiring stories that leap to mind of folks who did the stuff and saw cool results?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes, a lot of people I worked with start experimenting in their jobs, and, for me, the most amazing thing is when they manage to get other people around them, their colleagues, to experiment with them. And so, I’ve seen people now who literally run tiny experiments together as a team, and every month they have a one-hour meeting where they catch up and they say, “Okay, what is the thing you’ve been trying this month? What did you learn? What can we learn as a team?”

And because of that, it’s also created this psychological safety, where it’s completely okay to start something new and say, “I’m just running an experiment. I don’t know where this is going. I’ll report back in one month and we’ll see what happens.”

Pete Mockaitis
Cool. Okay. So, then the subtitle of the book, Tiny Experiments: How to Live Freely in a Goal-Obsessed World. So, could you paint that contrast or distinction for us, the experiments versus goal obsession? And what’s kind of like the vibe or the feel of these two different worlds?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes, I think visualizing it is helpful to understand the difference between kind of the status quo in terms of how we approach our ambitions and the alternative that I describe in the book. So, the mental model we tend to use when you talk about success at work and in life in general is the mental model of a ladder, in the sense that you have a series of steps you’re supposed to go through in a specific order, and when you’re done with a specific level, you can go on to the next level.

It’s a little bit like this very linear video game where you just collect all of the points and the artifacts and then you’re allowed to go on to the next level. And this kind of assumes that you already know where you want to go, that you have this very specific outcome, this very binary definition of success, whether you get there, yes, success, or you don’t get there and that’s failure.

The alternative to this linear model is a more circular model, a loop, cycles of experimentation. And so, that’s why I contrast the linear goal-setting approach to the experimental goal-setting approach. And in that case, instead of focusing on this very specific outcome that you want to achieve, you think like a scientist. You start from more of a hypothesis, a research question, and you ask yourself, “What might happen if I tried this thing, this particular action, this particular way of approaching a challenge?” You collect data, and based on that data you make decisions.

And what’s great is that in a world that keeps on changing, that’s fairly uncertain, you’re not clinging to that illusion that you know what the world is going to look like in three, four, or five years. You can just trust yourself that if you keep on iterating, collecting data, and experimenting, you’re going to grow, you’re going to learn, and you’re going to evolve with the world.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, could you give us an example of a specific domain in which we may often tend to approach in a goal ladder way? And then what that looks like in practice in the alternative tiny experiment way?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
I’ll take social media. I think this is something we’re all using, and whether you’re using it at a personal level or at work, maybe. This is something we’re all familiar with. So, the linear approach to growing an audience on social media would be, “I’m going to get to 10,000 followers by the end of the year.” That’s the linear approach. You have a specific end goal and you’re going to work really hard to get there.

The experimental approach is to say, “I’m going to post twice a day until the end of the year, and then I’m going to see where we’re at, at the end of the year. I’m going to look at where we’re at, what worked and what didn’t, and based on that, for my next cycle of experimentation, I’m going to tweak, I’m going to iterate and improve my process.”

And, again, you might not necessarily hit those 10,000 followers by the end of the year, but that’s the same as with the linear goal, actually. So, that hasn’t changed, but it’s your approach, your mindset that has completely changed. One of them is a lot more experimental and not focused on the outcome, but more focused on the process.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, understood. And so then, could you share with us a cool story of this in action, in terms of someone really did see some amazingness unfold when they did it this way?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
I think one of my favorite examples is someone in the Ness Labs community that decided to, they wanted to grow their professional network, and that’s something that can feel quite fuzzy, right? How do you grow your professional network? And a lot of people might end up attending. We’ve all been at those work events or conferences where we’re not quite sure what we’re doing here.

And so, what he did is that he designed an experiment where he said that, “For the next three months, every Monday, I’m going to reach out to someone on LinkedIn, someone whose work I admire, someone I heard on a podcast, or maybe I read their newsletter, or I saw something interesting they were working on, and I’ll just say, ‘Hello, and can we grab a virtual coffee?’ and that’s it.’”

And so, the great thing again is that you’re not trying to get to a specific outcome. The only kind of like measure of success is, “Are you doing the thing or not?” And so, every Monday, he sent that cold message on LinkedIn and he had a little tracker for it, tracking yes or no, and he ended up connecting with a lot of people. Some of them became collaborators, working on projects. And so, that was a project, a tiny experiment that happened in the past six months.

And so, long term, I don’t necessarily know what’s going to happen with that particular experiment, but I can already imagine that this is going to lead to a lot of interesting work. And it will also create a bit of a safety net for this person where, even if things end up not really working out with their current job, they’ll have now a stronger, better professional network they can reach out to you in case they want to actually start and do something else.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. And I like that as I’m imagining just sort of the mental, emotional, I don’t know, groove, vibe feeling of approaching the tiny experiment mindset. It’s a lot more pleasant in terms of, if it were a linear metric, gold, obsessed kind of a situation, like, “Ugh, I’m not getting enough meetings on the calendar. Aargh, what’s wrong?” you know?

As opposed to, if it’s a tiny experiment, it makes it more like a game, it’s just, “Oh, this is kind of fun. Oh, let’s see what happened. Oh, it’s time to check in on my LinkedIn account. Did it have any cool responses?” And then just that whole energy is more pleasant. And along the way, I imagine, in my own experience, that results in more creative, flexible, smart ideas along the way, as opposed to when you’re just like mad and frustrated it’s not working the way it’s supposed to.

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes, absolutely. Because when you’re experimenting in this way, also whenever you see that, I don’t know, maybe it’s been two weeks in a row, and you didn’t get a lot of replies, what a scientist does when they’re faced with unexpected results, they don’t say, “Shame, I’m such a bad scientist. I’m terrible. I’m a failure,” right? They just look at the results and they ask themselves, “Huh, that’s interesting. What’s going on here? And what might we want to try or explore or experiment with?”

And so, just using again that experiment of reaching out to people, whether on LinkedIn or other social media platforms, you could say, “You know what, this week, actually I’m going to tweak the language a little bit, or maybe I’ll add a little like photo of something that I think is fun or interesting, and I’ll be a little bit more creative with the way I design these outreach messages.” Because again, as you said, you’re not just really trying to get to that specific outcome. You’re just experimenting.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, you’ve mentioned that we have some harmful beliefs about success. Can you unpack some of those? Like, what are some of the most harmful, why are they harmful, what should we have instead, and how do we just reinstall our belief systems?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
I think, to me, the most harmful one is thinking that we know where we’re going and what we will want in a few years. And also associated with this, with linear goals also, is the idea that if we get to a specific place, if we achieve a particular milestone, whether it’s a promotion or anything like that, then we’ll be happy. It’s this “if, then” feeling of, “If I achieve this, then I’ll be happy.”

This is called the arrival fallacy, and a lot of people experience this, where you do get to that place of success where, defined in a traditional sense, and you realize that, “I’m still the same person. My problems are still here, and I’m not necessarily much happier because I’ve achieved this goal.” What a lot of people end up doing when they find themselves in this situation is that, instead of questioning the approach to goals and success, they just figure that, “Oh, it probably wasn’t the right goal,” or, “I’m just going to find another one. I’m going to try and climb to the next rung of the ladder.”

And that’s very harmful because you find yourself on this kind of like treadmill, trying to find what is the next success you’re going to chase in order to finally be happy. And again, and there are studies asking older people about their regrets. A lot of them actually regret having a lot of this, you know, really focusing on this linear path of success in their career instead of exploring it a little bit more.

And so, connected to the first one that I mentioned, this idea that you think you know what you want, whenever you take a step in a direction and you start having more experience, acquiring more skills, connecting with new people, you become a different person. And so, your goals and the direction you want to go in and your ambitions are going to evolve, and that’s a feature, that’s not a bug. So, I think embracing this is actually a lot less harmful than trying to resist it and trying to stick to a fixed plan.

Pete Mockaitis
The arrival fallacy. I don’t think I’ve heard the phrase but I know of the concept and I think it’s so powerful and dangerous in terms of, “If I just,” fill in the blank, you know, “…get the promotion,” “…get married,” “…have a child,” “…earn X dollars, then I’ll be happy. Everything will be fine, and all my problems are solved,” and it’s not true.

It’s funny how we have our doubts. I think it was John Green, who wrote The Fault in Our Stars and some other novels, was on The Hilarious World of Depression podcast, and I thought it was so perfect. He said that he was talking to a wealthy person, and he said, “Boy, if I just owned a whole plane instead of this fractional lease situation.” It’s like, “Oh, man, you’re still in it. You haven’t figured it out yet. That’s not how it works.”

And so, tell us, if folks have their doubts, like, “Okay, easy for you to say. Easy for you to say, Anne-Laure, but I don’t know,” anything that you can share to disabuse folks of their arrival fallacy?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yeah, I still experience it, so I want to clarify that it is really not about completely getting rid of it because it is such a deeply ingrained psychological mechanism that you’re always going to fit. And what’s interesting is that the more you are dissatisfied with your current situation, the more likely you are to cling to that arrival fallacy that if only you had this one thing, everything would be better.

So, what I really recommend is not that you’re trying to get rid of it, but just catching yourself when that happens, noticing that you’re doing that, that you’re really hoping, and that you’re going to be happy only if you achieve that one thing, and then trying to bring yourself back to a more, this is what I call having a more experimental mindset rather than this linear mindset, where we feel like, “If only I can climb and I can get to that next level, I’ll be happy.”

Bringing yourself back to that experimental mindset, reminding yourself that this is just a giant playground for you to try new things. You have no idea what’s going to happen. You actually have no idea what’s going to make you happy. A lot of people discover sources of happiness in their life, not because they had a perfect vision of what that would look like, but because they put themselves in lots of different situations, talked to a lot of people, discovered new perspectives, got outside of their comfort zone and tried these new things, and then they experienced that happiness.

And it’s almost like a surprise, you know, it’s like, “Oh, wow, I love this. I don’t know, I love water skiing,” or, “I love hosting workshops,” or, “I love mentoring,” or, “I love all of these different things.” And there’s no way for you to know if you don’t try different things.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, it’s fascinating how what we think we will enjoy or not enjoy is often wildly wrong.

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes.

Pete Mockaitis
I remember one of my all-time favorite consulting projects was working to help out call centers for an insurance company, and I was like, “Wow, that sounds boring. Call centers and insurance. Eugh!” And yet, it was the coolest thing because it’s sort of like, “Oh, wait. The work we’re doing is improving the call center employees’ experience, which is improving the attrition and retention rates, which is improving customer satisfaction, which is improving profitability.”

And it was just like, “Everybody is winning here, and it feels really good. I like this kind of people transformational type stuff more so than what seemed more fun, interesting, and sexy on the front end.”

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes, exactly. And so, I think this is really why, whenever you’re faced with something like this, same as you. If I saw this on paper, I would think that this is the most boring job. And I think that’s why it’s important to really approach those opportunities and saying, like, “I’m not necessarily going to…” If there is a little bit of curiosity, and this is really the compass that I use, right?

If there’s at least a little bit of curiosity, it might be worth saying, “Okay, let me just give it a try. Let me treat that as a time-bound experiment and let’s see what happens.” And again, you kind of start from a hypothesis. And, in that case, your hypothesis might be, “This is going to be so boring. I’m going to hate it.” But this is a hypothesis, “I don’t have certainty. It’s a hypothesis. So, now let’s test the hypothesis.”

And it might be that you were correct, that was really boring, and good. Now you know. Now you have confirmed your hypothesis after running the experiment. Or you might be wrong, and that’s the beautiful thing about having this experimental mindset, is that a scientist, when they’re wrong, they’re actually really happy about it because they learned something new, they feel like, “Oh, I stand corrected. I had this hypothesis, but the data is showing something else, and that’s amazing. I just discovered something new.”

In the case of those personal experiments, that means you discovered something new about yourself, about your work, about the world, and that’s actually pretty cool.

Pete Mockaitis
That reminds me, I think it was an Adam Grant’s book, Think Again, he was talking about interviewing, might have been Daniel Kahneman, or some illustrious, you know, thinker, researcher, who said that he loves it when he’s wrong, which is kind of surprising because most of us think, “Oh, no, I feel embarrassed. You know, oh, I was wrong. I feel dumb and stupid. I should have known better.” And he said, “I love it when I’m wrong. That’s the way I know that I’ve really learned something.” And I think that’s a beautiful reframe right there.

And so, speaking of reframes and good feels, good vibes, you’ve got a section about holistic self-regulation, which sounds handy. So, let’s say we’re in, Anne-Laure, we’re like, “Okay. All right, we’re going to do some experiments. We’re going to see what happens,” and we’re in the midst of them, and yet things aren’t going the way we would like, or prefer, or we’re experiencing some frustrations, disappointments, messes, disasters, whatever, how do we engage in holistic self-regulation?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
I like to describe it as a little dance. So, the issue a lot of people are kind of like facing, and especially if they’re doers, high-agency people who just want to fix the problem, is that they might just bypass looking at the actual emotion and the response, and just try to find a solution and fix the problem and the source of the disruption.

And what I really recommend doing is just not doing that, not rushing, taking a moment to go through the first step of that little dance, which is to engage with the emotion, to understand the subjective experience. And I recommend a tool that psychologists call “affective labeling.” It’s just a fancy word to really say “naming your emotions.” It just means naming your emotions.

There’s a lot of research showing that, by just taking the time to name your emotion, you’re going to be able to process it much better. So, what’s the emotion? So, as you said, things are not going as planned, right? Is it worry about whatever other consequences there are going to be because this thing is not working? Is it maybe fear of being judged by your peers or your manager, who might be looking and feeling like, “Oh, wow, she didn’t do that very well, or she made a mistake”?

Is it anxiety because you know that you’re supposed to present the result or something like that tomorrow and obviously the data is not what you thought it would be? So, what is the emotion? Affective labeling, naming the emotion, and that’s already going to help you process it. Only once you’ve done this, you can go on to the second step of the little dance, which is dealing with the actual consequences.

And so, basically, you dealt with the emotion at this emotional level, and now you can go at a more like mental cognitive level where you’re dealing with the actual problem. And, again, there’s research showing that you’re going to be able to do that much more effectively if you process the emotions before. So, those are the two steps. The first one is really processing the subjective experience and then dealing with the objective consequences.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, I hear that those are very different processes and thoughts that you’re having, and I could see how you may…well, you tell me, what kind of trouble do we get ourselves into if we kind of do both at the same time or skip to the second part and don’t do any labeling?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
So, the problem if you just jumped into solving the problem is that you’re not going to realize how your current emotional state is probably going to impact your judgment, and so you’re probably going to make decisions that are driven by those emotions, whether that’s the fear, the anxiety, the worry, and you might, for example, cancel tomorrow’s presentation because you feel like it’s not ready because that’s driven by the fear of being judged or the anxiety or whatever. Or you might make any kind of like rushed choice that you think is rational but is actually driven by the emotion. So, that’s the big risk.

And then the other one is just that, you know, your podcast is called How to Be Awesome at Your Job. If you stay stuck in just processing the emotions, and you don’t deal with the consequences, you’re probably not going to do a great job. So, at some point, you do need to move on to dealing with the actual consequences.

But, in general, the challenge I’ve seen for most people is not the dealing with the objective consequences, it’s that they skip the emotional processing, they don’t do the affective labeling, and they try to solve the problem straight away when they’re still in that state of fear or anxiety or just that stress state.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, it’s funny, you said “affective labeling” and at first, I heard you say “effective labeling” like, “Oh, I do a really good job of labeling it.” So, I’m curious, there are different typologies, I guess, in terms of how many emotions we humans experience, and I guess there’s the “Inside Out” movie, or others, that might say we have seven emotions. But lay it on us, how do we know if our affective labeling is effective labeling? Is it just like, “I’m feeling angry. That’s that”?

Or, I’m thinking about Marshall Rosenberg’s Nonviolent Communication. They’ll say things like, “Oh, I’m feeling angry because my need for respect, I don’t feel, is being met here,” which I found pretty handy. It’s like, “Okay, if there’s like an emotion and then perhaps a perception of a cause or need being unmet,” is pretty handy. When do you consider the affective label feeling done? Is it when I am chilled out a little bit about it, I’m not as worked up? Or it’s when I’ve said one word, “Angry”? Or, when am I ready to move on?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yeah, so this is really the emotional regulation part where it’s really about paying attention to how you feel in the moment, and sometimes actually just saying, “Oh, I’m so angry. I don’t know.” Maybe a contractor didn’t deliver something on time or whatever, “I’m just, I’m so angry or I’m disappointed.” Like, already, like, just in those few minutes of conversation, I think we’ve mentioned six or seven different ones. So, actually, angry is good if that’s what it describes, right? But if, after saying this, you still feel like, “Oh, there’s something else,” you can still go and dig a little deeper, and, “Okay, I’m angry but why? What is the underlying emotion underneath this? Okay, oh, it’s that.” And you will, by doing this, like those different layers of affective labeling, you will progressively feel calmer, and being able to re-engage at a cognitive level because you have dealt with the emotions. So, that’s one part.

The other part is that, sometimes while dealing with the actual objective consequences, you might have emotions that pop up again depending on what you discover, what you’re trying to solve. Let’s say that you’re trying to solve a problem and you discover that the only reason why this entire thing is happening is because one of your colleagues forgot to do something you told them to do. And so, again, like you might have an emotion that comes up. You go back to the first step of the little dance, process that, and then deal with the consequence.

So, there’s a term in psychology also called metacognition, which is the ability to observe your own thoughts, your inner landscape, and this is something that you can practice. And at the beginning, it might feel a little bit like, “Oh, what am I doing? I am angry,” those words. But after a while, when you’ve done it for a while, it will become very natural to go through those steps of the dance and going back and forth between the two.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And when you mentioned the underlying stuff, in a way, this is dangerous for me because I am very curious and could examine something for long, long stretches. But let’s say, “Okay, I’m angry about the contractor not doing the thing right,” okay. And you say, what would be the step associated with getting out the underlying stuff?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
So, again, it’s only in that specific context, it’s only doing as much affective labeling as is needed for you to be able to then move on and deal with the objective consequences in the moment. If, and that can happen, you realize that there’s something actually quite juicy or interesting in terms of your own cognitive or emotional patterns while you’re doing this, or maybe after a while you notice that every time a certain type of challenge arises at work, you have the same type of emotional reaction, it might be worth digging deeper, but this should happen in a different kind of modality.

So, for some people, it’s journaling, for some people it’s talking therapy, you know, whatever it is, where you have more space to explore this. Affective labeling is more of an in-the-moment tool to do just enough emotional processing that you’re able to think clearly again, that you can then deal with whatever problem you’re facing right now.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, I hear you. So, with the contractor situation, we might say, “Okay, I’m angry because he did the thing wrong, and this seems like a pattern, and that folks think they could just take advantage of me because I’m so nice,” or whatever. And so then, the goal is not to dig into, you know, “Why am I broken?” or, “What’s wrong with people in the world today?”

But rather say, “Oh, maybe there’s a pattern there associated with perhaps I need to be more assertive or establish boundaries or expectations more candidly, assertively, proactively in my interactions with folks. But we could just sort of note that and park that for my journaling time or therapy time or whenever I’m having a nice long walk, and that would be interesting to dig into.” As opposed to, “Stop everything. Emergency inspection must happen now before I, you know, ask for a partial refund or whatever it is I need to do.”

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes, exactly. And this is what’s really nice, is that in that way, you can actually just note these things and make sure that they don’t remain unexamined, and so you still will do that work outside of the current situation, like professional situation you’re in, but you’re also helping yourself make better decisions in the moment. So, it’s helpful as a tool to self-regulate in the moment, and as a tool also to notice patterns that you might want to explore deeper at a later moment.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, tell me, Anne-Laure, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about some of your favorite things?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Honestly, your questions were amazing, so I’m good.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, shucks. Thank you. How about a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
It’s been attributed to Viktor Frankl, but it’s actually much older than this, and it’s, “In between stimulus and response, there is a space. And in that space lies our freedom.”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Anne-Laure, I got to say, you’ve piqued my interest here because, fun fact, that is the most cited favorite quote amongst How to Be Awesome at Your Job guests, but you brought an extra wrinkle to it, it’s like, “Oh, it has history pre-Victor Frankl.” Do you know the tale? Can you tell us?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Well, I went in that rabbit hole, but there, basically, we don’t know who said that first, but there are lots of different versions of it. They’re very, very close in much older books, and Victor Frankl is the one who made this version famous, and the one I quoted is his version. But it’s very, very old actually. And so, that’s interesting, is that this idea that we have this little space of freedom is quite old. I have an entire footnote about this in my book.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, cool. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
There’s a recent study that shows that the systems that are activated in the brain are the same for impulsivity and curiosity. And I find it fascinating because that has a lot of implications for how we navigate the world and distraction and creativity and all of that. So, that’s one of my favorite studies at the moment.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I can relate to that. It’s like, “I need to know everything about this now.”

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Yes.

Pete Mockaitis
It’s really dangerous for me. I have to keep lists and guardrails and rules for myself. And a favorite book?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
That would be How We Learn by Stanislas Dehaene, who is also a French neuroscientist, and it’s a very short book, but it teaches you how your brain learns anything in childhood and adulthood, and it’s very helpful to understand how we navigate the world.

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

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
I use a note-taking tool called Roam Research, and it’s a bit of a weird, non-linear thinking type of tool where you can connect all of your ideas in little bullet points. And most people who look at my notes think that it’s a complete mess, but it’s helped me write a book and complete a PhD. So, I’m so grateful for this tool.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite habit?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Going for daily walks.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a key nugget you share that really seems to connect and resonate with folks?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Become the scientist of your own life.

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

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Go to NessLabs.com to subscribe to my newsletter, and look up Tiny Experiments anywhere books are sold, or go support your local bookshop by ordering it 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?

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
I want to ask them, “What will be your first tiny experiment?”

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Anne-Laure, thank you. This is fun.

Anne-Laure Le Cunff
Thanks for having me.