Tag

Self-Awareness Archives - How to be Awesome at Your Job

992: How to Break Free from Cynicism and Reclaim Hope with Jamil Zaki

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Jamil Zaki shows you that there’s much reason to hope–even for the most hardened cynics.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why hope equals success
  2. Why to be skeptical of your own cynicism 
  3. How your gut instincts can lead you astray 

About Jamil

Dr. Jamil Zaki is a professor of psychology at Stanford University and the Director of the Stanford Social Neuroscience Lab. He trained at Columbia and Harvard, studying empathy and kindness in the human brain. He is interested in how we can learn to connect better.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

  • Hello Bello. Get 30% off your first customizable bundle and a full-sized freebie product of your choice with HelloBello.com/awesome

Jamil Zaki Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Jamil, welcome.

Jamil Zaki
Thanks so much for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m so excited to dig into your wisdom here. Could you kick us off by sharing one of the most fascinating, surprising, and counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made about us humans and hope and cynicism?

Jamil Zaki
Sure. One of the, I think, counterintuitive discoveries is that when we think of hope, believing that the future can be better, thinking about how it could turn out well, what we want, we often imagine that that frame of mind is naive, like putting on a pair of rose-colored glasses. But it turns out that probably most of us are wearing a pair of mud-colored glasses already. We actually tend not to focus on the best things that could happen or the best parts of human nature.

We’re hyper-focused on the worst things that people do and all the untrustworthy and harmful events that we read about in the news. So, if anything, we’re biased away from hope, and being hopeful is not a matter of being naïve or sticking our head in the sand, or putting on glasses. It’s a matter of taking off those mud-colored glasses and seeing the world more clearly.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, Jamil, I love it. Right from the get-go, we’re getting meta and your perspectives on hope are hopeful in and of themselves right away. So, tell us, if we’re skeptical, like, “Hmm, I’m not so sure that’s true, Jamil,” is there evidence, is there proof that, in fact, hope is more of an accurate, realistic view of what is and what is likely to be than our default mode?

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, first I want to jump on this great term that you just used, “skeptical,” and a lot of people think that being skeptical and being cynical are the same thing. They’re not. So, cynicism is this blanket assumption about people, that, overall, we are selfish, greedy, and dishonest. Skepticism is, instead, a more scientific way of thinking where you kind of don’t have blanket assumptions about everybody. Instead, you let the evidence guide you. You let people show you who they are and you learn from your experiences.

And it turns out that being skeptical is terrific. I mean, in no way am I saying that being hopeful should mean trusting everybody or ignoring all the people out there who really are cheating or doing harm in some other way. But, to your point, there’s lots of evidence that, when we become skeptical, cynicism actually falls apart.

So, for instance, people in study after study underestimate how trustworthy, generous, open-minded, and friendly other people are. That’s not to say that there aren’t jerks out there. Of course, there are, but the average person underestimates the average person. I’ll give you one example, Pete. So, in Toronto, there was a social experiment where researchers dropped wallets all over the city, and these wallets had money in them, and they had an ID card so that if the person who found them wanted to be a good Samaritan, they could return the wallet.

And the question that was asked of lots of people in Toronto was, “What percentage of these wallets do you think will come back?” And I wonder what you would guess. I know you’ve probably read the answer, but what you would have guessed before knowing?

Pete Mockaitis
Percent of the wallets? That’s so funny. Jamil, I’m a sucker for hypothetical scenarios because it’s like I’m solving a case study. I want all the details. So, there are some cash and some goodies in this wallet?

Jamil Zaki
There’s cash and there’s an ID card, so you can run away with it and make some money, or you can give it back to the person who clearly lost it.

Pete Mockaitis
Toronto. So, because I’ve heard that this could really vary by city, and Canadians are very polite and friendly, just a blanket stereotype. I guess you could do that if it’s good. So, I’m going to, say in Canada, let’s go with 55% return it.

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, 55, pretty bullish. I love it. You’re more optimistic than Canadians themselves. So, people in Toronto expected the return rate would be 25%. In fact, it was 80%.

Pete Mockaitis
Ooh, okay, even better.

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, and this experiment has been repeated all around the world, and the general trend is that most wallets are returned, and return rates reach 80% in several different countries. And also, that we don’t know that, that if you ask people for their forecasts, their expectations, they’re way bleaker than that. And this is true, again, all over the scientific landscape. It’s not just hypothetical situations. Real people underestimate what real people are like, in part because we are so captured by hyper-negative and, I suppose, yeah, hyper-negative and troubling portrayals of people in the media.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, yeah, this reminds me, and I’ve shared this story a couple times on the show, but I remember one day, I got a random LinkedIn message from someone who said they wanted to talk to me about careers in consulting. I said, “Okay, I mean, sure.” I didn’t have that much to do at the time, and he was local. I could just meet him at a coffee shop, a short walk from my apartment. And so, we chatted, and I had no connection to him. We were in a LinkedIn group that had many thousands of people in it.

And so, we chatted, and I noticed he had this notebook of all the people that he talked to, and I was like, “Wow, looks like you’ve talked to a lot of people. Are you just reaching out totally cold to total strangers like me?” And he said, “Yeah.” And I said, “Well, how often do people actually talk to you?”

And so, he had these detailed records in his notebook, and it was about 28% of total strangers, more than one in four, said, “You know, sure. I’ll take some time to chat with you about some career stuff.” And I thought that was exceptional because that’s a decent chunk of time for someone you don’t know at all, and again and again and again, folks were doing it. It was awesome.

Jamil Zaki
I love this story, and it rings so true. There’s a bunch of research where people are asked to predict, “If you try to talk with a stranger, or even deepen a conversation with an acquaintance, open up about something you’re going through, ask for a favor, try to provide support, how will it go?” And people inevitably think it will be awful, they’re like, “Oh, my gosh, this is going to be so cringe. People will put on their headphones and try to ignore me. There’ll be awkward silence.”

We think about the worst possible outcome of trying to connect with somebody because we don’t really have enough faith in each other. And it turns out that if these same experimenters ask people to go ahead and try that conversation with the stranger, try connecting deeper with a friend, it goes extremely well, far better than we think. So, our cynicism isn’t just clouding our judgment about what people are like, it’s directly standing in the way of opportunities to build new connections and deepen old ones.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s powerful. And then just that experience, experiencing that directly, I think probably packs a much bigger punch, Jamil, is my guess, than us sharing these cool studies, and trust us, humans are actually pretty good. And I recall that there’s some therapists, they’ll do homework, in which they’ll assign them, it’s like, “Hey, go ask women.”

I recall this from the Feeling Good Podcast. This therapist gave some homework, “Go ask women if any of them would ever be interested in dating a person who has once checked into an in-patient psychiatric facility for depression,” because he thought, “No one would ever want to be with me.” And when he did, what he heard most often back was, “Well, is he rich?”

And so, it was eye-opening, like, “Huh, okay, so this is not an immediate disqualify or deal-breaker for me. Aha!” So, we’ve got some evidence, and if you go out and do it for yourself, you’ll see even more potently and feel that. That’s cool.

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, this is a great poll and a really important connection because I think depression is a story that we tell about ourselves often, “I’m worthless. Nobody likes me,” and that story can become its own kind of prison because you don’t then collect the data. You don’t then reach out and have those conversations that could disprove the very story that you’re living with, so you end up in this situation where your depressive stories become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And cynicism is kind of like that, except it’s not about ourselves. It’s stories about other people, about humanity. So, if you think that most people are only out for themselves, well, then you start to treat people that way. You start to kind of micromanage them, and monitor them, and even threaten them to make sure that they don’t run away with your money or betray you. You start to just act in an untrusting manner.

And guess what? That brings out the worst in other people. People reciprocate our kindness, generosity, and trust, and they retaliate against our selfishness, callousness, and mistrust. So, cynics, because they believe so little in people, treat people poorly, end up getting treated poorly in response, and then decide, “Aha, I was right all along.”

So, the way to break that cycle is exactly like you’re saying, this therapist’s homework from the Feeling Good Podcast, is to instead treat your life a little bit more like an experiment, to give yourself homework, to get out of your comfort zone, and try something new, whether it’s talking to a stranger or trusting somebody in your life in a new way, and don’t just do it.

As you do it, try to mark down, like this person did with his networking opportunities, mark down, “How did it go?” I call this encounter counting. Count and really record how these conversations go because, if you’re like most people, there will be pleasant surprises everywhere. And the goal is not to be surprised all the time, but rather, to learn from those surprises until we can update our expectations to be both more hopeful and more accurate.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, that’s so good. Well, Jamil, it feels like we’ve already got our money’s worth for this in terms of this is powerful, enriching stuff. I already feel good and more hopeful myself. So, thank you for that treat. So, I’m curious then, could you share with us one of your favorite stories of someone who made the leap from a lot of cynicism to some more hope and saw some cool results? And if I could really put you on the spot, let’s have that be in the workplace.

Jamil Zaki
Oh, sure. I want to make it a type of workplace that’s a little bit unusual. So, this is the principal of a middle school. So, this is this great person, LaJuan White, she was a principal in schools around Brooklyn, and then decided she wanted to move out of the city. And when you’re in this public school system, you can’t decide the school that you go to.

And so, she was assigned this place called Lincoln Middle School in Syracuse, New York. York. She looked it up and it seemed terrifying. It was on a list of persistently dangerous schools, meaning that there was more than one violent incident per 100 kids per year. It was one of the least resourced schools in the state, and it had spit out four principals in the previous six years. So, this was not a workplace that you necessarily wanted to be in. She was being tapped to act as its leader.

And so, she showed up there, and immediately realized that it wasn’t that the kids at this school were awful people. It’s that the culture around them was bringing out their worst. So, teachers, for instance, were really quick to punish kids, to suspend them, even expel them if they did anything wrong, and they had this hair trigger to see the worst in the kids at the school. And White realized, “Wait a minute, we’re not putting any faith in these kids, so it’s no wonder that they’re retaliating.”

As I said earlier, people become the folks we expect them to be. And so, what White did was, she said, “We’re going to replace this punishment culture with one where we try to treat these kids like the children that we hope they are.” So instead of focusing on punishment, they focused on opportunities and incentives for kids who did the right thing, who made good decisions.

And, over time, and not much time, by the way, we’re talking the course of one academic year, this school was pulled up. The kids started to relate more with each other and with their teachers, suspension rates fell, and the school ended up off of the dangerous list for good. White managed to reform this culture by focusing on trust, even and especially when things were difficult.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, I love that. Thank you. I was going to put you on the spot in terms of, “Okay, what are we looking at for crime, what are we looking for data in terms of performance?” So, we got the crime reduction, we got the suspension rates improvement. Beautiful. And could you zoom way in, in terms of what would be some examples of practices or ways of treating, interacting students, that speak to the low trust versus some of the new enhanced better ways teachers were interacting with students every day?

Jamil Zaki
White talks about two models of justice. One is punitive justice, where the idea is the person who’s done something wrong is the enemy, and my goal as a teacher is to protect the rest of the classroom from that negative element. So, that is exclusionary. Basically, if a kid does something wrong, you try to get them out of there, you try to send them to detention, suspension, or expulsion.

White replaced that with restorative justice, where the idea is, if a kid does something wrong, yes, they should be punished, but there should also be curiosity and compassion. We want to know why they did that. We want to treat them as a member of our community who we want to keep in our community. So, we want to ask more about what’s happening with them. We want to be curious.

White visited the homes of many troubled students and found out what a harsh and difficult home life they had. So, she had much more context to understand that a lot of these kids were acting out because they were struggling. And also, instead of just kicking kids out of the classroom, teachers were equipped with this new set of restorative justice practices, where when a kid acted out, they tried to pull them aside for conversations, “What’s going on with you? What do you need right now?”

This is still in the context of protecting other kids, and kids would still have to face consequences, but it was much more empathic. And it turns out that, especially when things are difficult, it matters how you take on that situation, how you treat somebody. And so, even in the context of a kid acting out, treating that kid kindly, treating them like they still deserve your respect, is a huge part of the change that they made within, at the micro level in the classroom.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s beautiful. All right, Jamil, so thinking about the workplace, hope, one, just feels good. Two, it helps other folks step up and live out their best selves and rise to expectations in a good way. Are there any other key benefits or results we might see in terms of work and being awesome at your job when we have less cynicism and more hope?

Jamil Zaki
A hundred percent. So, let’s focus first on individual contributors. I talk with a lot of people who tell me, “Yeah, you know, cynicism, it doesn’t feel good, but I need it to survive and to succeed because, guess what, it’s a dog-eat-dog world out there, and we got to compete. We got to duke it out. If you want to succeed, you need to step over or on your colleagues.” And it turns out that that’s a terrible strategy for success in most places.

So, there’s research from tens of thousands of people that finds that over a 10-year span, cynics earn less money than non-cynics, even if they start out at the same point. Now, why would that be? Well, cynics try to win at work to be awesome at their job by dominating other people. They try to outperform and outshine folks because they think in zero-sum terms. They think that “Anything you get, I lose, and anything you lose, I get.” But it turns out that that dominant attitude to work isn’t really how most people get ahead.

Most people get ahead by collaborating, by working together, doing things that none of them could do alone. And cynics, because they’re trapped in this sort of zero-sum mindset, don’t take advantage of those really important ways of succeeding. And this is where hope and trust and connection matter. In workplaces, yeah, all of those qualities feel good. People, when they feel connected and trusting toward their colleagues, they have greater mental health and resilience, but they also do better.

They’re more willing to take creative risks with their work because they know that their colleagues have their back. They’re more willing to share information, knowledge, and perspective, which aligns people and allows them to, again, collaborate more creatively and they’re more productive. So, it’s not an either/or. It’s not that you have to choose between hope or success. Actually, they go hand in hand.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, as I think about this study, I know how we measure earnings. That’s pretty straightforward. How do I measure whether or not someone qualifies as a “cynical person” versus a “non-cynical person”?

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, there’s a big questionnaire, a very famous one. I can give you just a couple of questions from it. So, I’m going to ask, I’m going to give you a couple of statements, and you tell me whether you agree in general or not, okay? Here’s one, “Most people can be trusted.”

Pete Mockaitis
Mostly agree.

Jamil Zaki
Okay. “People are honest chiefly through fear of getting caught.”

Pete Mockaitis
Mostly disagree.

Jamil Zaki
Okay. And “People generally don’t like helping one another.”

Pete Mockaitis
Disagree.

Jamil Zaki
Well, you’ve scored very anti-cynical on this test. That’s 0 for three, right? And there’s 50 questions like this, and you can score yourself if you want. There are cynicism tests online. This is called the Cook-Medley Cynical Hostility Scale for those folks who want to try it out themselves.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m just imagining, it’s like, “Oh, hey, how was your podcast, honey?” “Well, I just took a score. I took a test and it proved that I’m a cynic.” Like, “I already knew that.” I’m just imagining how that unfolds in people’s relationships and work. Well, so that’s handy. All right. Well, then, so let us know. So, let’s say we do have that, we got a heaping pile of cynicism, and we recognize, “Huh, I’d rather not have that. It doesn’t feel so good. Jamil is making a case that I’ve got benefits associated with ditching that. But personality transplants are not available at the local hospital,” so what’s a person to do?

Jamil Zaki
You brought up something that I think is a great starting point, which is the way that therapists operate, the way that they challenge people with depression or anxiety. I think that personality transplants are not available, as you said, but we are all works in progress. People’s personalities do change over the course of their lives. Events in our life can change our personality and we can change ourselves on purpose, therapy being the primary way that most people do this.

But I’m, personally, a recovering cynic. I deal with this all the time, and I’ve used tools from cognitive therapy on myself. I call it being skeptical of my cynicism. So, when I find myself suspicious of a person that I’ve never met, or over-generalizing and saying, “This politician did something corrupt, therefore, all politicians are fundamentally corrupt,” I ask myself, “Okay, Zaki, wait a minute. What evidence do you have for that claim?”

I’m a scientist. I can challenge myself to defend a position from a scientific perspective. And, oftentimes, I find myself saying, “Wait a minute, that’s not something that I have evidence for. That’s just my bias. That’s just my intuition.” And I don’t have to believe my intuition all the time. In fact, oftentimes our intuitions are dead wrong. So, I think that’s the first step, is to audit your inner experiences, to ask yourself whether you’re jumping to conclusions or whether you have enough evidence.

If you have enough evidence, great. Go for it. You’re not being cynical, you’re being skeptical. If you don’t have enough evidence, try to do an experiment. Try to take a leap of faith on somebody. Now, I’m not saying you have to share your bank information with a prince who’s going to wire you $14 million or anything like that, but try to take small, growing, calculated risks on other people.

Now, that doesn’t just help you learn about them, “Who can I trust and who can’t I trust?” based on evidence. It also changes other people for the better. Economists call this “earned trust.” When we put faith in other people, they’re more likely to step up and meet our expectations because they’re honored that we believe in them. So, that’s something really powerful that we can do to restructure our own thinking and also to bring out the best in the people around us.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, any other potential approaches or fun ways to get started right away?

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, I think that there’s two things that I could add to this, which are ways that we communicate with other people. One is, if you decide to trust somebody, don’t be quiet about it. I do something called trusting loudly, and I think this is especially important for supervisors, managers, leaders of any type, because we often put our faith in somebody. We give them a new responsibility, for instance, at work because we think they’re capable of it, but we don’t tell them, “Hey, I’m doing this because I believe in you.”

And it turns out that that simple message, just being upfront and clear. about the trust that we put in other people can intensify that act of earned trust. It can make that – the power of our trust, the gift of our trust – more clear and more impactful. The second thing that I would add when it comes to sharing or communicating differently is what I would call positive gossip. A lot of us are not just cynical in what we think, we’re cynical in what we say. We go around giving one-star Yelp reviews to life and everybody in it, and we can choose to do the opposite.

One thing that I try to do with my kids is share with them something kind that I saw somebody do each day, and, A, that helps me fight cynicism in them and help them stay attuned to the goodness of others, but it also changes how I think. Because if you are getting ready to tell somebody something, you’ve got to notice it. If I want to tell my kids about somebody who’s been helpful, I have an antenna up in my mind to spot helpers who are super easy to find when you’re looking. So, a habit of speech in this case, can become a habit of mind.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. Anything you recommend we stop doing right away?

Jamil Zaki
Oh, interesting. I would say we can stop jumping to conclusions, first of all, and trusting our instincts. This is one thing that people tell me a lot. It’s like, “I don’t know, man. I’ve just got this gut instinct that this person is not trustworthy, and I trust my gut.” And it’s like, “Well, okay, but your gut also tells you all sorts of other things that are probably wrong.”

Our gut instincts include, for instance, focusing on the negative over the positive, trusting people who look like us more than people who don’t, bias around race and gender and identity. Our gut instincts include being meaner when we’re hungry than when we’re full, being hangry. I mean, we don’t trust those instincts because they’re not right. They’re a poor match for the data. So, I would say one thing to stop doing is to credulously, naively trust our gut instincts because those gut instincts are very biased.

Another thing that I think we should stop doing is thinking of trust only in terms of the risk that we’re putting in. I think, again, a lot of leaders and managers lead like they’re trying not to lose, like they expect other people to shirk and try to take advantage of them, and their job is to police that, to stop people from doing something wrong. Well, if you treat people that way and show them how little you trust them, they’re going to actually act in ways that are less trustworthy.

There’s one story from the Boston Fire Department that I share in the book where the Boston Fire Chief, a new chief, actually, came in around the year 2000, and he realized that more sick days were being taken by firefighters on Fridays than any other day of the week. Now until then, firefighters had had unlimited sick days and been treated in a pretty trusting fashion because of their role. But this new chief said, “Nah, I don’t think so. These people are cheaters, and I’m going to make sure that they don’t do it anymore on my watch.”

So, he capped the number of sick days that firefighters could take at 15 a year. You had to get a doctor’s note if you went above that, you would get your pay docked. There’s all sorts of draconian policies where he was just trying to stop people from taking advantage of him and the city. Now, I wonder, Pete, whether you have a guess as to what the effects of that untrusting policy might have been.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, it’s funny, I feel my own internal, I don’t know what I want to call it, the big word is pusillanimous, small-hearted, like, “Well, oh, so it’s going to be like that, then. Oh, well, I got a doctor buddy who’s going to write all kinds of notes.” So, it’s like, “It’s going to be like that? All right, then. I’m going to…” It stokes the lower part of me that I don’t aspire to be, and, hopefully, I will be able to breathe and think through and say, “Okay, hey, you know what, I’m going to be as honest as possible and be sick when I’m sick, but my immediate desire is to stick it to them.”

Jamil Zaki
It’s beautifully put, and that’s exactly the desire that firefighters felt. So, the overall number of sick days taken by the entire city’s fire department in the year after that policy was rolled out was more than twice as high as it was before. And the number of firefighters who took exactly 15 sick days increased by 1,000%, ten times.

And it’s exactly as you said, that when you treat people cynically, when you choose to not trust them, you’re trying to cover your own butt. But actually, what you’re doing is you’re bringing out the worst side of these people. You’re appealing to their smallness, their pusillanimous side, where you’re saying, “I think you’re a cheater,” and people say, “Oh, you think I’m a cheater? I’ll show you a cheater.” And it turns out that this occurs all over our lives, and so people, in an attempt to protect themselves, harm each other and relationships, and then harm themselves as a result.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, well, I think we’re really getting into it in terms of decisions, policies, systems, processes, the stuff that you’re doing, in terms of how you’re running your team and your organization. In some ways, I’m feeling this tension because there are those who take advantage, and yet you want to extend trust to encourage the goodness in folks, and I guess to trust them loudly. That’s a good turn of a phrase.

So, help us out, what would be the optimal way? Let’s go with the same fire chief example. So okay, I’ve got firefighters. It looks like there’s a level, there may be, we don’t know, it could be statistically just happened that way. We suspect there’s a bit of abuse, that many Friday-sick days are not so much sick, so much as early weekend starts.

So, that’s what we suspect. We’d like to curb that, getting all bean counter-y in terms of, “This is how many days you get in the policies, and don’t you dare violate them.” It’s counterproductive. So, what’s your take, knowing all you know, what might be an optimal approach to address that matter?

Jamil Zaki
So, a mindset in general, that I recommend and sort of champion in the book, is being a hopeful skeptic. That is, paying very close attention to the data, being really evidence-based, but also the hopeful piece is understanding that our defaults, our factory settings as human beings, are probably too negative. So, basically saying, “Okay, let me be as scientific as I can in my interactions, but also let me curb and understand and audit my knee-jerk negativity.”

So, the fire chief here, he saw the statistic and his knee-jerk negativity took over. He said, “I’m going to take it out on my entire staff.” Well, probably if he had looked more closely at the data, he would find that maybe, I don’t know, 5% of firefighters were overrepresented in these Friday sick days. So, instead of making a blanket assumption about his entire team, his entire department, he could have asked, “Well, what’s up with these 5% of people?” and ask them some more questions, say, “Hey, I noticed that you’ve taken four Fridays off and no Tuesdays off. Are you getting sick in an unusual way? Can you tell me more about this?”

And sometimes just a little bit of curiosity, showing that, “Hey, I’m paying attention to this,” could probably curb that behavior. And the 5% statistic, by the way, I’m just hypothesizing here, but he could have also looked at the 95% of his staff who were not taking extra sick days on Friday, and said, “Wow, we’ve got such an honorable group of people here. You’ve got unlimited sick days and yet you’re only taking a pretty reasonable amount in a pretty reasonable way. This speaks to the spirit and the values that you all have as firefighters to protect your community.”

This is the thing that, I think, we do way too often as leaders is we focus on the 5%, 10%, 2% of people in our organization who we’re scared of, or who we feel like are threatening the organization, and not on the 90% or 92% or 98% of people who are upholding our values and probably all want the same thing. So, I would say, if I was in the fire chief’s seat, I would focus on the supermajority and try to develop policies and practices for them, and also extol their positive values as opposed to hyper-focusing on the two or five percent of folks who are not playing by the rules.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I love that and I think that’s just a great practice, in general, in organizations to celebrate the cool stuff that’s happening that you’re noticing, that you’re doing. I’m in a team and we have in the meetings a one minute of awesome in which we folks share, “Hey, this is a cool thing that happened,” and it speaks to the values and remind us, “Oh, yeah, this is why we do this. This is cool. All right. Good deal.”

So, yeah, and to trust loudly when you’re seeing cool things, to speak to it, as opposed to I get this sense and, huh, boy, this is a whole another conversation maybe, good doctor, that as humans, it seems like when good things happen regularly, we just become habituated to them and expect them, and that’s the baseline. Even though it’s amazing, it’s a blessing, it’s so good, we’re so lucky, it’s so privileged and delightful, we just get accustomed to it, take it for granted. That’s what normal is.

And then if we suddenly don’t have that, then, “Oh, this is an injustice, and it’s bad, and my expectations are being violated, and I’m cranky about it,” as opposed to realizing, “Hey, well, you know what? I’ve had it pretty good. I’ve been pretty lucky for a really long time. I guess I could just appreciate how, in this absence, how so often I am blessed with this thing,” usually isn’t how we respond to these deprivations. Is that just how we’re wired, neuroscience doctor? Can anything be done about this?

Jamil Zaki
Yes, and yes. So, what you’re describing is called hedonic adaptation, sometimes also known as the hedonic treadmill, which is that we get used to whatever is going on in our lives. We have a set point that’s related to our personal baseline. So, my baseline and your baseline in terms of what we’re used to in life might be totally different.

If we switched places, we would feel intensely the differences between how we live, but we don’t feel those differences now. The same way that when you put on clothes in the morning, you feel them for about five seconds and then you kind of forget that they’re there and you stop feeling them. We get used to stuff and that’s good. That is a form of adaptation, but it also means, as you’re saying, we get used to all the good stuff and forget how lucky we are, forget how good we have it.

Is there anything we can do about it? Yeah, there is. There’s a great practice called savoring. I think gratitude practice is really well known. You think about all the good things that have happened to you today or in your life in general. Savoring is much more physical and palpable. It’s about enjoying the good stuff as it happens.

Kurt Vonnegut has a terrific quote that I love, the novelist Kurt Vonnegut, where he says, “Sometimes you got to stop and say, ‘If this isn’t good, I don’t know what is.’” And savoring is in essence that. It’s pausing and noticing what’s happening, and especially noticing the things that you are happy about right now in the moment.

I think that one version of this that we don’t do enough is what I would call social savoring. That is stopping to notice the good in other people and the wonderful things that they do for each other, for us, for everybody, for the world all the time. And I mean constantly millions of people are doing good things every minute of every day, and we have grown adapted to that the same way that we’ve adapted to all the other good things in our lives.

But when we notice, there’s so much to be gained. My friend, Dacher Keltner, studies the emotion of awe, the idea of something that is vast and makes us feel small in a good way, like we’re part of something greater than ourselves. And when I think of awe, I think about, I don’t know, seeing the Milky Way, or the Aurora Borealis, or a grove of redwood trees, and those things all produce awe. But in a study of tens of thousands of people, Dacher asked them, “What made you feel awe today?”

And the most common response, the most common thing that made people feel awe, this beautiful experience, was what he calls “moral beauty.” That is the everyday acts of goodness, kindness, generosity, and compassion that people around us are performing all the time. So, when you start to notice that and savor the goodness of others, you have access to really, I mean, I know I’m sounding hyperbolic and maybe a little bit warm and fuzzy, but I mean it. I really do think that people do beautiful things. And to open ourselves to that beauty is a really powerful way to stop hedonic adaptation, to get off the treadmill and actually enjoy our lives.

Pete Mockaitis
I love it. I love it. Can you tell us what are some things you savor?

Jamil Zaki
Oh, well, I savor my children first and foremost. I feel wonder and awe at their new developments and hobbies and interests, and just the way they treat people all the time. I savor the work of people who fight through adversity. A special type of person to me is what I would call the wounded healer, the person who struggles mightily with something, and then turns around and helps other people.

So, this is veterans who help other veterans with PTSD, survivors of assault who become assault counselors, people who have suffered addiction who then join the recovery community and become sponsors. That’s a type of beauty to me that it never gets old. I find that those folks to be incredible. inspiring as well. How about you?

Pete Mockaitis
Thank you. You know, it’s funny, when you say savor, the first thing that comes to mind, well, two things, is washing my hands, just enjoying that warm water and my favorite soap.

Jamil Zaki
Nice.

Pete Mockaitis
And then, in my back porch, I’ve got these sliding wood cedar doors, which just look really cool and kind of unique. We just lucked out, the house had it. And I like to, whenever I open or close those doors, to take just a good whiff of that cedar smell and appreciate the home and the setting that I’m in. So, that’s what I savor.

Jamil Zaki
I love that. I love that. Those are beautiful everyday experiences, right? And I think that that’s the thing is, you could have gotten used to those things. Washing your hands, the smell of cedar, these are easy things to fall into the background of our minds, to relegate to the landfill of lost memories, but you’ve chosen to keep your attention open, to keep your mind open to those experiences. And I think that’s really the good fight. That’s what I think we need to do to retain a hopeful and skeptical mindset.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Jamil, tell me, anything else we should cover before we hear about your favorite things?

Jamil Zaki
No, I think this has been great. I hope that all this is useful to your listeners.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’d say I’m feeling good, so I hope they are, too. How about a favorite quote?

Jamil Zaki
Okay, I got to go Vonnegut again. Kurt Vonnegut said, “We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful what we pretend to be.” And to me, that speaks to everything that we’ve been talking about. Our beliefs about the world are self-fulfilling prophecies. We create the version of the world that we live in, and that, in turn, shapes the type of life that we go through. So, it’s, to me, critical to mind our minds because they’re so powerful in structuring who we become.

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

Jamil Zaki
I’ll share one again that speaks to workplaces and how they shape us. Unusual workplaces for most of us, there are two fishing villages in southeastern Brazil, separated by about 40 miles, similar in economic status, religion, and so forth, but one of them sits on the ocean. And it turns out that if you’re going to fish on the ocean, you need big boats, heavy equipment. You need to work together. You can’t do it alone.

The other village is on a lake. So, fishermen strike out on small boats alone, and the only time they see each other is when they’re competing. Economists went to these villages about 10 years ago and had these people play a series of social games to assess how trustworthy and how generous they were. And it turns out that when you started out in your career in one of these fishing villages, you’re not different from each other. People on the ocean and people on the lake equally trusting, equally trustworthy, equally generous.

But over time, working in a co-operative setting made people more trusting and more generous. I mean, we’re talking over the course of decades, and over the course of decades working in a competitive cutthroat environment made people less trusting and less generous. So, choose your workplaces carefully because they shape you into the version of yourself you will become.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite book?

Jamil Zaki
I just finished Bullshit Jobs by David Graeber, which I found absolutely fascinating, an account of why so many of us do work for most of our waking hours that we don’t think creates any good in the world, so that’s one. But here’s a more hopeful one, A Paradise Built in Hell by Rebecca Solnit is a book about disasters over the course of the last century or so. So, the earthquakes here in San Francisco in 1906 and 1989, the bombing of London in World War II, 9/11, Hurricane Katrina.

And in all of these, Solnit asks the question, “What do disasters teach us about ourselves?” And there’s a stereotype that when disaster strikes, people show their true colors, which is that we are selfish and awful and social order falls apart. By looking at the history, Solnit finds that the exact opposite is true, that when disaster strikes, people band together, they help one another, and they find solidarity. So, there’s a lot more goodness in even the hardest times than most of us realize.

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

Jamil Zaki
Yes, I use, well, a bunch of tools that I love, but one is a type of notebook, and I’m of course now blanking on the brand name, but I use it when I interview people for journalistic parts of my writing. And it’s this pen that has a recording device in it, and the paper has sort of sensors on it. So, as you write, it records what time it is that you were writing, and you can then later press down on any note that you took, and it will play back the recording from the pen of that moment that you were writing that particular note. It’s incredibly useful for interviews and for recording stuff.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool, yeah. And a favorite habit?

Jamil Zaki
Savoring, the one that we just talked about.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And is there a particular nugget you share that folks really connect and resonate with, and quote back to you often?

Jamil Zaki
From this book, not yet because it’s not out yet, but I think that, oftentimes, I think people are simply happy and relieved and surprised to learn the statistics on helping and kindness. I think that people really are fundamentally underestimating one another. And the freedom to stop doing that is enlivening for folks.

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

Jamil Zaki
Well, Hope for Cynics: The Surprising Science of Human Goodness is available wherever books are sold. And my lab, the Stanford Social Neuroscience Lab, is at ssnl.stanford.edu.

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

Jamil Zaki
Yeah, take a leap of faith on somebody today or tomorrow, this week at the latest, and write down what you think will happen, and then write down what actually happens. And if your predictions are different from reality, try to remember that and ask yourself why the difference is there.

Pete Mockaitis
Jamil, this has been a real treat. Thank you. I wish you much hope and joy.

Jamil Zaki
Thank you so much. This has been delightful.

968: How to Experience More Purpose and Passion Each Day with John R. Miles

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

John R. Miles shares powerful insight into what it takes to live an intentional and purposeful life.

You’ll Learn:

  1. How to feel impervious in the face of adversity and failure
  2. How anxiety makes you 400% more effective 
  3. How to visualize effectively 

About John

John R. Miles is a worldwide expert on intentional behavior change, leadership, and personal mastery. He is a keynote speaker, top-rated show host, and is the founder and CEO of Passion Struck®. Miles is devoted to promoting personal mastery, fostering an intentional mindset, enhancing health and wellness, and building meaningful relationships. His globally renowned podcast, Passion Struck with John R. Miles, has garnered tens of millions of downloads and consistently tops the charts as the number one alternative health podcast on iTunes. Miles is committed to inspiring people worldwide to believe in their ability to push beyond limits and achieve their aspirations. He is a graduate of the Naval Academy, where he excelled as a varsity athlete. Learn more by visiting johnrmiles.com or passionstruck.com.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

  • Acorns. Start saving and investing for your future today with Acorns.com/awesome
  • Harvard Business Review. Get 10% off your subscription at HBR.org/subscriptions with the promo code AWESOME
  • Storyworth. Give the Fathers in your life a unique, heartfelt gift. Save $10 with at StoryWorth.com/Awesome with the promo code AWESOME.

John R. Miles Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis 

John, welcome. 

John Miles 

Pete, it is so fantastic to be here. Thank you for the honor of having me on. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Well, yeah, I’m excited to dig into your wisdom, and I’d love it if you could kick us off with any particularly striking, or surprising, or extra fascinating discoveries you’ve made while doing your interviews and putting together your book, Passion Struck. 

John Miles 

A person I love to quote, because I love her work, is Sharon Salzberg, and she has a quote that I just love, that “There’s no commodity that we can take with us. There’s only our lives. And whether we live them wisely or whether we live them in ignorance, and this is everything.” 

Pete Mockaitis 

Okay. And tell me more about how that really grabs you. 

John Miles 

It grabs me because I think so many of us live in the subconscious. We’re not really active and being intentional in creating and crafting the life that we want, and so we end up living it in a way that isn’t as authentic as it could be to what we could accomplish if we were aligning our actions with our ambitions and our long-term aspirations. And I think that’s really what she’s getting at is the well-lived life versus a life of just going throughout our days as if we’re a pinball, actively engaging with everything around us but doing it in an unintentional way.  

Pete Mockaitis 

That’s a cool visual, or should I say a haunting, shocking visual, thinking about a pinball just bouncing around and actively engaging with everything, when some things are better to not be engaged with at times. Could you make this all the more real for us with a cool story of someone who found themselves kind of in pinball mode and then made some changes and unlocks some really cool stuff?  

John Miles 

Yes. So, a great person to highlight would be Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, who I highlight in the book. 

And I think his story is a great one to illustrate this point, because if you look back upon it, we see the person today who’s the megastar, one of the highest paid actors in Hollywood, but at the beginning of his career he actually spent a pretty considerable amount of time without any money, basically living almost homeless before he found his way to going into the WWE, but at that time he was going by his real name, and it wasn’t until sometime after that that he took on The Rock, which was actually his father’s name, and started to build his career. 

But what really differentiates Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is that he is a constant reinventor. There are so many times in his life that he could have plateaued and stood where he was, but he continuously strove to take those steps that would take him to the next place. And so that led him next into acting and then, even when he was an actor, he envisioned himself becoming even a greater actor in the pinnacle of male actors of his time. And it was through this constant manifesting that he took himself from this point where his life was completely at a point of desperation to what we see today. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Yeah, that is powerful. I understand, in his story, that he pretty much just declared, “I’m going to be a superstar,” and he took inventory of what’s up, he’s like, “Well, I’m pretty good at building muscles so that’s going to be part of the differentiator, and I’m going to hit the gym like mad in order to really become jacked, huge, shredded, etc.” so as to facilitate his journey to superstardom. 

John Miles 

No, I think that’s absolutely the case, and I think you bring up something that’s really important is, he had already started having this long-term aspiration that he wanted to manifest. And then I think what he did, and so many failed to do, is he started to take those daily actions that were getting him closer, and he aligned those actions with the short-term ambitions that he had along the path to reaching the long-term aspirations that he wanted. And that’s really the core of a lot about what I talk about through the lens of Passion Struck and creating a passion-struck life is aligning those three very things.  

Pete Mockaitis 

Well, it sounds like is that how you would articulate the big idea or core message of Passion Struck to make the shift from just existing and reacting and bouncing around like a pinball to getting in the proactive driver’s seat and making it happen? Or how would you articulate the key thesis? 

John Miles 

Yeah, well, the core thesis is it is a state of alignment, like I talked about, where actions, intentions, ambitions, and aspirations are in perfect harmony, but it’s more than that. It really represents a transformative mindset and behavior shift that’s essential for what I think is rewiring the patterns of default that so many of us end up dictating our entire lives to attaining. 

And it really emphasizes the importance of synchronizing what we do, why we do it, what do we hope to achieve, ensuring that every step that we take is infused with purpose and passion. And so that’s what Passion Struck really is, is it’s this never-ending pursuit of becoming your ideal self the best that you could possibly be. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Oh, that’s great. Well, you’ve got six mindset shifts and six behavior changes, and I’m going to rattle off the quick one-sentence version or teaser of what those are in a moment, but first I want to give you first crack at it. I love that turn-of-phrase you had, “rewiring our default setting.” So, answer me this, John, if there were a single setting within us, a toggle switch where we could shift the default from A to B, what do you think is the most leveraged impactful shift we could make? What’s our default setting? What’s the optimal setting? And how do we make that transition? 

John Miles 

I think for me, what’s top of mind today is motivation and what motivates us. So, I think in default, we tend to be motivated by the extrinsic things in life, the things that we’re led to believe will bring us happiness and success, which comes down to the money we make, the way we present ourselves to the world, the houses that we own, the neighborhoods we live in, the cars we drive, the titles we hold. 

And I think the shift that we really need to make is a shift towards intrinsic motivation acting as the cohesive glue that links our mindset, our behavior, and our deliberate action. That doesn’t mean that you can live without extrinsic motivation. It just means that the default should be more leaning in on the internal drive that fuels our journey towards a life of passion and purpose.  

Pete Mockaitis 

That does seem like a superior setting to be rolling with. John, tell us, how do we go about flipping that switch? 

John Miles 

So, I think right now, there is a profound sense of what I call un-mattering in the world. And before I started this journey of creating Passion Struck, I was given this vision over a decade ago that I was being called to serve, at the time, the words that were coming to me were the lonely, hopeless, broken, beaten, bored, battered of the world. And I had no idea what to do with it because my back story at that time was, I was a successful business executive. I was a C-suite exec in a Fortune 50 company. 

And so, when I started hearing these things, I had no idea what it was calling me to do, why or what even I was supposed to be doing to serve these people. But I started to examine my own life and what was going on in it, and I find that we are often best positioned to serve the people that we once were. And that’s absolutely what I talk about because I was living a life where I was consumed with the extrinsic motivations, and on the outside it looked perfect. 

But inside I felt completely numb and detached from the authentic self that I wanted to be. And I felt this profound sense of feeling that I didn’t matter, that I didn’t feel like what I was doing was fulfilling. 

And so, what I really then went on with this was this journey of me-search, of really doing core introspection into what was driving that state and how do I pivot to really having a different set of goals that were guiding me, and reformulating how I was thinking, how I was perceiving what I wanted in life, but more importantly, how I could teach others to really understand that they did matter, and that this feeling of being significant and valued is really anchored in our intrinsic motivation, energizing our pursuit of goals with relentless determination, and the inner spark that not only influences how we persevere through challenges that we face, but also guides and defines our actions towards the objectives that we want in life. So that’s the path that I ended up taking. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Oh, awesome. Well, I’d love to take just a couple minutes to dig into that journey a bit. When you said given this vision and hearing these things, what is the source, the message, the messenger? How did that land in you? 

John Miles 

So, it started to hit me at a point where my life was really consumed with the constant grind, and I have always been religious. And I decided to take courses that are offered in the Methodist religion called Discipleship, where for 36 weeks I went through an intense two-times a week class where we went through the entire Bible. 

And while I was going through that, it also awakened in me, and I think that this is something, whether you’re religious or not, I think sometimes we go about taking on a new challenge, and by doing that challenge, it opens us up to introspection, and that’s absolutely what it did for me, and I started to question the whys behind how I was living my life.  

Pete Mockaitis 

And that is a theme we’ve heard before. It’s like when folks engage, whether it’s a faith, or wisdom tradition, or intense introspective situation, yes, insights pop up and it can be a sort of an epiphany, a transformation, a life changer, a redirector of great consequence. So, we’ve heard that kind of a story before, so we’ll call it a theme, John. We’ll call it a theme. 

So, let’s dig in a little bit. We’ve got six mindset shifts, six behavior changes. And inside your mindset shifts, we’ve got the mission angler, muster the power to do something great; the brand reinventor, never being afraid to reinvent yourself; the mosquito auditor, avoid the most dangerous animal on the planet; the fear confronter, realizing that you are your greatest competitor; the perspective harnesser, zoom out and tap into its power; and the action creator, permit yourself to dream the dream. 

I’m most intrigued by talking about harnessing perspective, zooming out and tapping into the power. Lately, I’ve just been seeing that as a theme in terms of, like, I’m going about my life and I see my iPad, my iPad shows me an image, like Apple Photos does of, “Oh, here’s what was going on three years ago!” You’re like, “Whoa!” Or just looking at photos in general is like, “Wow, that’s a totally different time and place and an experience and perspective, and wow!” because it feels like, for me, at times, what you’re up in in this moment is, all there ever was, all there ever will be. 

And Daniel Kahneman has got a great quote, “Nothing is as important as you think it is while you’re thinking about it.” And I think that is so on the money. So, help us out here, if we want to harness some perspectives, how do we in fact zoom out and tap into some good power of broader, wiser perspective?

John Miles 

Yeah, so I think the first thing for the audience to understand is, in the Western mindset, that most of us who are listening to this likely have been brought up in, it’s deeply rooted in Greek philosophy which excels in linear learning. So, this whole concept of both/and thinking, which is really an Eastern concept doesn’t get really bestowed on us, so we really enter the world by thinking and viewing it as either/or instead of through the paradoxes that amplify the way we think. 

So, to think about this, and this both/and paradigm, it’s really thinking that our life has the possibilities where we can do things such as balance hard work with rest, merge self-discipline with self-compassion, finding harmony between solitude while also having community, integrating mind and body and so on and so forth. But the way I try to break it down in this chapter is I go into the behavior science behind it by looking at the works of Marianne Lewis and Wendy Smith who wrote a great book called Both/And Thinking, and then I use the example of a good friend of mine, astronaut Chris Cassidy. 

And I think Chris’s journey really highlights this difference in perspective and how it reshaped how he viewed challenges, how he viewed the world around him, and I’ll just give a couple examples of that. So, one of the core stories that I remember Chris talking to me about was his time going through basic underwater demolition school training to become a SEAL. 

And as he was going through Hell Week, everyone who’s there is miserable. But I remember him telling me that, in this point of misery, as he was colder than he’s ever been in his entire life, he looked down the line of people who were next to him, and he saw a Thai exchange student who was very thin, used to a completely different climate, and was so uncomfortable that he was actually buckling two and fours, he was looking at Chris, and Chris was looking back at him. And he realized that no matter how bad he had it, someone else had it worse. 

And it kind of gave him this courage to view life differently. Instead of looking at this as a never-ending trial, he looked at it as an opportunity, one, to see how far he could push his body and to view it as if it was a rubber band where he could expand or detract these trying moments in life. And he found through that, he could reshape his perspective to seeing that this was going to have a finite end. 

And all he needed to do was to concentrate on taking the conscious actions to let go of the things that were impacting him from achieving that goal. And that ended up leading him then throughout the remaining training and time in the SEALs as viewing these things that he would find himself encountering as finite periods of stress or trauma or action, and then training his mind to get through them. So, I think that’s just one powerful example of how you can implement it. 

Pete Mockaitis 

That is cool. And, boy, that feels like we need to have a movie scene of this eureka epiphany moment of enlightenment there. And I think that’s often the thing about perspective, is these things are objectively true, “Yes, this is temporary. The training will conclude.” And, yes, it is true, someone else has it tougher than you. 

And it seems like where I run into trouble, and I think many do, is those perspectives, while true, don’t get the focus, the attention. Like, your mind is consumed, like, “Oh, my gosh, this hurts a lot. I don’t know if I can handle much more of this.” And that is the dominant perspective and narrative that is running the show in your brain. Any pro tips, John, on when you’re in the midst of a small perspective dominating the scene, how to return to the broader perspective? 

 John Miles 

Yeah, to me, this is something that I refer to as the growth paradox, and I think real growth is like farming. It’s not instant gratification. It requires consistent effort and practice. And what that ends up doing is it leads to exponential returns over time. So, a core thing for the audience to think about is lulls and plateaus in our life shouldn’t be viewed as times of failure or not making progress, but as stages for future growth, and that’s something that this growth paradox teaches us about. 

Another one would be the failure paradox, which is looking at failure as a valuable teacher, which I’m sure many people have explored on this show, but each failure provides insights and learning opportunities just as James Dyson’s many inventions failed as he was creating prototypes before he successfully created the vacuum cleaner and then many of the other inventions that have come from Dyson’s products since then. So those would be two examples. 

 Pete Mockaitis 

Okay. Well, now, when it comes to, you listed six intentional behavior changes, and I’m going to give a little quick overview here. We got the anxiety optimizer, how to be on edge without going off the edge; originality embracer, realize that originality necessitates adaptability; the boundary magnifier, understand that sometimes being right means being alone; the outward inspirer, speak or act with your feet; the gardener leader, practice eyes-on, hands-off leadership; and the conscious engager, keep the main thing the main thing. 

I want to dig into the anxiety optimizer. We’ve had Morra Aarons-Mele, who’s great, talking about making anxiety your friend when you are trying to achieve stuff and to not let it consume you. So, let us know, what are your best practices you’ve discovered in terms of how do we make the most of the power, the fuel that anxiety can give us without just freaking out and losing it? 

John Miles 

So, I think it’s important, before we even go into that, to define why this is so important for us to master. McKinsey did some groundbreaking research on this zone of optimal anxiety, and what they found was that leaders who were able to perform in this state, outperformed their peer group by over 400%. Another way to think about that is they were able to accomplish, in two hours, what their peer group was doing, in eight to ten hours. 

So, in Passion Struck, why this is so important is I talk about, later in the book, the psychology of progress, and a core theme of that is that time is malleable. Well, in order to find more time, to take more action to move your life forward, you have to be better at utilizing it. And that’s, where getting into this optimal state of anxiety, is extremely important because in those two hours, if you learn how to do this, you can do what others are doing in eight to ten, which also opens up your life to have more balance in it and to develop and cultivate more relationships. 

So, at the core of this, it’s really thinking about your life as if you’re walking a tightrope. And on one side of the tightrope is overwhelming fear, and on the other is an indifference, and the state in between is what we talk about with finding the state of optimal anxiety. Anxiety is like a boon and a bane. A certain level gets you fired up, ready to take on challenges, but too much, it’s like you’re crashing a party like an unwelcome guest who doesn’t know when to leave. 

So, this is really science-backed strategy that’s crucial for achieving anything that you want in life. So, I talk about two different ways of doing it, there are more than these, but I really focus this chapter on another SEAL named Mark Devine, who many people have probably heard of, and also a race car driver named Jesse Iwuji. 

And Mark, when he was going through BUD/S himself, similar to Chris, was the first SEAL leader where his entire boat crew actually graduated from BUD/S. And the reason that that whole crew was able to do it was because he taught them four critical things that allowed them to exist in the state of optimal anxiety. The first was breath control. 

He, at first, started teaching them the simple practice of box breathing, which, if someone wants to experiment with this, just think of yourself doing a box, and breathe in for four seconds, breathe out for four seconds, etc. But this breath control is a dynamic way for you to control the energy that’s flowing through you and to really target it in a different way by quieting down your emotions. 

The second thing he really taught these folks was to have a positive internal dialogue, in that, similar to the way Chris, as I talked about, shifted his perspective, they too could shift that positive internal dialogue and how they were approaching their days and the activities that they were going through. The next thing he taught them was the power of imagery and how, having that imagery of them graduating BUD/S, of them becoming a SEAL, and seeing that optimism and success would change the way that they were viewing the longevity of the task that was ahead of them. 

And, lastly, and I think one of the most important things he taught them was the importance of targeted focus, of being present in the moment and getting through the activities that we were doing. So those four things – breath control, positive internal dialogue, imagery and targeted focus – are the things that I highlight in the book. But a way that a person could think about this is we often end up spiraling. And one of the initial things that we can do, is if you practice that breath work, it allows you to have awareness. 

And, to me, awareness is half the battle won, because if we have awareness, we catch ourselves before we even start spiraling because we notice when unease starts creeping in, and that perhaps prickly feeling or that thing where your hair is rising, and that’s your cue to understanding that you need to start taking some deep breaths and slowing everything down to allow yourself to get clarity. So that would be one starting point that I would talk about. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Yeah, that’s really cool, and you’re making me think I really need to finish that book by Mark Devine, the Unbeatable Mind, I think it’s called. I’ve started it, and too many books crowded it out, but there’s a lot of goodness there. So, I’m intrigued by this notion of optimizing anxiety. It seems like there are some interconnected ideas here, whether it’s Stephen Covey talking about the growth zone is in the middle of the panic zone and I think the complacent zone, or Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi says your flow state is when the task is not so easy that it’s boring, and not so hard that you’re overwhelmed, freaking out. 

So, it seems like all three of these conceptualizations have some overlap, but I like the way that you’ve zoomed it in on anxiety as an emotion, a signal, a trigger for you to tune in to these dynamics that are going on. Is optimizing your anxiety level just the same as Covey style being in the growth zone, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi style being in the flow state? Or are there some nuances, distinctions that you would highlight within this framework? 

John Miles 

No, you’re right, it is similar to both of those things, and that flow state is a critical and core component of it. To me, I think the phrase that really captures this the best is to learn to be on the edge without going over the edge. And the best vision that I heard to capture this was talking to NASCAR driver, Jesse Iwuji, who told me, when he’s driving the car, when he was too cautious, it would cause him to wreck because the other drivers were expecting him to do things that were more aggressive in his driving style. But when he tried to take it too far to the edge, he also would wreck out because he was trying to push things too much. 

So, it was really finding that balance in between those two where he learned how to position himself to be on the edge without going over the edge. And to me, that’s what makes this a little bit different. It’s like riding the wave without wiping out because we’ve all heard of athletes who are in the zones, artists losing themselves in creation, coders crunching lines of code until time blurs. But what I’m talking about here is the underlying, really, emotion that lies underneath it, and how do you calm that as your entry point into going into this state. 

Pete Mockaitis 

And to flip it, what if we don’t have enough anxiety, like we’re too we’re too passive, chill about a matter, and we would do better to crank it up? I guess what’s resonating for me is I’m thinking about there’s a time where I was hosting leadership conferences. I remember the first time I did it, I was kind of anxious, like, “Oh, my gosh, I’ve never done this before. This is a big role, a big deal. Got to really make sure everything is done well,” and things went rather well. 

And then the second time, I was like, “I got this. I know how this is done. Been there, done that,” and it went not as well. I was too passive and it would have behooved me and the attendees had I been more anxious the second time around. Any pro tips when what’s necessary is to crank it up a bit? 

John Miles 

Yeah, I think I have a tendency probably, as people are hearing me talk, to be more like what you were describing. And so, for me, if I’m giving a talk in that example, I really do my best to amp myself up, because if you’re too subdued, like you were talking about in that situation, people aren’t going to feel the energy reverberating from you that you want them to feel. 

So, I think it’s really having that self-awareness, which I talked about earlier, of understanding where your emotional state is, and the task that you’re trying to complete and readjusting it based on the situation that you’re faced with. So, in that same situation, if I’m behind stage, getting ready to go out there and give my best, I’m really pumping myself up. 

And something that I actually do is I visualize myself being someone other than myself at times. I often, going back to Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, picture myself as him coming on the stage, and how would he present himself to the audience, what emotion would he give. And when I do that, and I think about portraying him and the emotions on the stage, it completely changes how I myself am showing up and transforming it into a more profound version of myself. 

So, I would encourage the audience, if they’re facing the same situation, that’s something that I like to do, I was taught that by a speaking coach, is imagine someone else that you want to emulate and picture yourself being them as you’re going throughout that activity.  

Pete Mockaitis 

Oh, totally. We had a guest who used the term psychological Halloween-ism. It’s like you’re donning the costume of the superhero or whomever that you want to be, and, sure enough, somehow that just kind of influences your thoughts and attitudes and behaviors and results. Go figure. Really cool. Now, to that point about Mark Devine with those four things, with the visualization imagery, any pro tips or do’s and don’ts on visualizing well? 

I think sometimes, for example, in a tough spot, if you’re visualizing, “Oh, just a few more minutes till we get a meal,” or a donut, or a smoke, or whatever you’re craving and feel deprived of, that sometimes that could be a counterproductive strategy in terms of getting the best from yourself over the long term. What are your perspectives on best and worst practices for visualizing and using imagery well? 

John Miles 

Yeah, to me, what I think is most important about it is being consistent in your application of it. And for me, there are three different ways that I like to do visualizations. The first is I like to do activations. So, in the morning, I get up really early, 5:00 a.m., I go on this walk with my dog, and I use activations, which is a little bit different than a meditation. I’m activating the way I want my life to unfold. I’m activating how I want my day to go. 

And so, I picture for myself what I want the day to look like when it’s complete, and I kind of walk through what I want my morning to look like, what I want to get accomplished, what I need to do in the middle of the day, what I need to do in the late afternoon, but then also visualize how I want to show up for my loved ones. So that’s one way that I think you can do it is through those activations. 

Another way that I like to do it is through journaling, and really just going into a free flow of thought about, “How am I showing up today? What am I feeling?” and getting those raw emotions out on paper. And then, really then, if there’s a gap between the ideal state that I want to live that day in, then really visualizing, “What actions do I need to take in my energy, in my focus, in how I want to change the very aspects of how I’m going to lead my life for the next few hours of the day?” 

And so, those are two things that I found helpful for me where I use activations or journaling to help me get into that state of internal dialogue, and really that imagery that I want to see for myself and how it’s shaping the immediacy of, for me, the day and the transition points between it. 

Pete Mockaitis 

And so, when you’re visualizing that optimal day outcome, are you sort of imagining yourself in the process of, “Okay, and I’m going to write some stuff. I see myself – third person, first person – at the keyboard, clacking away, or I am admiring the written words with a beaming grin of pride”? Like, what are some of the details of a visualized scene that you construct? 

John Miles 

So, for me, I’m more visualizing the outcomes. Like, this time that I have, what are the outcomes that I want to achieve and in what time frames do I want to achieve them? So, it could be envisioning myself preparing for an interview that I’m doing on a podcast. It could be, as you were saying, visualizing myself writing chapters of a book or a blog that I’m working on. It could be me visualizing a phone call that I’m going to have and how I want that phone call to go to produce the outcome that I want. 

So, I’m really outcome focused and how I’m trying to use this imagery to think through the day and the positive outcome that I want to achieve through the actions that I’m doing. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Awesome. Well, John, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about a few of your favorite things? 

John Miles 

No, I’ve really enjoyed this. Thank you. 

Pete Mockaitis 

All right. Well, now could you give us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?  

John Miles 

This one is from Henry David Thoreau, and he says that “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” And I also love the quote by Mark Twain, that 20 years from now, you can look back upon your life, and you can either choose to live it by stepping out into the unknown, or you can choose to live it, as Sharon Salzberg said, in constant anticipation of what if or could be.  

Pete Mockaitis 

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

John Miles 

So, some research that I really like is that of Dr. Benjamin Hardy and some of the work that he’s done with Dan Sullivan. Top of mind to me is some of the work that he’s done on future self where he’s looked at the difference between the gap versus the gain, where so many of us live in this comparison trap where we’re constantly living our lives in the gap because we’re trying to compare who we are to some ideal that is just almost impossible for us to achieve. 

It would be like me trying to compare myself as a speaker to Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, or to Ed Mylett, or someone who’s been doing this to an extremely professional level. Whereas, I could be looking at my life in the gains that I’m making where I’m comparing my current self to my past self, and looking at the incremental progress that I’ve made. And I think that’s really important when we think about the life that we want to craft, is, “How do we develop the mindset shift from going from the comparison trap of living in the gap to living our lives more in the gains?” 

 Pete Mockaitis 

And a favorite book? 

John Miles 

I think one of the most profound books I’ve ever read that’s influenced me personally was Quiet by Susan Cain.  

Pete Mockaitis 

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

John Miles 

At first, I was fearing what AI would do, and so I was trying to not use it, but I’ve really figured that it’s not going away. So, if AI is going to be around for a long time, I better become an expert at using it. So, I have really been going further and further down the rabbit hole of what are different ways that you can use AI to make not only your career better, but your life better. 

Pete Mockaitis 

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

John Miles 

True success really comes down to winning the battle with yourself. Those, I believe, who persist in the pursuit of their dreams, no matter what the hurdles, are the winners in life because they’ve won over their weaknesses. And to me, that is really a profound thing that I want people to take away, is that we all have our different definitions of success. 

But to me, the biggest battle that any of us have is with the inner critic that presents itself to us at each and every day, and learning how to win over that critic, and to overcome the self-limiting beliefs that hold so many of us back, to me is the key to what Sharon Salzberg was talking about in how we choose to live our life, whether we choose to live it in excellence or with ignorance. 

Pete Mockaitis 

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

John Miles 

So, the two best places would be my two websites. If you want to learn more about me personally, you can go to JohnRMiles.com. If you want to learn more about the Passion Struck Movement, my podcast, things like that, you can go to PassionStruck.com. And a really great thing that people can do, if they want to try it out, is I created a quiz when I launched the book that will help people understand where they sit on the Passion Struck continuum. It’s about 20 questions, it takes about 10 minutes, and they can find that on PassionStruck.com. 

Pete Mockaitis 

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

John Miles 

Yes. Often our choice of career is dictated more by the allure of stability and safety than by passion and fulfillment. And I ended up being about 20 years into my career when I came to the profound realization that I had become an absolute expert at making money for others and making others dreams come true, but I wasn’t making my own dreams come true. 

So, really, it’s confronting this fear of uncertainty that pushes many of us towards professions that we feel less connection to, resulting in what I think is so many people feeling unfulfilled or disengaged in the workplace. So, what I would encourage people to do is to take that other path, the path to start making your own dreams come true, and finding something that you feel is fulfilling at your heart, and that you wake up just with this unending desire and passion and ignition within that it’s propelling you to just want to do that with your life. And that really gets down to exploiting your uniqueness, your unique gifts, to find a problem that’s worth solving in the service of others. 

 Pete Mockaitis 

Beautiful. Well, John, thank you. I wish you many more adventures and days of passion. 

John Miles 

Well, thank you so much, Pete, for having me on your show. That was an absolute phenomenal interview, and I can see why your show is so popular. 

Pete Mockaitis 

Well, thank you. Appreciate that. 

959: Daniel Goleman on How to Master Your Attention, Stop Negativity, and Work Optimally

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Famed emotional intelligence researcher Daniel Goleman shares tools for more productive and fulfilling work days.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The five-minute technique for mastering your attention
  2. The technique Special Forces use to stay cool and calm 
  3. How to quiet the negative voice inside your head 

About Daniel

Psychologist and author of Emotional Intelligence, Daniel Goleman has transformed the way the world educates children, relates to family and friends, leads, and conducts business. A frequent speaker on campuses and to businesses of all kinds and sizes, he has worked with organizations around the globe, examining the way social and emotional competencies impact the bottom-line.  

Ranked one of the 10 most influential business thinkers by the Wall Street Journal, Goleman’s articles in the Harvard Business Review are among the most frequently requested reprints. He has won many awards, including the HBR McKinsey Award for best article of the year. Harvard’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences awarded him its Centennial Medallion. Apart from his writing on emotional intelligence, Goleman has written books on topics including self-deception, creativity, transparency, meditation, social and emotional learning, eco-literacy and the ecological crisis.  

His latest book, Optimal, shows why emotional intelligence can help each of us have rewarding and productive days. Daniel Goleman’s online Emotional Intelligence Program found at danielgolemanemotionalintelligence.com, offers anyone a deep understanding of the competencies of self-awareness, self-management, empathy and social skill.  

Resources Mentioned

Daniel Goleman Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Dan, welcome.

Daniel Goleman

Thank you, Pete. Pleasure to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about some insights from your book, “Optimal: How to Sustain Personal and Organizational Excellence Every Day” but first I think, when people hear and see your name, they think, “Oh! Emotional intelligence!” So, you’ve been pursuing this stuff for, well, how long has it been?

Daniel Goleman

The first book was in ’95.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, there you go.

Daniel Goleman

When you were probably in nursery school, I would guess. I don’t know.

Pete Mockaitis

I was 12 years old.

Daniel Goleman

Twelve years old, there you go. So, I’ve been doing it a long time and it’s really interesting. The research has gotten better, that’s why I did this book. And when I did the first book, it was really kind of hypothetical, anecdotal. Now I wrote “Optimal” with Cary Cherniss, who was my fellow co-director of a consortium for research on emotional intelligence, and we’re just basically harvesting lots of research.

But in terms of how to be awesome at work, I think the most interesting research comes out of Harvard Business School. It’s what we start the book with. It’s a profile of a good day, and it comes from a study where they had hundreds of men and women keep a journal about what it was like today at work and what happened and how they felt. And from that there’s a kind of composite of a perfect day at work and it goes like this.

You’re very engrossed and engaged in what you’re doing. You’re totally focused. You’re not distracted. You like what you’re doing. You feel good. You’re in upstate, and you feel very connected with the people you’re working with. That turns out to be a high productivity state. And leadership is the art of getting work done well through other people. So, when you’re in that state, you’re helping your boss, and your boss knows it, but you’re also being at your best.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, yeah, that sounds like a fantastic place to be. So, tell us, how often do we tend to get there as professionals? Like what proportion of our days fall into this good-day zone?

Daniel Goleman

That’s a question that we don’t have an empirical answer for, but I would say it also varies a huge amount from person to person. And the lovely thing about this particular zone of high productivity is it’s different from the famous flow state. The flow state is that one time you were absolutely at your best, you know, you can’t believe how well you did. The problem with flow is that it just happens to you. You can’t make it happen. You can’t produce it.

The optimal state, on the contrary, is on the same spectrum, a little lower than flow I would say, but your attention is very important. And, in fact, attention is a way to get into that optimal state. Paying full attention to what you’re doing now or what’s most important to you right now as a doorway into the optimal state.

And the nice thing about attention is it’s a muscle. It’s a muscle of the mind. It’s like, you know, when you go to the gym and you lift weights, every rep makes that muscle that much stronger. It’s the same thing with the brain circuitry for attention. If you do an attention training or attention development exercise, you get better and better at it.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Cool. Well, so I’d love to hear, could you tell us perhaps a story of someone who wasn’t having such a good proportion of these optimal days, and they were able to do some cool brain training in order to turn that around, and what happened for them?

Daniel Goleman

Well, the brain training I’ll share with your listeners, it’s very simple. Sometimes it’s called mindfulness of the breath. It’s just if you take any meditation method and you strip away the belief system from a cognitive science point of view, they’re all developing attention. They’re all helping you ignore distraction, which today is worse than ever for people. We all have these little phones with us that carry the things that interests us the most, which are our biggest distractions.

So, by bringing your attention to your breath, the in-breath and the out-breath, and then the next breath, the in-breath and the out-breath, doing that systematically as a training, the same way you go to a gym, for example. It turns out that the research shows that this makes people better and better at bringing their focus to what they need to do right now, and that is how that state blossoms, the optimal state.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, that’s lovely. Could you share with us any particular studies or quantification of just how much better we get at that and how much of a dose I need to do of this sort of a practice in order to reach those benefits?

Daniel Goleman

Well, I did another book called “Altered Traits” which reviewed all of the hard science about all this, and it shows there’s basically a dose-response relationship that is the more you do it, the better you get, the better the benefits. I would recommend people who’ve never done this starting with just five minutes a day and then building up from there. The longer you do it the better it is, and that means that the stronger the circuitry for paying attention gets.

There was a study done at Harvard that shows people are distracted about 50% of the time, generally, in life. More so at work, it turns out. And so, if you want to be in a better state, if you want to be at your best at work, this is the kind of thing that will help you do that because it helps you ignore distractions.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And with regard to this dose-response curve, I’m wondering, is there a point of diminishing returns, like after you’re doing six hours, it’s not doing much more for you than when you’re doing five hours? Where would we put that?

Daniel Goleman

Well, frankly, very few people are going to do it five or six hours. You’d rather be like a monk or a nun or something to do it that much. But if you do it over years, if you do it maybe a half hour a day every day for a long time, you start to see, we’ve seen in our research, many more benefits from this.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And can you tell us about the particulars for how that’s done excellently? So, if we’re, for example, I’ve heard it said that it is ideal to have a posture that is alert yet relaxed, like you’re not lying down, and if you’re sitting, you’re not hunched over and you’re not standing at an attention, can you talk to us a little bit about the nuances or the particulars that make a practice optimal?

Daniel Goleman

Definitely. Well, first of all, before you get to your posture, let’s get to where you’re going to do this and when. You’ve got to find a time in your day when you can be someplace where no one’s going to disturb you. You don’t have to answer the phone, kids aren’t going to come in, or the dog is not going to jump on your lap, whatever it is, and you need a space you can control or can be controlled for you.

And then the basic instruction, as you said, is just to sit up straight. Not tense, relaxed, with your spine straight. You can do it in a chair easily, and then bring your attention to your breath, the in-breath and the out-breath, and then the next breath, the in-breath and the out-breath. Then your mind is going to wander at some point, and when you notice it wandered, you bring it back to the next breath. That’s the critical moment. That’s the strengthener because that’s a moment of mindfulness. It’s when you bring your mind back from distraction to the point of focus, where you get the payoff from this.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And if I can maybe vocalize a concern or response, “But, Dan, that sounds so boring!”

Daniel Goleman

People actually often say the opposite.

Pete Mockaitis

Pray tell.

Daniel Goleman

They say, “My mind is…I can’t control my mind.” Rather than nothing happening, too much is happening. And the answer is good for you. That means you’re finally paying attention to how your mind actually is.

That’s a normal beginning response. You start to see how active your mind actually is. Usually, we don’t notice it. We get carried away. We pay attention to this and to that and to this and that. We go wherever our mind does, but then you realize you don’t have to do that. You can start to control your mind. So, that’s a normal response. People rarely say they’re bored.

Here’s what you need to understand, Pete. The body is designed to have a fight or flight response, technically sympathetic nervous system arousal, to an emergency, to stress. The problem for so many of us at work is that it’s unremitting. It’s relentless. You’re stressed all the time. You never have a chance to do what the body needs, which is a recovery period. It’s called parasympathetic arousal, and it’s the downtime when the body rests and recovers. And if you never get that, you’re going to become emotionally exhausted that leads to burnout.

The antidote is something I really urge people to do, which is to schedule something that’s recovery for you, that’s relaxing, you know, playing with a pet or a kid, or being with a loved one, or meditation, yoga, walk in nature, whatever does it for you, but schedule it every day because it seems like it’s irrelevant. Like you were saying, “Well, isn’t this going to sound boring to people?” No, this is important. This is your time to yourself to help yourself be ready for the next period of stress, which is so-called work.

Pete Mockaitis

And, Dan, tell me, if some say, “You know, the way I really like to unwind is by watching movies or playing video games or being on social media,” does that count, Dan? Or, what do you think about that?

Daniel Goleman

Well, I would say that those are other forms of distraction. Sorry, I don’t think they count as recovery. Recovery is a time when you don’t think about those things you otherwise ruminate about and worry about. So, it needs to be something where you break the flow, maybe it’s a video game for you, but if you get really, like, into the game and I’m very excited by the game, it’s not recovery. Sorry. It’s what we call eustress. It’s a form of stress. It might be enjoyable, but still, it’s not that total rest and relaxation and recovery. That’s what you need.

Pete Mockaitis

I think that’s well said, because I guess, whether it’s a movie or a game or whatever, some of them are intense, like, “I’m shooting down 99 other people,” and others are more chill, like, “Okay, we’re making some lines in Tetris. All right. Here we go, doo-doo-doo-doo, in the groove.”

Daniel Goleman

But if you were to be measuring the physiology, your physiology, while you do that, it’s just as bad when you’re stressed.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So, here we go, we got one key principle, is that great days consist of doing stuff with uninterrupted focused attention on a thing, and one way we can get better at that is by doing a mindfulness practice and making sure that we have some restorative breaks built into our world. Tell us, what are some of the other master keys to being optimal?

Daniel Goleman

One of them goes back to Reinhold Niebuhr’s “Serenity Prayer.” You know that prayer that’s used in AA?

Pete Mockaitis

That’s right, yeah.

Daniel Goleman

“Give me the wisdom to know the difference between the things I can change and the things I can’t.” And implicit in that is the ability to adjust to things we can’t. So, think about your boss at work, some people are lucky and they have a great boss and some people aren’t so lucky. I’ve gone around the world asking different business groups, “Tell me about a boss you hated and a boss you loved, and a quality that made that boss so awful or so good.”

And the bad boss is invariably kind of an emotional Neanderthal, and the good boss is, frankly, emotionally intelligent. It’s someone who’s available, who’s empathetic, who’s supportive, who gives you clear direction, things like that. So, if you have a bad boss, day in and day out, or bad working circumstance, the question is, “What can you do in that situation that you can’t change, you have to live with, to make it more manageable for you?” And what I would say is manage your internal state.

I once had a boss that I hated and I became kind of avid meditator in the morning, so that when I went to work, I’d be at my best. So I could stand him, basically, and do my best work. And I would say that managing your internal state is something you have control over. I don’t know if you, Pete, you’re familiar with the book, “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl.

It’s a great book, and Frankl survived four years in Nazi concentration camps. And he said the way he did it was by managing his internal reaction to what was going on, and that’s what saved him. And I think it’s very profound because it implies any of us can have more control over our inner world. And it’s our inner world, bottom line, that makes the difference for how we feel at the end of the day.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, I love that. So, let’s talk about some of the practices by which we can manage our inner world and our emotional states. So, you have a scenario for there’s a bad boss, someone you dread interacting with, seeing, experiencing, and one approach is doing some mindfulness meditation practice in preparation for that. What are some of the other super effective tools you suggest we can use for managing our own internal emotional states?

Daniel Goleman

So, the mindfulness, the breath, the attention training that I mentioned, the payoff from that is gradual. It’s not like you’re going to do that at work. You’re going to do it every day or a few days a week, and the benefits come slowly. I would say if you know you’re going into a stressful encounter, you’re going to be with that person you can’t stand, for example, whoever that is, there’s something that’s used by Special Forces that I recommend. It’s a controlled breathing method. It’s called box breath, and it has a very powerful effect on your physiology.

The box breath is sometimes called four by four by four. You breathe in deeply so your belly expands. You hold your breath for as long as it’s comfortable, and then you exhale for as long as it’s comfortable. And if you do that, six to nine times, it actually changes your physiology, your body state, from being tensed, fight or flight, sympathetic nervous arousal, to that recovery mode, to parasympathetic.

It lowers heart rate. It lowers blood pressure, and it does it on the spot. And you can you can do it at work, it’s not that obvious what you’re doing. And it’s used by Special Forces, for example, before they’re going to go into a big whatever that they know they’ve got to prepare for. And I say why not use it at work?

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. Now, Dan, I’m loving this. So, I’ve heard of box breathing, and I’ve done it, and you’ve got some nuances there that I just delight in there. So, now I had heard it suggested that you do, it’s a box, like your inhale time, your hold while inhaled, your exhale time, and your hold while exhaled are the same. So, it’s like you could draw a box with four completely equal sides. And so, I had heard like, “Oh, do for, like, four seconds.” And so, you’re saying, “Ah, instead of doing four seconds, do it as long as you comfortably can on each of the four steps of the way.”

Daniel Goleman

Yeah, and it might be six seconds for someone. Who knows? I don’t think counting the seconds is the point. I think tuning into what’s comfortable for you is more to the point, and if you can hold it longer than the count of four, do it. If you can hold your breath for longer than that, if you can exhale for longer than that. In other words, find what works for you in this.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And also, you said six to nine times. I love the specificity. And so, that has been shown in the research to get the job done, that that amount of breathing will have a noticeable difference, just six to nine of those loops?

Daniel Goleman

That’s right.

Pete Mockaitis

Beautiful. So, like three-ish minutes and you’ve got a transformation. That’s what I’m talking about, Dan. Thank you. All right. Well, hey, lay it on us. What else we got? We got the mindfulness meditation. We’ve got the box breathing. What are some of your other faves for the emotional state management?

Daniel Goleman

If you’d like a third approach, one thing that some people find very useful is monitoring that voice inside our head that gets us out of bed in the morning, it has us propelled through our day, and then puts us to sleep at night. That’s self-talk, it’s called, technically. And monitoring self-talk, you may find, for example, that you’re being too critical of yourself, many people are. You may fixate on the things you did wrong and not encourage the things or celebrate the things that you do well. That is a way that we make things even more stressful for ourselves.

And so, there’s a wonderful book called “Learned Optimism” by a guy named Martin Seligman, a psychologist at Penn. And what he says is that you can talk back. You don’t have to believe your thoughts. And you can, if you find that you’re being overly critical, that you ruminate about the things you got wrong, he’d say, “You know, remember the things that you do right, the things that you do well.” In other words, look at your strengths, not just at your weaknesses.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So, monitoring the self-talk, I hear you there in terms of our self-talk may be like, “Oh, you always screw this up. You’re such a loser. This is rubbish. Oh, this is not going to work out. It never works out. This is too stressful. Why do I… How did I commit to this? How did I get myself into this?” Okay, so we got that groove. Not so encouraging. So, when it comes to the monitoring, I mean, I can maybe notice, “Oh, I got some negative self-talk going on here.” When it comes to monitoring, what is the practice or protocol or approach?

Daniel Goleman

In cognitive therapy, which uses this approach, they often will tell someone, “Notice what you keep telling yourself.” Very often, the critiques are repetitive. It’s like the same thing in various forms over and over and over again. And prepare yourself, rehearse something you could say back to those thoughts. Like, “I screwed that thing up at work, and that proves to me because of my negative self-talk that I’m an idiot.”

But what could you say to yourself when you notice you’re doing that negativity thing? You could say, “Actually, you know, usually I don’t mess up. Usually, I do pretty well. And I remember this time and that time and that time that I actually did just fine.” And so, you purposely bring that to mind to counteract the negative thoughts.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. So, we’ve got some rehearsal in advance. Lay it on us in terms of, if I’ve got some self-talk that says, “Ugh, I’m so tired. I really just don’t feel like dealing with this. This is so overwhelming,” what are some good responses?

Daniel Goleman

So, it sounds to me, Pete, that you’re evoking a situation where it’s kind of relentless and you’re feeling burned out. Is that right?

Pete Mockaitis

It could be burnout. It could just be dread or reluctance or procrastination, in general. It’s like, “Oh, this is a task I don’t feel like dealing with, and here it is. Ugh.”

Daniel Goleman

Okay. So, maybe you remind yourself, “Why do I need to do this? Why is this important? This is part of my job,” maybe. “And what is my state right now?” you might ask yourself. “And what can I do to upgrade it so that I can be up to the task?” I think one thing you can do is pay more attention to what you’re doing right now. One of the things that you’re letting happen, I suppose, is that your attention is just wandering, “Oh, I don’t want to think about this. I don’t want to do this.” You’re just basically letting yourself be distracted. And so, you could intentionally up your focus right then, “You know, I don’t love this thing that I have to do, but I have to do it for this reason, and so I’m going to really do it. I’m going to pay full attention to what I need to do.”

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, Dan, tell us, when it comes to having optimal days, we’ve covered a few things here. Where should we go next?

Daniel Goleman

Well, it turns out that emotional intelligence allows this more often. Emotional intelligence is four parts: self-awareness, managing your emotions, empathy, and relationship management. That’s the whole package, and some of us are better at some parts and less good at others. So, I’ve been talking about the first two parts, self-awareness and self-management; tuning into what you’re feeling and then managing those feelings. But there are other aspects of self-management. It’s not just about reducing the negative emotions, like, “I can’t stand this. I hate my boss,” whatever it may be. That’s part of it.

But another part is marshaling positive emotions, being optimistic, being positive about what’s happening, keeping your eye on goals that matter to you. Maybe you don’t like this particular part of your job, but you know that you want to advance at work. Maybe that’s a long-term goal. So, you remember that at that time, and you tell yourself, “This is part of the job I really don’t like, but I have to do a good job because I’m going up the ladder,” perhaps. That’s one way of doing it.

Then there’s empathy. Empathy is really interesting, Pete. There are three kinds of empathy. One is cognitive empathy, “I understand how you think about things. I see your perspective.” AI is very good at cognitive empathy. But then there’s emotional empathy, “I know how the person in front of me feels because I get a sense of it in my body.” There are actually, when you have eye contact in a real interaction, face-to-face, you establish a kind of invisible, instantaneous, unconscious bridge, brain-to-brain, and emotions pass very effectively on that bridge, so you tune in to what’s going on, and you pick it up. That’s emotional empathy.

The third kind of empathy is actually the one that we want in our boss. It’s called empathic concern, “I not only know how you think and feel, I care about you.” And these are each based in different parts of the brain. So, if you have a boss who has this third kind of empathy, you feel you can trust that person, you feel rapport with them. If you are a boss, if you have direct reports, and you’re that kind of person, then the people who work for you are more likely to give their best effort because they like you as a person.

They feel that you support them. You might even inspire them. You might articulate some meaning or purpose to what we’re doing that is even greater than the job itself. And that turns out to get the best efforts out of people. But at the very least, you can guide them, you can coach them, you can help them get better at what they’re doing. All of that makes people feel really good about their boss. So, that’s the third part. And then there’s putting that all together to have effective relationships.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, I’m curious, Dan. Let’s say, folks, their hearts are in the right place. They would like to demonstrate this and provide this for the people they care about in their lives, their colleagues, their friends and family. Assuming that’s there, what are some ways folks fall short in terms of, like, maybe they’re unconscious, that there are things that they’re doing or not doing that are just sabotaging their ability to effectively be empathetic, empathic, in a way that that folks can receive and appreciate?

Daniel Goleman

Well, one of the common colds of this is having relationships that are purely transactional where you only talk about what needs to be done. You never talk about the person, “How are you doing? What’s your life like?” In fact, one thing that I advise, I’m often asked, “What can we do when we work only by Zoom? We never meet each other.”

You know in the old days, or maybe still in some workplaces, you have a nine-to-five situation where you’re with someone five days a week for all those hours and it’s just natural that you find out about them as a person. You get to know them. It’s the, “Let’s have lunch together,” or, “Let’s have a beer after work,” or just around the cooler, water cooler, whatever it is.

But casual conversation matters because it knits people together. And if you don’t have that, if you’re working by Zoom, I think it’s important, particularly if you’re a leader, say, of a team, to replace that with a one-on-one, with the individuals on that team, for example, where you talk about the person, not the job, “But what do you want from life, from your career?” for example, or, “How can I help you?” That starts a very different kind of connection.

Pete Mockaitis

Alrighty.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, now could you tell us about a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Daniel Goleman

The first person to benefit from compassion or caring about other people is the person who feels it.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Daniel Goleman

Well, one thing I like talking about are the studies that established the social brain circuitry, which are relatively new in neuroscience, and one of them had to do with a neuron in a monkey’s brain that only fired when that monkey lifted its arm. This was a lab in Italy. One day, the neuron was firing, the brain cell was firing, and the monkey wasn’t moving, and they didn’t know why.

Then they realized it was a hot day in Italy. A lab assistant had gone out for a gelato. He’s standing in front of the monkey, and every time he raises his arm to take a lick of the gelato, the monkey’s brain cell for that same movement fired. That was the discovery of mirror neurons. And it turns out that the human brain is peppered with mirror neurons, and they tell us what the person in front of us is not just doing and intending, but what they’re feeling. Mirror neurons are a very important aspect of the social brain and of empathy.

Pete Mockaitis

And a favorite book?

Daniel Goleman

I’ll say “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Daniel Goleman

Listening.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Daniel Goleman

I’d point them to my website, DanielGoleman.info.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Daniel Goleman

Pay attention.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, Dan, this is fun. I wish you many optimal days.

Daniel Goleman

Thank you. Likewise, Pete. Great.

954: Rewriting Your Source Code: How to Identify and Cure the 12 Patterns Holding You Back with Dr. Sam Rader

By | Podcasts | 2 Comments

 

Dr. Sam Rader discusses a fresh approach to identify and cure the unconscious patterns that keep us from living fully.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The surprising origins of many work dysfunctions
  2. The 12 coping styles and their antidotes
  3. How to build your patience for annoying co-workers 

About Sam

Dr. Sam Rader is a former psychologist who took what she learned about childhood development, personality, and growth and turned it into a new quantum healing  modality called Source Code.

She is the author of SOURCE CODE, a forthcoming book about the 12 Coping Styles we adopt in childhood, which helped us then and hurt us now, and how we can heal. Dr. Sam believes that our early childhood experience writes a source code within us, which determines the rest of the way that our story unfolds. She helps people rewrite their code for a healthier, more beautiful life. 

Resources Mentioned

Dr. Sam Rader Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Dr. Sam, welcome.

Dr. Sam Rader

Hi, Pete. I’m so happy to be here.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, I’m happy to be here as well. Mawi sang your praises so strongly, I was like, “Well, I’ve got to hear what all this is about.” So, let’s jump right in and tell us, what is Source Code in your parlance and lingo?

Dr. Sam Rader

Sure. So, Source Code is a new technique and theory that I’ve developed over the last 13 years. I was a psychologist for 18 years, and during that time, I started seeing all these patterns in all of my clients across everyone, no matter their walk of life, where they’re from, who they are. They all seem to have the same 12 problems. And once I saw these patterns, I started working with those instead of any other old ways of diagnosing things. I just saw them as these patterns.

And over time, I found that the ways to heal them are quicker when we bypass the mind and just work with the patterns themselves as sort of symbolic energies, and I can speak more about that later. But as we’ve done this, I’ve developed this new way of healing. It’s an alternative to coaching and therapy, and I call it Source Code. And Source Code is based on the premise that in our first five years of life, our early experience writes a code deep within us. And that coding kind of becomes the algorithm that runs our matrix of reality for as long as we live.

So, we keep reliving the same patterns and problems that we had from our family system when we were little, keep attracting and reenacting it, and we’re not even aware of it. It’s kind of like living in an invisible prison. And what I do is I help people jailbreak. We kind of liberate ourselves from these life-long unconscious patterns so that we can finally feel truly free and feel more connected to our essence of love and joy and peace.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, boy, intriguing stuff. Okay. So, more love, joy, peace. Sounds great. I mean, I think we could all sign up for that, but I got to be true to the ethos of the show, “But, Sam, how’s that going to make me more awesome at my job?”

Dr. Sam Rader

I know, it’s so good. It’s such a good one. Well, so, Source Code is based on the premise that we live in a fractal universe, and let me explain what I mean by that. Fractals are, probably, your audience has seen 3D renderings of them online. They look kind of trippy and psychedelic and beautiful, but it’s really a mathematical equation representing how there’s a pattern that repeats at scale.

So, when you look at a fractal image, it’s got a certain amount of squigglies and doodly dots, and if you were to zoom all the way in microscopically, it’s that same exact pattern. Zoom all the way out, same pattern, all the way to the left, all the way to the right. It’s the same exact pattern that keeps repeating. So, when we’re encoded in our first five years of life with these patterns, these what I call our coping styles or the glitches in our matrix, they keep repeating at scale in every area of our lives, including our work life.

So, if we’re always a pushover because we had a parent that was highly dominating, we are going to attract best friends who dominate us. We’re going to attract lovers who dominate us. We’re also going to attract bosses at work who dominate us, and we’re going to keep doing that pushover people-pleaser thing and feel like we can never say no and never hold a boundary. This is just one of the 12 potential glitches that I’m outlining now, and it deeply affects our work life. It deeply affects our finances, how we show up at work, the circumstances we attract at work, what we’re capable of, and the money we’re able to make is all determined by our coping styles.

Pete Mockaitis

Intriguing. So, that, in essence, it sounds like I could have one or maybe multiple. Or, what’s your take?

Dr. Sam Rader

We all have several of the coping styles because none of our parents were able to get it right so many times because they were working with their own coping styles. So, I personally had all 12, which is what allowed me to be the conduit for the work. Most people have like a dominant, maybe five or eight of them. But, yeah, we all have a combination of them.

And another cool thing about the fractal is like that whole thing, “as within and so without,” that, let’s say, you’re a business owner. If you have a certain holding pattern in your energetic system that repeats in your life, your business is going to be an exact reflection of that same holding pattern inside of you. So, when I do coding work with CEOs and business leaders, when we code out all the glitches inside of them, lo and behold, all their clients start acting differently, their employees start acting differently, the money starts flowing, the whole organization feels completely different because the organization is just an extension of them.

So, whatever we’re embodying, whatever patterns we have, those patterns are going to show up exactly reflected in our work and in our businesses.

Pete Mockaitis

Could you give us a cool example of someone who identified one of these patterns, took some actions, and then saw some cool transformation unfold in their career life?

Dr. Sam Rader

Absolutely, yeah. I was recently working with this CEO and founder of a consumer product company, and what we discovered was that his core wound was what I call the “withstanding subtype of the frustrated coping style.” So, let me break that down for you.

When we’re little, around 10 months of age to 4 years old, we’re developing our will. We’re developing our sense of what we can and can’t control with our will. If we are overly frustrated, during that time and our will doesn’t get to matter, we won’t be heard, things are really hard around us, we become frustrated. We develop the frustrated coping style and it haunts us through life. But there’s four subtypes to frustrated, and the one this man was working with is called withstanding.

Withstanding is when we grew up in a family that was kind of extremely harsh, things were really hard. Maybe we were abused literally or emotionally. It was like high neglect or high abuse, just like really painful stuff, right? And so what we do on the inside to cope with that is that we become withstanding, resilient, durable, unbreakable, unbeatable, “I’m going to be so firm that none of that pummeling from the outside is going to break me or destroy me,” right?

And so, for this client, as we started processing it for him, he said he identified with the Man of Steel, like Superman, right, who can withstand anything. But the thing is, when you’re in the Man of Steel embodiment, because you’ve had to withstand so much abuse from the outside, that Man of Steel embodiment is paired together with a villain on the outside. There’s no superhero without a villain. He’d just be Clark Kent, otherwise, right?

So, what would happen in this man’s business is he’d be going along, thinking he was doing the right thing, and then, all of a sudden, the other businesses he was doing deals with, they would do these sinister, villainous, damaging things to him, and he would have to be that resilient, durable, withstanding Man of Steel because that’s the fractal pattern he was living inside of. So, he kept attracting and reenacting these circumstances where he’d be beat down, and disappointed, and the rug pulled out, and pummeled, and he’d have to just keep withstanding it.

So, once we were able to do the work and soften all that need to withstand, and realize that there can be an entirely new reality beyond the harsh, beyond the hard, where things actually get to be easy, which is the antidote to withstanding. Each coping style has a corresponding antidote. When things get to be easy, all of a sudden, the business starts taking off in a more effortless way and business partners and associates are coming in with kindness, fairness, gentleness, collaboration, playfulness, warmth, instead of that pummeling from the outside that was so familiar.

So, we were able to switch the story he was living in, and recode his matrix so that now he’s living in a world that’s easy and in flow instead of hard and challenging and “Aargh!”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, cool. Thank you. I dig that story. And it was funny, as you were talking, I was thinking a little bit about David Goggins’ book, Can’t Hurt Me, in terms of that’s very much the story. We had some abuse and then he became the hardest mother-fer alive, is kind of his tagline, and I don’t know the particulars as to his business partners or what has gone down there. But, yeah, I can sort of see how, indeed, certain experiences could form us to cope, have a coping style in a certain way.

I guess what I’m wrestling with a little bit is, talk to me about this word “attracting” in terms of what is the pathway or mechanism by which that unfolds in reality?

Dr. Sam Rader

Yeah, so if someone is showing up in meetings and in life as the Man of Steel, or whatever that guy’s book was, “I’m a badass mother-fer,” right? If you’re showing up into meetings and in that embodiment, “Come on, bring it on,” what is that going to elicit from the outside? A fight. A struggle. It’s just natural. It’s just instinct. You’re showing up ready for a fight, “Come on, try to break me,” and then that’ll happen.

And if you show up soft and present, and in a different kind of power, a power that’s not like, “Try me!” but a power that’s like, “Let’s try this. Let’s work together. This is my power.” It’s an invitation for the other to be collaborative, to be gentle, to be harmonious and synergistic in how our powers can work together. So, you can just think about, “Man, how I show up in my body and my energy really does impact what happens next in my story.”

Pete Mockaitis

Absolutely. So, let’s hear the rundown, perhaps, just the couple-minute version of what are the 12 coping styles, just like the listing, and then the alternative, just so we could hear the definition and perhaps see ourselves, or start to a little bit, like, “Oh yeah, that does feel kind of familiar to my experience”?

Dr. Sam Rader

The first coping style I call “disconnected,” and the disconnected coping style is when we essentially learned that we wouldn’t be understood by our caregivers, and so we figured that maybe we don’t belong in this world. So, we feel separate in some indefinable way than the rest of society. We feel like an outcast, we feel like an alien or a weirdo, we feel like we don’t belong in this time and space and place and planet.

And so, we found ways to disconnect, and we really struggle with feeling misunderstood a lot, feeling like an outsider, feeling like there’s no point in even trying to explain ourselves because no one could fully understand. And that causes a lot of ruptures, and it’s really not easy to maintain connection because connection feels really confusing and bad, and disconnecting is the only thing that feels safe.

So, if we’re disconnected the antidote is to become connected. And to do that we learn how to feel our feelings, share our feelings, repair the ruptures, take the risk to let people know what’s going on for us, let them know what we need so that we can actually get in that loop of connection and communication where things get to be a fit.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay.

Dr. Sam Rader

The next coping style I call frictive and it’s when there’s a lot of intensity and energy in the body. We feel like we can never stop going, and moving, and doing, and thinking, and it’s because, subconsciously, we’re quite afraid of disappearing. This comes from not having enough physical containment as a little one. And so, the physical containment being squeezed and held from all sides, especially as newborns, is what allows us to feel like we have a body and have a self and we’re not disappearing.

And so, without that kind of physical containment, we feel like we’re always at risk of coming apart and fragmenting, and so we have to create a friction that keeps us tethered to this world so that we don’t essentially fall off the edge of the earth and die. So, that friction means we never get to rest or pause because, in the silence and stillness, it feels like there’s a void that could swallow us up. It’s a very existential wound.

So, what it looks like as adults is you’re just kind of anxious, and manic, and talking fast, and doing a lot, and really can’t slow the self down and rest. And if you’re frictive, you think about at work, you know, it’s like work always has to be some drama. There’s always a rush. There’s always a drama. There’s always a challenge and the friction and this, because it’s the friction that makes us feel alive and feel connected to something. So, the antidote to frictive is to be spacious where things can be really easy and gentle and quiet and kind of effortless and things don’t have to be so high drama anymore.

The third coping style I call omnipotent. And this is when, well, the word, let’s break down the word. Omni, all; potent, powerful. So, when we’re omnipotent, we actually feel so out of control because everything affects us so deeply, we’re hypersensitive, everything in our environment impacts us so deeply, we need everything just so, or else we feel very, very reactive and very frightened and get very angry very fast. And so, we feel we need to try to have complete control over everything and everyone around us. That’s omnipotent, all-powerful.

And that’s actually secretly because we don’t know how to self-soothe. We don’t know that, instead of controlling everything out there, we could actually just take care of ourselves in here and start to feel safe. So, instead we become very bossy and demanding. And at work, we might find that our employees are scared of us, they perceive us as bullies or dominating, and, really, we’re just trying to prevent the chaos. Like, as omnipotence, it feels like, “If I don’t have everything just so, it will devolve into total chaos.”

And so, the antidote to omnipotence is to feel safe. And we do this by kind of creating a psychic skin that we didn’t get to develop as little ones, where we know that something outside isn’t actually us. We don’t have to control it and we don’t have to change it. We can actually just relax and calm ourselves down inside, and know that that thing out there that’s out of place isn’t going to kill us and isn’t us, and that we’re okay even when it doesn’t feel okay.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay.

Dr. Sam Rader

The next coping style I call deprived. This is a big one for people in their careers, but deprived is exactly what it sounds like. It’s when we don’t feel connected to the good stuff. So, it really feels like, “Other people can get the good stuff, but not me. I’m the unlucky one. I’m the one that experiences a lot of limits and lack, and I don’t ever get to be fully resourced. I’m always grabbing and grasping and wanting and longing for the good stuff, but it always stays just out of reach.”

And the antidote to deprived is to become resourced. So, when we’re deprived, it’s often really hard to get ahead financially, because no matter how much money we get, it doesn’t seem to stick around. For some weird reason, we always hover around that zero balance because we’re so used to feeling empty inside. But when we come out of deprived, and we become resourced, we learn how to drink in the infinite well of goodness that’s inside and outside because this universe is so abundant and benevolent.

And when we start to experience ourselves as living in that buoyant state of fulfillment from all that resource that we’re resourcing on, lo and behold, the world starts to reflect that by giving us more income, when we feel more valuable and good inside instead of feeling broken, bad, or empty inside. When we feel good inside and feel full inside, the outside starts to reflect that by us making a lot more money, having a lot more opportunities, and being fulfilled in life.

Pete Mockaitis

All right.

Dr. Sam Rader

So, the next coping style I call symbiotic, and this was the one I was kind of bringing up at the top of the hour where we become pushovers and people-pleasers. We’re really afraid of conflict. We’re afraid of ever saying no, firming up, taking shape, disagreeing, having our own point of view, being separate.

So, we tend to attract a lot of people who are dominating and we become kind of their sidekick, and their yes-person, and we kind of give up ourselves to have them, and we pretend like we have all the same preferences but actually we’re betraying ourselves to do that and to be in that twinship with them. And then after a time, it gets really annoying, and so we bail, and we cut and run, and we’re like, “I got to get rid of you to have me.”

And then the pattern just continues because we find the next dominating person, and we do the same exact thing over and over and over. It’s absolutely exhausting, and you can imagine what happens at work. It’s just, we get totally emptied out, totally used feeling, and then we have to quit and leave and go to the next place and do it all over again.

And we often don’t feel totally respected because we don’t respect ourselves. We often don’t find a lot of value monetarily because we always are in that kind of assistant mentality and embodiment where we can’t really get ahead because we don’t know how to firm up and take aim and be kind of potent because we just have to stay limp and malleable in order to stay in those fused connections with people.

So, the antidote to coming out of symbiotic is to become truly solid. And when we’re solid, we know that we have all the resources and all the capability inside to be able to feed ourselves, and trust ourselves, and have our own compass, and have our own agency. And when we can do that, then we can be more honest with people. We can say no, we can set boundaries, we can become in healthy relationships that are a two-way street, where there’s room for two people negotiating and collaborating rather than losing ourselves in the connection with others.

The next coping style I call premature, and this is when we had to sort of grow up too fast as little ones and take care of other people in the families when we were still kind of babies on our own, kind of toddler times. And so, what we do when we’re premature is we’re over-givers, we’re overachievers, over-doers. So, we’re the ones always planning, contributing, giving, volunteering, nurturing, cooking, caring.

We’re the ones always providing, and so all of our energy goes out to feeding others, and we go hungry. Our needs are always last on the list, and eventually it leads to a lot of burn out, so we can feel very, very drained. Even though it feels really good giving to others, because it generally does feel good giving, if we just keep depleting ourselves and we never nourish ourselves, we never take in any of the goodness that we’re giving to others, it’s an equation that doesn’t really work and it leads to burnout.

So, the antidote to coming out of premature is to become nourished, where we learn that it’s actually okay for us to need and feed. When we’re premature, we worry that our needs are too much and they make us needy, and so we wouldn’t want to ask anyone for help or be a burden. But when we come out of premature, we know that it feels just as good to other people to feed us as it does for us to feed them, and then it becomes a loop of nourishment, and it’s sustainable and very fulfilling.

And this definitely plays out at work if you’re the one picking up the slack for everybody, staying overtime, doing everything for everybody, and you’re starting to feel really drained and depleted, you may have the premature coping style, and it’s time for you to be nourished.

Pete Mockaitis

All right.

Dr. Sam Rader

Okay, the next coping style I call idealizing. And this is a wound about identity, really. But it’s when we’re really hyper-focused on our outsides, meaning anything we could measure or write down on a paper about ourselves, like our looks, our achievements, our status, our level of intelligence, our level of success, and we are constantly caught up in this rat race of comparing ourselves to people who are above us or people who are below us.

And what we never get to do is just stand eye-to-eye and heart-to-heart with people and get to be human, which is the antidote to idealizing. So, when we’re human, we’re more in touch with our sentience, the fact that we’re living beings with thoughts and needs and feelings and values and our essence energy inside of us, which is so much more who we really are than any of those outside things you could measure, which always do, by the way, go up and down, “Maybe today I got the best score on the quiz, and maybe tomorrow I don’t.”

And that ping-ponging up and down between “I’m the best, I’m the worst, I’m the best, I’m the worst” is so painful. When you’re more connected to your humanity and your insides, there’s no ping-ponging because you can’t compare essences. And there could be a lot of freedom in that in the workplace if you’re no longer the one always trying to beat everybody, beat your opponents, get the gold star, be the best, and it really starts to become about your own humanity and your needs, it could really change the game for how work starts to work for you.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay.

Dr. Sam Rader

All right. The next coping style I call frustrated. And I started to speak to this a little bit when I was giving the story of the CEO who had the withstanding subtype of frustrated. But frustrated is a will injury, where, as we’re developing our sense of will, of what we can and can’t control as little ones, we need to feel that we can control some things, that we’re not always crushed and thwarted and blocked by our parents, but we’re allowed to have a say, we’re allowed to make choices, we’re allowed to have a will.

And if for whatever reason our will is blocked, we become frustrated, and there’s nowhere for our power or our anger to go, and so it gets turned inwards, and it actually turns into self-sabotage. This is major for the workplace. If we’re always feeling like “Life is hard, I’m stuck, I can’t,” can’t is such a key word for frustrated, “Things are hard,” “I can’t,” all of that, that is a frustrated experience. And the truth is, that’s how it was when we were little, we couldn’t. Like, the thing outside, the parents were so much bigger than us. Of course, we couldn’t, right?

But we’ve been carrying that baggage with us and calling it true now as adults, which is what was happening with this man who felt he had to be the Man of Steel, and life is hard, and all these challenges. And it’s like once we melted that and we brought him into a state of ease, he was able to get in flow, which is the antidote to frustrated. Coming out of frustrated means owning our no and saying no to things we don’t want to do, and saying yes to things we do want to do.

And so, I say, we’ve got to say no to get in flow. So, if you find yourself at work feeling frustrated, like things are not going the way you want them to go, things aren’t fair, things are unjust, things are such a struggle, think of the places that you haven’t yet said, “You know what? No, I have a boundary here and I don’t want to do X, Y, and Z.” Once you hold that no with your universe, boom, things get in flow and you start to get what you do want, instead of always getting what you don’t want, which is the frustrated coping style.

Pete Mockaitis

Alrighty.

Dr. Sam Rader

And the next coping style is kind of a pair to frustrated. It’s another will injury, but it’s the opposite, which is when our will is actually overindulged. Instead of overly frustrated, it can also be overly indulged. I call this the indulged coping style. This happens when we’re either neglected so no one’s there to block our will, or we’re overindulged by our parents, but basically, whatever we want, we get. And these are kids who kind of would fail the Stanford marshmallow experiment of the “If you don’t eat one now, you can have two later,” right?

We never developed that capacity in our frontal lobes to have any self-restraint. We just want what we want when we want it, and we want to get it, and we want to get it now, and we want to get it at any cost, and we’re not aware at all of how we impact others. And so, that entitlement, that indulgence, that impatience, that “Me, me, me,” it’s really, really rough. And if you find yourself at work, feeling like other people don’t trust you, or they’re kind of shunning you, or they’re kind of like, “This one’s not a team player,” you might be struggling with the indulged coping style. In some ways, it’s one of the most shameful coping styles to have. I had it.

This is how I’ve discovered all 12 is because I have found them in myself. It’s a hard one to reckon with, but if we find the courage to reckon with it, it is a revelation because, really, when we’re indulged, we were just lacking a village. We were lacking a sense of belonging because when you know you belong to a tribe, then you know how you impact others, because you all impact one another. And so, we’ve been living in solitary confinement as empty, lonely consumers, so, of course, we just want to fill that hole. It makes so much sense.

But coming out of indulged is to enter the antidote of interbeing. Interbeing is a term coined by the late Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh, and it means that within every being is every other being that, in this computer that we’re talking through, the silicon parts were mined by miners, and it was part of the dirt and the earth where trees were growing, and all of those things are inside of this computer that we’re looking at each other through. Like, everything that is, is interwoven, inextricably interwoven with everything else. We’re all interconnected.

And so, coming out of indulged is realizing, “Hey, it’s not just me here. I’m part of a larger whole.” And when we do that, we work so much better with our teams, and we actually end up getting what we want, truly want, in a more holistic way than when we’re just grabbing in the moment in that impulsive, entitled way.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And number 10.

Dr. Sam Rader

So, the next one I call the squashed coping style. This one could really be at work, too. So, this is one, as we were developing our sense of power and beauty and magnetism as little ones, somebody was jealous, and so they actually squashed us. They didn’t want us to have that beauty and that power and that shine, and so we now inadvertently squash ourselves.

We keep ourselves small. We dim our light. We hide our shine. We play small. We’re always being the nice one or the invisible one or the one who doesn’t want to step on toes or threaten anyone. And it’s kind of like the archetypes of Cinderella or Harry Potter, and when we’re squashed, we’re usually not aware at all that we have this special sauce, that we’re a Cinderella or a Harry Potter. We don’t realize that we’re actually so beautiful and so powerful and so radiant and so potent that it makes other people envious. We’re not aware of that, but we do keep ourselves small unconsciously.

And so, coming out of squashed is to finally be erect, is to stand up into our full height, and be as radiant and potent and beautiful and powerful as we really are so that we start to become a true leader and an inspiration rather than this fear that we’d be a threat.

So, when we own that we are the radiant, beautiful bell of the ball, things really start to work for us in a new way and other people start to respond to us in a new way, and we’re no longer bullied and we’re no longer shunned, and we actually become a real leader and inspiration. So, this could be huge for people at work. If you’re like, “Why does everyone else seem to get ahead and I always have to play the nice guy?” you may be squashed and your story is not over. You can play in the big leagues. You can go to the ball. It’s time to go to the ball.

Pete Mockaitis

All right.

Dr. Sam Rader

The next coping style I call provocative. If we’re provocative, unfortunately, our parents play out a love triangle with us, where one of them was our object of desire and they kind of overindulged that and played into that with us of like, “Yes, you are my special one and I wish mommy would go away,” or whatever the vibe is, and then the other parent was jealous.

And there is a way to come out of provocative and become clear. That’s the antidote to provocative. So, when we are clear, we understand where the boundaries are “Okay, this person’s my business associate, this person is my secretary, and this person is my lover, and those things are very different, and I’m going to act very differently with those different people because I’m clear.”

Pete Mockaitis

All right.

Dr. Sam Rader

And the final one I call constricted. So, this is when during that time of proto-puberty when we’ve got all this exciting mojo coming through our little bodies, and we are no longer these chubby toddlers, but we want to run and jump and play and, “Tag, you’re it” and “Come, chase me” and be competitive and excitable during this time, how our parents respond to this animal-alive part of us determines how we feel about this part of us.

Whether our parents are overly controlling of that, they say, “Don’t do that. Put your head down. We don’t do this. This is bad. Aggression is bad,” whatever that is, or, if we had parents who were overly amorous, and we saw that that animal part of them got them in trouble in either case, if they were overly controlling, us or if they were out of control, in either case we learned that the animal instinctive wild part of ourselves is bad, and that controlling that part of ourselves is good, and now we’re constricted and we’ve got to hold everything in.

We can’t spill out. We can’t make a mess. We can’t be too wild. We can’t be aggressive. We can’t be expressive. We can’t be tender. We’ve got to keep it all held in, because if we don’t keep it all held in, maybe someone would judge us as weird, or bad, or wrong. And in all of those cases, we would feel humiliated, possibly shunned, and none of that feels okay to us. So, we’ve got a tight lid on ourselves. We have to be hyper-controlled. So, in the same way, an omnipotent person tries to control everything and everyone outside, a constricted person tries to control everything inside, like, “I should never fart,” “I should never scream,” “I should never do anything weird. It’s all got to be held in.”

And the antidote to constricted is to become free. And when we’re free, we get to trust our animal nature, and trust that everything we do and everything that we are is innocent, and that no judge out there has the right to decide what’s innocent or guilty, that we can have an inner authority, and we know that we’re innocent, and we know that our instincts are actually holy and beautiful, and will lead us exactly where we want to go. We don’t have to control them.

It’s actually the repression of them that causes them to act out. But when we know that all these animal parts of us are so good, there’s nothing to restrict or constrict around, then they only do good.

So, when we’re coming out of constricted, we become free. We’re able to express and desire and follow our instincts, and be more animal and alive and vibrant. And when we would stop resisting the flow of life, we can finally feel all the pleasures of being alive. And how this shows up in work is that things start to be a lot more creative, and flowy, and less literally constricted. Like, all the ways that it was like, “Uh-oh, we can’t do this, and we can’t do that, and we can’t do this.” It’s like, “Wait, the sky is the limit. The world is our oyster. Let’s do anything that we feel like doing. I’m free.” And it’s like, “Oh, my God, the workplace becomes so different and the results become so different at work once we’re free.”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, beautiful. Well, I really appreciate you going into the full rundown of the dozen here. And what I like about this lineup is these are patterns I think that we can recognize, like in ourselves or others, like, “Oh, yeah, I know someone who’s kind of like that. I know someone who’s kind of like that,” and it’s sort of handy to have some language and some categories to operate with.

I’m curious, beyond just sort of listening and reflecting, how do we know which ones are active in us? And then what do we do once we know that?

Dr. Sam Rader

Yeah. So, you can go to my website, DrSamRader.com, and take the free quiz, it takes like two minutes, and that’ll give you your “top coping style,” your most prevalent one. And once you do that, there’s like a really sweet little $11 mini course you can take to start unraveling and dissolving and resolving it. And then you can also take, once you get inside that mini course, you can take a full-length test. They can give you all of your coping styles and to what degree you have them, and you can start working on all of those as well.

But it’s funny, you also mentioned the thing about people at work, because once you start to understand the coping styles – and, by the way there’s also a free pocket guide on my website that describes all of them so you can kind of have that handy – you start feeling less annoyed with other people when you understand that it’s just a coping style and where it comes from.

So, for example, if there’s someone at work who’s frictive, who’s always like, “Hey, hey, hey, can I have your attention? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,” and they’re really like needy and intense, and you’re like, “Oh, that person won’t leave me alone,” you can be like, “Oh, they’re frictive. They didn’t have enough physical containment as little ones. Maybe I can just give them a squeeze and a hug, and, wow, they’re much calmer now. Wow, they’re bugging me a lot less.”

So, once you start to understand the motivation of other people’s behavior, it also causes really great team building, you’re much easier to manage others, and be managed by others when you understand what makes them tick, and how you can support them in being a little less in their coping styles and a little more in the antidotes.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, now could you share a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Dr. Sam Rader

One of my favorite studies was of a troop of orangutans in Africa, who, all the alpha males contracted a disease from eating from a garbage pile that was infected, and they all died. And so, traditionally, when new adolescent males join a troop, they’re sort of hazed by the alpha males and the females are not allowed to groom them. But once all the alpha males died out, when the new adolescents would come from other tribes, because that’s what happens to adolescents, leave their troop to go to a new troop so there’s no inbreeding, they would be welcomed by the new matriarchy who would groom them and touch them and welcome them. And they created a completely peaceful, egalitarian, anti-hierarchical troop that survived for nine generations forward that just had a completely different culture.

And why I love that study so much is that even though things can seem so effed up right now on the planet, all it takes is one shift in how we treat one another to create an entirely new culture here on Earth, and that’s my wish for humanity.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And a favorite book?

Dr. Sam Rader

I love the Hafiz, the Sufi poet, and this book translated by Daniel Ladinsky called The Gift. It’s Sufi poetry.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Dr. Sam Rader
“There are no bad people, only hurt people hurt people. And we all need more love, not less.”

Pete Mockaitis

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

Dr. Sam Rader

Come to my website, www.DrSamRader.com, or you can follow me on Instagram @drsamrader. I would love to hear from you. Feel free to DM me. I’d love to chat about what you loved about this interview or not. Or, I’d love to just meet all of you.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Dr. Sam Rader

Yeah. See if you can spot any patterns, the things that are bugging you about your vocational life. See if you can spot a pattern in that that is familiar, that it’s not just now, it’s not just in this job, but it’s been haunting you and with you for as long as you can remember. And then see if you can trace that pattern back to actually your early experience as a little one, how that’s actually in a reenactment of a drama from home.

And when you do that, sometimes just that awareness and seeing that it is a pattern, it’s not just this one thing that’s happening today at work, but it’s actually the pattern, that once you recognize that pattern and just hold it for what it is, sometimes that alone can start to dissolve and resolve it on its own.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Lovely. Well, Sam, this has been fun. I wish you much luck in transformations with you and your clients.

Dr. Sam Rader

Thank you for tolerating my woo, and it’s been a pleasure.

949: How to End Miscommunications, Unclarity, and Endlessly Repeating the Same Conversation with Marsha Acker

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Marsha Acker reveals how to break free from the cycle of miscommunication and misunderstandings.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The root of misunderstandings and miscommunications
  2. The four actions of every conversation
  3. The more effective way to disagree with someone 

About Marsha

Marsha Acker, CPCC, PCC, CPF, is the host of the Defining Moments of Leadership podcast, the founder and CEO of TeamCatapult, and the author of two groundbreaking and thought-provoking books:  The Art and Science of Facilitation and Build Your Model for Leading Change (a workbook). Marsha has an international presence and reputation as a facilitator of meaningful conversations, a host of dialogue, and a passionate agilest. She coaches leadership teams to grow their collective leadership and to build the capability of achieving true, sustainable behavior change through dialogue.

Resources Mentioned

Marsha Acker Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Marsha, welcome.

Marsha Acker

Thanks, Pete. I’m happy to be here.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I’m excited to talk to you, hear your wisdom. And first, I got to know, your pitch claimed you had the answer for “Why do organizations have the same conversations over and over again without getting anywhere, feeling frustrated?” So, I’m just going to put you on the spot right from the beginning. What’s up with that and what do we do about it?

Marsha Acker

Well, I think that so much of what we do every day is about having conversations with one another, and I think many of us would look at conversations and communication as not something that we need to go get any kind of development around it because we already do it. I mean, we do it all day every day, and I think many of us likely think we’re good at it.

But what, in the work that we do, I have found there’s a model that we use to help all of us look at the structure of conversations, and the structure can actually predict the outcome of the conversation. So, maybe a quick litmus test would be to think about “How often do you feel like you have the same conversation over and over again?”

Like, you had a conversation a couple weeks ago, and now you’re back in a conversation, and you’re starting to have that kind of Groundhog Day moment where you’re going, “Hey, wait a minute. I think we’ve been here before.” So, a lot of times I think many of us have those moments, but we don’t really know what to do about it. So, real quick, I think what we could do is, if you want to play with me for a moment, we could lay down a little bit of the theory, and I can tell you a story about how I apply it.

Pete Mockaitis

Yes. Well, I guess, first, I want to tee up the stakes here. Is it, in fact, possible to exit this? Because I think it was Dr. John Gottman who was talking about married couples, he’s like, “You’re going to be basically having the same couple arguments for decades until you die,” which, in a way, was heartbreaking. But in another way liberating, like, “Oh, okay. Well, then I guess we’ll need to figure out how to disagree in an effective, loving kind of a way.” But are you suggesting that, “No, we are not doomed to this fate”?

Marsha Acker

I think that if we notice that we keep coming back around to the same thing, the way I think about conversations is there’s likely something that, each one of us is thinking, but not really saying, or not saying it in a way that the other person can hear it.

And so, that leaves both of us, in some way, kind of leaving the conversation with a piece that we’re thinking but not saying. And I think that’s part of the work to do, is, “Can we be in the conversation and actually be authentic and be effective in how we’re communicating with one another?”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. So, is it your premise that should we find a means of effectively articulating the unsaid, then we will escape the groundhog loop?

Marsha Acker

I think when we’re able to really fully name what’s happening for us, yes, because we can escape the groundhog loop because both of us are able to work with new information or new data that comes into the conversation. So, that’s partly what enables us to change the nature of the outcome.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, cool. And so, you said then, in order to pull this off, you want to cover some conceptual territory?

Marsha Acker

Yes.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, go for it.

Marsha Acker

So, it’s work that comes from David Kantor in his theory of structural dynamics, theory of face-to-face communication. And, basically, what it says is that everything that we’re saying can be coded, and if we can code a conversation, that’s partly what will allow us to change the nature of it. So, there’s quite a bit of depth to it, but the very simplest way to start is in action. So, really, everything that we’re saying can be coded into one of only four actions, everything in conversation.

So, the four actions are, one is to set a move, which is to set direction in a conversation. So, move often points. You just made a move when you said, “Let’s hear what you have to say about the theory.” That would be a move. The second action is to follow. So, the follow gets behind or supports what’s happening in a conversation.

The third is to oppose. So, oppose offers correction. It says, “Hey, hold on. Stop. Wait a minute.” And then the fourth is a bystand. And a bystand offers a morally neutral comment about what’s happening in a conversation. So, to bystand, I might say, “I’m noticing I’m really engaged in a conversation right now.” It just puts some data into the conversation.

So, someone could make a move and say, “Let’s go get ice cream.” Someone could follow and say, “That sounds good to me.” Third person might say, “Nope, don’t like it, don’t want to go.” And a fourth person might say, “Well, I’m noticing we have two different ideas about what we’re going to do. What do we want to do next?” So, it’s sort of prompts for a new move.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m fixating on the, I think, did you say innocent? Or maybe I just added that myself, because innocent bystander tends to go together, like in comic books or something, “Innocent bystander.”

Marsha Acker

Yeah. No, just to bystand.

Pete Mockaitis

To bystand, you said that it’s just an observation. It doesn’t have judgment to it. But I got to know, in some ways, I don’t know, it almost feels like it can, like, “I’m noticing that your eyes are dimming and you are growling.” It’s sort of the implication is almost, like, “You’re behaving angrily and inappropriately in this context.” So, I don’t know, maybe I’m missing too much detail.

Marsha Acker

No, it’s great. So, here’s what’s really great about it. So, what you’re naming is, a lot of times, I think in conversation, what happens is we say one thing, so we voice one thing, and if you were just simply coding the conversation, you might code that as a bystand. But I’m on the receiving end of it and I’m going, “Hmm, that doesn’t feel…” like, I’m not experiencing it as a morally neutral statement because it feels like it’s loaded up behind it.

And so, a lot of times when that’s happening, what we’re doing is we’re saying one thing but we intend another. So, I’m speaking a bystand, but I’ve got judgment behind it, and so I’m really intending an oppose.

Pete Mockaitis

I see. Okay. Levels and layers.

Marsha Acker

Well, that’s the tricky part. So, I’ll tell you a quick story. My daughter, when she was much younger, I called it our Groundhog Day conversation, but it would be the, “Get your shoes on, please” conversation. And I would make a move, and I’d say, “Hey, Lauren, the bus will be in here in 10 minutes. I need you to get your shoes on.”

And her response will be, “Okay.” Walk away. Come back. “Bus will be here in five minutes. Need you to get your shoes on.” “Okay.” Five minutes later, at the door, and when I would turn around and say, “Lauren, the bus is here. Let’s go.” And there’s a little girl at the end of the hallway screaming because she says, “I don’t have my shoes on.”

And so, we had this pattern. I was making moves, and she was voicing a follow. She said, “Okay,” but she intended an oppose. It’s not what she meant. And it sets up this pattern of we’re saying one thing but we mean another. And it creates what we call, in the structure of coding it, it creates a covert action. So, what happens is the oppose, both in your example of you are bystanding, but what’s really behind it is a covert opposition.

My daughter was doing the same thing. She would voice a follow, but she would intend an oppose. Now, you know, why is that? Well, somewhere along the way, I might have laid down the expectations that “You’re not allowed to tell me no,” or, “I need you to do something different.” So, what I learned was that was really much more about…she’s a teenager now and we can still get into this pattern because every time when…so what happens is that we’ll have one or two of these actions that we can tend to do more in our behavior, particularly in different systems. So, in my home space, I’m often the one with her making moves, and I’m sort of expecting her to follow. But what’s not helpful is that she’s quite independent, even as a little person, definitely as a teenager, she’s quite independent.

And so, one of the ways that I started to change our stuck conversation, our stuck Groundhog Day conversation, was I stopped being the one making all of the moves, and I’d start to enter that conversation differently with the intent to give her the space to make the move that I could follow. So, our conversations would sound a little different, I would start to do more bystands, and I would say, “I’m noticing it’s 10 till 7:00. The bus is going to be here in 10 minutes or 15 minutes. What do you need to get done?”

And she’d think about it for a moment, and she’d be like, “Well, I need to put my shoes on.” And I’d be like, “Great. So, do you know where your shoes are?” So, I started to bring more bystand into the conversation and allow her the space to make a move. And it took a little bit more conversation in that way. But eventually, what she would come around to do is say, “Well, I need to get my shoes.” I’m like, “Great. So why don’t you do that? You’ve got 15 minutes. So, when do you want to do that?”

So, where I could, I began to shift the conversation, and it helped to change the nature of how we were engaged in that conversation. And I use that because I think it’s just such a really simple example, but it happens so often in leadership teams, across our workplaces. Particularly in American business, I think we have managed out or trained out the voice of opposition.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, that’s intriguing on so many levels. And you said this happens thousands of times. I was like, “Yes, I have asked my children thousands of times to put their shoes on.” What’s intriguing in a number of dimensions, like one, just general coaching principle. If you pose a question and they think about it, then that is more active and engaging and more likely to feel rewarding. Like, “Oh, I figured out that I need to get my shoes.” And then they did, and like, “I’m taking care of things.”

It’s funny, my kids right now, they’re five and six, and one and a half, but the five and six-year-olds, it seems like they’re relishing these little tastes of independence. They could say, “I’m going to make some toast.” All right, you go for it. And so, they’re into it. They really just plow through bread because they enjoy making toast and it’s delicious.

But I think, even more than that, they like that, hey, they can’t use the stovetop on their own, they can’t use the oven on their own, but even the microwave can be dicey. But the toaster is like, “Okay, I push the button and then I walk away, and then there we go.” But in many ways, I think, Kwame Christian said, he was on the show, he’s awesome, Negotiate Anything is his podcast. In many ways, we have an inner toddler within us, and so that’s strong.

And I’m intrigued by, when you say covert action, with the shoes, I think that sometimes what’s going on is that they’re thinking, “Well, I’m not opposed to putting on shoes. But at the moment, I’m very engaged with this little mouse character or whatever.” And so, I think that’s funny because covert action makes me think of, “Okay, I’ve got a spy who’s like sneaking into enemy territory.”

But I guess that, too, can run a whole spectrum associated with, “How much am I willfully saying yes when I mean no because I’m hoping they’re just going to shut up and forget about it,” versus, “How much am I like, ‘Oh, yeah, sure. Cool, yeah. Sure, I mean I’ll get to that soonish, so it’s fine, yeah’?”

Marsha Acker

What I’m often going for is wanting leaders to become more aware, more self-aware, of their behavior, how does their behavior, it’ll likely be different how we behave at home, talking to our children versus how do we behave in our leadership team, versus how do we behave in our development team when we’re collaborating with eight, ten peers.

I think it’ll be different, there will be spaces. And I think a lot of it happens, it gets laid down for us at a very early age, in our formative years, we develop. One of my childhood stories is not to oppose because it’s rude. And so, that got laid down very early on for me. The way that translated into adult and business life is oppose has often been my least used. It’s been the one for me to work on the most. Regardless of the role that I was in, it would be the one, kind of unconsciously, that I would use some of the other actions.

Or, sometimes I’d just make a new move. If I didn’t really want to directly oppose you, I’d just change the subject, which is another pattern that sits underneath of this. Or, many teams fall into the place of they’ll just agree, they’ll say, “Yes,” or, “Sure.” Or, they’ll say, “Sure,” and then they go out of the room after they finished talking to you, and they tell six other people what they really think of your idea, but they don’t bring that conversation in the room.

So, ultimately, what I’m all about, because I think it’s what changes the nature of the conversation, is, “Can we bring the offline conversation online? And can we be more aware of what our behavioral tendencies are, and where we go to say one thing, but we actually intend something else?” and catching sight of the difference between the action and the intent.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, that’s intriguing. And I guess, as you have this language and you can start to view conversations in this way, that’s intriguing. So, your goal is to get the offline, online, and get it in there. I think sometimes I follow, maybe often, I follow, I use the words okay, and I do the thing. But internally, I’m thinking, “This is so stupid.”

And I don’t know if that’s valuable, but I guess I’ve also had the internal conversation of, “But it’s pointless to bring this up because it’s not going to affect anything. So, the most efficacious, expedient thing for me to do is to just comply, even though it’s going to result in a worse outcome, but fine.” And I guess maybe sometimes there’s a time and a place where that’s just the reality, and so live it, but go ahead.

Marsha Acker

You and many, many, many, many other people. I watch it over and over. And I often say to folks if you’re in a group of people, and you’re not going to be with them for an ongoing basis, you’ve stepped in, somebody’s made a move, you’re following, like the juice doesn’t feel worth the squeeze, so you just say, “Yep, I disagree or I see it differently, but I’m willing to do it.”

I think doing that intentionally is one thing. Doing it out of a habit is another. And I think those things that you are thinking, what I would offer is those things that you’re thinking are actually quite valuable. But it definitely takes a system, like it takes a group of people that you’re working with on an ongoing basis. Because I think what matters is not that it happens one time or in one moment or with one group, but when it gets to be a stuck pattern, like when it’s a Groundhog Day conversation.

Because I think that’s where you’ll, if you talk to people, all the things that are in the news today about quiet quitting, and people are just burnt out, and they’re tired, and they’re exhausted, and they don’t feel connected, and it’s super hard to connect on Zoom. I hear all of that, and I go straight to this model of, “Yep, because we’re not having the real conversation.”

And people get really exhausted, “At the end of the day, if all I’ve done is have surface level conversations, I’ve not really been able to say what I think, I don’t think anybody wants to listen, so I just sort of fall into this victim mode or this apathetic mode, and I get into doing this sort of I’ll just show up and do the thing until I can do something better.” Like, none of us want to work in that kind of setting or in that kind of situation.

So, I always bring it back to, “Well, I wonder what the pattern is. I wonder which of these actions is being voiced and which are missing,” because those patterns, like things that keep recurring, there will be data in that. And so, I’m a huge advocate for teams, leaders at any level, building the muscle of, “Can we have the real conversation? Can we bring the real conversation online?” And it takes time. It’s not a one-time fix.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s good. So, that’s the main thing is having the real conversation. This reminds me, we had Amy Edmondson on a couple times, talking psychological safety. Any pro tips for how we can have the real conversation more often? One, so we got some coding, we got some awareness, that’s cool. Anything else in terms of building our own conversational courage and/or creating an environment where people feel more comfortable speaking up?

Marsha Acker

Well, I think the work is highly correlated to Amy’s work. Actually, Amy Edmondson and David Kantor worked together at Harvard, so both of their theories are quite distinctly linked. It does take container-building or creating the space. I often say sometimes it can be just helpful to introduce your team to the four-player model as a way to name that, actually, we need all four of these actions in a conversation in order for them to be effective. So, sometimes just all of us starting to gain awareness that we need all four and be watching for when we’re not hearing one of them. So, I think that’s one way.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, that’s great. That’s pretty simple. You just highlight, “Hey, this is what’s up.” And then someone might say, “Hey, I noticed that nobody opposed anything over this whole three-hour meeting. That’s interesting. All just coincidentally in unilateral consensus agreement? What are the odds? Or is someone not saying something that needs to be said?”

Marsha Acker

And, actually, Pete, what I love about what you’re doing is that you’re doing it with a little bit of humor, and I think that that is key to some of this work is to find a way to make it light and humorous, rather than…I realized really many years ago as I was starting to introduce this model to teams and leaders, so they’d take it and they’d be so excited, and then go off to the next meeting, and it was like, “You, you have made too many moves. You need to stop that,” with a bit of finger pointing.

And I was like, “Well, that’s not really what we’re after.” Like, it’s a model to create awareness, but I don’t think it’s really effective if we use it to sort of poke people in the eye with. So, I love the way you’re sort of tongue-in-cheek saying that.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, thank you. And when it comes to opposing, I’m curious, do you have any, because I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, but I imagine for many, that might be the spookiest of the four to step up and do. Any pro tips or any magical words or phrases that are great for opposing? I imagine you’re like, “No, you’re wrong!” is probably not the best way to do it.

Marsha Acker

Well, actually, there is. Well, so two things I’d say. One is we likely all know someone who’s really good at it, so just think about the person. It won’t be hard for everyone. It is definitely based on our behavioral model, like our viewpoint of how we grew up and how we think about the voice of oppose and what it does. So, likely there’s at least one person usually in each group. We sometimes load them up and we call them the devil’s advocate or the naysayer, which I’d encourage everybody to just stop using the labels because I don’t think they’re helpful.

But if you find someone who’s really good at bringing oppose, you can just watch and listen. Sometimes, though, for people who are stuck in opposition, the thing that will be challenging for them is to make a new move. So, they can be really good at opposing, but not good at the suggestion.

So, a really effective oppose, like a way to bring a really effective oppose, is to actually start with more follow and bystand because those are the actions of more inquiry. They’re also the places that, so if you’ve made a move, and you’ve said, “I think we need to switch all of our computers out, and go from Macs to PCs.” And if I want to oppose that, if I just come right back and say, “Nope, I disagree,” it’s helpful because it’s a really clear oppose, so that’s great.

But really, if I just say no, and I push back without voicing anything else, then we’re kind of stuck because now you’ve got an idea and I’ve got an idea, and we’re actually put ourselves in this debate or clash about, “Which one of us is going to have the winning idea?” So, a more effective way for me to oppose that might be to start with a follow, so what’s something about what you’ve suggested that I actually do align with.

So, I might say something like, “Pete, I really appreciate, and I actually share your value about keeping us up to date in technology. I’m with you on that.” I might bystand and say, “You know, I’m noticing that that would create…it would be really expensive. And it’s the first part of the year, we’re not quite sure where our revenue is at.” What’s my clear oppose? “I disagree with doing all of them right now and in this time frame.” But my new suggestion, my new move would be, “What if we looked at it, doing it five at a time?” or something like that? So, what’s my new suggestion? Then it would be back over to you.

And now what’s happened is I’ve actually put some of what I’m seeing, what I agree with, into the conversation, and the idea is that now we can continue a dialogue because I’ve put new data in, and it gives us something to build off of.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s good. Thank you. All right. Well, in your book, Build Your Model for Leading Change, you spend a good portion talking about self-awareness. And I wanted to hear your perspective on why self-awareness is important for change, when, really, Marsha, it’s the other stupid dummy heads who are the problem.

Marsha Acker

I know. I think life would be so much easier if everybody else would change, and then the world would work according to how we view it and what we want to do.

Pete Mockaitis

Exactly.

Marsha Acker

Yeah, I’m a big proponent of self-awareness. And I think that there’s so much to be gained from even just building on…so one aspect of Build Your Model for Leading Change is having a way to look at behavior because I think that behavior drives, like everything that you and I’ve been talking about, behavior and how we’re showing up in communication. Everything starts and ends with how we work with other humans.

And knowing, “Why do I do what I do? And where did I learn to do that? And why do I have such an affinity for following and bystanding in a conversation? And, more importantly, where can I grow my leadership range? Where can I expand my behavior so that it’s more effective?” And I think the way to go about doing that is through getting to know ourselves in various ways, and how we change based on the different contexts that we’re in, because I think context matters.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, so you actually delineate seven critical junctures of functional self-awareness. Could you give us the one-minute version of what are each of these critical junctures?

Marsha Acker

So, the junctures actually expand on the theory of structural dynamics. And without going through each of them, what I would say is they’re about “Where are you able to identify what you do? Are you able to expand your behavioral range? And are you able to notice, kind of growing the muscle for noticing in the moment, when the conversation isn’t working, like, when you’re clashing with someone?”

There’s another piece of it is “Beginning to understand when the stakes rise for me and how my behavior changes when the stakes are high.” We talk a lot about what’s happening today in leading from high stakes, which I think many of us are doing, and how when we’re not at our best, so, “How do we lower the stakes?” And then I think the big piece of it is, “How do we expand our tolerance for difference?”

Pete Mockaitis

Okay, sure thing. Well, I’d love it, so there’s a lot that we could dig into. Could you share with us, I believe, was it Tasha Eurich, we had on the show, who says, “You’re not as self-aware as you think,” is her assertion? Can you tell us, is there a particular zone in which many people overestimate their self-awareness? And how do you recommend we get after that?

Marsha Acker

I watched many leaders believe, like even if we just look at the four actions, many leaders believe that they are good at communicating, number one, with others, and that they are being clear in their communication. And I think the biggest gap that I watched people discover is where they’re not being clear. So, just the small examples, like we talked about today, where I think I’m saying to my daughter, “I need you to get your shoes on.”

Like, I think I’m communicating, but really, I’m doing something entirely different. It happens to me all the time, even with my own team. I’m fascinated. I’ve built a structure where we can give one another feedback in the moment about that. And so, I think it’s noticing when I think I’m doing one thing, but I’m actually doing something else, and it’s being interpreted really differently than what I intended.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. Well, could you give us an example of a common way this unfolds?

Marsha Acker

So, we have a monthly team meeting, and often the purpose of that monthly meeting is really for us to carve out some time and actually slow down our conversations so that we can talk about how we’re working together. And so, I had come in with a move around some reflection questions that I was actually teeing up for everybody to think about as we led into the conversation about thinking about how we were working together as a team.

And I have a colleague who would have agreed that the purpose of our meeting is to align on how we’re working together, talk about how we’re working together, but this particular person at that moment wanted to be involved in creating the agenda for the conversation, not to have me come in with some pre-canned questions. And so, the feedback to me in that moment was, you know, I hold on, “I think we set out with the intention to have a conversation about how we work together, and I feel like I’m being driven to your agenda, not a collective agenda that we would create together.”

And I think the stakes were pretty high for that person because it’s risky to say that. I think it’s really risky to name it. I, in that moment, so the stakes were pretty high for me in that moment because I kept thinking, “It’s not what I intended.” I felt quite misunderstood, and I felt like I was being accused of something that was really not my intent at all.

And so, it was in the moment of actually being able to park any further forward movement and talk about where the mishap was, where the misunderstanding was, that we were able to take what was a fairly high-stakes moment, and then I began to realize, “Okay, so it’s not so much an opposition. It was an oppose but not necessarily the intent, but it was definitely an oppose to how I started it off.” And it became a really, really fabulous conversation afterwards, so that sort of friction moment led to a much deeper conversation about how we work and where some of that pattern, even that dynamic that showed up, how it shows up in other places. But it was really challenging, and I am fascinated by the number of times that I watch that happen in teams.

So, when teams have the ability to name it, high stakes are happening all the time for us, and it either leaves us to keep talking about, like, I think about it, it’s like moving deck chairs around on a sinking ship versus talking about what’s really going on.

Pete Mockaitis

Yeah, it’s intriguing. And it was cool that they voiced it, and so you got to go there. And I remember, it is fascinating, one time I was coordinating in this leadership conference, and I just said something like, “All right. Hey, guys, now we’re off to the sketch session,” and then one of the volunteers, their mom, I heard this third hand, their mom said, “Oh, I think Pete just lost Matt as a volunteer for next year.” I was like, “What? What? I just said now we’re going to walk over here.”

But apparently, for Matt, it was rather an important tradition that he – I think he was dressed in a costume of some sort – like, I marched them over, and that was one of his favorite things, and I’m like, “I had no idea.” I looked at the clock, I said, “Oh, it’s time for us to go there.” And then I was completely oblivious that that mattered. And had I known, I’d be like, “Oh, well, let’s wait for a moment for Matt to return with his costume.” Just kind of a goofy camp kind of vibe.

So, you’re right, like we can just be utterly clueless about such things and, yeah, that’s really eye-opening to make sure that we’ve sort of built in those checks associated with asking questions in that context, like, “Hey, what’s the most important for your volunteer experience this weekend?” It’s like, “Okay, good to know.”

Because, I mean, hey, they’re volunteers, right? I owe them everything in terms of when this event occurred, I want to make sure that they’re getting what they need. But I was like, “Oh, I just didn’t make the agenda in terms of the weekend.” So, I’m just rolling the dice, basically. You don’t know who you’re alienating and why if you don’t take the time to get the info.

Marsha Acker

And I love your example because, here’s the thing, none of us will ever be able to plan or attend all the places that we could just make a mess. And unless we have people around us who have the communicative competency to really raise their hand and say, “Hold on a second. Like, that’s not what I thought we were doing,” or to say it rather than go out of the room and stew about it. We will never know, and I don’t think we can ever plan for all of that.

So, I think about navigating all the change and the turmoil that exists today. Like, we’ve got to have people around us that can say, “Hold up, we’re about to go over the edge,” or “I really see something differently here. I think we’re about to miss something important.”

Pete Mockaitis

That’s great. Well, Marsha, tell me anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Marsha Acker

No, I think we’ve covered a lot, yeah.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Marsha Acker

It comes from James Humes, and he says, “The art of communication is the language of leadership.”

Pete Mockaitis

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

Marsha Acker

I ran across this research, actually, a couple of weeks ago, and it really resonated, still along the same lines, but it was done by ZipDo. So, I think you could go to Google and search it, it was done July of last year. They found that 85% of employees at all levels experience conflict to some degree, and that 60 to 80% of difficulties in organizations come from strained relationships. So, I found that information fascinating.

Pete Mockaitis

And a favorite book?

Marsha Acker

There’s a book by William Isaacs, it’s actually been around for some time, called Dialogue: The Art of Thinking Together.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Marsha Acker

A journal.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And a favorite habit?

Marsha Acker

I wake up each morning before everybody else, I have a nice cup of coffee, and I journal.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Marsha Acker

I’m known for saying this phrase a lot, “Awareness precedes choice, precedes change.”

Pete Mockaitis

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

Marsha Acker

You can find me on LinkedIn, Marsha Acker, so I’m happy to connect with folks. And then you can read about the book at BuildYourModel.com, and you can also find me at TeamCatapult.com. And if you go to TeamCatapult.com, there is a Re-D-Room, so re, dash, d, dah, room, you can download a handout about what we’ve been talking about today.

Pete Mockaitis

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

Marsha Acker

Find a way to elevate dialogue.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Marsha, this has been a treat. I wish you many enriching conversations.

Marsha Acker

Thanks, Pete.